Subculture 12: not Barney singing?

I read this story from someone who posts on a football forum I frequent. Its interesting though I dont know how true it is.

Interesting story. When I was growing up in South Florida, I was talking to a local producer friend who told me that he sang the vocals on Subculture. His name is Ish LaDezma and he wrote a few popular dance tracks in the mid 80s (Fascninated by CompanyB being the most popular). He said that Barney was sick and the New Order guys were trying to beat a deadline. One of the engineers told Hooky that a producer working in a neighboring studio sounded just like Bernard and that they should consider giving him a chance to sing the song, and that Barney could voice over the vocals when he was well again.

I don't know how true the story is, but I can say that the vocals on Subculture sound distinctively different than many of the other NO tracks of the day. I couldn't get the story corroborated when I visited Factory in 1992.

Any chance there could be some truth in this? There are minor differences in the lyrics and vocal structure of the 12" compared to whats on Low life...

leather_girl wrote: I don't believe this guy. Whatever people say, I don't believe in garbage like that. True fans would never take such a story seriously, especially if it's stories like this one. I truly believe that is Bernard's voice. It's nearly as stupid to say something like "Oh, Paul from the Beatles passed away years ago and there's someone impersonating him now" or something like that.:(

Its not really like that at all actually

I suppose you meant to say you think its bollocks then

Just passing on what I heard

Wasim wrote:

leather_girl wrote: I don't believe this guy. Whatever people say, I don't believe in garbage like that. True fans would never take such a story seriously, especially if it's stories like this one. I truly believe that is Bernard's voice. It's nearly as stupid to say something like "Oh, Paul from the Beatles passed away years ago and there's someone impersonating him now" or something like that.:(

Its not really like that at all actually

I suppose you meant to say you think its bollocks then

Just passing on what I heard

OK, basically I was trying to say that I think this story is bollocks. I'm sorry if I ranted a bit.

Sounds like a crock of shit to me...

But nothing shocks me anymore

((((e))))

I don't know. Behind all the studio dickery and backing vocals it still sounds like a more-subdued-than-usual Bernard, though admittedly, the accent of a few of the verses ("Scarred") seems a tad off. However, like the story claims, Barney was sick at the time, sound familiar? I always wondered why his voice on Confusion was so off.

This is all, of course, if we're splitting microns on hairs here and what is a fansite for if not eternal speculation? :D

and .

That is the funniest thing i have ever heard on theses forums,made my day that has!

WHATEVER>>>>>>>still won't STOP me walking in the park when it gets LATE AT NIGHT!:D

Shit song anyway - even the Pope couldn't improve that 'filler'!

Andrew Sayer wrote: Shit song anyway - even the Pope couldn't improve that 'filler'!

Its a cracking song actually!

hey shuggs what about the deborah lyall remix...she nails the emotion in the song perfectly and sings in a flatter style than bernard...genius i think..my favourite new order remix ever........ps thanx for the live dvd via bittorrent

Well, you could be on to something here. Listen to the 'Substance' version of 'Subculture' carefully, especially in the verses. Obviously the whole song is backed up with male and female backing vocalists, but I always felt it sounded like someone else singing the verses, if not the choruses too.

It's definitely a different recording of the vocal track compared to the weaker 'Low-life' vocals, but doesn't it sound a bit too note-perfect (especially that low down the scale) to be Barney - and a touch 'American' too. I'm sure Barney's voice is mixed in quietly over the choruses, but I always had the feeling a session vocalist was involved in this mix somewhere.

Also, listen to the 12" of 'Dub-vulture' - there's points in there where you hear what is definitely Barney singing the verse, echoing in and out now and again: his voice there is noticibly different to the verses on the 12" A-side.

I honestly think there could be some truth in this...

Andy

sounds like Barney 2me. maybe he was just blitzed, or hungover when doin it

Wasim wrote:

leather_girl wrote: I don't believe this guy. Whatever people say, I don't believe in garbage like that. True fans would never take such a story seriously, especially if it's stories like this one. I truly believe that is Bernard's voice. It's nearly as stupid to say something like "Oh, Paul from the Beatles passed away years ago and there's someone impersonating him now" or something like that.:(

okay, paul is dead, this is a fact but i cant believe that new order, who take their sweet ass time on everything, were on such a deadline that they had to get some guy they never met before to sing on one of their singles because barney was sick.

john kershaw wrote: sounds like Barney 2me. maybe he was just blitzed, or hungover when doin it

So, Barney sings better and more in tune when he's "blitzed, or hungover when doin it"??!

We're on about the 12" version from 'Substance' here. Just have a close listen to it... Certainly session backing vocalists... How easy would it have been for John Robie to make one of the session vocalist's take of two verses slightly louder than Barney's take?

I still think there's something in this...

Andy

I'll see if the guy I heard the story from has anything to add

Just listened to the 12"

I probably would never have noticed had I not heard that story, but I feel there could be something in it. The lyrics are a little different although I suppose that could be put down to Bernard's style to mould lyrics as he goes along.

My theory IF this is true (and it could be bollocks obviously) is that they loaded the track with backing vocals and effects to disguise the fact that its not Barney singing, so many people wouldnt notice.

