Andrew Eldritch: Why won't you release a new Sisters LP?

[Sita]

No, absolutely not! Not at all. But if you'd want to be "professionally exploited", like I recall Eldritch said in one of these TV interviews you can find on Youtube, I think you'd want that sort of support.

Or, a less commercial benefit of being with a record company - do you remember how Mute records used to have, besides their acts that sold a lot, so many "non commercial" projects like Laibach, Diamanda Galas... I think that was brilliant for the artists to develop their work without the immediate pressure to be commercially half way successful.

[il duce]

It is all just excuses. Von has left Sisters a long time ago. Right now he just enjoys living in a bus and drinking free booze for a coupld of weeks a year. Gets him out of the apartment and tickles his ego.

[Prescott]

It is all just excuses. Von has left Sisters a long time ago. Right now he just enjoys living in a bus and drinking free booze for a coupld of weeks a year. Gets him out of the apartment and tickles his ego.

Agreed. It all sounds like quite a bit of lame excuses.

[Machine Regime]

It is all just excuses. Von has left Sisters a long time ago. Right now he just enjoys living in a bus and drinking free booze for a coupld of weeks a year. Gets him out of the apartment and tickles his ego.

Agreed. It all sounds like quite a bit of lame excuses.

We still can't stop listening to his stuff though, the rotten bastard.

[Sita]

We still can't stop listening to his stuff though, the rotten bastard.

Love is a terrible thing!

[Prescott]

We still can't stop listening to his stuff though, the rotten bastard.

Love is a terrible thing!

No, love is a many splintered thing, just like the state of the Sisters.

[Camy]

We still can't stop listening to his stuff though, the rotten bastard.

Love is a terrible thing!

No, love is a many splintered thing, just like the state of the Sisters.

His fans queued up in the hallway
He heard them scratching at the door
He tried to sing them
About Marx and Engels, God and Angels
He really knows what for...

[Camy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc

[H. Blackrose]

How would you know what he does and does not care about?

http://www.thesistersofmercy.com/misc/deardok.htm

Why don't you just keep towing the company line?

You misspelled "toeing". Hope this helps. Also, I actually agree with Von's stated reasons for not releasing a new album: a) they wouldn't make any money out of it; (b) he's happy with what the Sisters are doing right now; (c) if you want to hear the new songs, go to YouTube.

[bearskin]

Also, I actually agree with Von's stated reasons for not releasing a new album: a) they wouldn't make any money out of it; (b) he's happy with what the Sisters are doing right now; (c) if you want to hear the new songs, go to YouTube.

Yes, that's pretty much what he said, and it is hard to argue with that.

However.

Isn't that just a little undemanding? Don't we just expect from him, a whole lot more?

Taking his perfectly reasoned stance about how things are right now - in particular the 'why bother' attitude to releasing new material - aside... I'd love to take him to one side and just ask him...but what about your legacy?

Here's a bloke, a band, who wrote some of the very best pop-rock of their generation... for a few years, then... nothing.

The 'unreleased' material is just as good - the guy is obviously a massive, but wasted, talent. Playing live isn't really a legacy - your actual official recorded output is what will last - and he has so much more up his sleeve. I suspect that history will focus on the recorded output and the fourth album of songs that have only been played live will never be written into his legacy.

Which is a shame.

C'mon Andrew. Forget about the money, the endless paying the bills with gigs. Think about how you'll look back at things in 10 years time, and don't have regrets.

In NZ they have a saying - rugby related of course - about "leaving everything out on the pitch" - meaning give it your all and have nothing left in the tank at the end.

Right now I think there's plenty left. My question is: why?

[Being645]

... so, drawing on a slightly different view for once again, IMHO:

a) there has never been an intention to not release a new studio record, but it happened. Von fell prey to overload frustration and turned to elaborate some of his idiot habits rather than new songs and a perspective for some time. This has basically been overcome by now.

b) of course, Andrew (and everybody else in the band) cares about the Sisters and their audience.

c) of course, they have in mind the idea of putting out something but so far never got to finish further tracks in full length (understandably as they are all quite busy). Anyway they do record bits - and everybody can hear it at the gigs because there the results show ... so The Sisters are a living work in progress...

d) their picture (and the according alienation) - within the press as much as anywhere - has ceased being oriented to the 80ies ... which is an enormous progress in the view of two decades (or more) of recourses we won't repeat here now again ...

d) in addition, the world in general (not only music business) has changed and is changing further ...

e) The Sisters have improved their entire performance enormously within the last two years.

