Original Ceremony

Haven't heard it in full...why do most prefer this version over the one with Gillian? What's particularly different besides the tempo and production?

Al Jarvis wrote: It kicks arse, just like the live version. Comes crashing in like a light aircraft landing in your living room (how many times am I gonna use that analogy on this site?!!!).

The updated 12" was a pale imitation. No bollocks whatsoever.

100% agreed. Have a listen through the headphones Al, you can feel the hairs on the back of your neck rising!

That and Temptation make Singles worth buying IMO.

Yes, it's definitely all about testicles. The original has 'em knocking around its kneecaps; in the later version they have retracted somewhat into the abdomen, probably 'cos that version is the sound of a crisp, still Autumn afternoon.

I put Singles on in the car yesterday and ceremony blew me away, i have the 12" but never really given it much of a listen and just stuck with substance, no more....how much of a twat do i feel after ignoring it for so long.

It's how they wanted it to sound, how they had planned it when it was all coming together in rehearsals. No compromises, no concessions, no cop-outs. It comes at you like a beast possessed, the sound of a resurrection. Joy Division is dead, here we are.

i love both versions but honestly can't see how the original has more 'bollocks' than the rerecorded version. the version played live is much closer to the rerecorded version and i think everyone will agree it's Double Bollocks. Shug is right, the versions aren't that different to one another. Certainly less different than Temptation 82 + 87. i guarantee if you played the Gillian version at max volume to a packed club and the original at same volume to the same club, the Gillian version would be the most rousing. the original is beautiful and certainly one of the best 4minutes ever put on vinyl, but this argument baffles me the same way those who say the 87 Temptation is one of the worst New Order songs ever. seriously folks, aren't they both masterpieces? would Franz Fuckyourmom sell their souls to produce a song as good as the rerecorded Ceremony? You bet they would.

Both versions are fookin brilliant!

Stop with the hyperbole. Shivers DO NOT GO DOWN YOUR SPINE and HAIRS DO NOT RAISE ON THE BACK OF YOUR NECK after you've heard the song 1 billions times! Stop it!

The rerecorded version actually has some propusion to the drums, a faster tempo and a crisper sound. How did Hannett suck the life out of it? We get that you guys are 'ARDCORE and have been fans FOREVER! but be honest here. Put on Substance, turn dial to 11 and tell me the song is lifeless and a shell of the original.

BULLSHIT ALERT!

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: Stop with the hyperbole. Shivers DO NOT GO DOWN YOUR SPINE and HAIRS DO NOT RAISE ON THE BACK OF YOUR NECK after you've heard the song 1 billions times! Stop it!

The rerecorded version actually has some propusion to the drums, a faster tempo and a crisper sound. How did Hannett suck the life out of it? We get that you guys are 'ARDCORE and have been fans FOREVER! but be honest here. Put on Substance, turn dial to 11 and tell me the song is lifeless and a shell of the original.

BULLSHIT ALERT!

Why must you be this way? I once defended you but now i Know I was fooled. Your such an ass!!

Jonathan wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: Stop with the hyperbole. Shivers DO NOT GO DOWN YOUR SPINE and HAIRS DO NOT RAISE ON THE BACK OF YOUR NECK after you've heard the song 1 billions times! Stop it!

The rerecorded version actually has some propusion to the drums, a faster tempo and a crisper sound. How did Hannett suck the life out of it? We get that you guys are 'ARDCORE and have been fans FOREVER! but be honest here. Put on Substance, turn dial to 11 and tell me the song is lifeless and a shell of the original.

BULLSHIT ALERT!

Why must you be this way? I once defended you but now i Know I was fooled. Your such an ass!!

I honestly believe people who say Ceremony and Temptation on Substance are shite are actually putting on a air of superiortiy when the truth is, both versions are excellent. The original Ceremony is more Dirge like and less of the storming gig jump-up than the rerecorded version. I simply don't understand how anyone can honestly say the life has been sucked out of the rerecorded version. I'm not carrying a torch for Hannett, i'm just being REAL without trying to be COOL. To say the original has more energy than the rerecorded version is absolute bullshit. Energy is not 'bubbling under the surface'. The track is SLOWER and without a doubt has less energy than the later version.

Jonathan, please understand that I don't need or want anyone to stand up for me. I have an opinion just like you and even if i say your opinion is bullshit, i still respect that you're a fan of New Order. In my view, even if i disagree with your opinions on New Order, we're still allied in our love of the band and that trumps our differing opinions. Do you know how many times the old cliche of Hairs Standing On Neck has been used on NOOL? My point is that the extreme overuse of that statement irritates the shit out of me. Certainly Ceremony pushes some emotional buttons and regardless of how many times you've heard it, it still invokes a viceral response. However, Hairs Do Not Stand and Shivers Do Not Go Down Spine. I'll be the first to tell anybody at NOOL that i'm an asshole. I'm not afraid to call out people when i think they're full of shit and I certainly don't post here to make friends.

