15 replies · 17,640 views
Ok, just a quick question that maybe someone with a better know-how can help me with.
So I really dig the 1963 '95 Arthur Baker remix, it's actually one of the few remixes I care to listen to, but the thing is it doesn't sound like a typical remix, it sounds more like a re-recording not unlike Blue Monday '88 or Temptation '87 with the new instrumentation and new vocals.
So does anyone know how this track came about? Did New Order record a special session for this song? Thanks for any info.
Well, the legend goes that when the band recorded True Faith and 1963 with producer Stephen Hague in 1987 in order to have a shot at "breaking" the American charts it was a close run thing between which song would end up as the A side as the band felt both songs were of the same calibre. Rob Gretton allegedly wanted to put both tracks out on the same release rather than saving one for another single in order to give fans a decent b-side and thus value for money; the legendary FAC 183 appeared shortly afterwards.
Fast forward seven years, Factory's toast and London Records are preparing a nice few cash-in releases to celebrate acquiring the Joy Division and New Order catalogues. One of the compilations as we all know was (The Best Of) which spawned two singles: a "cleaned up" version of True Faith dubbed "-94" and a number of new versions of 1963 or "Nineteen63" as it was duly titled. So in the end, 1963 finally got its day in the sun as an A-side with both a cleaned up (-94) version of the original Hague mix and a spruced up Arthur Baker (-95) remix with a brand new approach to the song.
Another legend from around the same time concerns "Let's Go" where Bernard and Arthur Baker were on holiday together and rediscovered the instrumental the band recorded back in the day I.e. the demo-ish Salvation! version and possibly the "Waiting For So Long" vocal demo from the mid-80s. They subsequently went into the studio, pulled apart existing multi-tracks with Bernard recording brand new vocals and a guitar track. It was allegedly a Sumner/Baker only project and I don't think the rest of the band were even involved due to their estrangement post-Reading 93. The new "Let's Go (Nothing For Me)" took pride of place as track 1 on the US Qwest pressing of (The Best Of) but was relegated to the limited edition CD single of the newly remixed "Nineteen63" in the UK. Even then two mixes of the new "Let's Go" exist with one having a clean ending (US) and the other fading out (UK).
So I would surmise it's highly likely Bernard recorded the new acoustic guitar track for the Arthur Baker remix of 1963 at the same time they both decided to complete the new "Let's Go (Nothing For Me)" project. The rest of "1963-95" as far as I'm aware was derived from the original 1987 multi-tracks; notably the significantly louder Hooky bass which I'm sure we all agree enhances the remix. Baker obviously thought it was a decent opportunity to raise the faders on his contribution and let us hear the riffs.
Hope this helps.
Andy wrote: It's likely that Baker cohort Mark Plati played the guitar on the '95 remix.
He is listed as the engineer on the sleeve so it's definitely a possibility.
However I've given both a (nostalgic) listen this evening and the guitar during the instrumental break of "Let's Go (Nothing For Me)" and the intro of the Baker Remix of 1963 sound remarkably similar. It's got that acoustic-ey Technique chorus'd guitar strum about it.
NotAMod wrote:
The rest of "1963-95" as far as I'm aware was derived from the original 1987 multi-tracks; notably the significantly louder Hooky bass which I'm sure we all agree enhances the remix. Baker obviously thought it was a decent opportunity to raise the faders on his contribution and let us hear the riffs.
This is a question perhaps best aimed at Hooky, but is the bass really from 1987? It sounds nothing like the 6 string decoration played at the end of the song in the original version (and in live versions from 1987 and 1989). It sounds like brand new 6 string bass lines, although some of them are clearly looped (the same can be said about the "Let's Go" bass line in the new version). Did Hook go into the studio in '94 to record the parts? And/or did Baker piece the whole thing together from various takes/songs? In which case it is a tremendous effort. Or worse, is it an impersonator (Plati or somebody else)? I can't see Hook allowing that happen, though. Isn't it more likely that he insisted to re-record the bass parts when the song was finally chosen as the next single?
Thanks to the Mod for a charateristically full and interesting post. I always thought the inclusion of 'Nothing For Me' on the US 'Best Of' was essentially a marketing ploy, like 'Hellbent' on 'Total': tecnically not worthy of a hits compilation but intriguing. For once, a mix (Arthur Baker's 1963) sounds stronger than the original thanks to Hooky's inimitable bass. It's interesting that the late 80s are sometimes considered the band's greatest period, but it was also a period of relatively little Hooky. But this argument's been done to death.
