Heartland

Being645 wrote:I beg to differ ... for example YCBTO it as close to Alice to me as it is to Ribbons or Susanne .... ...

Stone mad but I like it.

Anyway, all things considered, if the original release schedule had gone according to plan FALAA would have been 84. Kinda one of those grey areas where the best thing to do is just say "feck it, whatever, it could fall either way and is it even worth squabbling over?"

Quiff Boy wrote:while falaa was the 84/85 era, i always considered it more 85

temple = 83
b+s = 84
falaa = 85

that's how it always felt to me anyway (regardless of the actual timelines...)

body and soul = 18 june 1984
peel session = 19 june 1984 (with poison door, emma, no time and walk away)
walk away = 8 october 1984
no time to cry = 25 february 1985
first and last = 11 march 1985

wasnt b+s released "sometime around the end of may"? (just quoting the black hat & dark glasses interview, or whatever its called)

Quiff Boy wrote:wasnt b+s released "sometime around the end of may"? (just quoting the black hat & dark glasses interview, or whatever its called)

i saw it on some advert or... in "heartland", i'm not sure maybe someone can confirm this date.

mh wrote:

Being645 wrote:I beg to differ ... for example YCBTO it as close to Alice to me as it is to Ribbons or Susanne .... ...

Stone mad but I like it.

Anyway, all things considered, if the original release schedule had gone according to plan FALAA would have been 84. Kinda one of those grey areas where the best thing to do is just say "feck it, whatever, it could fall either way and is it even worth squabbling over?"

completely agree ... also I wonder for example how Heartland got on the B-side of TOL ... ...

or why they didn't decide for Blood Money on FALAA, instead of Walk Away ...
or NWN on Walk Away instead of on FALAA ... and take Poison Door instead ...
and plenty more such options ... it's just come the way it is, and IMHO
FALAA is obviously not a concept album, so what the heck ...

But to return to topic - a CD release of Afterhours and Train were nice ... ...

playboy wrote:

stufarq wrote:

playboy wrote:you cannot put songs on an album which is not recorded and/or produced by that albums producer.

Yes you can. Happens all the time. Such as on, er, FALAA, which includes b-sides produced by A. Eldritch rather than Dave Allen.

Yes, this is correct. The band returned to Genetic Studios and recorded Blood Money and Bury Me Deep, which were produced by Andrew and were intended as b sides for the next single No Time to Cry. Appearing on that single makes the qualified them as bonus tracks for FALAA don´t you think? I think so. And apparently the Sisters also.

I didn't say they weren't but you're completely missing the point. You said that you can't add songs to an album if they weren't recorded with the album's original producer. I said that was untrue and provided a rather obvious example. mh provided further examples. It's got nothing to do with whether the songs "belong" to a particular album. You made statement that was factually wrong and we corrected you.

Well maybe you can't if you've been screwed over by your contract or if you're in the 60s or 70s working with one of the big studio producers. I'll grant that. Otherwise the original claim is certainly untrue.

stufarq wrote:

playboy wrote:

stufarq wrote: Yes you can. Happens all the time. Such as on, er, FALAA, which includes b-sides produced by A. Eldritch rather than Dave Allen.

Yes, this is correct. The band returned to Genetic Studios and recorded Blood Money and Bury Me Deep, which were produced by Andrew and were intended as b sides for the next single No Time to Cry. Appearing on that single makes the qualified them as bonus tracks for FALAA don´t you think? I think so. And apparently the Sisters also.

I didn't say they weren't but you're completely missing the point. You said that you can't add songs to an album if they weren't recorded with the album's original producer. I said that was untrue and provided a rather obvious example. mh provided further examples. It's got nothing to do with whether the songs "belong" to a particular album. You made statement that was factually wrong and we corrected you.

I stand corrected. Of course you CAN.
They could even throw in Home Of The Hit-Men if they wanted.
If I was to say that "you cannot walk around killing people" would tyou correct me on that as well, stating that I am factually wrong and that one CAN walk around killing people?
One must read and understand not only the words per se but the meaning and logic of the sentence in full.

So I will refrase. You can, but should not, put songs on an album as bonus tracks that don´t belong to the album. Not if you are making releases as the Sisters did with three albums, and putting on bonus tracks for each album all connected to the album or the album singles. That would have kind of non-logical. Saying, hey, why don´t we throw in the EP we did before working on the album.


Also, finally. There is something called time. You cannot put how many songs as you like on a record. So, which songs would they throw out in favour for Body And Soul, Afterhours, and if they were included then perhaps even Train and Body Electric too....

How long before a kindly passing mod locks this one I wonder? Can't see it going anywhere it hasn't been before.

playboy wrote:If I was to say that "you cannot walk around killing people" would tyou correct me on that as well, stating that I am factually wrong and that one CAN walk around killing people?

