Page 4 of 4

Posted: 01 Jul 2003, 10:22
by MrChris
I haven't been to Talinn, but I have been to Riga.

No, that wasn't very interesting, was it?

Posted: 01 Jul 2003, 13:43
by mayhem
'Although The Sisters half-arsed is still a million times better than 99% of the bands out there' (quote from earlier post but I've done this wrong sorry!)


And unless you want a debate on Music These Days- Why Is It So Crap? I think you've said it all there....(I'm allowed to think like this. I'm old. Most of you have no excuse.)

As soon as I stop having a good time at Sisters shows I will stop going.

Thirteen years and counting.

They don't owe me anything for that any more than any author whose books I read or director whose films I watch. But I have a hell of a lot more fun doing it....

Leave Whammy alone & don't even START on Mr Starling. Rock & Roll incarnate.

Cheers y'all

M

Posted: 01 Jul 2003, 15:29
by mh
Mmmmm - 16 years and counting here. I remember hanging around the original Dominion back in 90 or so, and the big hoo-hah back then was over "VT is crap" vs. "Noooo! VT is like angels coming down from heaven and dancing on my turntable!!!"

Don't seem to recall any definitive conclusions being reached though, but it did make for some sparkling debate.

To me, the rot started setting in circa 93 (also), but where they really blew it was the failure to release those indie singles in 97/98 (what ever did happen there?) There was definitely a buzz about the band beginning to return back then, and it would have been the most opportune moment to take advantage of it and from there work to get the megabucks record deal Von so obviously craves. The subsequent falling-through of the Mute and Virgin (or was this ever on the cards?) deals is testament to this.

What it all boils down to is whether Von sees the band as a legitimate going concern, or is it (to him) just a convenient excuse to enable him to pay the bills without having to get a job? I would love the former, but really do more than half suspect the latter at this stage.

One thing to his eternal credit though is that he has always resisted the temptation (however small - or large???) to get the original members back together (let's leave Wayne out of this). At least it does serve to indicate that there is a remaining vestige of credibility (not to mention dignity) intact in his greying/thinning/delete-as-appropriate temples.

Posted: 01 Jul 2003, 15:54
by Black Shuck
Sod Dignity.

Sod credibility.

I'd love to see a Sisters reunion.

So it'd be puely for cash - so what?
Give the people what they want!

Posted: 01 Jul 2003, 18:07
by MrChris
I think that the singles being released in 1997 could have been a mixed blessing; I'll have to play devil's advocate here. I've always been a bit underwhelmed by Summer, and Romeo Down. Now Crash and Burn, there's a storming record. Ditto, I'd have rushed out and bought a 1997 album as quick as anyone, but if it was (relatively, this is still SOM, mind) poorly produced and not thought through, it wouldn't have done anything for the band's standing. Which I do think AE cares a lot about. I think the songs that they have now are a lot better, although I guess there is a trade-off to be made, because as mh says, there was perhaps more interest half a dozen years ago, when we were all younger...