Acoustic Sounds

New Order

Substance

Music

Sound

New Order 'Substance' album cover

Label: Factory / Warner Music UK

Produced By: Various

Engineered By: Various

Mixed By: Various

Mastered By: Frank Arkwright

Lacquers Cut By: Frank Arkwright

By: Malachi Lui

March 30th, 2024

Format:

Vinyl

New Order ‘Substance’ Reissue Disappoints

Great music subjected to yet another pathetic remaster

The past few decades have brought an array of New Order compilation albums, yet 1987’s Substance, the original New Order singles compilation, still reigns supreme. In a time when “greatest hits” releases are mostly obsolete, there are several reasons for this. One is that New Order were (are?) primarily a singles band who released their best work as five- to eight-minute 12” singles. Older fans’ nostalgia for Substance is also a factor, but most importantly, Substance very conveniently cuts off right before New Order turned to shit. Later compilations include too much mid-career mediocrity; Substance itself was the band’s commercial height, just before their critical decline.

Formed after singer Ian Curtis’ death by the remaining members of Joy Division, New Order’s ‘80s discography documents a post-punk band becoming obsessed with synthesizers and expanding their musical worldview well beyond Manchester. They were a serious rock band and a dance group, whereas before, you had to be one or the other. This helped them become the first “indie” band to achieve worldwide stardom, with their label Factory Records proving that catastrophic bankruptcy was just another part of the rock ’n’ roll lifestyle.

For most bands, compilations are sacrilege, a cheat code invented by record label money men for casual listeners too lazy and impatient to find the highlights themselves. However, New Order is an exception. Their 80s albums are decent, though their early singles discography is among the most unassailable in pop history… if you could find it all back then.

Before Substance, you had to track down New Order’s 7” or (ideally) 12” singles to hear everything. This was possible albeit expensive in the UK, but a lot harder in the US until Quincy Jones’ Warner subsidiary Qwest licensed New Order in the States. Even then, Qwest only picked them up in the mid-80s and didn’t really bother to reissue the first handful of 12”’s. Plus, consumers had moved on to cassettes and CDs, the latter still in its expensive, clunky infancy. CD singles didn’t exist yet, and CD albums were so expensive and only worth it when stuffed to the brim (then 74 minutes).

Substance conveniently solved these issues. According to bassist Peter Hook (whose 700-page memoir Substance: Inside New Order is an informative, fascinating, and hilarious read), Factory founder Tony Wilson wanted to have all of New Order’s single A-sides on a CD for his fancy new car. In the pre-CD-R era, it had to be made commercially. Factory also had other issues to solve: even as New Order’s profile skyrocketed, the label was behind on royalty payments for the band’s existing catalog. Both sides struck a deal to split Substance’s profits 75-25 in Factory’s favor. Great idea, until its sales eclipsed the rest of New Order’s discography.

On the double LP release, Substance presents New Order’s first twelve single A-sides in chronological order, with some caveats. Their debut single “Ceremony” is the later version with drummer Stephen Morris’ girlfriend (later wife) Gillian Gilbert added to the band on keyboards ad second guitar; 1982’s “Temptation” and 1983’s “Confusion” are 1987 re-recordings specifically for this compilation; and 1985’s “Sub-Culture” and 1986’s “Shellshock” are edited from the extended 12” mixes. The original 2CD configuration also edited the 12” mix of “The Perfect Kiss,” and used the second CD for many of the relevant B-sides.

While the re-recorded “Ceremony” (September 1981) doesn’t begin to touch the March 1981 original’s emotional power and sonic rawness, it works as a neat transition point between Joy Division and New Order, considering it’s among the last songs Ian Curtis wrote and the first that New Order recorded. Even when Bernard Sumner (Joy Division guitarist promoted to New Order frontman/chief egomaniac) sings it, Curtis’ resignation cuts through; the original is one of the post-punk era’s most devastating songs, while the later version included here comes across as a new beginning that acknowledges the past.

Martin Hannett, mastermind behind Joy Division’s otherworldly sound, produced both versions of “Ceremony” as well as New Order’s 1981 debut LP Movement (the original UK Factory pressing cut at Townhouse is the copy to have). As Hannett’s drug use and temperament escalated, however, the band dumped him and began self-producing, moving further towards the electronic sound hinted at on Joy Division’s Closer. Thus, “Everything’s Gone Green” (kind of but not really New Order’s second single) focuses on sequenced synth lines, distant drums, and flashes of funkier rhythm guitar as Sumner sings into the abyss, finally sounding a bit less like Ian Curtis.

