New Order vs REM ... Professionalism?!

I thought most bands / artists usually stuck to the same same setlist to discourage bootleggers. Maybe that's just an excuse.

My cousin recently stalked, err I mean followed, Gemma Hayes on her 3 date Irish tour, and she only played a couple of different songs on the last night as it was a "home" gig.

Is Stipe still using an old school music stand to read the words off, or has he moved into Barney teleprompter territory?

Occupation, Begin The Begin, Fall On Me and Cuyohoga all on the same setlist? Fantastic.

Didn't play Orange Crush on either night I'd have been gutted.

I'm convinced that New Order's policy of playing the same set every night after so many years of making it up as they were going along is all down to Barney's increased dislike of bootleggers rather than the publicised reason of "wanting to be more professional". It's not as if they are rehearsing any more to get it tighter, if anything the recent live shows were less professional in terms of performance !!

There wasn't a stage when bootleggers got hold of an album too soon was there ? This all started with the Technique dates - I don't remember bootleg copies of Technique becoming available early. I don't think many bands differentiate between recorded music pirates and people who record live shows, which offer a different perspective of the band. Of course it could be that Barney listened to his own performances on many of the older gigs and realised just how out of it he often was, and got embarrassed, and decided that doing the same set every night would minimise the chances of anyone ever getting to hear his cock-ups !

Originally posted by BCE I'm convinced that New Order's policy of playing the same set every night after so many years of making it up as they were going along is all down to Barney's increased dislike of bootleggers rather than the publicised reason of "wanting to be more professional". It's not as if they are rehearsing any more to get it tighter, if anything the recent live shows were less professional in terms of performance !!There wasn't a stage when bootleggers got hold of an album too soon was there ? This all started with the Technique dates - I don't remember bootleg copies of Technique becoming available early. I don't think many bands differentiate between recorded music pirates and people who record live shows, which offer a different perspective of the band. Of course it could be that Barney listened to his own performances on many of the older gigs and realised just how out of it he often was, and got embarrassed, and decided that doing the same set every night would minimise the chances of anyone ever getting to hear his cock-ups !

Wise words,Tim

This is certainly true - if the Order were to go back to mixing it up, or maybe even rehearsing 30 songs and doing any 16 or so each night but changing it from night to night, they would sell out every gig they did and make more money out of it !

Originally posted by Hink Wavesass© Didn't play Orange Crush on either night I'd have been gutted.

me too! and the perfect circle

Originally posted by Al Jarvis > Originally posted by BCE This is certainly true - if the Order were to go back to mixing it up, or maybe even rehearsing 30 songs and doing any 16 or so each night but changing it from night to night, they would sell out every gig they did and make more money out of it !

Would they though? They don't gig very often, and when they do they sell out, so I can't see it's of any real concern to them these days. Take the money, and run!

It's only in the UK they sell out - nobody else gives that much of a toss, do they ?

There's been a gap of almost 10 years between them performing and singing songs now days so i expect re-learning how to play such a wide sprinkling of their back catalogue is a bit of a chore, not like in the 80's when they were effectivly practicing the songs out live on a regular basis.

Steve and Gillian had this to say in 1993......

At one time, New Order would go out on tour with all of their material prepared for live performance, giving them the chance to pick and choose which songs to play each night. But starting with the last US tour, the group realized that they had to skim things down as it was getting to be a bit too much. Given the fact that everything is running live, their soundman ends up having 24 - 42 tracks to mix on each song. "If you think about it, it's like him mixing an LP as it was going along, because every song is different," says Gilbert. "It's like juggling."

But while the band has been forced to streamline their set list, they still strive for spontaneity, something missing from many electronic band's shows. "Most bands do 'a performance' which is essentially the same set to a certain extent choreographed," says Morris. "It shouldn't get away from a gig-type, spur of the moment type feeling which is hit-or-miss ,basically."

© Chaos Control Digizine

Reprinted with permission from the author

NEW ORDER-----NEW ORDER-----NEW ORDER-----NEW ORDER-->

Originally posted by Al Jarvis Must admit I've just totally ripped these lists off from a mail sent to me by Steve Waller this morning. Met him for REM at the Academy on Tuesday and he's forwarded the setlists they've done over the past two nights. Now, why do New Order insist that, on doing the same setlist two nights running, this is in any way [ahem] 'professional' when you look at what REM offered over two nights at the Academy. REM, a band surely more noted for their 'professionalism' than New Order could ever hope to be (which is the reason I still love the latter).

