Page 1 of 1

how does it sound?

Posted: 22 Feb 2006, 17:35
by jost 7
how does ben sound like? i guess different than adam did. especially does he sound metal? how do the solos/main lines like in flood 2 or suzanne sound like?

if anyone who already had the pleasure could give some light to that it would be very nice.
thx

Posted: 22 Feb 2006, 18:01
by czuczu
That's the main news I've been waiting to hear since the 16th.
I'm guessing he's copying Adams parts exactly because no-one seems to be noticing the difference. And he's the latest in the line of guitarists who can't handle Temple?

Posted: 22 Feb 2006, 20:22
by MW
Saw both the Vegas and Phoenix shows, and the comparison was night and day. As mentioned on the Vegas thread, the sound mix was an ongoing issue throughout the night, and therefore made it pretty difficult to gauge what Ben would bring to the performance. His parts didn't really seem to stand out, but this could have been a result of either the sound problems or a first night "safe mode" performance with AE keeping a short leash on things to avoid a bad B-Day experience.

The Phoenix performance was much clearer (at least guitar-wise). I specifically recall the lead parts on Flood II being very sharp and precise. In general, this was the same for the majority of the set, with very few exceptions. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Ben couldn't "handle Temple", but it didn't seem to be AS on the money, note for note, start to finish, as I remember Adam playing it. But considering that Ben has only been playing these songs for around two months, I think he did a very admirable job. He should only get better with each passing show as his familiarity and comfort levels grow.

As for his overall sound, it does seem to come across as a bit more "metal" than Adam's sound. I would guess that his primary guitar, an Ibanez (looked similar to an RG-470), played a big part in that. At least from my experience, the Ibanez tone is definitely more metal than Adam's (primary) Firebird that we've been used to for so long now. I didn't get a chance to take note of what kind of amp or effects setup he was running through, but that likely played an equal part in the difference in sound. I definitely didn't take it as a change for the worse. While slightly different, it certainly didn't detract from the songs. I also liked his occasional improvisations (quick pick slides, additional filler notes here and there) that helped to further establish his presence during the performance. His backing vocals were also a pleasant surprise, as he and Chris did a fine job on that front.

He also seems to be a good bit more active than Adam was, as he seemed to only be in front of his mic when he absolutely had to. While he didn't make the mistake of staying too long at the front/center portion of the stage (I think I recall hearing that AE corrected him for this - fortunately for him, with a smile - in San Diego), it was nice to see that he didn't just languish in a corner all night. Although it was a bit of an adjustment to see anybody BUT Adam occupying that portion of the stage, my concerns were pretty quickly put to rest. After seeing the Phoenix show, I consider Ben to be a very capable, charismatic addition to the Sisters lineup. I'm just looking forward to hearing this new track they've been working on...and hopefully many more after that!

Posted: 22 Feb 2006, 21:22
by czuczu
:notworthy:
Thanks for that, some very nice details in there! 8)
Same kind of solos as Adam then - nothing as extreme as Tim's wall of noise or Andreas' little adventures?
Really starting to look forward to the tour hitting Europe now..

Posted: 22 Feb 2006, 22:18
by MW
Nothing TOO extreme - but certainly more personal flair/nuances than sounding as though he was just trying to replicate the albums. I'm really looking forward to hearing some recordings from the current shows just to better compare/contrast the new lineup's sound over previous tours.

I'm fairly certain you won't be disappointed when they reach the European leg of the tour. Five shows in, and they appear to be picking up steam with each passing night. It should be a VERY well-oiled groove machine by April!

Posted: 23 Feb 2006, 00:06
by Purple Light
Compliments from me too. :notworthy:

Nice juicy details. Can't wait for the machine to get to the UK. :D

Posted: 23 Feb 2006, 08:45
by Erudite
Purple Light wrote: Can't wait for the machine to get to the UK. :D

Me too, I just hope it doesn't break down on route!

But back to topic - excellent review of Ben.

Cheers :notworthy:

Ben??

Posted: 24 Feb 2006, 04:07
by crucifixbuddha
Ive just seen the two Texas dates and I have to say, I'm not all that impressed. Ben seems to be just another metal guitarist. Nothing special. He adds a little flair to the songs, but it is fairly typical cheesy metal ornamentation. He honestly reminded me of every kid in high school with an Ibanez and a Tube Screamer (and remember that was 20 years ago).

The true test will be if he ever gets around to recording a track. I just have bad flashbacks of bad Dave Mustane hair.

And on a side note, what's the deal with such a static set list? It's disappointing that these guys don't know more of the material.

Buddha

Posted: 24 Feb 2006, 09:22
by beatnick138
But wait... how can his guitar sound different if the Sisters are just using DAT now? :roll:

Posted: 24 Feb 2006, 11:08
by jost 7
thx for the detailed info, mw - this really was the main question when thinking of the new lineup.

i loved lots of what andres did soundwise, especially concerning the solo parts, but his rythm sections were too unispired - and adams solos never made it, but ribbons, lucretia and maybe some others really were great due to adam's sound/licks. flood 2 is always interesting, as adams intro was just pure thunder, but his solos were only a furt (soundwise). so you never get what you want ;-)

really looking forward, hopefully with as less metal as possible (this in fact means no matel at all)

Posted: 25 Feb 2006, 00:22
by His Dog Napalm
I spoke to someone who met Ben at The Austin show...apparently, he´s only been rehearsing with the band since around the 23rd\24th of Jan. So fair play to him....

