why isn't "world in motion" on the 511 DVD?!
Archived51 replies · 2,216 views
Space constraints? I beleive that was the reason they left 24 hours of the cd eddition of JD's Still - apparently two vinyls have slightly more spoace on them than a cd.
Nobody seems to know. Certainly nothing to do with space constraints though. The performance was dire, I can only assume that as they had a roadie sing it, it wasn't as easy to overdub in the legendary "post-production" that took place on that DVD. What you hear on the DVD is not what was played at the gig, you hear a bum-note removed version!
Tim wrote: Nobody seems to know. Certainly nothing to do with space constraints though. The performance was dire, I can only assume that as they had a roadie sing it, it wasn't as easy to overdub in the legendary "post-production" that took place on that DVD. What you hear on the DVD is not what was played at the gig, you hear a bum-note removed version!
But they apparently left plenty of those bum-notes in, too. LOL
Big Mouth Julio wrote: Because Barney messed the lyrics while he was singing
He's always messing up lyrics, lol. 
PetShopQueen wrote:
Tim wrote: Nobody seems to know. Certainly nothing to do with space constraints though. The performance was dire, I can only assume that as they had a roadie sing it, it wasn't as easy to overdub in the legendary "post-production" that took place on that DVD. What you hear on the DVD is not what was played at the gig, you hear a bum-note removed version!
But they apparently left plenty of those bum-notes in, too. LOL
I strongly reccommend that you find the bootleg of that gig, the DVD bears NO relation to it at all. It's a TOTAL fake.
They post-ed out everything a bit dodgy, including all of Barney's best lines ( as seems to be Warner policy these days)
Doctor? wrote:
PetShopQueen wrote:
Tim wrote: Nobody seems to know. Certainly nothing to do with space constraints though. The performance was dire, I can only assume that as they had a roadie sing it, it wasn't as easy to overdub in the legendary "post-production" that took place on that DVD. What you hear on the DVD is not what was played at the gig, you hear a bum-note removed version!
But they apparently left plenty of those bum-notes in, too. LOL
I strongly reccommend that you find the bootleg of that gig, the DVD bears NO relation to it at all. It's a TOTAL fake.
They post-ed out everything a bit dodgy, including all of Barney's best lines ( as seems to be Warner policy these days)
What is up with the record labels and taking out all of this stuff? Shouldn't it be up to the band? Of course, its the label that decides whats gonna be a selling point and whatnot, but I'd think New Order would raise a voice to something like that. Then again, depends on HOW bad this original really was. LOL!! Maybe someone can put up the bootleg?
I just remembered...
I have a version someone sent me from online (audio), but the quality is very good, and I can't really tell if its ripped from the DVD or just a soundboard or radio broadcasted quality version of the original show. Everything seems pretty much the same, except I seem to notice a little bit more of the off-tune-ness, but this could just be the fact that with this one I'm just 'listening', opposed to watching AND listening to the DVD, which scrambles the senses a bit more, and takes more of that concentration on individual bits and pieces like that away. If that makes any sense.
A perfect example is the intro to atmosphere, Hooky hits a MASSIVE bum note, hits it square on like he means it and doesn't even sneakyslide onto the right one.....DVD...GONE.
I'm off to work now, but if you have a gmail account or anything I will try and mail you a track or two from the bootleg tomorrow (assuming any of it is on my HD, if not and it lives on a CD, you may have to wait while I dig round the TARDIS to find it)
Doctor? wrote: A perfect example is the intro to atmosphere, Hooky hits a MASSIVE bum note, hits it square on like he means it and doesn't even sneakyslide onto the right one.....DVD...GONE.
I'm off to work now, but if you have a gmail account or anything I will try and mail you a track or two from the bootleg tomorrow (assuming any of it is on my HD, if not and it lives on a CD, you may have to wait while I dig round the TARDIS to find it)
Hey, if you get the chance, could you email me some of that bootleg as well? id love to hear it.
ZacheryAllanStarkey@gmail.com
What all happened in post production? Im really curious?
Z
The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Tim wrote: The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Tim,
Atmosphere's introduction is another example.