Alistair wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: BULLSHIT ALERT!

You seem to have detected your own bullshit here, I'm merely expressing an opinion and never said anything about 'being ARDCORE' as you put it. You think the Substance version is great, well hunky fucking dory eh? Makes no difference to me.

I personally found the original seven inch to have alot more of a punch than the Substance version and good recordings shouldn't need 'turned up to 11' as you put it to get the most out of them. I don't hate the Substance recording, I just think it sounds a little sparse for a song which has so much energy bubbling under. Not everything Hannett touched turned to gold although he was a fantastic producer.

Perhaps the bullshit detector went off w/r/t my own post. It's happened before and it will happen again. I stated clearly that i love both versions but feel that people who slag off the rerecorded versions of Ceremony and Temptation are overstating both their love of the original and their distaste for the Substance versions. Those who stand up and shout for the original recordings are almost without fail, the same folks who take pride in being Old School ('Ardcore) fans from the JD/Early NO days. The same folks talk about hearing Peel play Temptation in 82 and having to step off their tricycle to cry because of its beauty. You can't deny that a person who claims to have bought Ceremony on 7" the day of release instantly gets more respect than someone who first heard of New Order when Sasha played James Holden's mix of Someone Like YOu on the Essential Mix. Even if the latter fan has subsequently been seriously moved by the music of New Order and the older fan has had their love of the Order dwindle with the passing years, the older fan has more inherent respect and clout. I feel like this fact pushes some to claim a love for the original versions in an attempt to clutch some of that respect. The truth is, both versions are awesome and would be THE seminal track of anyband who had recorded them. A million bands would kill to have recorded/produced the second Ceremony. New Order did both. Both are worth praise.

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote:

The original Ceremony is more Dirge like and less of the storming gig jump-up than the rerecorded version.

I agree with that. Just listening to it now, and while Barney's vocals are much better than the rerecorded version, the track seems to drag out, instead of the 'wham,bam,thank you ma'mm' approach of the latter.

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: I simply don't understand how anyone can honestly say the life has been sucked out of the rerecorded version. I'm not carrying a torch for Hannett, i'm just being REAL without trying to be COOL. To say the original has more energy than the rerecorded version is absolute bullshit.

This was a problem that Barney acknowledges with the JD stuff. They sounded 10 times better live, and he hated the way Hannett seemed to zap out the energy, to give it that cold feel that we know and love with JD.

Got to admit I was never really much of a fan of Ceremony (Substance) for a long time.

THEN I HEARD THEM PLAY IT LIVE.

It was like a shockwave through the crowd. Now one of my all time fave songs and a very neat Tshirt.

Alistair wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: I certainly don't post here to make friends.

Truer words were never spoken..

Indeed. I refuse to suck up to anyone simply to get a badge, a bootleg or any other piece of the puzzle. I stand by my opinions until someone proves me wrong at which point, i apologize and admit my mistake. It's happened before and it will happen again. I've got no problem saying I was wrong but This Time, I'm Not Wrong!

Rorschach wrote: Got to admit I was never really much of a fan of Ceremony (Substance) for a long time.

THEN I HEARD THEM PLAY IT LIVE.

It was like a shockwave through the crowd. Now one of my all time fave songs and a very neat Tshirt.

This is sort-of my point. Ceremony in any form is otherworldly. It's probably the best song they've ever recorded. It's not the most eloborate, the most intense, the best lyrics etc. it just captures some strong feelings in the music and never fails to elicit a response. Live, original 7" and Substance versions are all fantastic. If only they'd done a Peel Session version. Ceremony is one of the only songs by any group i listen to that always affects me. It is an immaculate, emotional bombshell that gets detonated with every listen. Whether that comes through Substance, the gold 7" or a bootleg. Stating otherwise sounds like a lie to me.

I really do think that Temptation 87 is quite a horrible version compared to the original 7"/12", and yes I did buy it on the day of release etc...that may mean that the original has a more personal relevance as it was a time and a place thing. Although I would add just to counter that, that I do also like Temptation 98 far more than the 1987 version.

As for Ceremony I go for the original 7" version every time. For reasons I can't quite put my finger on. The sound is immense, the metallic guitars, the vocals...it just has that indefinable something! And if you never get those shivers down your spine then I feel you've missed out really.

Which version of Ceremony is best - what about the Western Works version, sung by Steve Morris?

That's raw.

to this day i'm still confused who wrote the lyrics. I know what barney says but Ms. Curtis credits it to her husband. Can anybody shed light on this?

Jonathan wrote: to this day i'm still confused who wrote the lyrics. I know what barney says but Ms. Curtis credits it to her husband. Can anybody shed light on this?

Ian hadn't written any lyrics down, so Barney ran the JD rehearsal tape through a graphic equaliser to try and decipher what Ian was singing. The rest he made up...