Do you mean legally and contractually or just as a general principle? Once again, I refer you to your original statement:

playboy wrote:Also, it has got to do with legal stuff and contracts etc.. you cannot put songs on an album which is not recorded and/or produced by that albums producer.

Shall I stop baiting now, everyone, or are you (not) entertained?

stufarq wrote:

playboy wrote:If I was to say that "you cannot walk around killing people" would tyou correct me on that as well, stating that I am factually wrong and that one CAN walk around killing people?

Do you mean legally and contractually or just as a general principle? Once again, I refer you to your original statement:

playboy wrote:Also, it has got to do with legal stuff and contracts etc.. you cannot put songs on an album which is not recorded and/or produced by that albums producer.

Shall I stop baiting now, everyone, or are you (not) entertained?

Yes, please, stop.
This is not going enywhere.

The topic was why Body And Soul wasn´t on the FALAA cd as a bonus track. But the fact that that song didn´t belong to FALAA wasn´t the answer some of you wanted to accept.
If you ever get a chance to ask Andrew if he think that Body And Soul would fit on FALAA as a bonus track connected to the album, please do. Until we know, all of our answers or just guessings, and mine is not more wrong than yours.

It isn´t included - that is a fact. We can all guess why and my guess could be as good as others.

And, as I wrote before, and I think this is the most important, it is also a matter of time. There was not space for more songs on the cd. So which of the songs should be exluded in favour of Body And Soul?.......

Have a nice day!

I would imagine (but obviously I don't know) that Andrew would say that the track-list of First and Last and Always should be:

Black Planet / Walk Away / No Time to Cry / A Rock and a Hard Place / Marian (version) / First and Last and Always / Possession / Nine While Nine / Amphetamine Logic / Some Kind of Stranger

No bonus tracks, no nothing, it should be as it is.

So I guess I see where you're coming from.

On the other hand, while no, the Body And Soul EP is not part of First and Last and Always, if you were going to stick it on any of the CDs, FaLaA is the one to stick it on.

This topic all got a bit heated, I take some of the responsibility for that, sorry. I think a lot of it was people miscommunicating.

markfiend wrote:On the other hand, while no, the Body And Soul EP is not part of First and Last and Always, if you were going to stick it on any of the CDs, FaLaA is the one to stick it on.

That's about as sensible as it gets.

playboy wrote:So which of the songs should be exluded in favour of Body And Soul?.......

In a perfect world FALAA would have been a multi-disk set (like The Cult's Love 4-disk reissue) so you wouldn't have to.

In an ideal world FALAA would have been a 2-disk set so you wouldn't have to.

In the world we've got - dropping Long Train and SKOS (demo) seems reasonable. You won't get all 4 tracks on for sure, but - and I haven't totted up the times so take this with an appropriately sized grain of salt - you'll likely get B&S/Train/Afterhours.

Yes, it's edging around the 80-minute mark. There have been plenty of CDs released with this kind of running time. No, it's not red book standard, but then again neither is any CD with copy protection or anything over 74 mins (SGWBM anyone?), so red book can be more or less ignored these days.

perhaps there's also the matter of who still 'owns' what. Perhaps held on to rights to some stuff for, i dunno, a dvd, which 'burnt down'

markfiend wrote:I would imagine (but obviously I don't know) that Andrew would say that the track-list of First and Last and Always should be:

Black Planet / Walk Away / No Time to Cry / A Rock and a Hard Place / Marian (version) / First and Last and Always / Possession / Nine While Nine / Amphetamine Logic / Some Kind of Stranger

No bonus tracks, no nothing, it should be as it is.

So I guess I see where you're coming from.

On the other hand, while no, the Body And Soul EP is not part of First and Last and Always, if you were going to stick it on any of the CDs, FaLaA is the one to stick it on.

This topic all got a bit heated, I take some of the responsibility for that, sorry. I think a lot of it was people miscommunicating.

I agree. I didn´t meant to offend anyone, just wanted to share my views and some took it all personally.

Have a nice weekend!

mh wrote:

markfiend wrote:On the other hand, while no, the Body And Soul EP is not part of First and Last and Always, if you were going to stick it on any of the CDs, FaLaA is the one to stick it on.

That's about as sensible as it gets.

playboy wrote:So which of the songs should be exluded in favour of Body And Soul?.......

In a perfect world FALAA would have been a multi-disk set (like The Cult's Love 4-disk reissue) so you wouldn't have to.

In an ideal world FALAA would have been a 2-disk set so you wouldn't have to.

In the world we've got - dropping Long Train and SKOS (demo) seems reasonable. You won't get all 4 tracks on for sure, but - and I haven't totted up the times so take this with an appropriately sized grain of salt - you'll likely get B&S/Train/Afterhours.

