Heartland

can you do me an the internets version?

sent! incoming...

flat color woulda bin better, tit

crap! can't you just add glitter to sparkle it up? or is my order a tall order?
don't want to do this to you on a friday evening.

I'm aff tae ma fart chariot, leave yer screensize (640x480 etc) and I'll 'majick' up a purple glistener for ya thi morra

James Blast wrote:I'm aff tae ma fart chariot, leave yer screensize (640x480 etc) and I'll 'majick' up a purple glistener for ya thi morra

you are a star!!!
sleep well honey & sweet dreams.. will check in tomorrow!

Does anyone know what that PM button at the bottom of a post is for ? I'm new round here and was jist wondering

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Does anyone know what that PM button at the bottom of a post is for ? I'm new round here and was jist wondering

Perpetual Motion? Perverse Monstrosity? Penile Mound? Pragmatic Mouse? Prehensile Megastructure? Purple Moose? Pimpled Muse?


It Is a Mystery.

mh wrote: The second side of FALAA was always better anyway IMO.

So, biggest mistake may have been the situation that led to Marx leaving.

Too right.

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Does anyone know what that PM button at the bottom of a post is for ? I'm new round here and was jist wondering

Send me a p.m and I'll let you know.

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:A decent song choice would have ensured a top forty chart slot, "Top of the Pops", capturing the zeitgeist and joining contemporaries REM/U2 etc on the path to stardom.

Wow. Pass whatever you're smoking this way. Sisters were never going to be superstars. Their biggest album only sold 150,000 in the US, while U2 and REM each have 10 million sellers.

The only way to become pop stars is to have a gigantic ballad and/or dance song. U2's "One" and REM's "Everybody Hurts" are good examples. They were overplayed in every Western nation on Earth. The mass populace doesn't give a toss about "Exit" and "Oddfellows Local 151." The other side is to be a Lady Gaga/Madonna type who gets the clubbers and the kiddies.

One of the most fascinating books I ever read about a band's trajectory was "Beds Are Burning" which really gets inside the industry machine during Midnight Oil's rise to almost superstars. It was all about being in the right place, right time with the right song and the label greasing enough palms. But in the end, the band chose to remain true to themselves and the industry has no time for that. The men in the board rooms are all about numbers. It's rather like Wall Street. They would never play ball with someone like Eldritch.

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Does anyone know what that PM button at the bottom of a post is for ? I'm new round here and was jist wondering

Private Message.

shivarising wrote:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Does anyone know what that PM button at the bottom of a post is for ? I'm new round here and was jist wondering

Private Message.

Thanks for the replies but my question was intended as an ironic reply to the lengthy private conversation which was beginning to clog up this thread ...

shivarising wrote:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:A decent song choice would have ensured a top forty chart slot, "Top of the Pops", capturing the zeitgeist and joining contemporaries REM/U2 etc on the path to stardom.

Wow. Pass whatever you're smoking this way. Sisters were never going to be superstars. Their biggest album only sold 150,000 in the US, while U2 and REM each have 10 million sellers.

They were that big in Europe in the 80s, with Floodland. When you got to know them, like I did as a child, when they were big, it's quite weird that they are an indie band now.

edit:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote: Thanks for the replies but my question was intended as an ironic reply to the lengthy private conversation which was beginning to clog up this thread ...

too subtle, I didn't get it either!

In my more unkind moments I'm inclined to think Von's greatest mistake was not dropping dead shortly after TOL '92. We could've spent the next couple of decades bewailing all those great albums he never got the chance to record.

But let's be honest, he's in his fifties and has so far avoided the need to get a "proper" job, which by my reckoning implies he hasn't made that many mistakes.

shivarising wrote:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:A decent song choice would have ensured a top forty chart slot, "Top of the Pops", capturing the zeitgeist and joining contemporaries REM/U2 etc on the path to stardom.

Wow. Pass whatever you're smoking this way. Sisters were never going to be superstars. Their biggest album only sold 150,000 in the US, while U2 and REM each have 10 million sellers.

The only way to become pop stars is to have a gigantic ballad and/or dance song. U2's "One" and REM's "Everybody Hurts" are good examples. They were overplayed in every Western nation on Earth. The mass populace doesn't give a toss about "Exit" and "Oddfellows Local 151." The other side is to be a Lady Gaga/Madonna type who gets the clubbers and the kiddies.

Fair point to an extent but the Sisters were making it big at a time when signing to a major was the big chance to make it massive. Adam Ant, the Human League etc all started as ultra hip indie acts. REM's Radio Free Europe was contemporaneous with Alice, Adrenochrome et al, and who at the time knew which band would go on to global supestardom, even allowing for my local bias. When Boy came out, U2 were also just another talented new wave band.
The Cure and Depeche Mode are probably better examples I could have chosen of bands of that era who seized the moment. For me, B + S and FALAA were a missed opportunity. By the time the Girls eventually charted with the trying-too-hard TC, they had missed the boat, and were destined to being (an admittedly huge) cult band.

sultan2075 wrote:Purple Moose?

mmmmmmm beer!