Jonathan wrote: to this day i'm still confused who wrote the lyrics. I know what barney says but Ms. Curtis credits it to her husband. Can anybody shed light on this?

i believe ian wrote the lyrics, but barney and co. were unsure as to what they said, so the band had to put them through a machine (not sure of the exact terminology)* to try and figure out what the hell he was saying. then barney changed the words around a bit.

i agree with shug that the 7" is more 'raw' but as to preferring one over the other, i think it depends on my mood and what i feel like listening to at that moment.

edit: *graphic equaliser...as old blue says.

johnny james wrote: I really do think that Temptation 87 is quite a horrible version compared to the original 7"/12", and yes I did buy it on the day of release etc...that may mean that the original has a more personal relevance as it was a time and a place thing. Although I would add just to counter that, that I do also like Temptation 98 far more than the 1987 version.

As for Ceremony I go for the original 7" version every time. For reasons I can't quite put my finger on. The sound is immense, the metallic guitars, the vocals...it just has that indefinable something! And if you never get those shivers down your spine then I feel you've missed out really.

Johnny, of course i got those feelings. However, they don't happen now, after i've heard the song a billion times. As i stated, i do feel an emotional impact of both versions of Ceremony but i do not have Hairs actually stand on my neck and Shivers DO NOT actually go down my spine and i would bet every single dollar i have and all my possesions that those reactions don't happen to you either. They certainly did at one point but not now. While i agree with the sentiment, i just get annoyed when that phrase gets overused. It's like saying I Love You to every girl you date. It cheapens the emotion and the sentiment.

Christy, thanks for your attempt of clarifying it. I guess i knew that already.

I also would like to say hello because im never online at the same time with you now.

when the original ceremony came out it was if the the impossible had happened,new order where as good if not better than joy division,i cant stress enough how at that time this seemed almost incredible. there was a lot of anticipation for the release but also a lot of (cant wait to slag it)IN THE MUSIC PRESS. but there was none of it,ceremony was a triumph and still stands head and shoulders above what virtually any band today could muster. as for the re-recorded version its ok in my opinion but never had the impact of the original,that along with the different mix of ialp which i feel didnt work as well either. why the band thought that the original felt over produced and they needed to strip it down a bit ill never know,but its their music and they can do what they want with it eh. still both versions get a from me.

rerecorded versions are usually crap. that said, new order is different.

the 12" versions, the '87 rerecordings and the ceremony rerecording are all individual cases. of course, i got substance first, only had brotherhood by that point. naturally, me then being a red-blooded american teenage male, i liked the original b.l.t. better than the 12". i didn't like dance music by that point. (new order got me into it.) other 12" versions (perfect kiss for example) are obviously superior.

i didn't know the original of confusion, so i thought it was a crap song... the '87 confusion is still my least favorite remake (the '87 dub may be my favorite).

temptation i got later. loved the '87 version, but the '82 was a revelation. it took me a couple of years to re-realize the genius of the '87. '82 may be their most perfect song, being everything that new order set out to be, but the '87 is a perfect pop song as well. absolutely beautiful.

ceremony was the last 12" i got from the substance era. i always liked the substance version, but i was totally blown away by the original. maybe because it was almost 8 years after i first heard the song... i don't know. if i have the choice, i always go with the original version when making mixes. one day soon, the substance version may strike me again. i don't doubt that it will. that's the great thing about new order.

the day that i rediscovered the '87 temptation was almost as good as the day i figured out perfect kiss.-->

we all, as new order fans, will listen to every goddamn version of every track they ever record. if you haven't heard the original version of ceremony, go and get it. it's great. if you say the '87 version of temptation sucks, go and listen to it again. if you still don't like it, wait a while and listen to it again. it's just 7 minutes of your life, and when you finally do like it, it will be well worth your time. and then listen to the '82 again. and let them fight it out. it's like hearing it for the first time.. ahh... new order... i love you...

Shivers down my spine, hairs on the back of my neck, goose pimples-whatever. Does for me every time, a million listens or not. Live, the opening notes will send most fans delirious hope they play it next week at the peel thingy. Go with the 7' version as well, no explanations just prefer it.

Al Jarvis wrote: Hold on, just as an aside, it's the first single New Order released.

And that was well over 24 years ago.

How could you 'not have heard it in full' after all these years?!

I'm 20. It'd be a bit hard to track down the 7", especially in the states. Where else would I have heard it?

is the 7" different from the 12" on ceremony? oh my. shit.

isnt the original on the new album "single", sounds lot more rawer and slower

I love both versions, but the bass sounds different in the original version, and for some reason it just sounds more agressive to me. I've gotten people hooked on the band with that version. I wouldn't say it's lifeless though. It depends on your mood really; if you want raw energy listen to the original, if you just want to hear a truely beautiful song, listen to the Substance version.