Now for a time jump: by New Order’s mid-late ‘80s peak, Sumner—according to Hook, at least—became a total control freak who would constantly whine and make everyone miserable until he got his way. Case in point: when Factory compiled Substance, Sumner insisted on re-recording “Temptation” and “Confusion.” The former was perfect to begin with, the original 12” perfectly juxtaposing Sumner’s vocal strain and the melancholic lyrics and melody with the upbeat yet cavernous instrumental. The 1987 version is sonically cleaner and more buoyant, but the arrangement is the same; for better or worse, the re-recording became the canonical version that appears on most New Order compilations as well as the Trainspotting soundtrack. (You can’t go wrong with either version, but still seek out the 12”.) “Confusion,” produced by Arthur Baker on both the 1983 and 1987 versions, went from a plodding New York electro track to a shinier production very reminiscent of Kraftwerk’s overly-maligned Electric Cafe. Save for a key change, the arrangement is mostly identical.

Back to 1983 and “Blue Monday,” the club-ready sleeper hit released between “Temptation” and “Confusion.” It’s New Order’s breakthrough moment and the best-selling 12” single of all time, despite its Peter Saville-designed die-cut sleeve losing money on every copy sold. No need to write much about this song that everyone’s heard a million times (and will hear another million times), except to say that Hook’s memoir has an interesting anecdote about a drum programming disaster.

“Thieves Like Us” concludes the first LP of Substance, representing the end of New Order’s pos-punk sound; after this, real drums appeared less often, the gloomy atmospheres mostly disappeared in favor of danceable beats and sequenced synths, and Hook’s signature bass sound became less prominent. The next studio LP, 1985’s Low-Life, finalized the transition.

Like many British groups of and before their time, New Order didn’t want to rip off their fans by releasing album tracks as singles. That’s the reason why Substance features nothing from Movement or the band’s 1983 sophomore LP Power, Corruption & Lies, and why the early singles discography bears no direct connection to the albums. Low-Life changed that, perhaps due to increasing demand for extended 12” remixes of these tracks (or maybe they knew the creative well was already starting to dry up). The 12” mixes of album tracks “The Perfect Kiss” and “Sub-Culture” are the versions to have; not only do they better represent the time period, but the sprawl allows the songs more space to groove and build up. John Robie’s “Sub-Culture” remix is especially noteworthy, embellishing the song so much that the album version sounds unfinished. Robie still made some obvious, dated mistakes, such as the gimmicky drum breaks and his laughably excessive use of that screeching effect.

The less said about the obnoxious “Shellshock” (commissioned for the Pretty In Pink soundtrack) and the boring “State Of The Nation,” the better. These are two back-to-back clunkers in an otherwise near-perfect singles run. Thankfully, Substance ends strong with Shep Pettibone’s superior 12” mix of Brotherhood single “Bizarre Love Triangle” and the Substance-adjacent single release “True Faith.”

Those last two songs represent New Order at their absolute height, when their sound had fully developed whilst maintaining their commercial success. In a way, New Order was one of the first acts whose cult following—one with an air of exclusive cool—effectively translated into significant, sustained commercial success. This was a band who, for about six glorious years, overcame shortcomings both musical (mediocre lyrics, Sumner’s awkward singing) and nonmusical (financial woes, increasing intraband tension) to create some of the catchiest, most captivating synthpop classics of all time. Substance perfectly documents not just one band, but the culture and mentality of an era; a time of rapid technological development, when strict categorization began to disintegrate and when clubbing appeared as a free escape from everyday misery.

And like anything else that defines an era, it didn’t last. After 1989’s Technique, not even New Order could take enough ecstasy to keep up with the acid house kids, and creatively, Bernard Sumner got too stuck in his ways. Bassist Peter Hook acrimoniously departed in 2007, and the current Sumner dictatorship is little but a recognizable name performing the hits. In recent performance clips, the rest of the band seems miserable as Sumner projects obvious negative energy the entire time, in addition to sounding even more like a cartoon character doing bad karaoke. For this reason, I argue it’s fair to indulge in the revisionist history that New Order ended at least 30 years ago, because have they done anything meaningful since then? Not really.

