41 replies · 669 views
I'm not too sure what the whole story was but wasn't "Vanishing Point" supposed to be the first single off of Technique instead of "Fine Time"? Is that true and why?
Furthermore, it's too bad in hindsight that "Vanishing Point" doesn't sound as cornball and dated as "Fine Time" and lyrically there is no contest really.
(further furthermore was I the only one disappointed that Technique was not represented well enough of retro?)
Apparently someone outside the band (people in Factory I believe, I forget who), wanted VP as a single. However, this was not the wish of the band, and they decided to do Fine Time instead. 
I do agree Technique was underrepresented on Retro, and so much more 
Yeah I (like probably a few others) made my own "best of New Order" and I included 3 songs off of Technique and I would have included 4 if "Round and Round" wasn't already on the other "best of"s
Oh well, one thing about songs like "Vanishing Point" is that when I play it in the car or something with my friends the usual response is "Wow, this is New Order? Cool track." Always puts a grin on my face. :)
Originally posted by Jackson Withrow I'm not too sure what the whole story was but wasn't "Vanishing Point" supposed to be the first single off of Technique instead of "Fine Time"? Is that true and why?Furthermore, it's too bad in hindsight that "Vanishing Point" doesn't sound as cornball and dated as "Fine Time" and lyrically there is no contest really.(further furthermore was I the only one disappointed that Technique was not represented well enough of retro?)
Vanishing Point and Mr. Disco were single contenders.
I think Hooky said something about wanting VP as the 1st single but Gretton said they shouldn't start with the best song because there would be "nowhere to go from there".
Mr. Disco was considered but Warner Bros. wanted the title changed because they were uncomfortable with the word "Disco". New Order and/or their management balked at that idea.
I think Denver's claim about Run occurred before it was issued as a single. If not, it's increased exposure as a single may have triggered the lawsuit. It's a shame; it was nice of them to choose a guitary track as a single for a change.
Originally posted by Andy > Originally posted by Jackson Withrow> I'm not too sure what the whole story was but wasn't "Vanishing Point" supposed to be the first single off of Technique instead of "Fine Time"? Is that true and why?> > Furthermore, it's too bad in hindsight that "Vanishing Point" doesn't sound as cornball and dated as "Fine Time" and lyrically there is no contest really.> > (further furthermore was I the only one disappointed that Technique was not represented well enough of retro?)
Vanishing Point and Mr. Disco were single contenders.
I think Hooky said something about wanting VP as the 1st single but Gretton said they shouldn't start with the best song because there would be "nowhere to go from there".
Mr. Disco was considered but Warner Bros. wanted the title changed because they were uncomfortable with the word "Disco". New Order and/or their management balked at that idea.
I think Denver's claim about Run occurred before it was issued as a single. If not, it's increased exposure as a single may have triggered the lawsuit. It's a shame; it was nice of them to choose a guitary track as a single for a change.
I liked "Dream Attack" better than "Run" myself, however that's a good point. I guess Technique will remain in the 'hidden gem' catagory for most music fans. I'd of probaby gone with "vanishing point" then "run" or "dream attack" then "mr disco" as a 3rd single. However, I was 7 when it came out and I was just getting over sesame street.
theres not a song off technique i wouldnt listen to 4 times in a row. its the best album, by far, and they really should play it live.
Originally posted by Clockwork C theres not a song off technique i wouldnt listen to 4 times in a row. its the best album, by far, and they really should play it live.
That would involve months of programming - and seeing as it takes them six months to open their breakfast cereal these days, let alone record anything new, they certainly ain't gonna revisit old stuff and re-program it for am every-ten-years live setting, are they ? They are using different gear to the live set-up when they last played these Technique songs, which is why they don't play them. Having said that, they could do Fine Time as this one is available in the current technology (as it was used in 1998).
Where do people get their information from? I've never heard any of this before. Interesting stuff though.
Fine Time was surely the obvious single, mind? This must've been decided - what? - a good three or four months before the single actually came out, probably longer, so would've been around the summer of 88. ie. Engerland's infamous 'Summer of Lurv'. It was New Order putting out something that was pretty much now, much in the same way they did with Confusion previously. They certainly couldn't have released Fine Time much later, say in 1989, cos they might've missed their chance and looked like they were really hopping on the bandwagon. Also, I can't really see Fine Time as just another 'album track'. It's fairly ill-fitting compared to the usual NO sound so probably had to be a single, and nothing else, given its diversity.
surely the programming could be done by some kid, all they would have to do is 'run' it 
the song is written, ts just a matter of emulating it on current technonogy.
its their best song.