The appeal of the original version for me is that all the parts are more distinct -- you can actually understand Barney, the bass roars rather than just blending in with the fusillade of guitars as on the re-recorded version. There's more sense of space and separation in the original. The re-recorded version is appealing precisely for its sheer monolithic thrust, but the original is the one I prefer. It sounds more charactistically New Order; Barney's smothered vox on the re-recording are faux JD.

ok ron here again. I guess I'm going to have to dig out my original 7" again. I usually just listen to the original 12" which I do have on cd. I just love the understated vocals and the booming bass.

Steve singing? Is that the one from the mutimedia section of this site! I can hardly make out his voice. I'd love to hear Steve sing it.

Then I've got a bit of a soft spot for Steve.

(Ignoring 30 yr age gap for a moment)

I marginally prefer the 7" original - more power blah, blah, as everyone has said. The rerecording is still fantastic though, lots of space in the production, maybe a touch too much? Everything seems a little bit further away. My favourite version is Blackpool 1980, with Steve on vocals. Wonderful!

Despite being an old fart who was there at the time, I do not share the reverence for the orig Temptation over the 87 version. The orig is a bit clanky for me - there are moments when everything feels too tinny. But you know, both are great really, so what does it matter?

Hey Biz, you post on ILM, don't you?

Al Jarvis wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: The original Ceremony is more Dirge like and less of the storming gig jump-up than the rerecorded version.

Don't know why you feel the need to make this thread almost personal, Brian, but one wonders how the fcuk you know what a 'storming gig jump-up' version of Ceremony is, exactly, seeing as you've never seen them play the track live?! Er, and if you had, you live on the West Coast of the US where fans don't do 'storming gig jump-ups'!

And as for the 'hairs on the back of your neck' syndrome?! Did people even mention that on this thread, not sure?! But I'll go along with that analogy. I can't even remember the last time I heard the 7" of Ceremony. I'd have been truly blown away if I'd stuck on Singles (which hasn't arrived yet) not knowing they'd used the 7" instead (I only read it on a thread this week) to hear it blasting through my speakers. Ceremony is a nasty, bouncy track live. One of the most incendiary in New Order's reportoire I'd have said. Always gets crowds jumping all over one another. I just think the 7" carries that emotion more readily than the 12" which, to me, seems more laconic and lounge-bar by comparison.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

It might be worth consulting someone from the medical profession to see if hair folicles do actually stand on end when you hear something and as for shivers down the spine that's ridiculous humans don't shiver.

has anyone else noticed they seem to have reversed the left and right channels on Ceremony on Singles? (or at least on the CD-R promo I have). The original vinyl has all the hi-hat on the right, the Singles version is on the left.

Of course it could just be my promo, haven't bought the final version yet

one wonders how the fcuk you know what a 'storming gig jump-up' version of Ceremony is, exactly, seeing as you've never seen them play the track live?!

Biznotic Love Tool or wotever he calls himself always comes across as a bit of a killjoy prick to me when I make my infrequent visits to this forum, and Al's quote above has reinforced that opinion!

As for Ceremony and Temptation 7in versions - they certainly blew me away when listening to them on CD on headphones for the first time this morning, it was like Christmas and my birthday rolled into one with a lottery win thrown in.

So up yours, BLT, you miserable twat.

lowlife wrote:

one wonders how the fcuk you know what a 'storming gig jump-up' version of Ceremony is, exactly, seeing as you've never seen them play the track live?!

Biznotic Love Tool or wotever he calls himself always comes across as a bit of a killjoy prick to me when I make my infrequent visits to this forum, and Al's quote above has reinforced that opinion!

As for Ceremony and Temptation 7in versions - they certainly blew me away when listening to them on CD on headphones for the first time this morning, it was like Christmas and my birthday rolled into one with a lottery win thrown in.

So up yours, BLT, you miserable twat.

Miserable twat + killjoy prick in equal measures. Perhaps i'm also someone who enjoys going against the grain to get to the bottom of a divide in opinion. I just do it with the tack and subtlety of a drunk elephant. I am arguing against an opinion, not an individual, despite the personal attacks on me.

Al, you are correct in stating that i've never been in the audience for a version of Ceremony but i've never met George W. Bush and i know he's a fucking moron/asshole who deserves to get shot. Do i need to actually meet him to know that for myself or is anecdotel evidence enough? As for the 12" rerecorded mix being 'laconic' and 'loungy', again, i'd have to say you've got the versions mixed up. The tempo of the 7" is distinctively slower and more languid. On 7", it's a mid-tempo ballad (dirge) but on the 12" it's clearly got more drive. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point since i'm obviously the only one able to call it like i see it, despite risking not being 'authentic' or 'old school'. I love both versions, but think the 12" mix has more energy. The 7" mix has more atmosphere, but to say it's more energetic is akin to stating Bush Jr. is a genius.

If you like the original, great.

If you like the Substance version, great.

There's no need to argue over it.

DC wrote: I marginally prefer the 7" original - more power blah, blah, as everyone has said. The rerecording is still fantastic though, lots of space in the production, maybe a touch too much? Everything seems a little bit further away. My favourite version is Blackpool 1980, with Steve on vocals. Wonderful!