…About The Reissue

From a technological perspective, New Order’s ‘80s progression is interesting to follow; you can hear everything get more digital as it goes on. Early cuts like “Ceremony” were almost certainly all-analog, though “Blue Monday”’s master was a U-matic 1630 tape and “True Faith” was tracked on PCM-3324 DASH. Though not explicitly stated, Hook’s memoir implies that the “Temptation” and “Confusion” re-recordings were also digitally tracked—at least, they sound as such. Even the mid-80s analog recordings for Low-Life are sort of a hybrid since New Order adopted digital synths and drum machines as soon as they could afford them.

Idiotically out of print on vinyl since its original 1987 release, Warner finally wisened up and orchestrated a big reissue campaign last November. There’s a 2LP set replicating the original UK packaging specs, a 2CD set with B-sides on the second disc (just like the original CD); a 4CD deluxe set with more B-sides and an Irving Meadows, California live show where they played through the entire Substance record, and a double cassette much like the 2CD. Like the other New Order and Joy Division reissues, Frank Arkwright at Abbey Road mastered all formats of the set.

Unfortunately, this Substance remaster is a mixed bag. Arkwright, possibly guided by New Order or their management, took a very aggressive mastering approach. The entire compilation now uniformly has an exaggerated smiley-face EQ and liberal amounts of compression, including digital peak limiting. I’ve not heard the original UK pressing, cut DMM at Townhouse through a digital delay line, but this reissue sounds nothing like the original US Qwest pressing cut DMM at Precision Mastering. The original emphasizes the high mids, while the reissue really jacks up the bass and top end. Some songs sound better, most sound worse. The additional bass helps “Thieves Like Us,” but the sub-bass bursts on “Blue Monday” almost sound like a defect here, and guitar-driven tracks like “Ceremony” are seriously grating. The digital peak limiting—mild for today’s standards, but aggressive for older music—solidifies left-to-right image width (“Bizarre Love Triangle”) but noticeably compromises image depth (“The Perfect Kiss”).

Generally, I find Arkwright’s vinyl remaster fatiguing and annoying, but not quite as bad as the digital/CD releases which probably used the same exact master. Still, I can hear that Arkwright cut lacquers from the peak-limited digital master, because every drum hit is audibly maxing out. I’m not a dynamic range snob, but this especially pisses me off with reissues. Older fans have fond memories of how the originals sounded, and “the kids” listening to the remaster know it’s an older record anyway, so no need to “modernize” it and pretend otherwise! Every time, it results in an inferior product.

I won’t go through each song, but “Ceremony” on the original Qwest Substance absolutely kills the reissue. The reissue’s kick drum is stronger but it has much more authority on the original, and Arkwright’s treble boost makes the guitars sound terribly harsh. Sumner’s vocals are often pulled forward to a fault, like on “True Faith” which sounds really stuffy compared to the original. The slightly darker EQ on “Temptation” is fine, except there’s too much compression and Stephen Morris’ kick drum is so present it’s borderline obnoxious.

Original UK and US vinyl pressings of Substance are rather expensive now, but you’d probably be better off with the original CD (less-than-stellar A/D conversion, but decent EQ and great dynamics) than the new vinyl reissue. Anyone saying that this reissue sounds "dynamic" or "expansive" or "better than ever" is going deaf. That said, Optimal’s 180g black vinyl pressing is pleasingly quiet, the inner sleeves are thicker and look better than the American original, and they at least spent the money to emboss and spot-varnish the type on the front cover.

I didn’t get the 4CD set nor stream the B-side remasters, but skimming through the Irvine Meadows live recording on Apple Music (CD resolution) conjured some second-hand embarrassment. It’s taken from the shittiest soundboard cassette imaginable, and anyone with common sense would say it’s unlistenable. The hi-hat and cymbals distort and cut in and out, while synth effects occasionally drown everything else. Hook’s memoir says that before the show, Sumner announced that he wanted to work with “other people,” thus casting his cloud of irritable grumpiness over yet another would-be-glorious New Order show. The performance itself is fine, but with sound quality that would embarrass most bootleggers, why even bother releasing it?