It'd be great to hear love less and all the way played live. Technique is indeed their best album IMHO. Very few below par tracks.
Originally posted by Clockwork C surely the programming could be done by some kid, all they would have to do is 'run' it
If only.....
I'm sure I've heard these points so many times before. Let's get one thing straight - Technique was the result of a group of thirty somethings enjoying to much sun, sea, and E - which naturally, made it brilliant. They're almost 50 now - it would just be too sad to witness Barney's acid house moves once more. If they adopted a detached cool like Kraftwerk, maybe they could pull it off. Besides, I was unfortunate enough to witness the sublime Technique material being slaughtered at the NEC in 89. Not a pleasant experience.
Originally posted by Detweiler > Originally posted by Clockwork C> theres not a song off technique i wouldnt listen to 4 times in a row. its the best album, by far, and they really should play it live.
That would involve months of programming - and seeing as it takes them six months to open their breakfast cereal these days, let alone record anything new, they certainly ain't gonna revisit old stuff and re-program it for am every-ten-years live setting, are they ? They are using different gear to the live set-up when they last played these Technique songs, which is why they don't play them. Having said that, they could do Fine Time as this one is available in the current technology (as it was used in 1998).
Can't be arsed re-programming more like. Perhaps someone at Kling Klang could do it.
Originally posted by Al Jarvis Where do people get their information from? I've never heard any of this before. Interesting stuff though.Fine Time was surely the obvious single, mind? This must've been decided - what? - a good three or four months before the single actually came out, probably longer, so would've been around the summer of 88. ie. Engerland's infamous 'Summer of Lurv'. It was New Order putting out something that was pretty much now, much in the same way they did with Confusion previously. They certainly couldn't have released Fine Time much later, say in 1989, cos they might've missed their chance and looked like they were really hopping on the bandwagon. Also, I can't really see Fine Time as just another 'album track'. It's fairly ill-fitting compared to the usual NO sound so probably had to be a single, and nothing else, given its diversity.
Given the fact that, for all it's perverse genius, "Fine Time" is the zit on the face of "Technique", perhaps it should've been a non-album single a la most of their others prior to 1989 (not sure I really count "BLT" or "The Perfect Kiss" as the single versions are so different to the album)?
We (nearly) all slag off FineTime but as Al says at the time the song hit the nail on the head for that E-ra ;)
Its just dated horribly thats all.
Dated yes but it is 15 years old. I personally don't mind Fine Time and I remember at Gmex Dec 1988 it went down quite well.
Roger Lyons from Lionrock programmes all NO's live arrangements (see this month's Sound on Sound - apologies if this has been stated previously), so maybe NO are so lazy they can't even be arsed to tell someone else what to do. Didn't Hooky say a couple of years back that it would be really sad if they were still playing The Perfect Kiss when they were in their 50s. So, go figure.
Roger Lyons told us at the Paris gig in 2002 that it would take six months to program something like Perfect Kiss, and doing this would interfere with the programming of other live songs that they would prefer to do. It ain't gonna happen, folks !
Originally posted by Casey Ryback Dated yes but it is 15 years old. I personally don't mind Fine Time and I remember at Gmex Dec 1988 it went down quite well.
Hardly surprising it went down well at GMex in 1988, that was its debut performance in this country and it had been released the week before the gig !
Originally posted by Detweiler Roger Lyons told us at the Paris gig in 2002 that it would take six months to program something like Perfect Kiss, and doing this would interfere with the programming of other live songs that they would prefer to do. It ain't gonna happen, folks !
That comment seems to have been repeated on every forum world-wide, though was fairly tongue-in-cheek at the time. Didn't someone here even once have a rant about Roger Lyons being dead lazy or something after said quote was (rather unfairly) repeated? I just assume they (New Order) don't want to play it live, nothing more controversial than that. If the Ice Cream Bandits and re-order can knock it out, I can't see why New Order won't!