All of this does, IMHO, mark a new situation.

So why not let them take a breath to realize these facts, to recreate from former inconveniences and allow them the time necessary to find the few bits here and the few bits there it takes to melt them into some new produce? (Honestly, I'm convinced this is taking place anyway right now.)
Of course, they could throw out anything at any time... but if they want to make a record, they probably want to make one they actually like, a sound and rock for themselves as much as for us and for everybody ... a really nice’n pretty thing ... that's nothing one can hurry. Sometimes it takes years for a band to reach that state or to reach it again after some release. One cannot force that, so no cause to pressure them.

[Prescott]

Also, I actually agree with Von's stated reasons for not releasing a new album: a) they wouldn't make any money out of it; (b) he's happy with what the Sisters are doing right now; (c) if you want to hear the new songs, go to YouTube.

Yes, that's pretty much what he said, and it is hard to argue with that.

However.

Isn't that just a little undemanding? Don't we just expect from him, a whole lot more?

Taking his perfectly reasoned stance about how things are right now - in particular the 'why bother' attitude to releasing new material - aside... I'd love to take him to one side and just ask him...but what about your legacy?

Here's a bloke, a band, who wrote some of the very best pop-rock of their generation... for a few years, then... nothing.

The 'unreleased' material is just as good - the guy is obviously a massive, but wasted, talent. Playing live isn't really a legacy - your actual official recorded output is what will last - and he has so much more up his sleeve. I suspect that history will focus on the recorded output and the fourth album of songs that have only been played live will never be written into his legacy.

Which is a shame.

C'mon Andrew. Forget about the money, the endless paying the bills with gigs. Think about how you'll look back at things in 10 years time, and don't have regrets.

In NZ they have a saying - rugby related of course - about "leaving everything out on the pitch" - meaning give it your all and have nothing left in the tank at the end.

Right now I think there's plenty left. My question is: why?

Exactly what I thought I had clearly expressed myself throughout this thread. Yet obviously some are more concerned with proof-reading my spelling mistakes than acknowledging the points you and I have raised.

How important recorded songs for a musical artist's legacy is being irrationally down-played. It smacks of agreeing with whatever excuses he makes at all costs. Or damage control. Either way it's disingenuous at best and straight up inauthentic at worst. Especially when some of us have no problem with voicing our true thoughts and feelings.

[Prescott]

... so, drawing on a slightly different view for once again, IMHO:

a) there has never been an intention to not release a new studio record, but it happened. Von fell prey to overload frustration and turned to elaborate some of his idiot habits rather than new songs and a perspective for some time. This has basically been overcome by now.

b) of course, Andrew (and everybody else in the band) cares about the Sisters and their audience.

c) of course, they have in mind the idea of putting out something but so far never got to finish further tracks in full length (understandably as they are all quite busy). Anyway they do record bits - and everybody can hear it at the gigs because there the results show ... so The Sisters are a living work in progress...

d) their picture (and the according alienation) - within the press as much as anywhere - has ceased being oriented to the 80ies ... which is an enormous progress in the view of two decades (or more) of recourses we won't repeat here now again ...

d) in addition, the world in general (not only music business) has changed and is changing further ...

e) The Sisters have improved their entire performance enormously within the last two years.

All of this does, IMHO, mark a new situation.

So why not let them take a breath to realize these facts, to recreate from former inconveniences and allow them the time necessary to find the few bits here and the few bits there it takes to melt them into some new produce? (Honestly, I'm convinced this is taking place anyway right now.)
Of course, they could throw out anything at any time... but if they want to make a record, they probably want to make one they actually like, a sound and rock for themselves as much as for us and for everybody ... a really nice’n pretty thing ... that's nothing one can hurry. Sometimes it takes years for a band to reach that state or to reach it again after some release. One cannot force that, so no cause to pressure them.

I hope you're correct. Only time will tell. As far as "pressuring" him is concerned, it's interesting that some here are convinced he is beyond being pressured and others here think that the mere act of posting what one really thinks and feels about no records in 20 years is "pressure".