Music Specifications

Catalog No: Fact 200 / 0190295928889

Pressing Plant: Optimal

Speed/RPM: 33 1/3

Weight: 180 grams

Size: 12"

Channels: Stereo

Source: Digital Remaster

Presentation: Multi LP

Comments

  • 2024-03-30 02:21:31 PM

    Michael Fremer wrote:

    My comment is that this a scholarly, incredibly well-written, comprehensive review that sets a high music review bar for any publication!

    • 2024-03-30 06:21:59 PM

      Mark Ward wrote:

      I couldn't agree more.

    • 2024-03-30 06:29:22 PM

      Martin Straub wrote:

      Completely agree. But it does not read like Malachi has actually heard all the original 12" vinyl UK singles on original vinyl.

      • 2024-03-30 08:21:33 PM

        Malachi Lui wrote:

        correct, i haven't heard all of them. that would quickly get expensive! but i do have original UK 12"'s of 'ceremony' version 1, 'temptation', 'confusion' and 'sub-culture'.

        • 2024-03-31 07:10:24 AM

          Martin Straub wrote:

          Please, spend the money, and get an original, one of the original five UK pressings of this. Any student of music should have one, it is that good. There are reasons it was the best selling 12" ever. In a word, it is stunning.

    • 2024-03-30 10:28:55 PM

      Jim Shue wrote:

      I beg to differ.

      to be clear - this is a VERY well written review by Lui.

      However it's not on the level of anything by Mark Ward or Fred Kaplan - Ken Redmond and McNair on the equipment side. Not there just yet. Promoting a teenager is overblown. It's not a good look for TrackingAngle and imo for Lui. Pull back on the accolades a smidge....

    • 2024-03-31 01:51:34 PM

      Tomato Sandwich wrote:

      Just fucking stop with the salad-tossing. It's pathetic. It's a good review. Leave it at that.

      • 2024-04-01 01:42:53 AM

        Anton wrote:

        That guy ain’t right.

        • 2024-04-01 01:34:38 PM

          Tomato Sandwich wrote:

          I'm perfectly fine. Fremer just posted a recommendation for a phono preamp that was defective twice. Now, he posts a weird, slobbering review of a review. So weird, an you think I'm "not right". So odd.

          • 2024-04-01 01:57:01 PM

            Anton wrote:

            Apologies, I meant to be talking to you about Jim Shue.

    • 2024-04-01 12:25:23 PM

      Matt wrote:

      Agree - One of the most thorough reviews I've read in a long time. As a long time New Order collector (including the original 12"s and the Factory employee gifted 'The Gatefold Substance'), Malachi's insight is both spot on yet thought provoking. Thanks!

    • 2024-04-07 09:45:02 PM

      WesHeadley wrote:

      Without question. The writing is just so right on. I'd also have to agree that the perceptions mirrored my own experience with the Substance vinyl reissue. I really love that collection. The reissue annoyed and disappointed.

    • 2024-04-07 09:45:11 PM

      WesHeadley wrote:

      Without question. The writing is just so right on. I'd also have to agree that the perceptions mirrored my own experience with the Substance vinyl reissue. I really love that collection. The reissue annoyed and disappointed.

  • 2024-03-30 05:53:53 PM

    andy wrote:

    Excellent review, spot on about the remaster sound, with just one general error, Thieves Like Us used a Drumulator not live drums. NO were my favourite band growing up, so much so that I'm getting married in June and the invites are based in Substance' cover art!

    • 2024-03-30 05:54:54 PM

      andy wrote:

      On not in Substance' art I meant.

    • 2024-03-30 11:56:29 PM

      Malachi Lui wrote:

      thanks for pointing out the error about 'thieves like us'. should've known that. even though it was a drumulator, it's certainly the last new order single where the drums sound somewhat real.

  • 2024-03-30 06:24:58 PM

    Martin Straub wrote:

    I'm pretty sure the original Factory 12" of Blue Monday is analog. It sounds analog, unlike what came later, which is clearly early digital. There are five original issues of the Blue Monday 12". Best sounding is the 5th press, the first four were cut at Factory in Manchester, the 5th at Townhousebin London. Result: improved sonics. The 2nd cut is the best of the four Manchester cuts. For obsessives, the 2nd UK cut is on paper thin vinyl, but metal parts were sent to Holland for the Dutch/Europe issue. That one sounds great, the best quality vinyl of the bunch. Did I mention New Order were part of my clubbing university youth.... If you're in doubt about Blue Mondays analog sources, back to back play original 12"'s of Blue Monday and Bizarre Love Triangle. I so wish digitals deadly advance had happened ten years later. Or not at all.

