New Order vs REM ... Professionalism?!

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.