IN THIS MONTH'S Q50

IN THIS MONTH'S Q50 THERE IS A SONG BY THE THE CHARLATANS CALLED Mis-Takes WHICH SOUNDS VERY NEW ODERISH , SOUNDS LIKE SOME THING FROM LOW-LIFE, WORTH CHECKING OUT

http://home.q4music.com/cgi-bin/q50/track.pl?id=591

THERE ARE ALSO OTHER TWO SONGS WHICH THEY MENTION IN IT'S Q50 WHICH THEY SAY SOUND LIKE NEW ORDER & JOY DIVISON

http://home.q4music.com/cgi-bin/q50/track.pl?id=608

http://home.q4music.com/cgi-bin/q50/track.pl?id=615

Q MAGAZINE ALWAYS MENTIONS OR HAS SOMETHING ABOUT NEW ORDER OR JOY DIVISION IN MOSTLY ALL OF IT'S ISSUES.

linus sulanki wrote: IN THIS MONTH'S Q50 THERE IS A SONG BY THE THE CHARLATANS CALLED Mis-Takes WHICH SOUNDS VERY NEW ODERISH , SOUNDS LIKE SOME THING FROM LOW-LIFE, WORTH CHECKING OUT

oh FFS

okay this time i agree with you

Jesus H....

a) read the threads a bit more

b) sort out your bloody CAPSLOCK

:angry2:

sorry about that, my main point was that even now new order is still influenced , talked about and written in magazines.

sorry about the caps, it is a dirty habbit that i have.

Is Q magazine actually called Q50 these days then? Ain't bought it for years.Would make sense seeing as it's lazily just made up of endless Top 50 lists

nope q50 is a section in q where it lists 50 songs for the month

point being made linus is more that there are already about 153 threads about the new charlatans album and it's similarities to new order, doesn't need another new one

Linus pal, I've got disagree with you about Q - the magazine does NOT mention New Order enough. And if it does it is a token gesture.

NO are now a barometer by which other modern day bands that try to ilk out a similar style are measured. But this doesn't constitue reams of column inches on the band, rather it produces the same old, tired stuff.

I read Q religiously for over 13 years and apart from the perenial interview whenever they release an album, they was hardly owt about them, other than vague generalisations and stereotypes. An interview from 2001 could well have been taken from 1993 with the same questions about Ian et al.

I've stopped buying Q, but on the other hand, if they were to publish the article:

"Hooky and Bernard: Why we fell out, made up and are going to take on the fooking world"...

noorder wrote: Linus pal, I've got disagree with you about Q - the magazine does NOT mention New Order enough. And if it does it is a token gesture.

NO are now a barometer by which other modern day bands that try to ilk out a similar style are measured. But this doesn't constitue reams of column inches on the band, rather it produces the same old, tired stuff.

I read Q religiously for over 13 years and apart from the perenial interview whenever they release an album, they was hardly owt about them, other than vague generalisations and stereotypes. An interview from 2001 could well have been taken from 1993 with the same questions about Ian et al.

I've stopped buying Q, but on the other hand, if they were to publish the article:

"Hooky and Bernard: Why we fell out, made up and are going to take on the fooking world"...

Say's everything I wanted to say. I've never regretted stopping buying it. Whenever I look over it it's just pages of uninteresting lists - bit like those shite 'Best 100 sock wearer programmes'

noorder wrote: Linus pal, I've got disagree with you about Q - the magazine does NOT mention New Order enough. And if it does it is a token gesture.

NO are now a barometer by which other modern day bands that try to ilk out a similar style are measured. But this doesn't constitue reams of column inches on the band, rather it produces the same old, tired stuff.

Am i missing something here? Why should any magazine mention New Order at all? Its finished, its over. What more needs to be said that isnt going over old ground for the millionth time? Everyone knows about all the Factory stories, losing money, the Hacienda, etc etc. Its been done to death. As long as New Order remain 'dormant' they deserve zero amount of column space.

And you can say what you want abouth the pages being full of Keane, Snow Patrol, Coldplay etc, but while these bands remain active (and I dont count crappy DJ sets) then they deserve to recieve preference over another New Order article by Paul Morley which is in fact just cover for another Paul Morley article about Paul Morley.

Couldn't agree more Unc.