Either way, it would be wonderful if you're correct, "yet anyway to me you're too serene."

To the rest, "all you do is down-play."

[bearskin]

OK, I'll say it.

If I had the talent that Andrew Eldritch has, I would like to think that I wouldn't waste it.

I'd like to think I wouldn't be semi-retired at home with my cats, doing the occasional tour playing old songs to old men; when I was still able to create something that your average Joe cannot. Stuff that makes anyone's jaw just drop at the sheer bloody talent of it.

OK, so the last output was a while ago and there have been one or two changes in the world, in himself, since then - but... listen to stuff he has written and performed recently - the standard of concert he is still capable of performing... and it's pretty clear that if he wanted to he could put out music that would knock Lady Gagas willy off.

Feck me, it's a bloody shame.

[Aazhyd]

You're all wrong. Saint Andy has an incidious genius master plan, and it's all going to be revealed on December 21, 2012.

[Prescott]

You're all wrong. Saint Andy has an incidious genius master plan, and it's all going to be revealed on December 21, 2012.

I've thought about that! What if that is when the EMP bombs start dropping? Then: Blammo! No more internot and he will feel the threat of illegal downloading will have then been sufficiently mitigated!

[Pista]

I do find it rather absurd that a new studio product hasn't emerged for such a long time & sometimes find myself almost sensing that something's coming.
Then I put myself in his shoes (& Barca away top), log onto a site like HL & see this sort of thread & think, "Hey. Fcuk you all! I'll not be bullied into this. I'll take my own sweet time."
But I find it akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face & he's taken it so far in that in practically every interview he flatly rules out the possibility & he's sort of painted himself into a corner.
If he U-turns on all those "no way" messages now, maybe he'll feel a bit of a plonker & we'd see his credibility wain.
As Sabine said, in the past couple of years, the band have really got their act together & perhaps now that they are in such great form, they might feel ready to press the "record" button. I sincerely hope so.
I also think Andrew should talk to Si Denby more about the whole pledge thing, as I (& I guess a few others) would pledge my left nut for even an EP.
He recently talked about taking the band back to how it started (in the NZ phone call with his cat playing a star role).
He stated that they were the band that played shows & yet never released stuff.Well, I might be missing something, but Damage Done, Body Electric, Alice, Anaconda...etc. seemed to be "releases" or was I dreaming that bit?
I think that even if they just released the occasional single it would be enough for me. I would certainly part with folding for a full blown long player though.
But in truth, I don't think they have enough material for an LP. Well, none that they'd be allowed to use without having to cough up royalties to ex members anyhow.

[Sita]

I agree about the talent. Like Catalyst said on the interview at the UK festival, Eldritch is one of the most under estimated pop writers.

Talking about the legacy - I imagine that if you release 4 master works (I mean the Sisters albums and Gift), you have set the standard very high. Both quality and success wise. Why would you want to dilute that legacy?

I'm not saying that this is what I think would happen. It's just what springs to my mind when I try to imagine myself as an artist who has been ridiculously successful, and then hasn't released anything in a while. I'd find such concern much more realistic than all these theories about Eldritches presumably mean and rotten character...

Just to be clear, I would be the first one to buy any official release. Even the USB stick I've seen at Iggy Pop and Einstürzende Neubauten with last night's gig is fabulous. I know some are into bootlegs, and that's cool, but I'm not so much into it.

[Ahráyeph]

Today this is absolutely not the case and downloading is killing music.

Well to be fair it isn't.

To be fair, it is. Yes, I agree : there has never been more music out there than nowadays. And how much of that is actually new? And how much of that new music is actually quality (besides my own band and FGG, of course )?

You probably didn't read my whole - I admit : elaborate - post or misunderstood it. It's not about the abundance of music, it is about musicians being able to be self sufficient enough to keep doing what they love and do best. The oversupply of mid - to low quality bands out there plus the fact that everyone downloads the music for free without consideration of the time and money that went into it (regardless of what anyone says, recording music on even a semi professional level still costs a small-to-sizable bundle of dough and a lot of hours of writing, recording and production), has made it that much harder for musicians and bands to stand out from the crowd, as they're drowning in an overload of noise. Having everything at your fingertips isn't necessarily a good thing, because a lot gets heard, but not a lot gets listened to intently. Which nowadays makes music a disposable commodity. I'm sure dear auld James will agree with me at least on this. So in that light, does it pay to release an album? No, it doesn't. Downloading IS killing music. Or, at least, the opportunity for musicians to keep making it.