I think the keywords here are sheer indolence and laziness, which have only been allowed to increase exponentially during the 'sabbatical' years (all of the nineties, save for the Republic live dates). So what if 'Perfect Kiss' is a bitch to reprogram? Just do it, for Christ's sake. And why, if you can type in 20 titles for the autocue, not make it 40 or 50? You don't have to remember them anyway, just read them off the bleeding screen.

REM, on the other hand, have continued to mix up their setlists throughout the years, with the sole sorry exception of the Monster Tour ('95) which was really boring (they also did a fair share of 'oldies' during their '99 world tour). If professionalism means rehearsing 75 to 100 songs (the reports vary on this point)in preparation for an upcoming world tour, then I'm all for it. And besides, Stipe has, in the period since they stopped touring regularly year after year, never made a secret of using printed lyrics as a memory aid, but he's turned it into a prop (he uses a music stand), and the fans get something out of it as well (he throws the lyrics to the ground, page after page, ready to be picked up by eager hands). That's professional, too.

Somebody should forward this thread to the band members. 'The Peter Saville Exhibition Soundtrack' is a nice CD, but a little bit of extra work wouldn't hurt, men!

Even if the band played their usual programmed songs surely an interlude of Let's Go or Sunrise wouldn't tax the sound man too much would it?

it's the man with the huge avatar again! shrink it down or change it!

yeah, when they played the up tour thgey changed the set every night, now they have a new drummer who has had to learn the songs & they still change them all.

in fact when i saw them at the men on the up tour stipe played hope solo & clearly hadnt practised it, made loads of mistakes & had to abandon it part way through, but it was still great to see.

but rem were a pub band & started off playing cover versions at a party back on april 5th/6th in that little church in athens in the 70's so they have always operated under a different ethos

The most frustrating thing is that New Order could easily do a full set of songs with hardly any sequencing required. Maybe it's because they could do it that they don't !

Well, seeing as I prompted this thread by giving Al the setlists, the least I can do is add my comments, although firstly I can confirm that Stipey does still use a music stand, and also for some reason there was a nice array of toy dinosaurs on an amp behind Peter Buck!!

I suppose it comes down to how you define professionalism - New Order probably ARE more accomplished now, and they don't try songs out like they used to, but they are also - frankly - a bit dull. I went to the first two nights at Brixton and the two were virtually interchangeable, with Finsbury not being vastly different. When I saw them the most (84 - 86) I often went two nights running and saw very different sets. There may have been the odd mistakes, but that was made up for by the variety.

I took a chance when I saw REM two nights running at Earls Court in 99 - I expected "big" bands used to playing stadiums to play much the same each night, but was pleasantly surprised to see this wasn't the case, and so I did the same at Brixton (from a monetary viewpoint, NO could be missing out on income as me and Shugz would see them more if they varied things a bit!). OK, they've got a bigger back catalogue, but to do two 23 song sets and only duplicate 7 is pretty impressive (and they'll probably do another set tomorrow at Glasto), with at least two of these not done since the 80's. It's far from trendy, but I saw Springsteen last month as well and looking at the setlists before and since, he's been doing the same thing in terms of varying shows and performing songs that he hasn't done in years. I know NO aren't the exception, and plenty of groups do the same thing all the time, but it's just a shame when they don't have to be this way and weren't before.

And I think the fact that REM didn't do Orange Crush is interesting, because it would encourage me to go to more shows in the hope it would appear - if you get the same set every night then you know there won't be any surprises.

Let's just hope that they (or somebody close to and who has an influence) get the message that is coming across loud and clear here, and that one day we get a bit of variety again. I know for a fact that I would travel wherever in the world to see different sets !

Come on we got Love Vigilantes at Move last year what more do you want.... ;)

Originally posted by DoN Come on we got Love Vigilantes at Move last year what more do you want.... ;)

Them not following it with Crystal, Transmission, Regret, 60mph, Atmosphere......

