NO better with primitive technology ?

Interesting point made over at the Wire mailing list :

'Cabaret Voltaire were a classic example of a band that was at its best when struggling with primitive music technology, but lost its edge when the technology improved (see also Kraftwerk, New Order).'

Anyone else agree that NO were much more interesting when struggling with primitive technology (PC&L, 2nd Peel Session, etc.) than later with better technology (Republic) ?

NO! Check "Get Ready"! "Republic" had been produced under pressure. Stephen Hague was more involved in the production as he should have been and the atmosphere within the band wasn't very good. On "Get Ready" they used the technology to support the songs not to actually write them.

I actually agree with that statement. NewOrder have been relying on other people to program their sequencers etc. and I doubt they could actually make a song as good as Temptation on their own in 2002. Bernard has shyed away from electronic production claiming that it's too dificult these days. They don't have any experimentation left in them. No Art, just Craft. It would seem that new technology would make it easier for them to do everything themselves but reaching the mouse over those huge guts must be too dificult.

Cummon Geaux, give the lads a break, while technology is far easier to tame than before, getting to know all the intricacies involved is far more complicated. Take for example a VCR, you can programme it but you could not, unless you were well into it, repair or adjust one. New Order are quite able to work with the modern electronics and Barney for instance has made good use of them in his partnership with Marr. However the actual knob twinkling is best left to others and I very much doubt whether all but the most anorakish of new groups do their own programming. More to the point: programming sequencing is CRAFT, creating beautiful songs such as Barney writes is ART.

Originally posted by Budvar Huber Cummon Geaux, give the lads a break, while technology is far easier to tame than before, getting to know all the intricacies involved is far more complicated. Take for example a VCR, you can programme it but you could not, unless you were well into it, repair or adjust one. New Order are quite able to work with the modern electronics and Barney for instance has made good use of them in his partnership with Marr. However the actual knob twinkling is best left to others and I very much doubt whether all but the most anorakish of new groups do their own programming. More to the point: programming sequencing is CRAFT, creating beautiful songs such as Barney writes is ART.

you're right, i do need to give the lads a break they are stars in my eyes...

i disagree about the quality of Bernards use of electronics in Electronic. Shite IMHO.

Programming and sequencing can be ART if done well. Stewart Walker, Bjorn Torske, Plaid...I could go on listing electronic producers who are leaps and bounds more creative than the Order.

most of the music i listen to is electronic and no vocal. i strongly belive the artists involved twiddle all the knobs on their records. I've used Pro Tools and once you get the basic principals of the program down, it's easy to use. If I have time to learn on a friends machine, then certainly they can sort it out at the farm.

you said "Creating beautiful songs such as Barney writes is Art"....to my ears, Bernard has been Crafting a load of shite for the better part of a decade. Raise The Pressure, Republic and Get Ready are filled with cliched, cheesy, unbalanced writing. Musically better than they are lyrically. Just my opinion (and i'm not afraid to use it).

Hmmm, interesting. I can see where they are coming from, but weren't New Order one of the pioneers of useing new kit as and when it became available ? Blue Monday was done on new kit, and that was fairly groundbreaking...... The use of different producers and getting people to do the sequencing has certainly changed various bits of their sound - I'm most concerned with the live reworkings of old classic songs (and TBTHOG) that sound washed-up and tinny compared to the versions they did themselves in the old days. Should we be looking at persuading Roger Lyons to add a bit more guts to his work for them ?

Originally posted by Biznotic Love Trapazoid > > > Programming and sequencing can be ART if done well. Stewart Walker, Bjorn Torske, Plaid...I could go on listing electronic producers who are leaps and bounds more creative than the Order.

Brian, maybe I am carefully splitting ends here but programming and sequencing is not Art, merely technique, as much as piano tuning is not an Art, as finer as the tuner could be. The best programmer and sequencer in the world could not match a song written with the help of a mellodica by a talented musician. On the other hand that is not to say that there can't be programmers who are very well endowed musically and as such are able to create challenging, beautiful Art, but that is because they are fine musicians not because they can programme well. Ultravox for example have always been at the forefront of technology and doing their own programming and what not but unable to create any song with half the soul of those from the Foxx era when they were using casiotones.

> > most of the music i listen to is electronic and no vocal. i strongly belive the artists involved twiddle all the knobs on their records. I've used Pro Tools and once you get the basic principals of the program down, it's easy to use. If I have time to learn on a friends machine, then certainly they can sort it out at the farm.

I think that you are attaching too much importance to what is nought but menial work. In the past most painters would not do the most boring parts of their works such as draperies or buildings but left that to apprentices at their workshop. They would draw the general plan and then add the personal bits such as hands and heads. After a fashion that is what NO do, they left the programming to the experts and concentrate on the Pernod..I mean..on the more exacting work of writing music. As for the lyrics I do not share the general view that they are shite and in time I want to open a thread with my views on that.

> > you said "Creating beautiful songs such as Barney writes is Art"....to my ears, Bernard has been Crafting a load of shite for the better part of a decade. Raise The Pressure, Republic and Get Ready are filled with cliched, cheesy, unbalanced writing. Musically better than they are lyrically. Just my opinion (and i'm not afraid to use it).

I strongly disagree there with you, IMO Get Ready is an album as strong as any they've done before. I do not dig certain songs like RTS but then I did not like all their previous songs either. Anyway, that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

I was thinking about proposing this the other day after we discussed the bands use of "backing tapes" (which they don't btw). New Orders use of sequencers and sampling technology moved them into first place when it came to production values and experimentation in the mid 80's but it really comes down to personal choice when deciding what sound you prefer.

I really don't think they could have avoided using this "new technology" at all - in particular their use of the Emulator sampler and the much talked about Oberheim DMX drum machine. Songs like "Thieves Like Us", "Confusion" & of course "Blue Monday" could never have existed without these instruments and their live sound gains a great deal through the use of sampled backing vocals and sequenced bass/synth lines.

In the early 80's, Barney often spoke of their attempts to develop software based sequencers using FORTH (i think...) and he was known to have built his own keyboards some time before that so it's clear that they were more than a little keen to advance their sound using electronic equipment quite early in their career.

See "Taras Tschevchenko" for some interesting use of these early examples of keyboards & synths - in particular, "Temptation".

As for Mr Lyons efforts on behalf of the band, I'm sure he has plans to "translate" a few more favourites before too long...

I totally agree with that premise, and it goes for pretty much everybody else too. I don't think it's necessarily a criticism of the band, though - today's "new technology" (or at least that which is current on the music industry marketplace, which is seldom really new) sounds like shit compared to the late 70s to early 80s current crop of gear. The analog (I realize they weren't all analog, I'm generalizing for clarity, so back off, nitpickers) synths and sequencers had their problems, but that forced the band to stay on their toes and not totally rely on it, which made them better musicians, and those gadgets sounded pretty damn good anyway. Today it's all Pro Tools and digital crap keyboards and effects. The only area of general improvement in the music industry since the early 80s is in live PA and in low end consumer recording gear, which is much cheaper and more available.

This is what our good friend Barney has to say on the matter:

"You can't ignore technology and, more importantly, you have still got to play these new fangled instruments. It does not matter if it is a Fairlight or a saw. It's the tune that matters. A strong melody was always the most important thing with any songwriter and certainly with us. It will always be. However easy it is to play...and anyone will soon be able to play music... you've still got to produce the melody. That is the art"

Source: Mick Middles' book. Page 217. 2002 edition.