I think I read somewhere that it was Sumner and Baker, with Barney re-recording vocals for True Faith, 1963, Round & Round, Bizarre Love Triangle, as well as adding new keyboards/guitar on 1963 and TF-94. Huge chunks of 1963-95 sound like someone has tried to re-create Hookys bass sound and reused bass outtakes from the original recordings. For me, the band weren't talking at that point except at occasional band meetings, and there was no case of anyone but Sumner being involved in the remixes. UIf I'm totally wrong, someone please enlighten me!
I think the vocals on True Faith-94, 1963-94, Bizarre Love Triangle-94 and Round & Round-94 were merely "cleaned up" rather than re-recorded. BLT-94 had been around since 1988 on the "Married To The Mob" OST albeit in a slightly different form while R&R-94 is basically the 7" version from 1989. He definitely re-recorded at least one vocal around that period though: Blue Monday for the 1995 reissue.
I guess who did the additional guitar on 1963 will remain a bit of a mystery but my money's on Sumner as he had obviously done new guitar for Let's Go (Nothing For Me) probably around the same time.
Yeah, Hague hardly broke new ground with the please-buy-the-best-Of 94 mixes. Almost identical to the originals: the TF/63 single, his R and R 7" mix, the Married to the Mob OST BLT... Intigued that they used some of the Sunkist ad in the Brain mix of BM.
1963-94 has a completely new vocal (or possibly an un-used vocal take from 87 but I don't think so, since it is much cleaner and better recorded)... listen to the "Johnny came back/with another wife" line which has a different melody, and the "special occasion nineteen sixty three" which has a different rhythm to it.
The same vocal was re-used for the 95 Baker version. I'm still intrigued by the Hooky bass on that one! I'm not convinced that it's "outtakes" - it just sounds too different from the 87 version.
I'm fairly sure the BLT-94 mix has different vocals ; one version has a unheard Barney "La La La" at the end, and the vocals seem clearer and softer, similar to his 1989 onward singing style when he took listens and learnt how to breathe between lines. I also noticed that the 7" remix of the 1986 track has Hooky bass on, and the 1986 12" remix has absolutely no Hooky bass at all. It only took me 27 years to notice that when I was mucking about with the tracks in MixPad on the train home after work one day. http://www.mixcloud.com/mrmarkreed/bizarre-love-triangle-full-length-re-edit/
uberpsycho wrote: Ok, just a quick question that maybe someone with a better know-how can help me with.
So I really dig the 1963 '95 Arthur Baker remix, it's actually one of the few remixes I care to listen to....
Been revisiting the 1963 remixes - or at least the ones I can tolerate for more than 30 seconds - and have a couple of questions for the completists.
The full 5:05 Arthur Baker 95 remix is a cracker, but as far as I can tell, it never got a vinyl release...does anyone know differently? A huge dereliction of duty not to have put this on the main 12"!
I'm assuming the Spooky 'Nightstripper Mix' on the 1963 CD is the same as the 'Night Tripper Mix' released previously? Sounds the same to me. YouTube also has a Night Tripper Dub mix Night Tripper Dub but I wonder if that ever got an official release?
I have a newfound appreciation for the Joe T. Vanelli Light Mix of 1963 1963 Light Mix but what's with the Elmer Fudd vocals, and odd affectations like 'Januawy nineteen sixty fwee', 'gweat surpwise', 'any pwice' etc? I know we've heard this from Barney before ('underneath a twee' from Behind Closed Doors for example) but does anyone know if it's anything more than vocal filtering / autotune settings being overdone perhaps? Weird. I asked a few of these questions on Discogs too, sorry for any repetition.
And just an observation of little consequence - I didn't realise the ending of Let's Go on the 1963 single is slightly different to the US Best Of...
From what I understand of Stephen's memoir, it's more of a re-recording than a proper remix. (And he wasn't even involved)
M1 wrote:
I'm assuming the Spooky 'Nightstripper Mix' on the 1963 CD is the same as the 'Night Tripper Mix' released previously? Sounds the same to me. YouTube also has a Night Tripper Dub mix Night Tripper Dub but I wonder if that ever got an official release?
Not really official : https://www.discogs.com/release/885232-New-Order-Excerpts-From-Recycle
Jcp7 wrote:
M1 wrote:
I'm assuming the Spooky 'Nightstripper Mix' on the 1963 CD is the same as the 'Night Tripper Mix' released previously? Sounds the same to me. YouTube also has a Night Tripper Dub mix Night Tripper Dub but I wonder if that ever got an official release?
Not really official : https://www.discogs.com/release/885232-New-Order-Excerpts-From-Recycle
Oh good one, I forgot about that one. Will have to dig it out today :)