Yes, it's edging around the 80-minute mark. There have been plenty of CDs released with this kind of running time. No, it's not red book standard, but then again neither is any CD with copy protection or anything over 74 mins (SGWBM anyone?), so red book can be more or less ignored these days.

Yes, I agree, a 2-disc set would be lovely. Included not only Body And Soul ep but all demos recorded 1984. CD one with the album the way it turned out, and cd 2 with the working process, demos etc.....

playboy wrote:Yes, I agree, a 2-disc set would be lovely. Included not only Body And Soul ep but all demos recorded 1984. CD one with the album the way it turned out, and cd 2 with the working process, demos etc.....

and foocking peel session from june 84, right? is it fit on 2cd falaa?

lachert wrote:

playboy wrote:Yes, I agree, a 2-disc set would be lovely. Included not only Body And Soul ep but all demos recorded 1984. CD one with the album the way it turned out, and cd 2 with the working process, demos etc.....

and foocking peel session from june 84, right? is it fit on 2cd falaa?

No, not the foocking peel session, never ever said that, right?
Just proper demos made for the band.
Peel sessions are made for a specific radio program.

playboy wrote:

lachert wrote:

playboy wrote:Yes, I agree, a 2-disc set would be lovely. Included not only Body And Soul ep but all demos recorded 1984. CD one with the album the way it turned out, and cd 2 with the working process, demos etc.....

and foocking peel session from june 84, right? is it fit on 2cd falaa?

No, not the foocking peel session, never ever said that, right?
Just proper demos made for the band.
Peel sessions are made for a specific radio program.

I agree, Peel Sessions should be used as they have been - as bonus tracks for live bootleg material ...
or as a thing in themselves ... or together with audios from TV apprearances ... ...

playboy wrote:

lachert wrote:

playboy wrote:Yes, I agree, a 2-disc set would be lovely. Included not only Body And Soul ep but all demos recorded 1984. CD one with the album the way it turned out, and cd 2 with the working process, demos etc.....

and foocking peel session from june 84, right? is it fit on 2cd falaa?

No, not the foocking peel session, never ever said that, right?
Just proper demos made for the band.
Peel sessions are made for a specific radio program.

strange guy you are so probably no live stuff too (as on the cure deluxes for example) for the sisters 2-3 cds falaa, right? fat bob just don't know what he's doing, right?

1. Body And Soul wasn't on the original FALAA CD because the purpose of that CD was to make the original album available in the new, up-and-coming, "CD" format. Plus the Body And Soul 12" vinyl was still widely available at the time, and vinyl was still a common format at the time (same applies for its non-inclusion on "Some Girls..." and "...Overbombing".)
2. Body And Soul wasn't on the recent FALAA re-issue CD as a bonus track because the CD wasn't put together as a result of meticulous research by someone with encyclopaedic knowledge of the Sisters with a brief to make sure that every single Sisters track was available on CD for the fans, but rather by someone at WEA who threw together what he/she could find in the archives to make a viable product that would make money.
3. Unless the current owners of any other Sisters tracks are convinced (or at least optimistic) that spending time and money compiling, manufacturing, marketing and distributing their release on CD will be more profitable than doing the same for whatever fresh, young musicians are also in their stable, then it ain't gonna happen because it's a profit-driven business.

Glad we got that sorted.

lachert wrote:

playboy wrote:

lachert wrote: and foocking peel session from june 84, right? is it fit on 2cd falaa?

No, not the foocking peel session, never ever said that, right?
Just proper demos made for the band.
Peel sessions are made for a specific radio program.

strange guy you are so probably no live stuff too (as on the cure deluxes for example) for the sisters 2-3 cds falaa, right? fat bob just don't know what he's doing, right?

Depends on the quality of the live recording. If it´s not a proper recording I don´t see the point. But a good recording of an early live version of Walk Away could be interesting since it differs a lot from the finished version. And, yeah, why not a few other tracks as well. After all, as Andrew once said, "live is a total different medium, the songs are not supposed to sound exatcly as on record".
All in all I would say that the important thing is that all track are proper track and not some bootleg s**t. That´s not new to any of us.

Have not heard Bob´s deluxe cd:s but my guess is that he knows what he´s doing and give the fans really good proffesional recordings of the live tracks. They tend to give good live recordings both on record and video for the fans.
Sad to say that but I doubt that Andrew will make Wake available on dvd and/or blu ray. Released properly all he gave us was Ribbons and Something Fast live on a b-side.
Maybe some will count the Wake video as well, but a crappy old video-tape is not my cup of tea. But ok, it was released, even if only on video-tape, twenty-five years ago or something.