Would be good to see a return of Everything's Gone Green and Perfect Kiss as well. Not to mention Sunrise, Face Up, Thieves Like Us....

Originally posted by Steve Waller Well, I can confirm that Stipey does still use a music stand, and also for some reason there was a nice array of toy dinosaurs on an amp behind Peter Buck!!

they have had those dinosaurs with them for ages - they always go to the recording studio with them as well - bit of a tradition i believe. if you'll excuse the pun.

Originally posted by masaaki sakai > Originally posted by Steve Waller> Well, I can confirm that Stipey does still use a music stand, and also for some reason there was a nice array of toy dinosaurs on an amp behind Peter Buck!!> >

they have had those dinosaurs with them for ages - they always go to the recording studio with them as well - bit of a tradition i believe. if you'll excuse the pun.

I've got a feeling that in one of the REM videos that has an REM "ABC" at the end, the "D" is for "Dinosuar"

Originally posted by Al Jarvis > Originally posted by DoN> Come on we got Love Vigilantes at Move last year what more do you want.... ;)

Yeah, but where was Ceremony?!

Oh, no! Not another Joy Division track... (oops, wrong thread)

Originally posted by Spotnick And "These Days" is indeed a REM track? Not a cover of something we know?

Nope... truly an original, and a great one at that, from arguably their best album (Lifes Rich Pageant).

Oh, and I forgot earlier today: you can actually go to the band's homepage (www.remhq.com) and request your favourite obscure track at the gig(s) you'll be attending. Take that!

Originally posted by Spotnick > Originally posted by little boy lost> > > > Originally posted by Spotnick> > And "These Days" is indeed a REM track? Not a cover of something we know?>

Nope... truly an original, and a great one at that, from arguably their best album (Lifes Rich Pageant).

Oh, and I forgot earlier today: you can actually go to the band's homepage (www.remhq.com) and request your favourite obscure track at the gig(s) you'll be attending. Take that!

Well, we never know ;)

These Days (Berry/Buck/Mills/Stipe) - 3:21

I thought it was by Hook/Sumner/Morris/Curtis or by Bon Jovi/Sanbora

I attribute the lack of variety in setlists to Barney. He's always maintained that he hates to practice. He claims it's boring but surely having 25-30 songs to choose from on a given night would offset the boredom. I say he just no longer has the motivation-nothing left to prove I suppose.

Hooky's of a different mind. It's obvious he would love to expand their touring repertoire as evidenced by his (spontaneous?) solo performances of Age of Consent, Dream Never End, etc.

Stephen would probably go along with whatever the other two (ha!) decide but apparently Barney has more weight (ha! again) in that decision. Stephen had put the blame on the soundman in BCE's quote but that's what soundmen are paid for. It's not a good argument for the sequenced/programmed elements because the volume levels and mix can be preset (programmers' responsibility).

What they need are a tech/support staff for their shows that can tell them "Whatever you want to do live, we'll make it happen." The programmer should have 50 tracks ready and the sound and lighting men should be ready to present any of those songs on any given night.

Oh, and I want free tickets and airfare for those shows.

I don't buy the theory that NO would censor themselves out of spite to bootleggers. They've never exhibited any particular ire for them, in fact you could make a case for them almost supporting the bootleggers by allowing high quality mixing desk tapes to get out from pretty much at least one show from every tour going back many years - maybe they didn't want it, but if it keeps happening, at some point you take responsibility for not stopping it by placing new controls on the soundmen. They've also declined to go after bootleggers legally, for whatever reason, haven't they ? At least, I've never heard of them taking anybody to court over that. They were probably too busy going to court for their own battles. It's been said that the band were actually responsible for a few of the bootlegs existence; I don't know if that is true or not, but in the case of some of them, it is plausible because so few people would have had access to the reel to reel master tapes of the '78 studio recordings that became the 'Warsaw' bootleg, for example. Supposedly the band bought back the tapes and rights soon after they were recorded and still have them; it is possible that it was copied surreptitiously at the studio in the late 70s, or since then at a band members' house or wherever, but we'll most likely never know.