I think if a band wants to release a new album that they don't want people copying they could include something exclusive with the album. A t-shirt perhaps, or some other nice artifact that you can't copy. Sure, people will still copy the music, that's inevitable, but it'll sell more than a bogstandard album.

In theory, you're right. But doing that costs an even bigger bundle of money, which most people or bands just couldn't front on their own. It would take... a record company. Loving the irony yet? I certainly am.

Fun fact : when my debut, 'Marooned On Samsara' was released, it didn't take long for the people who liked the music to start asking when the next album would be released. Three years and a handful of months have gone by since, and I'm on the verge of properly recording all the demos I've selected for this 'next album'. However, seeing the meager result of the album sales (in large part because it was illegally downloaded more than it was bought, but also through lack of promotion and opportunities to play live due to the oversaturation of the live market I've referred to in my original post), which generated ZERO income for me, but A WHOLE LOT OF DEBT which I'm still paying off instead, often makes me wonder if it's all still worthwile.

Unfortunately, I'm cursed with the gift of musicianship and I don't fit in anywhere else, so I have no other alternative than to keep going. But I did have to take on other jobs to recoup some of the losses I've made, which accounts in large part for this nearly four year delay. Non- musicians and even people who dearly love music by and large very rarely seem to take into consideration the amount of time and effort it takes to write a decent song, record it decently and produce it decently. In that sense, illegal downloading is like the looting in London and the other cities in the U.K. : we do it because we can, and we blatantly ignore the fact that we're hurting the wrong people. Harsh, perhaps, but true nonetheless.

You might condemn Von for not releasing anything new, but so far, all the arguments I've read against his stance as given in the NZ radio interview haven't convinced me at all. Releasing a new record is bad business, the songs can indeed be found in varying quality on Youtube for you to listen to and watch, which you shouldn't complain about if you're all about that pro free music stance anyway, so why then even harp about the fact there isn't something physical for you to have and hold?

I would love for the world to be a different place and releasing albums would still be a viable option. I mean, why else would I be so mad as to even seriously entertain the idea of releasing a new album next year? I love having a physical product of my favourite musicians' efforts, and for me it represents physical proof of my own, the end result of a long and intense creative process. But only if in that different world I spoke of Von still wouldn't release an album, this thread would have more validity. But here and now, to my mind, it hasn't. Whatever his other reasons may be and no matter whether they're justifiable or not, just the illegal downloading stance alone outweighs every other argument...

*Not just taping either. It's been going on since the advent of recording. I've got a recording of Harry Roy - She Had To Go And Lose It At The Astor (1939), copied by someone playing the 78 on a gramophone and recording it with a disc cutter via a microphone held next to it in about 1950. There's even recordings where someone's copied a wax cylinder off another wax cylinder by putting 2 machines together.

What you're referring to, is called 'bootlegging' and it's a whole different can-of what-Blaast!-posted-a-picture-of...

[Prescott]

Today this is absolutely not the case and downloading is killing music.

Well to be fair it isn't.

To be fair, it is. Yes, I agree : there has never been more music out there than nowadays. And how much of that is actually new? And how much of that new music is actually quality (besides my own band and FGG, of course )?

You probably didn't read my whole - I admit : elaborate - post or misunderstood it. It's not about the abundance of music, it is about musicians being able to be self sufficient enough to keep doing what they love and do best. The oversupply of mid - to low quality bands out there plus the fact that everyone downloads the music for free without consideration of the time and money that went into it (regardless of what anyone says, recording music on even a semi professional level still costs a small-to-sizable bundle of dough and a lot of hours of writing, recording and production), has made it that much harder for musicians and bands to stand out from the crowd, as they're drowning in an overload of noise. Having everything at your fingertips isn't necessarily a good thing, because a lot gets heard, but not a lot gets listened to intently. Which nowadays makes music a disposable commodity. I'm sure dear auld James will agree with me at least on this. So in that light, does it pay to release an album? No, it doesn't. Downloading IS killing music. Or, at least, the opportunity for musicians to keep making it.