    • 2024-03-31 12:03:11 AM

      Malachi Lui wrote:

      i'll reply to all of your points here:

      'blue monday': peter hook's memoir talks about the original mastering session at strawberry and says the master for that single was a u-matic 1630. could be a mistake, but i'll take his word for it. haven't heard any of the UK 12" variants but it's interesting that you prefer the townhouse cut, considering townhouse had by then installed a digital delay line. but about the 2nd UK cut, vinyl weight doesn't matter much if the mastering is great!

      'blue monday 88' sucks. hook's memoir states that they'd spent time prepping the multi (perhaps a copy of the multi) to be sent over for the remix, and by that time i wouldn't be surprised if the duplicate multi was digital.

      i assume that your original 1987 copy of 'substance' is the UK factory pressing? not surprised that it would suck, because it was cut at townhouse with their DDL. the US qwest pressing sounds pretty good, regardless of cutting source (by then it could've been a DAT for all we know).

      • 2024-03-31 07:14:58 AM

        Martin Straub wrote:

        I read that too in Peter Hooks memoir. Having multiple copies of it, I don't believe it. Peter Hook at the time was pretty strung out on various recreational chemicals and I think he may have gotten confused. Important thing, and the only real thing, that 12" sounds superb. Much better than anything that followed.

      • 2024-03-31 07:16:46 AM

        Martin Straub wrote:

        Yes, my 1988 copy of Substance is the UK factory. Yes, it SUCKS. Played it once.

        • 2024-03-31 02:35:04 PM

          Martin Straub wrote:

          1987 🙄

      • 2024-03-31 11:38:02 AM

        Martin Straub wrote:

        I am guessing Townhouse did not have the digital delay in the path when they did the 12". Possibly because it would be audibly so much worse than the five preceding cuts ? In any case, for whatever reasons, Blue Monday turned out great sounding.

        • 2024-04-03 05:13:27 PM

          Miles Showell wrote:

          Absolutely 100% or everything cut at the Townhouse was done via a digital delay. Townhouse mastering was a STUDER free zone and used AMPEX ATR series analogue tape machines. These machines were never supplied with an advance head system for disc mastering studios (the machines now at Sterling and Absolute sounds are relatively recent custom modifications. This modified version of the ATR was not available when the machines were being manufactured by AMPEX).

          Even in 1979, all disc mastering studios that wanted to use ATR machines had to purchase the optional extra digital delay from AMPEZ (the ADD-1). For its time, it was an excellent sounding delay (50 kHz sampling rate, 16 bit resolution), early digital processors tended to be fitted with Burr Brown chips which sounded a lot better than what followed.

          • 2024-04-03 05:17:09 PM

            Miles Showell wrote:

            Damn typos... Absolutely 100% OF everything cut at the Townhouse...

            and obviously AMPEX in paragraph two.

            • 2024-04-09 06:37:28 AM

              Martin Straub wrote:

              That is really interesting. Something wierd is going on here. Because that track sounds analog, if it is digital, it is really well done. And not 1983 tech well done. Anyway, I thought I would play some of my copies over the weekend.

              1. First press, one of the original 60,000. Sounds great, open and full.
              2. Second press, UK, thin vinyl. A bit fuller and more open.
              3. Second press, Dutch. Better vinyl. Slight improvement.
              4. Fifth UK - Townhouse press. A bit brighter, would say a bit more definition.
              5. Closing with Blue Monday from the original UK Substance double set. That one sucks. Flat and two dimensional. Then I played Bizzarre Love Triangle and Regret, the original UK 12"s. Both great musically, however clearly digital. Like, Obvious.

              One thing I must say too, the 12" are cut hot and hugely dynamic. They have the VU meters on my pre-amp bouncing across the range into the red.

              So I did some research, as best I could. There is no information around as to how and on what Blue Monday was actually recorded. Wierd. Apart from a mention of Britannia Row where it was recorded and the band having issues with all the "archaic gear". Which kinda points to analog tape. I "think".