Despite being an old fart who was there at the time, I do not share the reverence for the orig Temptation over the 87 version. The orig is a bit clanky for me - there are moments when everything feels too tinny. But you know, both are great really, so what does it matter?

Hey Biz, you post on ILM, don't you?

yes, i post at ILM. What's your user name there?

Your post illustrates my feeling about authenticity and an unspoken 'rule' amongst fans of most bands; ie. the closest performance to the original performance is almost always touted as being the best. You state the Blackpool 80 version with Steve on vocals is your 'favorite'. While i find that version intersting, i also find it impossible to come back to because of it's awful sound quality. I cannot have a 'favorite' version of a song that i can't listen to on a regular basis. 10 times out of 10, i'll put the 7" Ceremony on a mix, because i find it the most interesting mix of the track.

Good point about Temptation. I actually haven't played the 87 version for ages. I love the rawness of the 82 7/12" versions and also love the short and sweet 98 rerecording. The point is, i really haven't heard a version of Temptation done by New Order that i dislike. I can't say the 87 mix is awful and ruins that track, even if i prefer the other mixes. It simply isn't true. I think folks are being dishonest when they say New Order stripped the track of it's feeling in 87.

Jonathan wrote: Christy, thanks for your attempt of clarifying it. I guess i knew that already.

I also would like to say hello because im never online at the same time with you now.

hello to you too, jonathan.

and regarding a question asked above: i do believe hairs can stand up on one's neck, as a result of an adrenaline rush. the same principle applies when a cat's hair stands up on its tail and back when it's angry or frightened. just a little aside.

off subject: " cant get you out of my head"by kylie sends chills down my spine. I wondering how that lovely lady is doing battling cancer.

i was listening to 50 Cent today and one of his songs has a GUN SHOT sound in it. The HAIRS STOOD ON THE BACK OF MY NECK! What a raw feeling of emotion that 50Cent guy brings. PHWOAR!

ok. now we're getting somewhere. perhaps it's the 'tone' and sonic quality of the bass in the intro that provokes the response. It sounds like the bass in the intro on the rerecording has been compressed. It doesn't sound as full (or PHAT, to the younger bredren) as the 7" intro. Bernard's guitar line that comes in after the intial bass/drums is also considerably slower and conveys the sense that these 3 guys were still trying to find their way after losing Curtis. The uncertainty and desperate mood certainly comes across on 7". The 12" version sounds more confident and aggressive. If by 'bollocks' you're referring to the overall tone of the sounds, the tonal quality of the notes being warmer/thicker, then I can totally see that. My interpretation of the use of 'bollocks' to describe the 7" has, until this point, been linked to the 'energy' of the track. To me Energy = Tempo. Right or wrong, that's how i interpret it. Emotion, however is a different story.

Shug wrote: Brian mate - if I send you the slipcase and the three 7" singles will you gies peace?

Shug, you know how much i love arguing. Honestly, i'm at work right now, not doing a thing (HEY ROCKET MICK!!!) so a good stir of the pot keeps me sane.

I'd love the Slipcase Shug, but the 7"s have already arrived at my humble pad. If you promise to send it, i'll refrain from arguing. Honest!

i didnt buy it on the day of release but the 7" is just a thumping stomper of a song!.great vocal peformance from Barney,great sounding guitars and great Hooky bass.

the other version? um.. a damp squib

Shug wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote:

Shug wrote: Brian mate - if I send you the slipcase and the three 7" singles will you gies peace?

Shug, you know how much i love arguing. Honestly, i'm at work right now, not doing a thing (HEY ROCKET MICK!!!) so a good stir of the pot keeps me sane.

I'd love the Slipcase Shug, but the 7"s have already arrived at my humble pad. If you promise to send it, i'll refrain from arguing. Honest!

Slipcase will be on its way over once I receive it masel compadre, yer debating skills have got worse over the years by the way, incorporate the words fuckwit and gobshite more often and you'll be on the right path - we're all big enough (Al) and ugly enough (Rocket Mick) to take it ;)

Have i MISSED something?

OK you are going on about ceremony 7 and 12 being different but I have two versions of the 12 a green sleeve and a blue and white are these different mixes? Also which version of perfect kiss is it? I have two 7" versions one is a FBN123/7 in a picture sleeve with a normalish short version and the uk 7" FAC123/7 with a weird ivan ivan edit c/w a weird perfect pitt (not sure if that was a promo though).

Shug wrote: :D

Just out of interest Rocket, which version of Ceremony do you prefer?