I think if a band wants to release a new album that they don't want people copying they could include something exclusive with the album. A t-shirt perhaps, or some other nice artifact that you can't copy. Sure, people will still copy the music, that's inevitable, but it'll sell more than a bogstandard album.

In theory, you're right. But doing that costs an even bigger bundle of money, which most people or bands just couldn't front on their own. It would take... a record company. Loving the irony yet? I certainly am.

Fun fact : when my debut, 'Marooned On Samsara' was released, it didn't take long for the people who liked the music to start asking when the next album would be released. Three years and a handful of months have gone by since, and I'm on the verge of properly recording all the demos I've selected for this 'next album'. However, seeing the meager result of the album sales (in large part because it was illegally downloaded more than it was bought, but also through lack of promotion and opportunities to play live due to the oversaturation of the live market I've referred to in my original post), which generated ZERO income for me, but A WHOLE LOT OF DEBT which I'm still paying off instead, often makes me wonder if it's all still worthwile.

Unfortunately, I'm cursed with the gift of musicianship and I don't fit in anywhere else, so I have no other alternative than to keep going. But I did have to take on other jobs to recoup some of the losses I've made, which accounts in large part for this nearly four year delay. Non- musicians and even people who dearly love music by and large very rarely seem to take into consideration the amount of time and effort it takes to write a decent song, record it decently and produce it decently. In that sense, illegal downloading is like the looting in London and the other cities in the U.K. : we do it because we can, and we blatantly ignore the fact that we're hurting the wrong people. Harsh, perhaps, but true nonetheless.

You might condemn Von for not releasing anything new, but so far, all the arguments I've read against his stance as given in the NZ radio interview haven't convinced me at all. Releasing a new record is bad business, the songs can indeed be found in varying quality on Youtube for you to listen to and watch, which you shouldn't complain about if you're all about that pro free music stance anyway, so why then even harp about the fact there isn't something physical for you to have and hold?

I would love for the world to be a different place and releasing albums would still be a viable option. I mean, why else would I be so mad as to even seriously entertain the idea of releasing a new album next year? I love having a physical product of my favourite musicians' efforts, and for me it represents physical proof of my own, the end result of a long and intense creative process. But only if in that different world I spoke of Von still wouldn't release an album, this thread would have more validity. But here and now, to my mind, it hasn't. Whatever his other reasons may be and no matter whether they're justifiable or not, just the illegal downloading stance alone outweighs every other argument...

*Not just taping either. It's been going on since the advent of recording. I've got a recording of Harry Roy - She Had To Go And Lose It At The Astor (1939), copied by someone playing the 78 on a gramophone and recording it with a disc cutter via a microphone held next to it in about 1950. There's even recordings where someone's copied a wax cylinder off another wax cylinder by putting 2 machines together.

What you're referring to, is called 'bootlegging' and it's a whole different can-of what-Blaast!-posted-a-picture-of...

By focusing on only one issue, the illegal download issue and not addressing any of the points either myself or anyone else that agrees, you have created an ad hoc argument of no merit. Merely saying our arguments are "unconvincing" is lame and since that's basically another way of saying, "whatever dude" I'll return the favor.


Whatever dude.

Besides, I don't think this thread was meant to convince YOU of anything.

[Ahráyeph]

Well to be fair it isn't.

To be fair, it is. Yes, I agree : there has never been more music out there than nowadays. And how much of that is actually new? And how much of that new music is actually quality (besides my own band and FGG, of course )?

You probably didn't read my whole - I admit : elaborate - post or misunderstood it. It's not about the abundance of music, it is about musicians being able to be self sufficient enough to keep doing what they love and do best. The oversupply of mid - to low quality bands out there plus the fact that everyone downloads the music for free without consideration of the time and money that went into it (regardless of what anyone says, recording music on even a semi professional level still costs a small-to-sizable bundle of dough and a lot of hours of writing, recording and production), has made it that much harder for musicians and bands to stand out from the crowd, as they're drowning in an overload of noise. Having everything at your fingertips isn't necessarily a good thing, because a lot gets heard, but not a lot gets listened to intently. Which nowadays makes music a disposable commodity. I'm sure dear auld James will agree with me at least on this. So in that light, does it pay to release an album? No, it doesn't. Downloading IS killing music. Or, at least, the opportunity for musicians to keep making it.

