Hey all, question and apologies if this has been asked before (kindly point me toward the thread), but I own the original US CD release of "Still" from the 80s and the other JD 80s CDs and was wondering if an owner of the newly remastered "Still" could tell me if they edited or changed in any way the May 2, 1980 "final" JD gig on "Still" (i.e.: lopped-off the poorly recorded vocal intro that was on the original version of "Still"). I'm on the fence in regard to buying this reissue and decided I would only buy it if the live gig was unchanged from the original release; even though it is poorly recorded it has a timeless feel and there's no need to buy a new version unless the new master enhances the sound quality as a remaster of this gig was not included on "Heart & Soul." Input appreciated! Thanks all!!!
Did They F***-up the May 2 1980 gig on the "Still" remaster?
Archived28 replies · 2,070 views
same tracklisting, no intro on ceremony. and 24 hours is still omitted, so there's a fuck-up right there.
My main question is, did they reissue the full 1988 CD release with the poorly recorded vocal intro or did they edit "Ceremony" to start with the properly recorded non-f***ed-up vocal? I've no interest in buying this thing if it is in any way missing any material no matter how small. What's the matter with this band? They keep releasing incredibly inferior reissues hoping us fans will buy flawed shit over and over again. Personally, I have decided I will only buy a professionally researched and executed catalog reissues. No more bullshit guys...
Danimal wrote: My main question is, did they reissue the full 1988 CD release with the poorly recorded vocal intro or did they edit "Ceremony" to start with the properly recorded non-f***ed-up vocal? I've no interest in buying this thing if it is in any way missing any material no matter how small. What's the matter with this band? They keep releasing incredibly inferior reissues hoping us fans will buy flawed shit over and over again. Personally, I have decided I will only buy a professionally researched and executed catalog reissues. No more bullshit guys...
there is no "properly recorded" intro to Ceremony. in the first place, Ian's mic was either not working or turned down at the beginning, so that's why you can only hear his vocals in the first verse being picked up faintly by another mic. audience recordings are little better and of much poorer quality, though the soundcheck of Ceremony (not on any version of Still) contains every little syllable. the intro was intentionally clipped on Still to give it the feel of a bootleg, as many JD bootlegs were circulating at the time, so you might as well blame the late Mr. Wilson's odd sense of humor. or use your time machine to kick the roadies' ass.
i'd be far more embarrassed over the omission (again!) of 24 Hours. now that's just sloppy.
the intro was intentionally clipped on Still to give it the feel of a bootleg, as many JD bootlegs were circulating at the time, so you might as well blame the late Mr. Wilson's odd sense of humor. or use your time machine to kick the roadies' ass.
The AHW story is almost certainly a myth, the sound man not pressing record in time is bound to be the reason.
i'd be far more embarrassed over the omission (again!) of 24 Hours. now that's just sloppy.
Unfortunately you still can't fit more than 80 minutes on a single disc. Though there was no reason to exclude it from the original Japanese double CD release.
johnny james wrote:
the intro was intentionally clipped on Still to give it the feel of a bootleg, as many JD bootlegs were circulating at the time, so you might as well blame the late Mr. Wilson's odd sense of humor. or use your time machine to kick the roadies' ass.
The AHW story is almost certainly a myth, the sound man not pressing record in time is bound to be the reason.
A myth from the horse's mouth then - AHW told me that personally! The whole "Still" thing was done, even named, to make it into Factory's "bootleg", as Factory were pissed off that the bootleggers were making more out of Joy Division than they were. If you can't beat 'em......
johnny james wrote:
the intro was intentionally clipped on Still to give it the feel of a bootleg, as many JD bootlegs were circulating at the time, so you might as well blame the late Mr. Wilson's odd sense of humor. or use your time machine to kick the roadies' ass.
The AHW story is almost certainly a myth, the sound man not pressing record in time is bound to be the reason.
i'd be far more embarrassed over the omission (again!) of 24 Hours. now that's just sloppy.
Unfortunately you still can't fit more than 80 minutes on a single disc. Though there was no reason to exclude it from the original Japanese double CD release.
WTF, omit "Dead Souls" then, this song is everywhere - from Substance to Permanent to Heart & Soul. I still don't get why they included it on Still but then also on Substance.
The point of including it on Still was to mop up the unreleased or difficult to find tracks. An Ideal for Living may have still been easy to get hold of in 1980 (particularloy the 12"), but Atmosphere/Dead Souls wasn't, and never had been. Remember that there was a 12" single of Atmosphere also released to accompany it.
The point of including it on Substance was that Substance was a singles collection. :D
I don't know what version of Still the OP had, but the Factory version never had a full take of Ceremony, and the CD always left off 24 Hours.
A myth from the horse's mouth then - AHW told me that personally!
Well it was something he was known for, making a myth out of a mistake. Who was on the desk that night anyway? Was it Hannett warming up for the upcoming US tour?
His Holiness, The Pope wrote:
there is no "properly recorded" intro to Ceremony. in the first place, Ian's mic was either not working or turned down at the beginning, so that's why you can only hear his vocals in the first verse being picked up faintly by another mic.
You misunderstand me. I would like a remastered version of the original "Still" concert INCLUDING the beginning of Ceremony WITH the almost completely silent first verse. I had heard that on previous UK reissues of "Still", the band had omitted the song completely because of the poor quality of the intro. I was afraid that for this reissue, the label/band would edit the intro off. For some reason, I like the intro on the original issue; it gives one the sense of actually being at a small club gig...screw-ups and all.