That's why I still buy R.E.M. records; to show support for a band that'll still mix it up for the shows. Even though a couple of the recent albums have taken awhile to warm up to, and there will always be a song or two that I'll never care to listen to again, I like the chances that I'll hear something I wasn't expecting at an R.E.M show over just about any band now.

I still thrill at the memory of hearing Wendell Gee a full year and a half before it was released on Reconstruction, it was a sweet ending to a raucous show in a jammed nightclub, and there's still the chance, though it's probably lessened since they signed with Warners, of them pulling some choice, and not so choice, cover versions. The former would include the likes of Have You Ever Seen The Rain? and The Arms Of Love, while the latter would be stuff like Where's Captain Kirk?.

Yeah, think I'll catch 'em out my way in a month or two...

Originally posted by teleharmonium I don't buy the theory that NO would censor themselves out of spite to bootleggers. They've never exhibited any particular ire for them, in fact you could make a case for them almost supporting the bootleggers by allowing high quality mixing desk tapes to get out from pretty much at least one show from every tour going back many years - maybe they didn't want it, but if it keeps happening, at some point you take responsibility for not stopping it by placing new controls on the soundmen. They've also declined to go after bootleggers legally, for whatever reason, haven't they ? At least, I've never heard of them taking anybody to court over that. They were probably too busy going to court for their own battles.It's been said that the band were actually responsible for a few of the bootlegs existence; I don't know if that is true or not, but in the case of some of them, it is plausible because so few people would have had access to the reel to reel master tapes of the '78 studio recordings that became the 'Warsaw' bootleg, for example. Supposedly the band bought back the tapes and rights soon after they were recorded and still have them; it is possible that it was copied surreptitiously at the studio in the late 70s, or since then at a band members' house or wherever, but we'll most likely never know.

Two live quotes on the subject.....

"This one's for all you bootleggers, no-one noticing you yet you make a fortune out of it" (Barney, Portsmouth 84 before Hurt) "Nice Xmas Alex ? New tape recorder and some blank tapes ?" (Hooky to ATR, Manchester 98)

Certain recordings, i.e. mixing desk tapes, can only have come from band sources. What amazes me though is that they had to seek fan help for the live recording CD of Retro - they certainly used to have recordings of every show, and Hooky in particular is known to have the lot, as well as a good collection of other bootlegs. I guess we'll never know.

i think the programming is an excuse as well. radiohead's last couple albums have had a lot of electronic stuff and they just adapted. i think it's along the lines of NO being lazy. i don't like to hear them live much anyway. barney doesn't seem to care enough to stay in key. tho i must say i love electronic ecstasy. they do great live versions there and barney is unusally good at staying in key. i was pleasantly surprised at how good the songs sounded live and not just like stage versions of the recordings. i bet they'd have a bigger following if they did put that much effort into touring with different setlists and all. they've proven they're capable of it

I'd forgotten about this little tidbit of info: R.E.M. also worked with Stephen Hague, back in 82, before they recorded Murmur. Messrs. Berry, Buck, Mills and Stipe complained that he used too many synths on the songs he worked on. Considering who Hague worked with before, I just wanna know who at I.R.S. thought that would be a good working relationship.

Murmur

fuck rem

I gave up on REM about 3 or 4 albums ago. I'd probably go see them if they came near in hopes of hearing some older stuff. REM's music is so much simpler and shorter than NO's. Plus, Stipe merely needs to mumble along instead of singing.

Reckoning is my fave REM album.

Out of Time is a pearl by them :)

Originally posted by Green I'd forgotten about this little tidbit of info: R.E.M. also worked with Stephen Hague, back in 82, before they recorded Murmur. Messrs. Berry, Buck, Mills and Stipe complained that he used too many synths on the songs he worked on. Considering who Hague worked with before, I just wanna know who at I.R.S. thought that would be a good working relationship.Murmur

Scott Litt, producer of R.E.M.'s most popular albums, remixed Run for it's single release.

Around 10 years ago I heard a radio interview where Barney explained he had been to a voice coach who defined his vocal range, many norder songs were out of this range. For example, how many times has the line "won't you please let me go?" been all over the place, changing an octave mid line? Since then variation has been negligible with only selected archive tracks played.