REM Broke Up!!!

[blue330]

The first time I met R.E.M. Peter had flatwounds on his guitar. I thought that was fantastic and bold and weird in 1981. You could hardly even find them in stores at that point! I used to use Vox flatwounds- they came in what looked like a fishing line round plastic box, different colors for different gauges. So I had fond memories of flatwounds but they had pretty much vanished from the rock scene by end of the 60s, in my experience, anyway.

[Ain'tGotNoPokemon]

The first time I met R.E.M. Peter had flatwounds on his guitar. I thought that was fantastic and bold and weird in 1981. You could hardly even find them in stores at that point! I used to use Vox flatwounds- they came in what looked like a fishing line round plastic box, different colors for different gauges. So I had fond memories of flatwounds but they had pretty much vanished from the rock scene by end of the 60s, in my experience, anyway.

He is a unique guy, isn't he? I recall an associate of mine telling me about his father, a photographer, taking pictures of REM in the early days, and he kept insisting that Peter liked OLD, rusted strings. I took that one with a grain of salt.

[Folkie]

The first time I met R.E.M. Peter had flatwounds on his guitar. I thought that was fantastic and bold and weird in 1981. You could hardly even find them in stores at that point! I used to use Vox flatwounds- they came in what looked like a fishing line round plastic box, different colors for different gauges. So I had fond memories of flatwounds but they had pretty much vanished from the rock scene by end of the 60s, in my experience, anyway.

Thanks, Mitch and David, for all the information about Peter's strings. I don't know what accounts for the sound difference I described (ie. the brightness of the early guitar sound vs. the mellowness of his later tone), but I guess his use of flats explains why there's no finger-squeak on any of the recordings.

David, I think you made Werner blush by attributing my comment to him! Sorry about the mixup

[electrofaro]

David, I think you made Werner blush by attributing my comment to him! Sorry about the mixup

At least he didnt say I'm an english bloke playing in a Youtube video

Thanks for reply, Mitch!

[Ain'tGotNoPokemon]

The first time I met R.E.M. Peter had flatwounds on his guitar. I thought that was fantastic and bold and weird in 1981. You could hardly even find them in stores at that point! I used to use Vox flatwounds- they came in what looked like a fishing line round plastic box, different colors for different gauges. So I had fond memories of flatwounds but they had pretty much vanished from the rock scene by end of the 60s, in my experience, anyway.

Thanks, Mitch and David, for all the information about Peter's strings. I don't know what accounts for the sound difference I described (ie. the brightness of the early guitar sound vs. the mellowness of his later tone), but I guess his use of flats explains why there's no finger-squeak on any of the recordings.

David, I think you made Werner blush by attributing my comment to him! Sorry about the mixup

The difference between the early days and latter days have to do with choice of amplification, guitars, etc. Peter didn't use Vox amps until well after the first three albums. Of course, on Document and Green, and probably Monster and New Adventures, he had a Marshall, and of course a Les Paul. Peter always close-miked his amps until Don Gehman showed him how to mic from different distances, which largely accounts for the bigger rock oriented sound on LRP.

I've also noticed, in photos, Peter will use both pickups on his Ric (Though whether or not he has the neck pickup dialled in cannot be answered because it's hard to see from a distance). This will of course make for a thicker sound. When you watch early live videos, Peter always has the treble pickup on, so the sound is thinner.

Today, Live, his Tone Tubby amp accounts for a lot of the thicker sounds. Though, in the studio, he uses different combinations of amps. For instance, for Up, he used a Vox stack for some tracks instead of his normal combo, as I recall.

If anyone needs me to source this information, I can do so.

[marc61]

Hate to bring this thread back to the original topic but, I wanted to share my thoughts...

I'm very happy for the band, and the decision they made. They had so much success. Now they have a chance to live their lives as they wish. Very few groups with this level of popularity have that opportunity.

I feel very fortunate that I was able to discover their music early on(1981), and actually meet them a few times (between 82,83). What a nice bunch of people. They used to send my band a Christmas card every year. Who does that? From everything I've seen and heard since, besides making more and more fabulous music, they don't seem to have changed a bit.

Wishing them lots of health, happiness and success in the future...and yeah I wanna hear some solo tunes from all!

[Rickygirl]

R.E.M. are my all time favourite band too and it is thanks to Peter that I took up guitar and fell in love with Rickenbackers. He is my guitar hero and I have been lucky to have met him a couple of times. He is the nicest person and always willing to chat to fans that I have seen, even when they are a little nutty!!

I felt shock at first but not the sense of sadness I thought I might have. They are still there for me in their music and I am very happy to think that I have seen them play in big and small venues. I have been really lucky to have got so close up to them and I will treasure every moment. I also really like the side projects I have seen Peter do and I hope there may be more stuff with Robyn Hotchcock. Not sure if I have missed anything in that department??

For what it is worth I quite liked Collapse and although it is not my favourite album I disagree with the "lazy" theory. I also really liked Accelerate.I am an "old" fan too and have been with them for many years, since the 80s. I also like that stuff best too. However the truth is that music is of the here and now and we all change. It cannot stay the same as we all change over time! I accept that their newer stuff cannot be the old stuff, though Accelerate was a good compromise IMHO.

