JD original?

Benny Cobweb stated a while back on this forum that "Joy Division wouldn't have been original had it not been for Martin Hannett"

I was just wondering is this true? And why does Hannett alone make them go from normal/un-original to original?

I think I was arguing that it was Hannett's (at the time) novel approach of inverting the traditional bass and guitar roles for many songs in the mix, an idea which the band then used for devastating effect on many later tracks by writing the melody on the bass and using the guitar part as rhythm. Barney and Co were certainly very quick learners and quick to make this style their own, but I think that Hannett's tinkering in the studio beefed up the sound to an extent that gave them a new direction.

Listen to the difference between the weedy and strangely-mixed Warsaw stuff, then the RCA "album", then Unknown Pleasures etc for development and comparison. The earlier JD songs had guitar riffs - Novelty being a classic example, and were guitar-driven. Using the bass as the driver in other songs gave them a different and unique sound.

Were there other bands as bass driven before JD? Also what bands sort of followed that inversion after JD?

I like the fact that the bass is prevalent in their songs. But its something about the way all the intruments and Curtis vocals come together to form smooth rhythm and overall unique flavor to the music.

Well, The Stranglers used bass up front at times, and a whole host of bands have done so since.

So you saying without Hannett they are nothing special BENNY! Dont degrade JD!! But seriously, don't you think it is more than just the bass/guitar-lead/ryhtm inverison that made JD special?

Originally posted by Nikos Malakas So you saying without Hannett they are nothing special BENNY! Dont degrade JD!! But seriously, don't you think it is more than just the bass/guitar-lead/ryhtm inverison that made JD special?

No, I didn't say that at all. What I will say though is that it took the combination of image, perceived persona and innovative production to elevate Joy Division from just another gigging band of the late 70's to the much-vaunted pioneers we hear. Not to mention a suicide that placed them once and for all in rock history and legend.

Which other famous bands after JD did this inversion Benny? Just curious.

Also what do you think makes JD special from the average band of its time (late 70s, early 80's)?

The C**e are the obvious one that springs to mind.

What made JD special ? They dared to be different. At a time when everyone else was snarling and spitting, they made you sit up and take notice, either slamming a bassline into your head or disconcerting you with string keyboards. The in/out sound was just part of the compelling mystery. The "no press" stance added to the mystery. The hypnotic trance-inducing dance accidentally perfected by Curtis live nailed the experience to you - this wasn't just a band who had made groundbreaking records, it was a band who pushed back horizons at every turn until ultimately Curtis could take no more.

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes The C**e are the obvious one that springs to mind.What made JD special ? They dared to be different. At a time when everyone else was snarling and spitting, they made you sit up and take notice, either slamming a bassline into your head or disconcerting you with string keyboards. The in/out sound was just part of the compelling mystery. The "no press" stance added to the mystery. The hypnotic trance-inducing dance accidentally perfected by Curtis live nailed the experience to you - this wasn't just a band who had made groundbreaking records, it was a band who pushed back horizons at every turn until ultimately Curtis could take no more.

i agree with you about JD, but about ian's death--i think it was the result of a man who was probably manic-depressive, who was definitely suffering from the limitations of his epilepsy, and who was backed into a corner over his affair with annik. whether he was in a band or not, i think he may have ended his life just the same.

having said that, i don't think ian's lyrics would have had the same effect had he not gone through the difficulties that plagued him.

Yes, but I think he used his lyrics to articulate what he was putting himself through - it's pretty well-documented that he was more than slightly interested in epilepsy before he managed to trigger it in himself. His dancing mirrored a fit, he brought so much of his problems on himself almost as though he was trying to out-Iggy Iggy. He was becoming a product of the band's success, and sadly events conspired for his lowest point to coincide with the screening of Stroszek on the eve of the US tour. If only he'd missed the film, he'd have been on that plane.....

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes Listen to the difference between the weedy and strangely-mixed Warsaw stuff, then the RCA "album", then Unknown Pleasures etc for development and comparison. The earlier JD songs had guitar riffs - Novelty being a classic example, and were guitar-driven. Using the bass as the driver in other songs gave them a different and unique sound.

i think this in inaccurate..to my mind, the memory of joy division had Hooky playing bass like he does in new order ALL THE TIME, but in reality, it was really different..the later Joy division songs had guitar riff's and such, with peter hook playing nothing like he does now, Colony springs to mind. even though Colony has a predominent bass riff, theres also a lot of guitar work.

