I don't like 1963 (Original Version)

Arthur Baker's remix in 1995 made the song a lot better, but the 87 version is among one of the worst things NO has ever done.....Awkward lyrics (Barney singing about another guy taking advantage of him), virtually no Peter Hook, and the music sounds like it should be in a commercial for a cereal with strawberries.......Damn that Stephen Hague!

J

Both versions have the lyrics, and they are about Marilyn Monroe getting offed by John Kennedy or some such nonsense, with a ghost and maybe Bobby Kennedy getting sloppy seconds. Bernard claims this... Yes, it is even stupider than the gay idea of his "gun"(penis) pointed at him interpretation. This song will forever be the most confusing New Order track.

The Hague version is more syrupy. Not sure why Bernard loved Hague so much, maybe because Bernard wanted to be pop like The Pet Shop Boys.

And don't be so partisan... hate this and that and whatever. Chill. You can discuss without all the me me me stuff.

0_o wrote: And don't be so partisan... hate this and that and whatever. Chill. You can discuss without all the me me me stuff.

I believe I was not talking about "me". I was talking about 1963 and my dislike for Stephan Hague. When did I even say the word "hate"?

And yes the lyrics are the same in both versions but at least Arthur Baker made improvements to the music.

J

1963 is one of their best songs ever. brilliant in every way, especially the bizarre keyboard chords.

lyrics are straight out of the freudian godhead.

so sorry we hardcore fans like it and upset your little Confusioned Blade fan mind....

I started a thread a while ago saying how much I love the original version. I still do, and it desperately needs to be remastered.

It's so full of emotion, particularly the ending. The Arthur Baker version takes away from the sense of desperation in it, to my ears.

Ryan wrote: I started a thread a while ago saying how much I love the original version. I still do, and it desperately needs to be remastered.

It's so full of emotion, particularly the ending. The Arthur Baker version takes away from the sense of desperation in it, to my ears.

I would agree that the original builds up the emotion in the end really well, and that ultimately makes the song work. Maybe Baker cleaned it up to much, maybe it was better with the overdone synths and the bombastic ending? Or maybe Hooky was put too low in the mix?

I which Bakers version had the swirling keyboards and high bass outro, then it would the bollocks.

No Holiday wrote: Arthur Baker's remix in 1995 made the song a lot better, but the 87 version is among one of the worst things NO has ever done.....Awkward lyrics (Barney singing about another guy taking advantage of him), virtually no Peter Hook, and the music sounds like it should be in a commercial for a cereal with strawberries.......Damn that Stephen Hague!

J

What a fucking retarded thread.

Always preferred 1963 to True Faith. I think the original is still the best version, although it may need a bit more bass, and the outro is fantastic.

I like the original Hague-version the most. For me it's equally good to it's Hague a-side True Faith. However I like the 95-Baker-version in it's guitar extension (it was a good revisitation of the song), I always come back to the original. I think it's one of their best songs, at least the best b-side out there (later a-side).

The song's full of emotion which I like, it's typical New Order.

The lyrics are the same in both versions...I won't criticise you for disliking the song, but I personally preferred the original version over the Arthur Baker remix.

To me the original doesn't have nearly enough low end in the mix....It sounds dated as hell (very 1987), kind of sounds like a Bad Depeche Mode song to me. I don't know.. I respect everyone's opinion too, but I don't think that the original 1963 will stand the test of time. It sounds too stuck in the UK bubblegum pop of the mid-late 80s.

Which leads me to add that I wish NO would have worked with Arthur Baker more. Confusion is a classic and IMO he saved 1963. In Baker's 1963 there's a lot stronger atmosphere, it doesn't nearly sound as flat. The sonic element of the remix is far and beyond a substantial improvement over the original. Plus, as much as I don't want to say this, the original 1963 just sounds kind of fruity to me. 80s Fruity! The best kind!

True Faith is good though.

J

I quite like the Arthur Baker 1995 version of 1963 but I prefer the original. by a smidge. They are both very good though, and its a great song period.

I love True Faith, I think its probably New Order's best song. True Faith is, as one critic put it:

"New Order's best combination of head and heart".