              In 2003 or 2004 or around then, a reissue was apparently done. By a guy called Roger Lyons, who did the reissue. This I did find, below: "The first problem Roger encountered with 'Blue Monday' was finding the original recording. "For all the old New Order stuff I went back to the original multitracks, but for some reason, there was no multitrack for 'Blue Monday' in the vaults of London Records!" explains Roger. "After a bit of detective work, I found out that Quincy Jones still had a Sony 48-track digital reel of 'Blue Monday' from when he'd copied all the parts for a remix in '88. He'd just bounced the 24 analogue tracks onto his 48-tracker so that he could put his bits on the remaining 24 tracks, so I got a copy of that."

              What this seems to be saying is the original tape/recording for Blue Monday was a 24 track analogue. Which is basically what I am hearing. I think.

              Then, there is the question, how come the Townhouse cut sounds so good if it was run through a digital delay??? That I do not get.

      • 2024-04-02 08:26:15 AM

        Andrew Curtis wrote:

        I've had a UK first press on my Discogs want list for a while. Do you think I should change that to a US first press? Or even Aussie... would make shipping cheaper!

        • 2024-04-02 05:29:32 PM

          Martin Straub wrote:

          I would not think so. The UK used the original tapes. I had a discussion a while back with a real obsessive on.... the Hoffman forum... He, after auditioning every version he could find, said tje UK is umequivocably out in front. He had nice things to say about the Pakistan press 🤣 Which gives an idea of how obsessive he was.

          • 2024-04-03 10:43:48 PM

            Andrew Curtis wrote:

            I've looked hard for that. The only one close is a 1988 press.

            • 2024-04-03 10:47:31 PM

              Andrew Curtis wrote:

              Sorry, this was a response to further down the thread! However, in response to your recommendation for first UK press of Substance, you also say it 'SUCKS'. So are you saying that although it sucks, it is in fact the best pressing?

  • 2024-03-30 06:25:05 PM

    Martin Straub wrote:

    I'm pretty sure the original Factory 12" of Blue Monday is analog. It sounds analog, unlike what came later, which is clearly early digital. There are five original issues of the Blue Monday 12". Best sounding is the 5th press, the first four were cut at Factory in Manchester, the 5th at Townhousebin London. Result: improved sonics. The 2nd cut is the best of the four Manchester cuts. For obsessives, the 2nd UK cut is on paper thin vinyl, but metal parts were sent to Holland for the Dutch/Europe issue. That one sounds great, the best quality vinyl of the bunch. Did I mention New Order were part of my clubbing university youth.... If you're in doubt about Blue Mondays analog sources, back to back play original 12"'s of Blue Monday and Bizarre Love Triangle. I so wish digitals deadly advance had happened ten years later. Or not at all.

    • 2024-04-02 08:20:27 AM

      Andrew Curtis wrote:

      How do I work out which one it is on Discogs? I went though them all and can't find Townhouse in any of the matrices. Is 'lacquer cut at' Tape One, rather than Strawberry Studios what I'm looking for?

      • 2024-04-02 05:32:21 PM

        Martin Straub wrote:

        Look for "" FAC-73-AI * TOWNHOUSE MAX. // FAC-73-BI * MAX. " in the deadwax

        • 2024-04-03 10:48:10 PM

          Andrew Curtis wrote:

          I've looked hard for that. The only one close is a 1988 press.

  • 2024-03-30 06:27:50 PM

    Mark Ward wrote:

    What a fantastic review and overview of one of my favorite bands. I learned a lot. This makes me want to read Peter Hook's book. Have you read this one: Mick Middles' "From Joy Division to New Order - The True Story of Anthony Wilson and Factory Records (2002)"? Fascinating. How utterly disappointing - and, alas, predictably so - that the remaster is so sonically compromised. This seems to be happening a lot with these pop/rock vinyl reissues that otherwise I would acquire. (I own all the original NO UK 12" singles, plus the UK albums, all of which is a little scary to contemplate.....)