Big Mouth Julio wrote:
Tim wrote: The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Tim,
Atmosphere's introduction is another example.
Do pay attention 007!!
( I mentioned that)
The NYC gig is another one...they took out all barney's Ian gags as well as either Hooky or Barney singing like "anne elk" during SLC.
PSQ, I am looking for the boot, promise.
Maybe the band didn't like the performance? And, as for the overdubs, maybe that was the band, and not the record company?
Nick King wrote: Maybe the band didn't like the performance? And, as for the overdubs, maybe that was the band, and not the record company?
Possible, but unlikely as the cheating starts only when owned by the AOL time Warner Peadophile corporation.
And it aint overdubs, it's out and out warping and bending of the original material.
I say death to the mobile studio....gigs should be mastered straight to stereo to stop us being ripped off this way.
Tim wrote: The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Im quite shocked to discover this. I remember owning Simple Minds "Live In Paris" LP around 1987 and it stated on it that there was subsequent modifications to the performances (re-recordings, over-dubs, and whatever). I thought the idea sucked as its suppose to be a live LP for gods sake.
Dire Straits (ok i loved them in the 80's but they annoy me knwow) Alchemy live double LP also sounded perfection. I dont know if this was dubbed too but its the same as the video audio, or if the musicians are actually accomplished enough to play live without gaffes.
I always presumed the Finsbury concert DVD was the same as how the band sounded on the day. This makes me doubt whether the audio from Reading 98 is all that it seems to be or even Electronic Ecstasy (where New Order (IMO) sound as accomplished live as Ive ever heard them). I feel abit let down and Ive lost abit of respect for the band for this.
NO Regret wrote:
Tim wrote: The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Im quite shocked to discover this. I remember owning Simple Minds "Live In Paris" LP around 1987 and it stated on it that there was subsequent modifications to the performances (re-recordings, over-dubs, and whatever). I thought the idea sucked as its suppose to be a live LP for gods sake.
Dire Straits (ok i loved them in the 80's but they annoy me knwow) Alchemy live double LP also sounded perfection. I dont know if this was dubbed too but its the same as the video audio, or if the musicians are actually accomplished enough to play live without gaffes.
I always presumed the Finsbury concert DVD was the same as how the band sounded on the day. This makes me doubt whether the audio from Reading 98 is all that it seems to be or even Electronic Ecstasy (where New Order (IMO) sound as accomplished live as Ive ever heard them). I feel abit let down and Ive lost abit of respect for the band for this.
woaahh.. i didnt mean this thread to turn into this kind of a thing. lol.
its most likely a label thing. as we all know what they're like. rewatching the concert, i cant see how anything's really changed to be honest. as in, nothing seems out of place. as for vocals, it appears barney is singing everything in sync and nothing overdubbed not matching, and the bass sounds totally messed up through bits of it... Barney and Hooky getting kooky over some type of technical issue in some parts, lol. and you can still hear them.
Maybe hardly a thing was even edited.
I'd have to hear this other recorded version to tell...
I can't possibly see the band doing that. Not like its being said it was. I remember reading something a long time ago about record labels having a contractual thing with some artists, that if a live production wasnt satisfactory to their liking (the labels) then the band had to fix stuff up.
I mean hell.. this is a band that leaves in all kinds of other stuff in their live shows, interviews, etc. Barney flipping out at Hooky or someone for fucking up a note or whatever, or being too loud.. lol. Or flipping out at a crew person, acting all pissy. or someone else in the band, though to some people it could be a turn-off. I think they're as natural as it is. LOL and i respect and like that a lot! they keep things real.
How about Live at Cirkus 2001, Werchter 2005, Olympia 2001... ones like that, and are any of these supposedly "dubbed"?
NO Regret wrote:
Tim wrote: The post-production consisted of replacing the bits they fucked up with correct playing. Sure, they left a couple of gaffes in the final product, but nowhere near as many as they actually made on the night. 60 Miles An Hour was probably the worst example of this - sounded like Hooky had never heard it before, let alone played it!
Im quite shocked to discover this. I remember owning Simple Minds "Live In Paris" LP around 1987 and it stated on it that there was subsequent modifications to the performances (re-recordings, over-dubs, and whatever). I thought the idea sucked as its suppose to be a live LP for gods sake.
