Substance re-recordings
Archived16 replies · 954 views
I can't speak for confusion, but my personal feeling about Temptation is simply that even though from an artistic standpoint the original temptation RULES, from a technical standpoint it's appalling, bordering on unuable, see what happens when you mix in the early hours when yuo're hammered.
Course it could be something quite different.
Steve Campbell wrote: I can't speak for confusion, but my personal feeling about Temptation is simply that even though from an artistic standpoint the original temptation RULES, from a technical standpoint it's appalling, bordering on unuable, see what happens when you mix in the early hours when yuo're hammered.
Course it could be something quite different.
Oh i love the original version of temptation.
ickyelf wrote: Does anyone know why "Temptation" and "Confusion" were re-recorded for Substance?
isn't the story that they re-recorded these two songs for Substance so that the versions on Substance would be similar to how they were playing the songs live at their gigs at the time (circa '87)?
I don't think it's any big mystery... they thought they could improve those two tracks, and maybe add some interest for longtime fans for a singles collection
I like the original Temptation but it does sound funny, very high end skewed. The band was trying to assert themselves out of Martin Hannent's shadow, and this was Bernard's first try to be more upbeat/ poppy-er... and the results are kinda messy, so they rerecorded it in a more accomplished manner
the original Confusion sounds just like it was... a rushed awkward collaborative experiment, so they rerecorded it in a more New Orderly style, after having practicing it live
the orignal confusion is a cutout from a 12 hour off-their-nuts jam if I recall correctly. As has been mentioned, the version on substance is based on the version they sequenced for live use.
Wish they'd rerecord a lot of that old dance music without the stupid WMMMMMPPPF snares :-)
I heard at the time it was released that the reason was they wanted to have a go at producing those tracks themselves.
Temptation being a Hannet piece, and confusion being Arthur Baker.
Not a fact here, just something I remember hearing.
FC Can Can Man wrote: I heard at the time it was released that the reason was they wanted to have a go at producing those tracks themselves.
Temptation being a Hannet piece, and confusion being Arthur Baker.
Not a fact here, just something I remember hearing.
Which makes no sense as Temptation never had anything to do with Hannett.
....or anyone else who had any right to behind the controls :)
Oh well, you gotta learn somewhere, and now they've all worked as producers, so it must have worked.
I actually prefer the '87 Substance version of Temptation over the original (blasphemy, I know!) but the vocals are polished and sound improved. I do prefer the original Confusion over the '87 one though. On the '87 Confusion version, Barney sings too high of a pitch.
Simple answer. AS Tracy has stated, they wanted those songs to sound more like the live versions.
I do prefer the originals however.
a guy who i worked with had only heard "that song on Trainspotting" so i turned him on to the original version - the one on the EP (thank you for releasing that on CD!) and he went apenuts. i like the new version too, but something about the original is refreshing.
the originals were more creative than the remixes and i think there was more heart in them.
the remixes were to satisfy the fans and where their muisic was heading at the time.
If you notice thought ones donw live now sound more like the originals than the crappy remixes.
Although I never heard confusion live.
I understood that the intention was to release Temptation '87 as the single for Substance but this was overtaken by True Faith, hence the re-hash of Temptation.