I just hope they play some new tracks...be that wholly new ones or tracks not played live for a while Logic or Rock and a Hard Place, anyone...?

Posted: 25 Feb 2006, 10:56
by Erudite
His Dog Napalm wrote: I just hope they play some new tracks...be that wholly new ones or tracks not played live for a while Logic or Rock and a Hard Place, anyone...?
Amphetamine Logic always hits the spot, as does Body Electric.
I have mixed feelings about Floorshow - love the song, but the last time
I heard it back in 93 at the Crystal Palace gig (back when Adam was the new guy) they murdered it.
So much so that I don't think it's been played live since?

Did a good of Blood Money during the Distance Over Time tour, which
introduced War On Drugs, which is overdue an airing this time out.

Other than that:

Kiss (The Carpet)
Train
Nine While Nine

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 17:36
by jost 7
after listening to the vegas recording (thx for the link and the upload!) i now know a little bit how it sounds - and i an really pleased with most of ben's and chris' guitarwork, and the voice seems to be strong as last summer!

its interesting to see, what ben does/does not. he obviously is a well trained guitarplayer and fits in on many of the tacks, adding new parts and solos which did not happen almost a decade! its very lively due to that. but why the ugly f&l&a riff again, together with a really powerless leadsound? i don't understand. also the bass sound lacks power, but hey.

anyway, for the first show quite cool, and i am shure, it gets better with each gig played! like the army would say: let's roll! yeah!

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 18:12
by Brad
I would echo those sentiments after hearing the Vegas recording. This in indeed a new Sisters. I still maintain the August 05 tour was a warmup for this tour. Better to briefly break in one new guitar player instead of two - made for a good transition.
Ben brings a new style that I think injects some new energy to ALL of the songs. I loved Adam's playing, but it is certainly interesting to hear the new versions.
I must have had a wide grin listening to it, although my wife was not sure what the fuss was all about :)

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 18:34
by czuczu
jost 7 wrote:...but why the ugly f&l&a riff again, together with a really powerless leadsound? i don't understand.
I thought that was midi when I heard it... I've only had a quick listen to a couple of the mp3s and what I heard sounded OK.
Now I'm going to try and avoid everything for the next month so it's all fresh when I see them.

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 18:43
by Obviousman
FALAA is odd indeed, especially as Chris appears to have said they're playing 'exactly' what they played last year :eek:

Anyway, quite liked the overall sound, and the backings are much better :D

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 18:44
by jost 7
czuczu wrote:
jost 7 wrote:...but why the ugly f&l&a riff again, together with a really powerless leadsound? i don't understand.
I thought that was midi when I heard it... I've only had a quick listen to a couple of the mp3s and what I heard sounded OK.
its always a problem, when people who use metal-sounds and metal gear try to sound like the parts wayne/adam played - this is always a mess, as its not metal nor celtic/goth/??? or whatever you might call it. e.g. the new fields album shows exactly the same problem (for me), which is annyoing. but i know that many people in here do like it that way. i do rate it as a pale compromise - metal gear for metal sounds, not-metal gear for not-metal sounds. this will improove, definitely, during the tour

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 18:59
by czuczu
jost 7 wrote:
czuczu wrote:
jost 7 wrote:...but why the ugly f&l&a riff again, together with a really powerless leadsound? i don't understand.
I thought that was midi when I heard it... I've only had a quick listen to a couple of the mp3s and what I heard sounded OK.
its always a problem, when people who use metal-sounds and metal gear try to sound like the parts wayne/adam played - this is always a mess, as its not metal nor celtic/goth/??? or whatever you might call it. e.g. the new fields album shows exactly the same problem (for me), which is annyoing. but i know that many people in here do like it that way. i do rate it as a pale compromise - metal gear for metal sounds, not-metal gear for not-metal sounds. this will improove, definitely, during the tour
I don't mind them having a more 'metal' sound, they've always sounded pretty contemporary for the era they were playing in - sparse, angular in the early '80s etc. I'd be more worried if they were trying to play someone else's arrangements straight - Wayne's or Adam's for example. Looking forward to being impressed in Paris (and praying his voice holds out :innocent: )

(Edit - fixed my s**t typing)

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 19:38
by James Blast
there's definitley more of a 'crunch' to the guitar sound on what I've heard, this is a good thing

Posted: 02 Mar 2006, 23:25
by DGP00666
I'm not a sound engineer and I don't care... I just know that I'm listening to that Vegas recording and I'm impressed on how fcuking HEAVY Flood I sounds (where's the feedback anyway?). IMHO during the last tours they sounded as if they were bored or something while they were playing it. That makes me happy. :P

Posted: 03 Mar 2006, 15:36
by jost 7
DGP00666 wrote: IMHO during the last tours they sounded as if they were bored or something while they were playing it. :P
.... i had a discussion about that in vienna with adam last summer.

btw, after having done a kind of clean up of the vegas recording i have to admit, that a lot has happened to sound &, even more importent, to the performance - in a very positive way - f**king great, and this was the first show - looking forword to hearing what other people who already had the pleasure will tell us.

is the seller of the vegas recording on ebay among us? always interesting what a tour causes on ebay - lots of stuff at the mo.