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes Yes, but I think he used his lyrics to articulate what he was putting himself through - it's pretty well-documented that he was more than slightly interested in epilepsy before he managed to trigger it in himself. His dancing mirrored a fit, he brought so much of his problems on himself almost as though he was trying to out-Iggy Iggy. He was becoming a product of the band's success, and sadly events conspired for his lowest point to coincide with the screening of Stroszek on the eve of the US tour. If only he'd missed the film, he'd have been on that plane.....

deborah seems to think he would have just topped himself while in the states. perhaps he would have. bit eerie about the stroszek bit, though.

Yes, Hooky never changed the way he played bass, or the style of bassline. What changed was the way in which the bass was used as a pivotal instrument in the song. Not all songs were bass-driven by any means out of the later compositions, Colony being a good example (though the mix of Closer takes the bass a lot further back than live versions). Passover is another one - there's hardly any bass up front. The use of bass as a melody instrument, with the guitar providing what was essentially a rhythm part (i.e. inverting the "traditional" guitar and bass roles in a two-guitar band) was something that they didn't really use until they had been in the studio a few times.

Originally posted by AgentWood > Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes> Yes, but I think he used his lyrics to articulate what he was putting himself through - it's pretty well-documented that he was more than slightly interested in epilepsy before he managed to trigger it in himself. His dancing mirrored a fit, he brought so much of his problems on himself almost as though he was trying to out-Iggy Iggy. He was becoming a product of the band's success, and sadly events conspired for his lowest point to coincide with the screening of Stroszek on the eve of the US tour. If only he'd missed the film, he'd have been on that plane.....

deborah seems to think he would have just topped himself while in the states. perhaps he would have. bit eerie about the stroszek bit, though.

no, in the book "touching from a distance", she thought that ian was goign to kill himself no matter what..the reason he wasn't worried about the flight to america, was becasue he knew he wasn't going.

I've seen Stroszek, and i think its a great film.

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes The C**e are the obvious one that springs to mind.What made JD special ? They dared to be different. At a time when everyone else was snarling and spitting, they made you sit up and take notice, either slamming a bassline into your head or disconcerting you with string keyboards. The in/out sound was just part of the compelling mystery. The "no press" stance added to the mystery. The hypnotic trance-inducing dance accidentally perfected by Curtis live nailed the experience to you - this wasn't just a band who had made groundbreaking records, it was a band who pushed back horizons at every turn until ultimately Curtis could take no more.

THE CURE you mean Benny? Why the C**e??

Originally posted by AgentWood > Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes> Yes, but I think he used his lyrics to articulate what he was putting himself through - it's pretty well-documented that he was more than slightly interested in epilepsy before he managed to trigger it in himself. His dancing mirrored a fit, he brought so much of his problems on himself almost as though he was trying to out-Iggy Iggy. He was becoming a product of the band's success, and sadly events conspired for his lowest point to coincide with the screening of Stroszek on the eve of the US tour. If only he'd missed the film, he'd have been on that plane.....

deborah seems to think he would have just topped himself while in the states. perhaps he would have. bit eerie about the stroszek bit, though.

He'd have topped himself at some stage anyway, it was in his personal manifesto and gift to himself. We'll never know.

Originally posted by Nikos Malakas > Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes> The C**e are the obvious one that springs to mind.> > What made JD special ? They dared to be different. At a time when everyone else was snarling and spitting, they made you sit up and take notice, either slamming a bassline into your head or disconcerting you with string keyboards. The in/out sound was just part of the compelling mystery. The "no press" stance added to the mystery. The hypnotic trance-inducing dance accidentally perfected by Curtis live nailed the experience to you - this wasn't just a band who had made groundbreaking records, it was a band who pushed back horizons at every turn until ultimately Curtis could take no more.

THE CURE you mean Benny? Why the C**e??

Mere mention of their name sends certain NOOL regulars into spasms of apoplexy !!

Ian's death shouldn't be interpreted as some kind of "divine sacrifice to the altar of Rock". The man had serious problems which he couldn't or choose not to confront. I think his schoolboy fantasies of glory beyond the grave fueled his early preoccupation, but real life (epilepsy, a failed marriage, adultery, etc.) and the demands it placed on him certainly magnified his already potent depression. I don't know that he would have been able to carry on much longer than he had if they made it to America, his problems might have been magnified. The best thing he could have done was walk away from the band and seek treatment for his condition, but he didn't obviously feel like that was a solution. Whatever your take on Ian, you gotta feel sorry for the fact he couldn't see a way out.

As to the Hannett and JD thrust of the original post, I think it was a marriage of two great forces. One without the other is unimaginable, and they certainly deserve credit for helping to steer music away from the spit-and-piss of punk (Let's not forget Public Image, however, and Pere Ubu). He obviously helped shape their sound, but New Order's continued creativity shows they weren't studio tools of the producer.

