Heartland

Been thinking a little too hard lately, but does anyone see much better sound recording's of Sisters gigs in the 80's compared to today's technology. Am I missing something? I wasn't sure were to post this either; here or in the sharing section. Anyway, I'm listening to boots like Gimme Shelter, Silence is Platinum, Trojan Horse etc and they sound much better than what is recently recorded. Maybe its time for some new speakers or something.

A lot of them are soundboard recordings.

exactly. and according to rumors floating in air many given by

it's all pish, sorry

and yes, you think too hard

...and featured better setlists tae

varied even...

Soundboard eh? Well then, that explains it. Never thought of that. No wonder you can't hear the crowd yakking as clearly as others. And thank you Mr. Blast, I know...

sultan2075 wrote:A lot of them are soundboard recordings.

much less than you would think though

James Blast wrote:varied even...

sadly, not really after say 1983. 1984 for each tour remained pretty much the same, 1985, with the exceptions of the specials meant for filming Blackburn, Leeds, Newcastle had the same set. the set lists are actually more varied now than ever before (if you take the latest two gigs as an example)

frederik wrote:

sultan2075 wrote:A lot of them are soundboard recordings.

much less than you would think though

agreed, i think for the 'famous' tapers it was an artform, a real risk and generally they had the contacts to get decent positions, technical acumen etc

recently anybody can have a go, and are generally keen to share their efforts, so the better recordings remain off radar, or in the trader circle - Leeds 2003 and a few other European gigs excepting *

* talking really top quality, there are lots of very good things to be had

paint it black wrote:* talking really top quality, there are lots of very good things to be had

Like some, but few, have actually done, they could think about putting some of them on ebay... It'd be no different than tapers selling their stuff at record fairs in the 80s. And majority of the recordings available to buy these days isn't any better than what's shared...ie. simply not worth it. From 2000s, i know of exactly two outstanding recordings being sold - and even the last one was a few years back (that said, by no means do i scour ebay even every quarter, so it's quite possible i've missed some.)

I never saw the Sisters in the eighties, but I did see a lot of other bands and I reckon that the reason the Boots sound so crap these days is because the noise coming out of the speakers is so bad. Whether this is a deliberate policy to cover up the fact that Eldo can't sing so good these days or, the more unlikely, they have the worst sound system of any band I have seen in my life, ever. On every occasion they can sound s**t. From pub bands to Rock City to the NEC nobody has a worst sound - this cannot be by accident.

Not sure I fully agree with that.
There are a few SBDs from earlier on & yes they are bl00dy good.
But they'd be a feck sight better with a bit of mastering before being unleashed.

There are modern recordings that sound fantastic though.
The Artmania show that Eggi shared for example.

What you need to look for when choosing a bootleg (hate that term) is the taper &/or the gear used.

That usually only falls apart when the source (the band) sound cr@p themselves.
A good example is BC's recording of Seattle 2008.
BC's recordings are some of the best recordings I have ever heard. The Cure stuff he's taped has been nothing short of incredible in terms of quality.
Same gear, same bloke, different source.

His note on the Seattle 2008 show

Notes: Really poor vocal mix during this show.

Musically it still sounds really quite nice, but he didn't bother putting any work into EQ-ing or anything, due to being p!ssed at the fact there was practically no vocal level at all.

The quality of audience recorded bootlegs should get better over time. The sound that comes out the PA is better and the equipment used to record it is better. Easy example being the comparison of Ziggy boots to Reality boots. A lot of the Reality boots are nearly as good as the original "Stage", whereas most of the Ziggy are "For Serious Collectors Only"
The sound that comes out of the PA at Sisters gigs nowadays is awful and that is why the boots sound awful

They didn't do rain from Heaven in the bloody 80's.

Oh, there are plenty of crap recordings from the 80s too if you go looking hard enough.

million voices wrote: The sound that comes out of the PA at Sisters gigs nowadays is awful and that is why the boots sound awful

Not all of them.

Try
Brussels 2009 (CH version)
Toronto 2008 (MZ N1 source)
Tienen (JS' utterly astonishing version)
Bologna 2008 (Microtrack source)
One of the Zottegem 2007 recordings
Bratislava 2006 (CE i think)
Madrid 2006 (still my fave recording from that tour)
Practically all the 2005 shows
Bonn 2001

& there are more.......
Sure, the source needs to be good & a lot of the later shows are not the best quality, but some are stunning.
Okay, they're not SBDs, but sometimes SBDs can be really "dry" without the crowd. They are concerts after all.
& also, don't forget, the recordings can be manipulated/ re-mastered to make the optimum product, but if you expect every single master to sound wonderful, then you'll be disappointed.

On the original point of the topic, I don't think the quality of the recordings are worse than those back in the 90's. If anything, they are better.
It's just the "subject matter" that is occasionally somewhat lacking.

mh wrote:Oh, there are plenty of crap recordings from the 80s too if you go looking hard enough.

Zackerly!
eg
The_Sisters_of_Mercy_1984-05-26_Hague
Okay. A crisp enough recording, but Andrew. Please write lyrics before performing songs.

I've heard way, way worse than The Sisters live. They sounded no worse than anything else I've seen in the last place I saw them- where everything sounds pretty s**t- and better than... well, any metal band I've seen there when I still went to such things, for one. The noise coming off the stage ain't bad at all. It's not exactly a secret Mr. E's more of a "character" vocalist than a singer, especially these days. He was never a technically accomplished vocalist and never made a point of disguising it- Floodland's production exempted.

million voices wrote:Bonn 2001

Eh? The ones I know are quite... unspectacular.

Llamatron wrote:I've heard way, way worse than The Sisters live.

Actually, I haven't and I am being entirely honest and serious here. I've been going to gigs since 1974 too.

it's shabby and not nice on the poor erses that still pay to see them

Llamatron wrote:I've heard way, way worse than The Sisters live. They sounded no worse than anything else I've seen in the last place I saw them- where everything sounds pretty s**t- and better than... well, any metal band I've seen there when I still went to such things, for one. The noise coming off the stage ain't bad at all. It's not exactly a secret Mr. E's more of a "character" vocalist than a singer, especially these days. He was never a technically accomplished vocalist and never made a point of disguising it- Floodland's production exempted.

These days he sounds more like Vic Reeves doing his "Northern Club Singer" routine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXJmPttN ... re=related

James Blast wrote:

Llamatron wrote:I've heard way, way worse than The Sisters live.

Actually, I haven't and I am being entirely honest and serious here. I've been going to gigs since 1974 too.

it's shabby and not nice on the poor erses that still pay to see them

That's not fair. They've been great this year, though they did give some p*ss poor shows a while ago.

Agreed centurion, I love the 2010 gigs