I really have NO idea.SOmetimes one then the other.I went years without EVER talking about the band to ANYONE who had ANY idea about the band.I knew about the covers being different but loved the MUSIC that much i NEVER even hated a single track.Maybe CONFUSION bugged me a LITTLE.To have all this discussed NOW 20 odd years later is somewhat VERY weird.I didn't even think i would still be ALIVE.NOOL has made my love of the group so much more ENJOYABLE.To know there are other NUT(ters) about is bloody GREAT.Will miss you lot next week.But will see you ALL soon. NU ORDAH Rocket Mick

ben JAMJAM23 wrote: OK you are going on about ceremony 7 and 12 being different but I have two versions of the 12 a green sleeve and a blue and white are these different mixes? Also which version of perfect kiss is it? I have two 7" versions one is a FBN123/7 in a picture sleeve with a normalish short version and the uk 7" FAC123/7 with a weird ivan ivan edit c/w a weird perfect pitt (not sure if that was a promo though).

Although there are 2 covers some of the GREEN ones also got put in the BLUE and WHITE ones.You can tell if they are different from the GROOVES length and i think the ENGINEER's markings.At this moment(on the beer) i cannot tell you which is which.But i know the EXPERTS here will put me right.As for the PERFECT KISS i have about six 7 inch singles in different covers so SHOULD be able to help you.But AGAIN..........beer and DIFFERENT versions do NOT mix.Anyway WELCOME here. Rocket Mick

Shug wrote: "Watching forever" is the groove notation on the 7"

on the 12" there are 2

"Watching Love Grow Forever" & "This Is Why Events Unnerve Me"

Watching Love Grow Forever is the original. If you listen carefully enough you can hear a faint kind of false start before it kicks in on the original.

I hope that's cleared it up - cos I have 3 Ceremony 12"s (2 B&W and a Green Cover) and I've just played them all with no mercy shown.

Obsessed? Aiiiii :D

Well done SHUGZV and on a school night too!Doesn't seem GREAT to play the 12 inch records though.Proper music.....none on this PEAPODS stuff.Can you send me back my 78's of SCOTLAND's GREATEST HITS please?

Cheers, I have everything on factory commercialy released on 7 12 (and cd), Just a bit rubbish at spotting subtle differences. I also get confused about what was released and what was different eg run2 on 7 and thieves on 7 I know were not commercial releases.

I don't have the 7" of perfect kiss to hand but this ivan ivan edit was different to anything I have elsewhere and with it being in a plain black sleeve I presumed it might have been a promo especialy as it was a butchered to funk(sic).

The curiosity with the ceremony thing and the new "singles" album is what originally drew me to new order was that the 12" was the single and all the shorter formats were bastard offspring that had to be done to "nearly conform".

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: (or PHAT, to the younger bredren)

that word is so 2003, dude.

AgentWood wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: (or PHAT, to the younger bredren)

that word is so 2003, dude.

What`s replaced it these days then?

Johnny wrote:

AgentWood wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: (or PHAT, to the younger bredren)

that word is so 2003, dude.

What`s replaced it these days then?

off da chain.

AgentWood wrote:

Johnny wrote:

AgentWood wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: (or PHAT, to the younger bredren)

that word is so 2003, dude.

What`s replaced it these days then?

off da chain.

LmFAO This thread is the most fun I've had all day! That, or my unsuccessful walk to Safeway for rubbers only to find they're sold out. I mean wtf.

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote:

DC wrote: I marginally prefer the 7" original - more power blah, blah, as everyone has said. The rerecording is still fantastic though, lots of space in the production, maybe a touch too much? Everything seems a little bit further away. My favourite version is Blackpool 1980, with Steve on vocals. Wonderful!

Despite being an old fart who was there at the time, I do not share the reverence for the orig Temptation over the 87 version. The orig is a bit clanky for me - there are moments when everything feels too tinny. But you know, both are great really, so what does it matter?

Hey Biz, you post on ILM, don't you?

yes, i post at ILM. What's your user name there?

Your post illustrates my feeling about authenticity and an unspoken 'rule' amongst fans of most bands; ie. the closest performance to the original performance is almost always touted as being the best. You state the Blackpool 80 version with Steve on vocals is your 'favorite'. While i find that version intersting, i also find it impossible to come back to because of it's awful sound quality. I cannot have a 'favorite' version of a song that i can't listen to on a regular basis. 10 times out of 10, i'll put the 7" Ceremony on a mix, because i find it the most interesting mix of the track.

Good point about Temptation. I actually haven't played the 87 version for ages. I love the rawness of the 82 7/12" versions and also love the short and sweet 98 rerecording. The point is, i really haven't heard a version of Temptation done by New Order that i dislike. I can't say the 87 mix is awful and ruins that track, even if i prefer the other mixes. It simply isn't true. I think folks are being dishonest when they say New Order stripped the track of it's feeling in 87.

Biz - I'm Dr. C on ILM.

I should have said that Blackpool 80 was my favourite live version of Ceremony, not fave version per se. I love Steve's vox, the Joy-Div style attack of Barney's guitar and I prefer Hooky's slightly cleaner tone that he used to use on earlier live versions. It probably is closer to the 7" in sound. Interesting that they introduce it as 'our new single' when they hadn't even settled on a singer yet.

I don't disagree with yout thoughts on authenticism.