Dire Straits (ok i loved them in the 80's but they annoy me knwow) Alchemy live double LP also sounded perfection. I dont know if this was dubbed too but its the same as the video audio, or if the musicians are actually accomplished enough to play live without gaffes.
I always presumed the Finsbury concert DVD was the same as how the band sounded on the day. This makes me doubt whether the audio from Reading 98 is all that it seems to be or even Electronic Ecstasy (where New Order (IMO) sound as accomplished live as Ive ever heard them). I feel abit let down and Ive lost abit of respect for the band for this.
Talk about mountains out of molehills! All official live DVDs are given some degree of post-production, even U2, Dire Shites and gawd bless'em The Cure. The nature of live sound, particularly in an open-air venue, can mean that at times you get something that isn't quite what the soundboard man intended it to be. Obviously this allows you to remove bum notes etc as well. New Order are no different to most bands in that they occasionally fuck things up, Finsbury Park was a bad one for fucking things up, having invested the money in getting the video crew there in the first place they needed to touch the audio up to give them a commercially viable product. Reading 98 also had a bit of post-production, but not as much. Electronic Ecstacy though is a bootleg, and reflects just how they sounded that night. They were incredibly tight on that 93 tour, almost as tight as the 81 European tour.
Why do you think Bernard doesn't like bootleg audio recordings? Not because they don't get any money out of them, but purely because they reflect how it actually was on the night, with potty-mouth outbursts, bum notes and the reality of a gig, rather than everything being perfect.
If it's note-perfect you want, buy the records instead of live stuff!
PetShopQueen wrote:
How about Live at Cirkus 2001, Werchter 2005, Olympia 2001... ones like that, and are any of these supposedly "dubbed"?
Of course not. They aren't official recordings or releases. Who's gonna invest time and money in touching up a bootleg?
Tim wrote:
PetShopQueen wrote:
How about Live at Cirkus 2001, Werchter 2005, Olympia 2001... ones like that, and are any of these supposedly "dubbed"?
Of course not. They aren't official recordings or releases. Who's gonna invest time and money in touching up a bootleg?
I find those shows some of the best I've heard in a long time. Sounds like they're having loads of fun and the sound is just amazing. Especially Werchter! Cirkus is great, with Barney and what sounds like him having a bad cold. 
This is just it - they are a great live band, so for NORegret to say he's lost some respect for them just because they touched up the sound on a live DVD is a load of bollocks. Let me ask you this, NORegret - when you type something into this message board, do you spell and type everything correctly first time around, or do you go back and edit things? Me, I go back and make sure it's typed correctly. You can with editing software, so why not make sure something is as presentable as it can be?
With any live band, there is always the prospect of mistakes, particularly as the vast majority of performers need some kind of stimulant to be able to perform on stage in front of an audience. With me, it's a couple of pints of cider beforehand to calm any nerves. With Bernard it used to be Pernod, some people like a joint maybe, or a couple of lines. Sometimes you overdo it (Brixton Academy 83) and are incapable of performing correctly.
What has made New Order so special over the years is their unpredictability. You could see them play two nights in succession back in the 80s, and they would play 25 different songs over the two nights (Birmingham and Malvern 86 spring immediately to mind), one night could be wonderful and the next dreadful, there was no way of knowing whether you were going to get Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde. I've seen them start a gig in fantastic form (Oxford 86) but end it in a right row, pissed off with the audience and each other. As Hooky has admitted, they started doing pretty much the same set every night, or at least selecting the set from a pool of songs, in 1989 and have kept this policy ever since because they wanted to sound tighter, more professional. They've done this pretty successfully ever since. Finsbury Park was just a one-off bad day, the weather didn't help, and there was also the nerves factor, it was probably the biggest crowd that had ever paid to see them play (sure there were bigger crowds at Glastonbury and Reading, but this was an NO gig rather than a festival), and they had a habit of failing to deliver with the largest crowds.
