Heartland

My thoughts exactly, Mark!

markfiend wrote: Don't blame the band if your venue isn't up to the job of staging a Sisters show.

Aye!

The Sisters are a lot of smoke, always have been, always will be....
Some people must have been sleeping in the preparations to this gig.

Sure it's down to bad preparation by the venue, but they'd worked out an agreement and the band ignored it. So the audience lose out on a complete show and that ain't good.

regardless of what was agreed on and how the venue prepared itself - the sisters' reaction does not seem to having been in favour of the audience - which should have been the main goal. andrew normally tended to make use of external (unpleasent) things to his own (= the bands) favour - let's handle it that way!

so i am happy that the gig in tabor in 2005 was'nt stopped by the band due to the wind blowing away the whole smoke during the whole gig, leaving behind only mirrors .....

jost 7 wrote: the sisters' reaction does not seem to having been in favour of the audience

I kno what you're saying, but...

Multifaceted wrote: they said to stop the smoke since the venue wasn't cleared for it (iirc the band started the smoke up again a few seconds before they got cut off), or keep going...and if anything serious happened the sole blame would be on the band.

Why should the band accept that sort of condition?

markfiend wrote:I would be very surprised if the Sisters' touring contract fails to include stipulations about the smoke machines. (I understand that they even have a clause allowing them to cancel a gig if they're billed as Sisters Of Mercy without the word "The".)

Don't blame the band if your venue isn't up to the job of staging a Sisters show.

Hmmmm.... a few pages back:

Petseri wrote:The contract with the venue states that the band used smoke machines in performances, so there should not have been any surprises.

(Quoting or paraphrasing Chris).

Now, I don't know about members of the Sisters, maybe their lungs are attuned to colossal amounts of carbon monoxide, but assuming that the smoke used wasn't the real stuff, there seems no way that it should have set off any alarms in the normal course of things (it obviously hasn't done so at other gigs). This one seems squarely down to the fire marshall either being overly cautious or getting an ego trip and wanting to flex some authoritative muscle.

If the venue is in breach of contract, as it seems to be, then it should be giving refunds to fans.

mh wrote:assuming that the smoke used wasn't the real stuff, there seems no way that it should have set off any alarms in the normal course of things

i've been at clubs were smoke machines and/or foggers have triggered the fire alarms...

it used to happen at the wendy house in leeds a few years ago (before the big refurb & relaunch, when it was in the space at the back of the old milk bar...) and its happened at sin a couple of times (back when we were allowed smoke)

i guess we are going to far when talking about breach of contract. these aspects have to get sorted out of course, but the main thing is the gig. it's still only rock'n roll, and i still like it.

to what we know both parties to the contract have contributed to this mess - to which extent i don't know. but the sisters are more than a smoke machine, and they should dare to proof that, even if it affords a slight change of overbombing

Thinking more about it, I reckon that the fire marshalls in question were probably unconnected with the venue, but were actually from the local City Council or whatever. If that's so, it seems a bit much to blame the venue for it.

mh wrote:Thinking more about it, I reckon that the fire marshalls in question were probably unconnected with the venue, but were actually from the local City Council or whatever. If that's so, it seems a bit much to blame the venue for it.

The fire marshal said that he was there during setup. It has been a few days now, but he may have said or implied that he (or another) is there whenever there are performances.

Also, thanks, dontbemad , for another first-hand perspective.

When this show was announced originally, I really did not expect it to garner as much attention as it has. I saw them a few other times during the tour, so I am not as disappointed as others may be. Everything was in line for a memorable performance -- great venue, nice city, better sound, energetic opening act. Granted, we did get a memorable performance, but not for these reasons. Memorable were also Washington 1998 (cancelled at the last minute) and Prague 1998 (near riotous shortened gig), so maybe I should stop attending.

markfiend wrote:Why should the band accept that sort of condition?

They gave the venue no choice because they didn't stick to the agreement. Can't have everything your own way.

Anyway, it's Petseri's fault

markfiend wrote:Don't blame the band if your venue isn't up to the job of staging a Sisters show.

dontbemad wrote:It does suck that we have a sensitive fire system , but it had been noted in the advancement of the show as well once it became clear that they used as much smoke as they do.

It was in the contract that they couldn't use the amount of smoke that was used. I hate to be snide , but don't blame the venue if your band isn't up to the job of following what is agreed upon in a contract.

mh wrote:Thinking more about it, I reckon that the fire marshalls in question were probably unconnected with the venue, but were actually from the local City Council or whatever. If that's so, it seems a bit much to blame the venue for it.

You are exactly right. They are not there by request , by the venue , but by the city itself. We have no say in it if they come or not or what they do , we are at the mercy of them just as much as the band.

Petseri wrote:The fire marshal said that he was there during setup. It has been a few days now, but he may have said or implied that he (or another) is there whenever there are performances.

There are 2 fire marshals at every show. I don't know why he would have said he was there during setup because he wasn't. They usually show up about 1 hour before doors open to inspect the general situation of the venue such as are fire exits blocked , unmarked wires running across the stage etc, then they stay for the rest of the show to make sure no other violations arise. It was actually the female fire marshal that gave them the final decision of shutting of the smoke machines or ending the show. The lead singer (sorry cant remember his name) made that final decision.

As much as I love the Sisters and believe Andrew to be fallible, if the facts have been presented accurately, I would find no fault with the venue.

dontbemad wrote:

Petseri wrote:The fire marshal said that he was there during setup. It has been a few days now, but he may have said or implied that he (or another) is there whenever there are performances.