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Thanks for the replies but my question was intended as an ironic reply to the lengthy private conversation which was beginning to clog up this thread ...

Don't worry your pretty little head about it. You don't need to try to moderate the forums when you're not a moderator.

markfiend wrote:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:Thanks for the replies but my question was intended as an ironic reply to the lengthy private conversation which was beginning to clog up this thread ...

Don't worry your pretty little head about it. You don't need to try to moderate the forums when you're not a moderator.

Absolutey, we're a nanny state ... ...

* entirely no problem with your question, Nikolas Vitus Lagartija ...
if the king and his parliament are not home, the guards have to protect the castle ... ...

There are more missed opportunites than mistakes...

Not releasing the Floorshow EP - it was fantastic & would have really helped elevate their profile

Not leaving Merciful Release after Body Electric! MR was never going to have the resources to put Alice or Temple of Love into the Top 40 (which the likes of Factory, Creation, Mute, Rough Trade could & their chart placing on the Indie Top 10 at the time indicated The Sister popularity & potential...)
Compared to the Merciful Release material, the WEA is bigger but not neccessarily better. They now had the resources but not neccessarily the song/single to break through - I doubt any of the MR material would've stalled outside the top 40 with WEA pushing it the way the FALAA era singles did.
I'm pretty confident an album with the Alice/Reptile & Temple EP's with a major label support would have made more impact. So imagine we basically have Some Girls as their first album...
FALAA isn't a bad follow up as second albums go by bands. Then how about releaseing FALAA, Logic & On the Wire as singles?

But I think the biggest problem was always songs & quantities. I remember around the time of VT Eldritch saying that he wasn't easily inspired writing songs - no wordsworth daffodils moments so there was only 2 Sisters Of Mercy albums in the 80's... Compare this with around 7 Cure, 4 Mary Chain, 5 Bunnymen, 6 Furs, 5 Smiths (i'm including comps & lives & guesses!)

If Some Girls was released earlier, if the Radio Sessions were released, if Wake was a live album, even a covers album (which would/ could be fantastic!) - the fan base could have been expanded without 'new' songs but at some point ... Around 1990, they seem to have dried up. VT was 9 Songs since Floodland in 1987. In the next 3 years we only got Under The Gun & Come Together!!! And it gets pretty hard to maintain the machine without material -

Sita wrote:

shivarising wrote:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote:A decent song choice would have ensured a top forty chart slot, "Top of the Pops", capturing the zeitgeist and joining contemporaries REM/U2 etc on the path to stardom.

Wow. Pass whatever you're smoking this way. Sisters were never going to be superstars. Their biggest album only sold 150,000 in the US, while U2 and REM each have 10 million sellers.

They were that big in Europe in the 80s, with Floodland. When you got to know them, like I did as a child, when they were big, it's quite weird that they are an indie band now.

edit:

Nikolas Vitus Lagartija wrote: Thanks for the replies but my question was intended as an ironic reply to the lengthy private conversation which was beginning to clog up this thread ...

too subtle, I didn't get it either!

They weren´t THAT big... They had some charters but it did not last long enough. When I saw them in Sweden 1985 there were about 400 people. Two years later they released Floodland which had some hits. Still, even then, they were played in MTV:S indie programs. They COULD have been bigger if they released more hits and toured. The didn´t tour tour at all with Floodland and next album took three years. I saw them again in Sweden two times during that tour and it was a few more than last time. 6-7000 or something like that in total in Sweden. And that if, of course, a lot. But the Sisters at that time were a cultband, much thanks to the early singles, up to First And Last And Always, and after the spilt, EVERYBODY suddenly liked The Sisters. A bit like Joy Division after Ian Curtis died.
But a cultband must do SOMETHING to still, 20 years after, be as interesting. They have not released a new album since. Only toured. And none of the current line-up has been on a record with The Sisters Of Mercy, has not been part of the "cult". Both of the current guitarists doesn´t burn that much for the band, they don´t live with the Sisters 24-7, they have other bands, they rarely write about Sisters on Facebook, never about Andrew. Ask them question about thei other bands and they will gladly answer, ask about the Sisters and they won´t get answers, and if, only small, non-informative answers, as they are not allowed to speak about Andrew. If you d not commit 100 percent and work very hard to be a BAND it is very very hard to obtain cultstatus. They will hang around for a few more years for sure. And it is only because the name The Sisters Of Mercy. As a band they are very indie.

so, basically they're a 'brand'?

I said that, and too many words man

James Blast wrote:so, basically they're a 'brand'?

I said that, and too many words man

Pretty much a brand.
And yes, you are right. too many words. U have to excuse me, I am a journalist, I just cannot stop writing...... Sorry......

yer awrite, no worries

I think he should bring back Underneath The Rock. It was a mistake to stop it's publication. I'm sure plenty of us would volunteer to help start it back up.