Tim wrote: This is just it - they are a great live band, so for NORegret to say he's lost some respect for them just because they touched up the sound on a live DVD is a load of bollocks. Let me ask you this, NORegret - when you type something into this message board, do you spell and type everything correctly first time around, or do you go back and edit things? Me, I go back and make sure it's typed correctly. You can with editing software, so why not make sure something is as presentable as it can be?
With any live band, there is always the prospect of mistakes, particularly as the vast majority of performers need some kind of stimulant to be able to perform on stage in front of an audience. With me, it's a couple of pints of cider beforehand to calm any nerves. With Bernard it used to be Pernod, some people like a joint maybe, or a couple of lines. Sometimes you overdo it (Brixton Academy 83) and are incapable of performing correctly.
What has made New Order so special over the years is their unpredictability. You could see them play two nights in succession back in the 80s, and they would play 25 different songs over the two nights (Birmingham and Malvern 86 spring immediately to mind), one night could be wonderful and the next dreadful, there was no way of knowing whether you were going to get Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde. I've seen them start a gig in fantastic form (Oxford 86) but end it in a right row, pissed off with the audience and each other. As Hooky has admitted, they started doing pretty much the same set every night, or at least selecting the set from a pool of songs, in 1989 and have kept this policy ever since because they wanted to sound tighter, more professional. They've done this pretty successfully ever since. Finsbury Park was just a one-off bad day, the weather didn't help, and there was also the nerves factor, it was probably the biggest crowd that had ever paid to see them play (sure there were bigger crowds at Glastonbury and Reading, but this was an NO gig rather than a festival), and they had a habit of failing to deliver with the largest crowds.
Good post!!! I agree 100%.
Tim wrote: This is just it - they are a great live band, so for NORegret to say he's lost some respect for them just because they touched up the sound on a live DVD is a load of bollocks. Let me ask you this, NORegret - when you type something into this message board, do you spell and type everything correctly first time around, or do you go back and edit things? Me, I go back and make sure it's typed correctly. You can with editing software, so why not make sure something is as presentable as it can be?
With any live band, there is always the prospect of mistakes, particularly as the vast majority of performers need some kind of stimulant to be able to perform on stage in front of an audience. With me, it's a couple of pints of cider beforehand to calm any nerves. With Bernard it used to be Pernod, some people like a joint maybe, or a couple of lines. Sometimes you overdo it (Brixton Academy 83) and are incapable of performing correctly.
What has made New Order so special over the years is their unpredictability. You could see them play two nights in succession back in the 80s, and they would play 25 different songs over the two nights (Birmingham and Malvern 86 spring immediately to mind), one night could be wonderful and the next dreadful, there was no way of knowing whether you were going to get Dr Jekyll or Mr Hyde. I've seen them start a gig in fantastic form (Oxford 86) but end it in a right row, pissed off with the audience and each other. As Hooky has admitted, they started doing pretty much the same set every night, or at least selecting the set from a pool of songs, in 1989 and have kept this policy ever since because they wanted to sound tighter, more professional. They've done this pretty successfully ever since. Finsbury Park was just a one-off bad day, the weather didn't help, and there was also the nerves factor, it was probably the biggest crowd that had ever paid to see them play (sure there were bigger crowds at Glastonbury and Reading, but this was an NO gig rather than a festival), and they had a habit of failing to deliver with the largest crowds.
Blimey. I didnt think I get such a response, Tim. I was only speaking as I find. I think you'll find most of my postings have bad grammer or mis-spellings.
I thought the sound of the Finsbury gig was pretty tight on the day. I didnt think there was any need to make changes for the DVD. If its only the odd tweaking for say dips in volume, etc then I dont mind but the way I read your posting it sounded like the band had gone back into the studio to re-record parts. Thats what grates on me, I cant see the point. If its live its live, mistakes and all. Like you point out Tim, thats what makes New Order stand out, that they can be brilliant and also crap live, and thats why we love them.
If Ive misread your intentions then I apologise. Maybe lost abit of respect for the band is abit strong. But an idea would have been to release the DVD with the addition of the true performance. Then fans would get both the best of both worlds.
I can understand that the band or label would want to put out the best product they can and that they might make alterations to the recording to get the best results. As long as those alterations are kept to a minimum and results dont differ to much, is all Im saying. I hope this clears up my point.