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes Yes, Hooky never changed the way he played bass, or the style of bassline. What changed was the way in which the bass was used as a pivotal instrument in the song. Not all songs were bass-driven by any means out of the later compositions, Colony being a good example (though the mix of Closer takes the bass a lot further back than live versions). Passover is another one - there's hardly any bass up front. The use of bass as a melody instrument, with the guitar providing what was essentially a rhythm part (i.e. inverting the "traditional" guitar and bass roles in a two-guitar band) was something that they didn't really use until they had been in the studio a few times.

what do you mean the bass was put further back in the mix of closer?, what about isolation? 24 hours?..if it seems toned down, its because its meant to be. No use comparing the recordings with live versions, there are so many.

Originally posted by Sean Komakino > Originally posted by AgentWood> > > > Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes> > Yes, but I think he used his lyrics to articulate what he was putting himself through - it's pretty well-documented that he was more than slightly interested in epilepsy before he managed to trigger it in himself. His dancing mirrored a fit, he brought so much of his problems on himself almost as though he was trying to out-Iggy Iggy. He was becoming a product of the band's success, and sadly events conspired for his lowest point to coincide with the screening of Stroszek on the eve of the US tour. If only he'd missed the film, he'd have been on that plane.....>

deborah seems to think he would have just topped himself while in the states. perhaps he would have. bit eerie about the stroszek bit, though.

no, in the book "touching from a distance", she thought that no matter what, ian was goign to kill himself no matter what..the reason he wasn't worried about the flight to america, was becasue he knew he wasn't going.

I've seen Stroszek, and i think its a great film.

that's exactly what i mean! no matter where he was, he wouldn't have escaped suicide.... in touching from a distance, tony wilson said that he wished that ian had only boarded the plane, as though that would have made a difference to ian's psyche. deborah alluded that it wouldn't have.

anyhow, as for warsaw vs. JD: to my ears, the early recordings sound more traditionally 'punk' (in the most stereotypical sense of the word). i see what BCE means by the use of heavy guitar riffs, and i think the production is messier. hannett 'cleaned them up' so to speak and helped create the sound that they became best known for, bringing out hooky's bass in the process.

[Content deleted by AgentWood on 11/27/2002 6:24:44 PM EDT]

Originally posted by Sean Komakino what do you mean the bass was put further back in the mix of closer?, what about isolation? 24 hours?..if it seems toned down, its because its meant to be. No use comparing the recordings with live versions, there are so many.

Some songs on Closer had the bass taken a bit deeper in the mix, no two ways about it. The bass was a lot more up front in a live context. You can hardly hear any bass in Passover besides a few rumbles !

Let's face it, when they first started, they were a bit limited in what they could actually play. Barney learned a few chord patterns and riffs, and they developed from there. Bloody quickly. Meeting Martin Hannett opened their eyes and ears to new ways of using the powers they had, and as they developed as songwriters, so they were able to combine their undoubted talents to much greater effect.

There's always a debate as to what the "true" sound of a track is - is it the recorded studio-enhanced multi-tracked version, or the live performance ? One to mull over...

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes > > Some songs on Closer had the bass taken a bit deeper in the mix, no two ways about it. The bass was a lot more up front in a live context. You can hardly hear any bass in Passover besides a few rumbles !

maybe on your copy. don't you think it depends on the sound quality of the live recording, obviously??

Most of my JD tapes are either mixing desk tapes or first generation high-quality audience tapes. Believe me, the bass was bloody loud (as was the guitar) when I saw them.

do you happen to own the Roots Club, Leeds gig?, 11 July 79 , anyway..one of the worst recordings ive ever heard.

look at the infamous preston gig, which is unbelivable, despite th fact that there was technical difiulties, when the bass was on, you could hardly hear it..and that was official!

Originally posted by Sean Komakino do you happen to own the Roots Club, Leeds gig?, 11 July 79 , anyway..one of the worst recordings ive ever heard.look at the infamous preston gig, which is unbelivable, despite th fact that there was technical difiulties, when the bass was on, you could hardly hear it..and that was official!

Yes, Roots club is pretty bad. There are worse though, a Band on the Wall gig, Berlin Kantkino are just two that spring to mind.

The reason there was no bass audible on the Preston gig was that the PA had blown, so everything was being played through Hooky's amp. In order to get a half-decent guitar sound from that, they necessarily had to alter the settings, which meant upping the treble and mid ranges and taking the bass down. I've tried running bass and lead guitar through a bass amp at the same time, and the results were remarkably similar. Preston's not the best example to use my friend !