I think if a band wants to release a new album that they don't want people copying they could include something exclusive with the album. A t-shirt perhaps, or some other nice artifact that you can't copy. Sure, people will still copy the music, that's inevitable, but it'll sell more than a bogstandard album.

In theory, you're right. But doing that costs an even bigger bundle of money, which most people or bands just couldn't front on their own. It would take... a record company. Loving the irony yet? I certainly am.

Fun fact : when my debut, 'Marooned On Samsara' was released, it didn't take long for the people who liked the music to start asking when the next album would be released. Three years and a handful of months have gone by since, and I'm on the verge of properly recording all the demos I've selected for this 'next album'. However, seeing the meager result of the album sales (in large part because it was illegally downloaded more than it was bought, but also through lack of promotion and opportunities to play live due to the oversaturation of the live market I've referred to in my original post), which generated ZERO income for me, but A WHOLE LOT OF DEBT which I'm still paying off instead, often makes me wonder if it's all still worthwile.

Unfortunately, I'm cursed with the gift of musicianship and I don't fit in anywhere else, so I have no other alternative than to keep going. But I did have to take on other jobs to recoup some of the losses I've made, which accounts in large part for this nearly four year delay. Non- musicians and even people who dearly love music by and large very rarely seem to take into consideration the amount of time and effort it takes to write a decent song, record it decently and produce it decently. In that sense, illegal downloading is like the looting in London and the other cities in the U.K. : we do it because we can, and we blatantly ignore the fact that we're hurting the wrong people. Harsh, perhaps, but true nonetheless.

You might condemn Von for not releasing anything new, but so far, all the arguments I've read against his stance as given in the NZ radio interview haven't convinced me at all. Releasing a new record is bad business, the songs can indeed be found in varying quality on Youtube for you to listen to and watch, which you shouldn't complain about if you're all about that pro free music stance anyway, so why then even harp about the fact there isn't something physical for you to have and hold?

I would love for the world to be a different place and releasing albums would still be a viable option. I mean, why else would I be so mad as to even seriously entertain the idea of releasing a new album next year? I love having a physical product of my favourite musicians' efforts, and for me it represents physical proof of my own, the end result of a long and intense creative process. But only if in that different world I spoke of Von still wouldn't release an album, this thread would have more validity. But here and now, to my mind, it hasn't. Whatever his other reasons may be and no matter whether they're justifiable or not, just the illegal downloading stance alone outweighs every other argument...

*Not just taping either. It's been going on since the advent of recording. I've got a recording of Harry Roy - She Had To Go And Lose It At The Astor (1939), copied by someone playing the 78 on a gramophone and recording it with a disc cutter via a microphone held next to it in about 1950. There's even recordings where someone's copied a wax cylinder off another wax cylinder by putting 2 machines together.

What you're referring to, is called 'bootlegging' and it's a whole different can-of what-Blaast!-posted-a-picture-of...

By focusing on only one issue, the illegal download issue and not addressing any of the points either myself or anyone else that agrees, you have created an ad hoc argument of no merit. Merely saying our arguments are "unconvincing" is lame and since that's basically another way of saying, "whatever dude" I'll return the favor.


Whatever dude.

Besides, I don't think this thread was meant to convince YOU of anything.

Funny, that. I thought having an opinion and making it known was the whole raison d'être of this board.

Putting words in one's mouth, on the other hand, isn't, or so I thought. So while I basically disagree with several things that have been said here, I never insulted anyone or put words into their mouths. There was absolutely no disdain towards anyone. So I wonder which is of least merit then : my post, or your reply.

[Prescott]

No words were put in your mouth. I merely expressed my disdain for your lack of an argument. Since you couldn't address in your dialectic any of the pre-emptive rebuttals that were already made by myself and others in this thread. If you were insulted, that was not my intention. Unless the phrase "whatever dude" really burns you up that bad? Every single point you tried to make had already been addressed in this thread, either by myself or someone else. If you can't be bothered to enter into a discourse that is even vaguely reminiscent of a manner that shows you've taken the time to read what we have already collectively said, then why should I or anyone else take your rant about some out-dated philosophy of selling records?


It's certainly a sign of the times. Baby-boomers and what not who continue to cling to the old paradigms and think that the rest of us have moved on are wrong.