I agree. I love the big, uplifting anthemic quality of the song, and its a great dance track as well as a beautifully written song. This, combined with with the quite sad lyrics about the optimism of youth being blotted out by drug addiction (in my opinion Bernard Sumner's best set of lyrics) make for a powerful song and I never tire of hearing it.

You know that True Faith and 1963 are brilliant simply as songs, because you can perform them in about any arrangement and style and they still sound great. Its all there in the melodies.

The original version of 1963 is brilliant.

As for your explanation of the lyrics I think you need to read the explanation written by Bernard himself in the New Order sheet music book.

Major Tarantino wrote: The original version of 1963 is brilliant.

As for your explanation of the lyrics I think you need to read the explanation written by Bernard himself in the New Order sheet music book.

I do not know if you were referring to what I said or not.....but I know that bernard wrote down what 1963 is about for the New Irder sheet music book. JFK and all that.

My explanation of lyrics was actually referring to the lyrics of True Faith, which is, in Barney's own words, about smack addiction.

Musically, it's a classic.

The lyrics put me off for a bit, it sounds like a failed attempt at a techno ballad. They were trying new things at the time, I suppose.

Now I sort of filter the lyrics out and enjoy the tune.

Zachery Starkey wrote:

Major Tarantino wrote: The original version of 1963 is brilliant.

As for your explanation of the lyrics I think you need to read the explanation written by Bernard himself in the New Order sheet music book.

I do not know if you were referring to what I said or not.....but I know that bernard wrote down what 1963 is about for the New Irder sheet music book. JFK and all that.

My explanation of lyrics was actually referring to the lyrics of True Faith, which is, in Barney's own words, about smack addiction.

Sorry, I was referring to No Holiday's comment:

"Awkward lyrics (Barney singing about another guy taking advantage of him)"

Hey Major Tarantino, you're a Major Jackoff.

The Baker version is great, but I must say that I prefer the original over it. To say it's one of their worst songs like it's a matter of fact is a bit harsh. I'm sure a poll here can prove otherwise.

I've always had a soft spot for this song due to how emotional Barney sings it. When you realize what he is actually singing about, it makes it somewhat comical, yet he continues singing straightforward for more heart and conviction than anything off of Get Ready or WFTSC can conjure.

You know i'm sure that the real Joy Division loyalists really dig the tune. What would Ian think!

J

No Holiday wrote: What would Ian think!

Ian would think "what a bunch of fags! I'm glad I offed myself!"

Is that what you think Ian would think?

I don't like Round and Round '94

I don't like Mondays...

michael preda wrote: I don't like Round and Round '94

I do. But then I like all versions of Round and Round. Best chorus in any NO song, I believe.

I don't mind either version of 1963, but for me its one of those songs you have to be in the mood for.

El Jarvo wrote:

Ally wrote: He would have called them cocksuckers.

It's my word of the month thanks to the Deadwood season 1 DVD boxset.

Cocksuckers there, I've said it again.

I call someone it at work next week.

I think I can see where you're coming from!

You cocksucker.

Best said in Mr Wu's accent though. So that you can be both racist and insulting. Two birds for the price of one!

Totally off topic, but has anyone done a cocksucker word count on that show? Which is fucking brilliant TV btw

No Holiday wrote: To me the original doesn't have nearly enough low end in the mix....It sounds dated as hell (very 1987), kind of sounds like a Bad Depeche Mode song to me. I don't know.. I respect everyone's opinion too, but I don't think that the original 1963 will stand the test of time. It sounds too stuck in the UK bubblegum pop of the mid-late 80s.

Which leads me to add that I wish NO would have worked with Arthur Baker more. Confusion is a classic and IMO he saved 1963. In Baker's 1963 there's a lot stronger atmosphere, it doesn't nearly sound as flat. The sonic element of the remix is far and beyond a substantial improvement over the original. Plus, as much as I don't want to say this, the original 1963 just sounds kind of fruity to me. 80s Fruity! The best kind!

True Faith is good though.

J

New Order, even including it's more dancier songs, wouldn't be considered bubblegum pop, and as much as I also listen to Depeche Mode, they sound nothing like DM.

But hey, whatever.

The Joe T Vanelli mix is good - bit Italian disco but better than the orginal. Still like the Arthur Baker mix the best because it has Hookey's killer baseline that is missing from the original (curse that Stephen Hague)