AgentWood wrote:

Johnny wrote:

AgentWood wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: (or PHAT, to the younger bredren)

that word is so 2003, dude.

What`s replaced it these days then?

off da chain.

Off The Hook gets used over here.So Hookys bass is off the Hook.

Always loved the original Ceremony, on 12" on a decent system it is untouchable. The original just seems bigger, has more space and gravitas about it than the re-recorded one which sounds hollow. Bernard's vocals on the original also seem to have that ethereal quality which is absent on the later version. Something about the original which is just undefinable, its Joy Division but not as we know it - a truly cathartic moment for the band.

Very well summarised

Razed In A New Division Of Agony wrote:

That, or my unsuccessful walk to Safeway for rubbers only to find they're sold out. I mean wtf.

Us goths don't have sex.

The best version of Ceremony is Joy Division's in Birmingham 2/5/80, even if we only get half of it from the soundboard. Very powerful. I've never considered any version of Ceremony to be definitive because its a song which is special in every form, particularly live as opposed to on record. It seemed to lose a bit of its edge in the late 80s when they played it live, although I suppose it didn't feel as such for those who saw them. One of my favourite songs of all time without a doubt.

The original kicks ass! The re-recording sucks ass!

The original sounds too demoey to me, the newer one is far more pure and beautiful. Compare the bass during the 'watching forever' part and its far better on the newer one

Christopher Owens wrote:

Razed In A New Division Of Agony wrote:

That, or my unsuccessful walk to Safeway for rubbers only to find they're sold out. I mean wtf.

Us goths don't have sex.

Seriously!? Boy is my face red now.

Chris Nash wrote:

Oh yes, Goths DO have sex (at least the Goth girls when they meet New Order fans in pubs...)

Just lucky I guess... :p

We're too busy moping about to notice the opposite sex.

As for you, Mr. Nash, stop showing off!

Christopher Owens wrote:

Chris Nash wrote:

Oh yes, Goths DO have sex (at least the Goth girls when they meet New Order fans in pubs...)

Just lucky I guess... :p

We're too busy moping about to notice the opposite sex.

As for you, Mr. Nash, stop showing off!

I don't mope... haha

What about that bird out of Sisters of Mercy. And I don't mean Eldritch........

:bag:

The spirit of the Goth

Deadbeat wrote: What about that bird out of Sisters of Mercy. And I don't mean Eldritch........

:bag:

You mean Patricia Morrison.

Al Jarvis wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: ok. now we're getting somewhere.

Indeed, we probably are. I hear a bassline which makes me want to bounce off walls. You hear something you need to sit down and analyse. Therein probably lies the principal difference between US and UK fanbases, and certainly explains the atmosphere (or lack of) generated at gigs across our two shores.

no offense, but, oh, what a load of crap. it's absolutely baseless. i saw arcade fire here and thought the floor was going to fall through because of all the hopping about. i saw clap your hands say yeah and stood there like a sullen indie kid. i saw shellac and got beat up by a girl (whom i beat right back). it all depends on the gig.
people on both sides of the ocean listen to music analytically. people on both sides jump around at gigs. if new order played a decent venue (one without "auditorium" after and some corporate logo before) then there would be sweat dripping off the ceiling. are all english reserved? of course not. it's a stereotype and we all know it. what you've got to say is just ridiculous. i can't believe that you would believe that. it's just so ignorant. what next?

sorry... this thread seems to be making me very angry. or something. i'm a bit on edge. my point still stands, but i wish i had put it another way, but i'm too lazy to edit.

jesse steichen wrote:

Al Jarvis wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: ok. now we're getting somewhere.

Indeed, we probably are. I hear a bassline which makes me want to bounce off walls. You hear something you need to sit down and analyse. Therein probably lies the principal difference between US and UK fanbases, and certainly explains the atmosphere (or lack of) generated at gigs across our two shores.

no offense, but, oh, what a load of crap. it's absolutely baseless. i saw arcade fire here and thought the floor was going to fall through because of all the hopping about. i saw clap your hands say yeah and stood there like a sullen indie kid. i saw shellac and got beat up by a girl (whom i beat right back). it all depends on the gig.
people on both sides of the ocean listen to music analytically. people on both sides jump around at gigs. if new order played a decent venue (one without "auditorium" after and some corporate logo before) then there would be sweat dripping off the ceiling. are all english reserved? of course not. it's a stereotype and we all know it. what you've got to say is just ridiculous. i can't believe that you would believe that. it's just so ignorant. what next?

yeah, i ignored Al's statement initially but it really is part of the wider argument. No, i do not need to 'sit down and analyze' Ceremony, but i will analyze it SITTING DOWN, on an online forum. That's the FUCKING POINT of being here, to analyze/share/discuss etc the music. If you can't handle a remotely intellegent discussion of the sonic qualities of the music, then keep discussing the bogus Raw Emotion and Energy you feel when you hear Ceremony 7". I guess that's what makes Americans different from UK fans, we have brains that aren't swimming in LAGER, LAGER, LAGER and pseudo-macho Hooliganism. UK fans are the only contingent in the world who can't stand to have New Order grouped with their contemporaries, Depeche Mode, Pet Shop Boys etc. Too 'girlie' for the ARDCORE! Well, guess what? Everywhere else in the world, people group New Order with The Cure, Depeche and Pet Shoppers. It doesn't mean the boys are Gay or even soft, but it's a logical grouping.

as for Ceremony, i love both versions, but still can't see how people can claim the original has more "energy". it's a bogus argument that can't be substatiated with anything other than slander and aggression.