    • 2024-03-31 12:05:56 AM

      Malachi Lui wrote:

      haven't read the mick middles book, but i might check it out sometime. peter hook's new order memoir is HIGHLY recommended, one of the best rock n roll books i've read. his other book 'the hacienda: how not to run a club' is also very entertaining... haven't yet read his joy division book.

      it's frustrating that these reissues constantly suck, and perhaps even more frustrating that people think they sound good. most of the crappy reissues are mediocre enough that you don't need a state-of-the-art system to hear it.

      • 2024-03-31 02:40:37 PM

        Martin Straub wrote:

        Completely agree, both memoirs highly entertaining. The Hacienda must have been an amazing place.

        Also agree, most of these reissues suck, pretty much. Then you get people saying how great they sound. I remember a reviewer in a well known newspaper reviewing the 2010 reissue of Exile and going on about how great the sound was....

  • 2024-03-30 06:32:52 PM

    Martin Straub wrote:

    I have an original 1987 copy of Substance, great music, stunning sometimes, but the sound, well, it pretty much sucks, unfortunately.

    The 12" of Shell Shock by the way, sounds pretty good.

  • 2024-03-30 06:35:44 PM

    Martin Straub wrote:

    Or back to back Blue Monday 1988, Quincy Jones effort with an original 12". The originals sonics are so much better.

  • 2024-03-31 11:09:41 AM

    Mark Dawes wrote:

    Excellent technical insight Malachi, thanks for the detail. I agree, New Order made a long career after their early work - I couldn’t be bothered with it. The original “Temptation” is a total classic (the re-recording lost much of the emotion and sonic potency for me). After “Blue Monday” I stopped paying attention. Your summary of the lyrical and vocal weaknesses is spot on. I can see there would be demand for a release like this. What is perplexing is how people with decent ears are meant to accept something worse than the original.

  • 2024-03-31 01:55:58 PM

    Tomato Sandwich wrote:

    Greatly appreciate you calling the remastering out as garbage. There are too few reviewers who will be honest about what's being foisted on them by companies and bands as "new and improved" pressings...many are garbage. Want to see a recent example? Look at the Schitt phono-stage review. Hell, the unit didn't work as advertised and designed. Yet, go buy it! Drivel.

    Thanks again for your candor.

    • 2024-03-31 07:11:33 PM

      Michael Fremer wrote:

      If you are using the Schiit single ended as 96+% will, it’s perfectly fine…

  • 2024-03-31 01:56:04 PM

    Tomato Sandwich wrote:

    Greatly appreciate you calling the remastering out as garbage. There are too few reviewers who will be honest about what's being foisted on them by companies and bands as "new and improved" pressings...many are garbage. Want to see a recent example? Look at the Schitt phono-stage review. Hell, the unit didn't work as advertised and designed. Yet, go buy it! Drivel.

    Thanks again for your candor.

  • 2024-03-31 09:43:50 PM

    Will wrote:

    Great review and well done for calling out Abbey Road.

  • 2024-04-01 12:44:59 AM

    Matt wrote:

    A thorough and interesting review, but kinda one-eyed in its view of New Order's merits. "... New Order were (are?) primarily a singles band who released their best work as five- to eight-minute 12” singles"? I love these tracks as much as anyone but there are an embarrassment of riches on the albums, including better tracks than the singles. "Your Silent Face", "Every Little Counts", "Weirdo", half of "Movement" - these are the soul of first-period NO as much as the singles, if not more so. "Substance very conveniently cuts off right before New Order turned to shit … the band’s commercial height, just before their critical decline." To blithely write off Technique, NO's most cohesive and moving record, is baffling. I'd agree Republic is pretty terrible outside the singles, but Get Ready and Siren's Call hit some exquisite heights. If you're in love with NO as a synth pop band, I'd say those opinions are defensible, but for those of us who love their gnarly guitar band side equally, Substance is half the story. (oh and yeah, the lyrics are terrible on paper and Barney's not a great vocalist, but why do they hit so hard at times?)

    • 2024-04-01 01:29:00 AM

      Malachi Lui wrote:

      'technique' is a decent enough album, but after that it's mostly mediocre. 'get ready' and 'waiting for the siren's call' have some okay moments but nothing that blows me away. and yes, the first three studio albums are all worth having, but i primarily consider new order as a singles band. that's not to fully dismiss the albums, rather to say that the singles are more important imo.

