Why do they often rerecord their songs?

Remixes are one thing, but it's kind of odd that they rerecord the entire song. I don't know of other bands that do that.

Temptation is one of my all time favorite songs. And I had thought the version on Substance "was" the song. Then I recently heard what I think was the 1983 version. I have no love for that version. I think it's due to the fact I heard the substance rerecorded version first. Now I found out they rerecorded temptation again in 98. They've done the same for quite a number of their songs and I'm wondering why that is.

Maybe bernard realized how awful his singing was the first time around?

But I do have a great appreciation of how ahead of the times they were with those early recordings.

Temptation 1983 is the best version,the "Substance" version is closer to the live take,and the "98" version is a good version too.

But why rerecord it? Wouldn't you rather have new or unreleased material instead of a rerecorded track taking up disc space?

Originally posted by afr0puff But why rerecord it? Wouldn't you rather have new or unreleased material instead of a rerecorded track taking up disc space?

So that people can ask questions like this, and so that people can go out and buy them. If you had something worth selling, wouldn't you want to maximise your returns from it ? I know I would !!

Maybe because they dont have so much inspiration...

On the Academy video hooky says they re-recorded tracks that used proucers to do their own versions. Although Temptation was originally produced by New Order

oi!! I used to think Benard couldn't sing until sunday. He can certianly sing the Bizzare Love Triangle and True Faith very well, just don't ask him to sing any Joy Division tracks:D

Does anybody know what the difference between True Faith 87 and True Faith 94 is? they both sound the same to me.

Originally posted by Ian MadManc oi!! I used to think Benard couldn't sing until sunday. He can certianly sing the Bizzare Love Triangle and True Faith very well, just don't ask him to sing any Joy Division tracks:DDoes anybody know what the difference between True Faith 87 and True Faith 94 is? they both sound the same to me.

I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now. The original had poorer vocals but I prefer the track overall. I guess they like updating their old classics and thats not always a bad thing. I love the uptempto dancier 1998 version, although its a bit too short. As for True Faith, the song is basically the same just polished up a bit by Stephen 'Lets turn 'em into pop tarts' Hague.

Which version is on my Substance 87 LP? I've seen Temptation on my DVD from 1981 and it sounds very different, I prefer it actually, I just assumed it was a one of live version and the one in my LP was the original.

Temptation 82 was their first official self- production single, probably New Order is kinda ashamed ast their first go alone. the percussion sounds too trebly and kinda funny, but i prefer the first rawer version, the 87 version sounds too slick in comparison. both very good but neither definitive. why not listen to both.

Blue Monday got remade in 88 in the attempt to make it even a bigger hit. didn't really make it in america, but the short version is an excellent production. i guess they "remixed" themselves... why not?

Confusion was remade in 87. the original was pretty much made up and recorded in a couple of days, no chance to play it live first. the remake sounds much more like a New Order song, after they had played it live for a few years

Ceremony was remade... i guess they didn't like the first version all that much since it was never put on CD, or maybe just as a sign of respect to Gillian who was not part of the first session.

as for the recent remakes... just trying to get New Order back and running again

Originally posted by DShamen I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now.

Personally, I find the opposite to be true. I heard Temptation 87 for the first time two years ago. I think it's aged beutifully. I can easily blast that from my cubicle and not have to defend it or feel embarrassed. There isn't an over abundance of synths like on TPK or BLT.

Originally posted by afr0puff > Originally posted by DShamen> I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now.

Personally, I find the opposite to be true. I heard Temptation 87 for the first time two years ago. I think it's aged beutifully. I can easily blast that from my cubicle and not have to defend it or feel embarrassed. There isn't an over abundance of synths like on TPK or BLT.

Personally, I don't take ghetto blasters into bogs anymore

Originally posted by five hates six > Originally posted by afr0puff> > > > Originally posted by DShamen> > I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now.>

Personally, I find the opposite to be true. I heard Temptation 87 for the first time two years ago. I think it's aged beutifully. I can easily blast that from my cubicle and not have to defend it or feel embarrassed. There isn't an over abundance of synths like on TPK or BLT.