Al Jarvis wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: If you can't handle a remotely intellegent discussion of the sonic qualities of the music, then keep discussing the bogus Raw Emotion and Energy you feel when you hear Ceremony 7".

You could promote intelligent discourse, if you could at least spell the word, Brian, instead of just ranting.

You amaze me. I've met you twice in the flesh and you always come across as the shy retiring type, careful of what you have to say. Stick you behind a keyboard though and you're Conan the fcuking Barbarian. Such an odd transformation.

the dichotomy of Brian in real life and Brian on teh internets is fascinating. spelling isn't my subject and i could care less how i spell online. it ain't being graded!

that's part of the fun of discussing/arguing on the internet. i'm really not a brash, outspoken guy in person. i love to argue though. i enjoy provoking people to get the heart of the difference in opinions. i also don't take any of this online banter seriously. i would be thrilled to hang out with Digital Mike (gasp!) for an afternoon, despite our online clashes. i loved jumping around with you guys in Oakland. i suppose my approach online needs a bit of a muzzle but who knows if it will happen.

Al Jarvis wrote:

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote: i love to argue though. i enjoy provoking people to get the heart of the difference in opinions. i also don't take any of this online banter seriously. i would be thrilled to hang out with Digital Mike (gasp!) for an afternoon, despite our online clashes. i loved jumping around with you guys in Oakland. i suppose my approach online needs a bit of a muzzle but who knows if it will happen.

You say tom-aye-toe, I say tom-argh-toe!

or: You say Tom-argh-toe, I say YOU STUPID UK FAN ARSEWHIPE how dare you hold a different opinion than me! AARRGHHH..FLAMEFLAMEFLAME!!!!:D

"Everywhere else in the world, people group New Order with The Cure, Depeche and Pet Shoppers."

I group New Order with The Velvet Underground.

I couldnt agree with you more, Johnny.

I can't believe what I'm reading here. Some of the posts above are slightly racistic. Oh dear.

Yeah, they share a lot with the Velvet Underground. Barney's unsteady voice can at times be a Kraftwerkian Lou Reed impression. But he sings great on Technique, and I can't remember hearing a Velvets record or a Lou solo disc where I think Lou Reed is consistent in his singing. However, New Order's contemporaries rarely held a candle to the quality of New Order's records. Their only competition in my eyes were the Smiths and the Bunnymen.

Back to the versions on 'Singles' though. What's the 'Thieves' edit like?

Al Jarvis wrote:

jesse steichen wrote: if new order played a decent venue (one without "auditorium" after and some corporate logo before) then there would be sweat dripping off the ceiling.

Having seen New Order in New York and Chicago this year in 'auditoriums' I can assure you, that isn't the case. Though I'm sure you can point me in the direction of gigs where this happened?! At least I'm talking from experience, rather than just spouting hot air and hyperbole.

Wow. What you didn't notice in the quote above is that I said, "WITHOUT "auditorium" after..." Never see any band in the States at a fucking auditorium. See them in a proper club with proper sound, not on some basketball court... So, the experience you are talking about is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Like I said, depends on the show.

NObabe wrote: I can't believe what I'm reading here. Some of the posts above are slightly racistic. Oh dear.

WTF? Goths aren't a race, they're a sub-culture. WTF? Racistic? What posts?

are you actually Johnny Cochran in disguise? He's got a full deck of race cards, even in the grave he's holding a full house.

maybe i missed something, but what posts would you considered racist? I cant be bother to look through.

Biznotic Love Trapezoid wrote:

NObabe wrote: I can't believe what I'm reading here. Some of the posts above are slightly racistic. Oh dear.

WTF? Goths aren't a race, they're a sub-culture. WTF? Racistic? What posts?

are you actually Johnny Cochran in disguise? He's got a full deck of race cards, even in the grave he's holding a full house.

You can chill out, Brian, I probably for the first time in my life share your point of view on this subject. Nothing to do with Goths though. It's just that this Brit Vs. American NO fanbase thing is truly getting on my nerves.

Maya, i agree with you and see what your saying. I see a tendency for the british fans to sterotype the american fans. Maybe vice-versa is true also.

have chilled out now Maya. agreed on the UK vs US fan thing. have nothing but respect for the lads when we're face to face, cuz they're SOUND AS A POUND. but the type of things being levelled at US fans is absurd.