There are 2 fire marshals at every show. I don't know why he would have said he was there during setup because he wasn't. They usually show up about 1 hour before doors open to inspect the general situation of the venue such as are fire exits blocked , unmarked wires running across the stage etc, then they stay for the rest of the show to make sure no other violations arise. It was actually the female fire marshal that gave them the final decision of shutting of the smoke machines or ending the show. The lead singer (sorry cant remember his name) made that final decision.

That sounds in line to what they told me. The one fire marshal (the man) did say that he/they arrived pre-gig to check on things such as you mentioned. He also noted that the smoke levels had been too high initially. That sounds like being there during preparations, but maybe he meant that the venue dealt with the situation at that point, not he or the other fire marshal. (I have no idea if one is an assistant or deputy or what, but they fit the bill as "fire marshal" here.) Both were insistant that the band, not they, made the call to pull the plug.

I will state again that it was a shame that it happened.

I agree with you, Petseri. However, it was no lesser shame in Wolverhampton 2003, where the fire alarms went constantly off during the gig, although the show didn't get cut short. A complete gig with the constant noise of a fire alarm is no fun either.

In Richmond I didn't understand why they wouldn't wait for whatever time needed (I've heard something about 1 hour) and then continue the show. But I can also accept that the band (if this version is the final truth) didn't want to play without any smoke. Maybe in hindsight they would decide differently but lost the nerves at that particular point. It's a shame for the fans who only got to see them once or twice, but it really is just bad luck. With any band you can pick a crappy performance, even if it is a complete show.

dontbemad wrote: It was in the contract that they couldn't use the amount of smoke that was used. I hate to be snide , but don't blame the venue if your band isn't up to the job of following what is agreed upon in a contract.

So if it was in the venue's contract that they couldn't use so much smoke, and it was in the band's contract that they they require the use of a lot of smoke (as their guitarist said)...

Then it sounds like some people weren't reading their contracts.

bismarck wrote: Perhaps you'd be good enough to suggest a new album then?

But there are so many other CDs on my "wishlist" at the moment.

Eva wrote: In Richmond I didn't understand why they wouldn't wait for whatever time needed (I've heard something about 1 hour) and then continue the show. But I can also accept that the band (if this version is the final truth) didn't want to play without any smoke. Maybe in hindsight they would decide differently but lost the nerves at that particular point. It's a shame for the fans who only got to see them once or twice, but it really is just bad luck. With any band you can pick a crappy performance, even if it is a complete show.

They weren't even required to wait an hour to finish playing. The only requirement was to literally take the power cord out of the smoke machines so that there wouldn't be any more "accidents" of pumping out smoke even though they weren't supposed to. They could have pulled two power cords and walked right back on stage to finish the set.

Multifaceted wrote: So if it was in the venue's contract that they couldn't use so much smoke, and it was in the band's contract that they they require the use of a lot of smoke (as their guitarist said)...

Then it sounds like some people weren't reading their contracts.

This is how we go over the contracts. They give us theirs, we review it , and note problems in the contract by crossing out some things that we will not abide by, or editing in notes as to why certain things aren't possible. Then we give it back via fax or some other means with the things we are not willing to budge on. They decide if what we have edited is acceptable. Then they sign and send it back to us , to sign. They knew very well the situation about the smoke before they signed the contract.

Puts a different face on things dontbemad

Sorry for snarking at you up thread.

When all is said and done we loved having them, the crew and band were very cool , and we had a great time before all the fire marshal problems. It's very unfortunate it ended the way it did. I'm sorry to all the fans that didn't get to see the full show they paid for. I hope to have them back sometime with a level of smoke that wont set off the alarms, but from the way you guys are talking they only come to the US once in a blue moon.

Once again sorry guys , we never wanted it to end this way.

Reminder: I recorded the Richmond show, Bismarck edited it (split tracks and touched up the EQ) for me/everyone to enjoy.

What I posted originally is not the master. I had to do a rough chop off the beginning to get rid of the music that preceded the intro (Bowie, Motorhead, etc.) and chop off the end because it isn't for me to share conversations with the fire marshal, the guy at The National, Ben, Simon and Andrew.

If anyone wants to do a trade for a lossless version (sans conversations) I'm willing for a top notch show from this tour. I'm sure some of you from Europe will have something to trade with me later in the tour too.

All about some smoke...

This sounds like the whole venue was filled with a thick smoke so no one was able to see anything.

Well they had the fog machines on for maybe the first three songs. Then they were completely shut off. You could clearly see everything! It was a very high ceiling to the place. All the fog was floating up to the top and just hovering there. NO damned ventilation. "over-sensitive" fire alarms according to the female african-american fire marshal.

She made the argument that none of us had moved when the alarms went off because none of us had heard them because the music was "so loud". Well how is it Andrew's fault if their alarms aren't loud enough? She said "what if it were a real fire?" Yeah, what if it was a real fire, we would be dead, and it wouldn't have had anything to do with Sisters or fog machines. People not hearing those alarms is a problem that could happen with any loud band that plays there and would certainly NOT be any bands fault, if there ever was a real fire. Just like the marshal said.

But it was still a bad excuse to stop the show. ANd definitely NOT Andrew's fault.

There. That's the whole story.

The band played too loud?

What a great venue that is.

bismarck wrote:Richmond

split tracks 192 kbps mp3 files

Prescott wrote:Excellent work, thank you for doing this.

Thank you for recording it!

All I did was split the tracks from the version I downloaded from you, and add a bit of eq.

And thank to everyone who thanked me, but in truth I was just an editor on this one.

Ozpat wrote:

The band played too loud?

What a great venue that is.

The drummer played too loud as well. The boxes with the new album struck the door. The singer's hair was too long and became a serious struggle for the security guards. Last but not least, a goathead was set up on a stick and the bible was read backwards by the female bass player.

(please, will this be copied and paste by a journalist someday, someday?)