As I've mentioned before, who says you or Von or anyone else need spend inordinate amounts of money on some lavish production for a record? Obviously anything recorded would be better than those live recordings "available on YouTube in varying quality". It wouldn't really matter if you or I or Eldritch used Reason or ProTools or Logic and a few interns or if freaking Jim Steinman and Quincy Jones themselves produced and engineered it with Flood sitting there in the background sipping coffee and making strange noises.

You and Andrew are both so close-minded about how to make a record it's not even funny. With this mind-set it's a wonder the early singles were ever recorded.


I hope that clears things up.

[Sita]

I know exactly what Ahrayeph meant, even if I know the situation just from the opposite perspective, so to say.

And the interesting thing is that even Courtney Love said recently that it DOES need money, time and "traditional" recoding to make her albums. It's this article online, "Courtney does the Math". Pain to read though, it's quite a rant + ramble, and some of what she says is BS, but I couldn't help but agree to her a lot of the times.

I don't want to convince anyone or change their mind either. It's just that people are misinformed when they fall for this "you can record an album in no time, for zero cost, and it will sound just as good as this other album that people worked on 3 months full time and cost a bomb".


Edit:
PS - Prescott, what you say in your last post about this topic is not quite true. I think my argument regarding production costs was the most important, somewhere on the page before, and all you said was "Rinse and Repeat". You can't say that is adressing a roblem.

[Prescott]

I know exactly what Ahrayeph meant, even if I know the situation just from the opposite perspective, so to say.

And the interesting thing is that even Courtney Love said recently that it DOES need money, time and "traditional" recoding to make her albums. It's this article online, "Courtney does the Math". Pain to read though, it's quite a rant + ramble, and some of what she says is BS, but I couldn't help but agree to her a lot of the times.

I don't want to convince anyone or change their mind either. It's just that people are misinformed when they fall for this "you can record an album in no time, for zero cost, and it will sound just as good as this other album that people worked on 3 months full time and cost a bomb".


Edit:
PS - Prescott, what you say in your last post about this topic is not quite true. I think my argument regarding production costs was the most important, somewhere on the page before, and all you said was "Rinse and Repeat". You can't say that is adressing a roblem.

No. That's definitely not all I said. Here:

Seriously Sita. No one has said that "do-it-yourself" recordings are going to sound necessarily as "good" as the previous recordings that were done "traditionally". Yet none of you seem willing to get into the particulars of what that even means. Not Andrew, Courtney or anyone else for that matter.

My biggest complaint in regards to the "it's on HL and YouTube as audience recordings anyways so why make such a fuss" argument, is that no listener should have to be distracted by anything other than the music, no howls, screams, banter or otherwise should be in the mix. Listen to "Live After Death" by Iron Maiden. It's a live double LP, but obviously they only mix the crowd noise in where it belongs, in-between the damned songs.

Something of that nature would be better than what we have now.

Finally, if one can enjoy the early singles, with the rudimentary production techniques, equipment, budget and lack of experience they exhibit, surely the production equipment and software Andrew already has at his disposal is more than adequate. Oh, and once again, using one's own experience and that of others such as Si Denbigh, and the tools already available to one isn't going to cost too much. And to reiterate: a new recording obviously should not be about MONEY it should be about aural cleanliness and LEGACY and giving back to the fans that have waited so damned long.

[Mav787]

Re Simon & The March Violets and using Pledge Music. All I'll say is that they will have been working on this album for more than a year before its finally released.

The reasons for the length of time are probably down to the physical location of the 4 band members, the fact they all have other day jobs (not least a heavy touring schedule administering the Doktor), and their need to create a piece of art that is worthy of their previous efforts.

Each of these reasons would apply to The Sisters so its understandable if just can't be bothered with such a lengthy commitment.

I haven't heard any Violets pledgers complaining (the band have given away an ep to pledgers in the mean time) but judging by some of the comments on this forum you do have to wonder if Sisters pledgers would be so patient.

Plus even without a record for almost 20 years we're all still here on the forum, going to the gigs, caring about this band.

There are other bands who were similar in size around about 1990/91 who kept releasing music to an ever smaller audience, both in terms of record sales and concert sales, and whenever they toured the audience only ever wanted the old stuff.

So maybe has got it right after all....