Is there a place one can find out when and where the recording was done for Low Life as opposed to the 12"?

Wasim wrote:

My theory IF this is true (and it could be bollocks obviously) is that they loaded the track with backing vocals and effects to disguise the fact that its not Barney singing, so many people wouldnt notice.

i think it's more likely that they loaded the backing vocals onto the track to disguise the fact that Sumner can't sing at all, not the he wasn't signing. Lowlife features his worst vocals. or most out of tune anyway. i like the vocals on the album. but they are pretty bad. i think he was first starting to really explore his voice (there is still a bit of the monotone ianisms going on during pc&l) and didn't quite have control over it yet. subculture's vocals are truly terrible. i never thought it was anyone else. i love the 12' version of the song, and i play it all the time. this is it or not line of thought never entered my brain.

i say it's crap (the theory), but i guess i'll go listen to the song because of it. fascinating crap then.

The originator of the story doesnt want to encourage any more rumours without any concrete proof

This one will probably be unsolved until someone close to the band can put it to rest

jesse steichen wrote:

i think it's more likely that they loaded the backing vocals onto the track to disguise the fact that Sumner can't sing at all, not the he wasn't signing.

This is probably the reason. I gave the 12" another close listen last night, and there's certainly two tracks of lead vocals during the verse and chorus. one could be a quiet Barney, but I reckon there's someone else singing along at an equal (or louder) volume - especially during the chorus.

Barney + 1 I reckon.

Andy

Nah... don't believe this personally, it sounds very much like Barney to me.

Wasim wrote: I read this story from someone who posts on a football forum I frequent. Its interesting though I dont know how true it is.

---

Interesting story. When I was growing up in South Florida, I was talking to a local producer friend who told me that he sang the vocals on Subculture. His name is Ish LaDezma and he wrote a few popular dance tracks in the mid 80s (Fascninated by CompanyB being the most popular). He said that Barney was sick and the New Order guys were trying to beat a deadline. One of the engineers told Hooky that a producer working in a neighboring studio sounded just like Bernard and that they should consider giving him a chance to sing the song, and that Barney could voice over the vocals when he was well again.

I don't know how true the story is, but I can say that the vocals on Subculture sound distinctively different than many of the other NO tracks of the day. I couldn't get the story corroborated when I visited Factory in 1992.

---

Any chance there could be some truth in this? There are minor differences in the lyrics and vocal structure of the 12" compared to whats on Low life...

well, we never know what goes on in the music industry do we, so we cant be sure. to be honest, the vocals did sound a bit weak, so again you never know

It's layered vocals possibly fired through a harmonizer and definitely tuned. There's even a stack of female vocals mixed just underneath that's layered durning the verses and not only in the chorus. If you shift the song's pitch down about 45 to 60 cents then you can definitely tell it's Barney's voice. More than likely the vocals were sped up slightly to match the new tempo of this mix. There's also a 16th note synthesizer part playing with the vocal melody to help it along.

It is quite possible that this guy is singing the lead as part of the layer, but he hasn't replaced Barney entirely. It's also no big secret that sometimes musicians get their parts "replaced" by more proficient musicians, but rarely something as obvious as a vocal.

okay, its a bit OT, but i thought i would ask seeing as some people on this thread seem to know a lot about this tech stuff. I always assumed that the vocal on 60 mph was a double but i mentioned it to someone the other day and they thought i was mad. i thought it kind of went with the whole beatles pastiche thing.

so.. am I mad?

lucy anna wrote: okay, its a bit OT, but i thought i would ask seeing as some people on this thread seem to know a lot about this tech stuff. I always assumed that the vocal on 60 mph was a double but i mentioned it to someone the other day and they thought i was mad. i thought it kind of went with the whole beatles pastiche thing.

so.. am I mad?

I can't hear an audible double during the verses but there is a definite double(or triple) during the chorus. Doubling vocals is a very common practice, even if you can't intentionally hear it. In this case, it was probably intended to help give the chorus a bit more impact and help the vocal overcome the additional guitar tracks.

It sounds very un-Barney like to me, more so than any other NO song I've heard. This almost beats the did-they-didn't-they moon landings debate!

Mr Discography wrote:

jesse steichen wrote:

i think it's more likely that they loaded the backing vocals onto the track to disguise the fact that Sumner can't sing at all, not the he wasn't signing.

This is probably the reason. I gave the 12" another close listen last night, and there's certainly two tracks of lead vocals during the verse and chorus. one could be a quiet Barney, but I reckon there's someone else singing along at an equal (or louder) volume - especially during the chorus.

Barney + 1 I reckon.

Andy

The lead voice is 100% Barney. I listened to it again and again. There is a second voice "under it" like you said, that is different...

Bentley wrote:

I can't hear an audible double during the verses but there is a definite double(or triple) during the chorus. Doubling vocals is a very common practice, even if you can't intentionally hear it. In this case, it was probably intended to help give the chorus a bit more impact and help the vocal overcome the additional guitar tracks.

thanks, very interesting!

i still think it makes it sound like early beatles though.