Personally, I don't take ghetto blasters into bogs anymore

Aye, but ut was fookin' great back in the old days when we could set up sound systems in the bogs. Bangin'. Tell the kids that today, and they'll never believe you.

Originally posted by five hates six Personally, I don't take ghetto blasters into bogs anymore

No idea what that means.

Originally posted by afr0puff > Originally posted by five hates six> Personally, I don't take ghetto blasters into bogs anymore

No idea what that means.

Kids today

Originally posted by afr0puff > Originally posted by DShamen> I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now.

Personally, I find the opposite to be true. I heard Temptation 87 for the first time two years ago. I think it's aged beutifully. I can easily blast that from my cubicle and not have to defend it or feel embarrassed. There isn't an over abundance of synths like on TPK or BLT.

Well I agree that its dated better than both The Perfect Kiss and Bizarre Love Triangle... although the new live version of BLT has a more modern-ish feel to it.

Originally posted by DShamen > Originally posted by afr0puff> > > > Originally posted by DShamen> > I like all the versions of Temptation, but musically the 1987 version has dated worst... sounds very 80s now.>

Personally, I find the opposite to be true. I heard Temptation 87 for the first time two years ago. I think it's aged beutifully. I can easily blast that from my cubicle and not have to defend it or feel embarrassed. There isn't an over abundance of synths like on TPK or BLT.

Well I agree that its dated better than both The Perfect Kiss and Bizarre Love Triangle... although the new live version of BLT has a more modern-ish feel to it.

And by "modern-ish", you mean boring shit, right?

I think the reason they re-recorded for remixes, is because they wanted to offer a completely different demension to the song...which is the purpose of a remix.

Although I like some remixes better then others, the one thing I can honestly say, is that I appreciate all of them... even if the only reason for doing so is to thank God that the actual version I like didn't turn out that way... lol. :D

They don't 'often' re-record anything - they re-did "Ceremony" to include Gillian and because Barn didn't like the vocal take, the Substance versions of "Temptation" and "Confusion" for a number of reasons (Barn not happy with the vocals again, also to bring the songs closer to what they sounded like live) and Temptation 98 as a backing for the mimed Commonwealth Games performance. Thats 4 (or 3.5 if you prefer) songs in 24 years, hardly a frequent occurrence. I don't think NO can be accused of 'often' recording anything.

Exactly why we are recording some more tracks soon - no longer as happy with the demo/Community tracks we did last year. Bands move on, use new technology and have different ways of approaching songs.

Also it gives NOOL Trainspotters/Collectors/Obsessives/Compleitist/SULTANSOFBLING/Gullibles(Me) to buy EVEN MORE bloody versions and different COVERS for the NEW COVER...geddit!

Originally posted by CTB Thats 4 (or 3.5 if you prefer) songs in 24 years, hardly a frequent occurrence. I don't think NO can be accused of 'often' recording anything.

Point taken, but that's still 4 more than most bands. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I was just curious. Other bands will leave it at that, calling it a "snapshot" in time. And maybe they will remaster it in the future. It's the first I'm hearing of a band rerecording "several" of their songs.

For the record, the Peel session in 1998 that re-recorded several old songs was done because they had upgraded their technology, and had programmed those songs as part of the forthcoming live set.

I would have liked a re- recorded version of Temptation that was more true to the live version on the Taras Shevchenko video 1981.With the sequencer and drum machine going on forever at the end.And that loud bit in the middle that i think is Bernard doing something with the guitar and/or amp.

Originally posted by I don't want to be just a number in Society In 1999, they used german musical composer/director Peter Schwartz and, believe me, he did a fantastic job. If you listen, for instance, to the original "West End Girls" and then listen to the re-worked version, you'd get the idea. I could upload it to some FTP nearby if you like...

Could you?

sometimes these things are done for good reasons, sometimes not, an orange-juice commercial well !!! money is nice sometimes eh ! anyway compare the 7" to the 12" mix of temptation which came first the chicken or colonel sanders;)