I also don't see why it's really sad for NO to be playing Perfect Kiss in their 50's (which they've not reached yet) when, if they're still around, they'll still surely be playing songs of an equivalent standing like BLT, Blue Monday, Temptation and True Faith. The particularly galling thing though is the popularity of this song: always top 3 on every poll on this site. Presumably once popular with the band too?- rarely dropped from gigs and often used as the big closing number, due to that wonderful outro.
Makes you wonder - just why it's deemed so unpopular with New Order these days? Answers on a postcard to the usual address.
Originally posted by Detweiler Roger Lyons told us at the Paris gig in 2002 that it would take six months to program something like Perfect Kiss, and doing this would interfere with the programming of other live songs that they would prefer to do. It ain't gonna happen, folks !
Pardon my technical ignorance on this but why so long to program TPK ? 
Originally posted by Detweiler > Originally posted by Casey Ryback> Dated yes but it is 15 years old. I personally don't mind Fine Time and I remember at Gmex Dec 1988 it went down quite well.
Hardly surprising it went down well at GMex in 1988, that was its debut performance in this country and it had been released the week before the gig !
True. Well at least the song was liked that December by most anyway.
Originally posted by Rorschach Pardon my technical ignorance on this but why so long to program TPK ?
Have you not heard TPK? The drums are like a fcuking Opera going off.
However, Roger Lyons was being facetious.
Originally posted by Al Jarvis Where do people get their information from? I've never heard any of this before. Interesting stuff though.Fine Time was surely the obvious single, mind? This must've been decided - what? - a good three or four months before the single actually came out, probably longer, so would've been around the summer of 88. ie. Engerland's infamous 'Summer of Lurv'. It was New Order putting out something that was pretty much now, much in the same way they did with Confusion previously. They certainly couldn't have released Fine Time much later, say in 1989, cos they might've missed their chance and looked like they were really hopping on the bandwagon. Also, I can't really see Fine Time as just another 'album track'. It's fairly ill-fitting compared to the usual NO sound so probably had to be a single, and nothing else, given its diversity.
Good thing they didn't feel the same way with "Rock the Shack"...
Have you not heard TPK? The drums are like a fcuking Opera going off.
However, Roger Lyons was being facetious.
Thanks Al, I see RL isn't the only facetious guy in town - of course I have heard TPK - I love the symphonic crescendo & can indeed see it being difficult to program - but just wondered what might set TPK apart from other tracks, due to my technical ignorance, y'know.
Originally posted by Rorschach > Have you not heard TPK? The drums are like a fcuking Opera going off.> > However, Roger Lyons was being facetious.
Thanks Al, I see RL isn't the only facetious guy in town - of course I have heard TPK - I love the symphonic crescendo & can indeed see it being difficult to program - but just wondered what might set TPK apart from other tracks, due to my technical ignorance, y'know.
I think it's down to the cowbell in the main.
Barney wanted it programmed, cos he couldn't remember how to play it.
Roger told him to fcuk right off in disgust.
:D
Originally posted by Jackson Withrow I'm not too sure what the whole story was but wasn't "Vanishing Point" supposed to be the first single off of Technique instead of "Fine Time"? Is that true and why?
First or not - I don't know... But this tidit is from the Discography:
Q: I have heard that a single mix of Vanishing Point was made. Is that true? A: Yes. Although it was never released.
That piece of info comes from a reliable source...
/TLV
Originally posted by Rorschach > Have you not heard TPK? The drums are like a fcuking Opera going off.> > However, Roger Lyons was being facetious.
Thanks Al, I see RL isn't the only facetious guy in town - of course I have heard TPK - I love the symphonic crescendo & can indeed see it being difficult to program - but just wondered what might set TPK apart from other tracks, due to my technical ignorance, y'know.
It's not difficult at all to program, it is believe it or not one of the more simple ones to do (as I'm sure you will eventually appreciate when we finally get round to doing a gig (don't blame me......Est. Jan 2189)). Took me less than a day to program it. It's only really got a dozen or so different synth things going on in it, and they are never more than 4 deep until the end of the song.
jarvo..yes you are correct the outro of the song is better than the intro,but i still preferred tpk first up than as an encore or last up.
regarding the reprogramming or new order ever playing this track again...its never gonna happen