      • 2024-04-01 01:42:42 AM

        Matt wrote:

        Yeah I get that view - it’s funny but Substance came out when I was 17 and Technique when I was 19 and at the time I would have been of the same view as you. Later in life after I’d been through a bunch of stuff I found Technique had much more to say, it’s kind of a bitter and broken album underneath the gleaming surface. Kind of an amazing band to keep their depths hidden so well. Even “Regret” lives up to its title, one of the saddest uplifting songs I can think of.

        • 2024-04-01 01:44:32 AM

          Matt wrote:

          (Careful to frame that as my own experience rather than some ageist crack - I don’t think experience makes a better or a worse critic, just shifts perspective. I love your reviews.)

          • 2024-04-03 04:58:33 AM

            Jeff Henry wrote:

            I’m a little younger than you, Matt, but right there with you regarding the NO albums, which I’ve always thought are underrated and the UK originals sound great. Malachi, happy to prove it to you the next time you’re in Seattle : )

  • 2024-04-01 04:37:21 PM

    JT wrote:

    There's a few people over a Discogs - one in particular called Batwings - reporting any negative review of this reissue. I've seen several disappear Pinochet-like from the site.

    Perhaps Batwings is an AI bot controlled by Mr Arkwright...?

    • 2024-04-01 06:14:02 PM

      Malachi Lui wrote:

      hmmm. wouldn't go THAT far but something's definitely happening with discogs comments in general. things are getting wiped all the time for seemingly no reason. and there are always tons of glowing comments about the worst stuff sounding great!

      • 2024-04-02 01:25:32 PM

        Georges wrote:

        The idea of cataloging all the music in the world was good but unfortunately capitalism took over!

  • 2024-04-02 12:08:02 AM

    Patrick Brennan wrote:

    I'm unaware if they paid any real attention to sound quality on the definitive releases of the first 3 albums. I'm really hoping that they might have gone to the original analog recordings, but who knows? If so, I would so wish for the same attention be paid to this release, and provide us fans with a definitive release of what has become their best selling album.

  • 2024-04-02 12:08:11 AM

    Patrick Brennan wrote:

    I'm unaware if they paid any real attention to sound quality on the definitive releases of the first 3 albums. I'm really hoping that they might have gone to the original analog recordings, but who knows? If so, I would so wish for the same attention be paid to this release, and provide us fans with a definitive release of what has become their best selling album.

  • 2024-04-02 08:26:50 AM

    Andrew Curtis wrote:

    Great review! *****

  • 2024-04-04 07:08:30 PM

    Jimhb wrote:

    "Singles band"? For very casual New Order fans, maybe, but for people who grew up with New Order they were way more than that. To this day myself and my friends still pay their albums from start to end. They are that good.

    I still need to compare my colored copy with my original US pressing, but I will admit I was not blown away by the new pressing (even if they did use the best available sources).

    Oh, the original 12 inch singles, from the UK or the US sound great on my system.

  • 2024-04-04 08:22:15 PM

    Rashers wrote:

    The use of poor quality audience recordings or cassette SBD bootlegs on these official releases is beyond infuriating. Surely New Order have access to professional recording during that timeframe. Similar picture with the recent release of “Machine head”. Lazy cheapo content used to pad out box sets. I agree with your review of the vinyl set - fairly expensive for what sounds like a loudness war era CD.

    • 2024-04-08 01:16:42 PM

      Georges wrote:

      The same comment was posted on the infamous discogs and repeating it here (taking advantage of the freedom of expression that reigns) does not make it true. If anyone finds that this concert at Irvine Meadows on 12/9/1987 was recorded by a member of the public, just give me the brand of their equipment (just for the stereo effects!), we could do some Huge savings. The Deep Purple box set has nothing to do with it, they did not record their concerts (just like Lou Reed or his Velvet Underground for example but also many others unfortunately) and warned that their concert at the Montreux casino on 16.4. 1971 was not on par with the rest. It does, however, sound relatively decent and has not been released before to my knowledge.

  • 2024-04-11 07:02:20 AM

    Jaime wrote:

    Yes, very well written! Fortunately, I had 2 1st US pressings of the album. One Club pressing which sounds 'OK' and an ARC pressing that sounds WAY better. I sold the Club one. Fortunately I also have several of their 12" singles, like you say, that is a good way to hear them 😊