If the new version of "Still" isn't somewhat improved over the original 1980 issue/late 80s CD issue, somebody please let me know.
Danimal wrote:
His Holiness, The Pope wrote:
there is no "properly recorded" intro to Ceremony. in the first place, Ian's mic was either not working or turned down at the beginning, so that's why you can only hear his vocals in the first verse being picked up faintly by another mic.
You misunderstand me. I would like a remastered version of the original "Still" concert INCLUDING the beginning of Ceremony WITH the almost completely silent first verse. I had heard that on previous UK reissues of "Still", the band had omitted the song completely because of the poor quality of the intro. I was afraid that for this reissue, the label/band would edit the intro off. For some reason, I like the intro on the original issue; it gives one the sense of actually being at a small club gig...screw-ups and all.
If the new version of "Still" isn't somewhat improved over the original 1980 issue/late 80s CD issue, somebody please let me know.
then be satisfied in the knowledge that the original cut-off intro is still intact. same as the original version, but presumably better sound quality (i'm no audiophile, so don't ask me about the remastering issues).
|| | ||| 6217|| 8 || 3 wrote:
johnny james wrote:
the intro was intentionally clipped on Still to give it the feel of a bootleg, as many JD bootlegs were circulating at the time, so you might as well blame the late Mr. Wilson's odd sense of humor. or use your time machine to kick the roadies' ass.
The AHW story is almost certainly a myth, the sound man not pressing record in time is bound to be the reason.
i'd be far more embarrassed over the omission (again!) of 24 Hours. now that's just sloppy.
Unfortunately you still can't fit more than 80 minutes on a single disc. Though there was no reason to exclude it from the original Japanese double CD release.
WTF, omit "Dead Souls" then, this song is everywhere - from Substance to Permanent to Heart & Soul. I still don't get why they included it on Still but then also on Substance.
To clarify about "Dead Souls", when Still came out it was a rarity that was welcomed as a re-release on Still. Years later they included it on all these collections because it was a damn good song. They never made any effort to "upgrade" Still in the 90s, but you are right that would have been a good idea. Joy Division/New order have been rather lazy as far as their back catalogue. Still is redundant anyways now, except for the live stuff, because of Heart and Soul.
Still is redundant anyways now, except for the live stuff, because of Heart and Soul.
Aren't some of the mixes different? I'm pretty sure H&S has (some of) the original mixes lacking Bernard and Martin's 1981 post-production.
REMASTERING IS NOT RE_MIXING FOR FUCK'S SAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remastering can change the amount of icing on the cake, change the cherries for bigger ones. It CANNOT put in more eggs or take out some flour.
Remastering is a process done on the stereo master, instrument levels and pan positions cannot be changed, all you can really do is fuck with the compression, the noise reduction and the overall stereo image (using psychoaccoustic techniques like phase inverted cross feeding).
Asking for Ian's vocal to sound better on Ceremony is like asking to see the book depository window using the zebruder film, you cannot, it was not recorded.
Doctor? wrote:
Remastering can change the amount of icing on the cake, change the cherries for bigger ones. It CANNOT put in more eggs or take out some flour.
Remastering is a process done on the stereo master, instrument levels and pan positions cannot be changed, all you can really do is fuck with the compression, the noise reduction and the overall stereo image (using psychoaccoustic techniques like phase inverted cross feeding).
Asking for Ian's vocal to sound better on Ceremony is like asking to see the book depository window using the zebruder film, you cannot, it was not recorded.
Please read what I've actually written! I am not asking for something that does not exist! The concert as recorded is OK with me! Mastering technology has come a long way since 1980 and it is now possible to get a clearer sounding version of what was recorded. That's it!
Ceremony 5 May 1980 Full version:
http://download.yousendit.com/A922511D7DB3777A
Best I could do given the source material.
Danimal wrote: Please read what I've actually written! I am not asking for something that does not exist! The concert as recorded is OK with me! Mastering technology has come a long way since 1980 and it is now possible to get a clearer sounding version of what was recorded. That's it!
Danimal wrote: Please read what I've actually written! I am not asking for something that does not exist! The concert as recorded is OK with me! Mastering technology has come a long way since 1980 and it is now possible to get a clearer sounding version of what was recorded. That's it!
So, the Pope has already answered your question....?
Sound of Confusion wrote: But Still was never released with the full version of Ceremony...
it's a bootleg recording dude...
Indeed*!*
Doctor? wrote:
sooooo if its like putting on bigger cherries, can they put in bigger eggs? and isn't that essentially like putting in more eggs???? I'm confused Cambo!
Leigh maude wrote: Ceremony 5 May 1980 Full version:
http://download.yousendit.com/A922511D7DB3777A
Best I could do given the source material.
Cheers
You made my day :)
Leigh maude wrote: Ceremony 5 May 1980 Full version:
Thanks! Haven't heard this for ages. But it's still great!
That's very cool! So what exactly is going on there? Is is an audience recording stitched to the front of the Still recording?
birddog586 wrote: That's very cool! So what exactly is going on there? Is is an audience recording stitched to the front of the Still recording?
You're spot on. It is indeed the audience recording of the beginning of the 5/5/80 gig crossfaded into the soundboard recording taken from Still to present the tune as a whole. You can perhaps see (if you believe AHW's story) why the beginning was lopped off on Still, given Barney's bum notes.
If anyone has a better quality non-lossy version of the Aud I'll make a definitive version. :-)
GAH! The link expired. Can someone repost this? I've never actually hear the full thing!
Thanks.