Just my own point of view and sharing with other people who appreciate them.

So I will drink a toast to R.E.M. and for everything they have given me and countless others.

R.E.M.

[Ain'tGotNoPokemon]

For what it is worth I quite liked Collapse and although it is not my favourite album I disagree with the "lazy" theory. I also really liked Accelerate.I am an "old" fan too and have been with them for many years, since the 80s. I also like that stuff best too. However the truth is that music is of the here and now and we all change. It cannot stay the same as we all change over time! I accept that their newer stuff cannot be the old stuff, though Accelerate was a good compromise IMHO.

The "lazy" theory is supported by the fact that WB was hassling them. Peter and the gang had to go into the studio fairly soon after Accelerate to record demos, and then quickly bring Michael in to write lyrics and sing. However, the large part of the "lazy" theory comes from the bad lyrics, uninspired playing, etc. I, nor anyone I know, would want or expect them to go back to their roots or attain what they once had. A band or artist has to move forward, and for me, CIN was two steps backward. I don't think it's coincidental that they decided not to tour and then broke up soon after.

Honestly, I don't think they made a weak album until ATS, and that was a lazy album. Peter Buck was barely in the studio, and Mike was playing bass, keys, and guitar. So, I'm not in the camp that thinks they lost it at any point. Accelerate was really good, and I wanted them to use that momentum to make an even better album.

[jdawe]

Honestly, I don't think they made a weak album until ATS, and that was a lazy album. Peter Buck was barely in the studio, and Mike was playing bass, keys, and guitar. So, I'm not in the camp that thinks they lost it at any point. Accelerate was really good, and I wanted them to use that momentum to make an even better album.

From what I've read, the band -- particularly Peter -- seem to have had the completely opposite take on ATS. Peter has repeatedly expressed the opinion that the band worked too hard on the album, and in the process killed any spontaneity and freshness. Here's a fairly typical excerpt from an interview Peter gave in 2009:

Have you got the bug? Can we expect a new Reckoning next year?
Believe me, that’s all coming down the pipeline. And just think, it’s only 21 years until it’s 25 years of Around The Sun. Now there’s a record that would benefit from everyone hearing the first month or so of roughs. It would be ten times the record!

You polished that one until there was almost nothing left.
Yeah, it’s like something you’d imagine someone doing a lot of crystal meth would do [laughs].

http://www.mojo4music.com/blog/2009/02/ ... murmu.html

[Folkie]

I've also noticed, in photos, Peter will use both pickups on his Ric (Though whether or not he has the neck pickup dialled in cannot be answered because it's hard to see from a distance). This will of course make for a thicker sound. When you watch early live videos, Peter always has the treble pickup on, so the sound is thinner.

You reach a real insight here. Maybe pickup settings are a factor in the tone difference I'm talking about. However, I've only seen R.E.M. in concert once, so all I have to judge by are bootlegs from 1981-1986, that show I attended on the "Green" tour, and the Dublin Olympia show from 2007. I do know that Peter could get some serious jangle out of just about any guitar he played. Listen to the Raleigh, NC 1985 You Tube footage, where he plays what looks like a Tele Thinline for "Pretty Persuasion." I don't know which pickup positions he's using, but it sounds almost like the studio version. I guess those flatwounds were a major component of his sound, too. I've tried playing "Laughing" with roundwound strings, and the finger squeak is almost unbearable.

[Ain'tGotNoPokemon]

I've also noticed, in photos, Peter will use both pickups on his Ric (Though whether or not he has the neck pickup dialled in cannot be answered because it's hard to see from a distance). This will of course make for a thicker sound. When you watch early live videos, Peter always has the treble pickup on, so the sound is thinner.

You reach a real insight here. Maybe pickup settings are a factor in the tone difference I'm talking about. However, I've only seen R.E.M. in concert once, so all I have to judge by are bootlegs from 1981-1986, that show I attended on the "Green" tour, and the Dublin Olympia show from 2007. I do know that Peter could get some serious jangle out of just about any guitar he played. Listen to the Raleigh, NC 1985 You Tube footage, where he plays what looks like a Tele Thinline for "Pretty Persuasion." I don't know which pickup positions he's using, but it sounds almost like the studio version. I guess those flatwounds were a major component of his sound, too. I've tried playing "Laughing" with roundwound strings, and the finger squeak is almost unbearable.

I've never noticed any string noise when I play Laughing...

Well, Peter does sound like Peter when he plays anything.

Jdawe: My response is this:





This is Mike during the making of ATS. Also consider that the guitar work on ATS is not only minimal, but more sparse than any other REM release.

[Sweden]

I've also noticed, in photos, Peter will use both pickups on his Ric (Though whether or not he has the neck pickup dialled in cannot be answered because it's hard to see from a distance). This will of course make for a thicker sound. When you watch early live videos, Peter always has the treble pickup on, so the sound is thinner.

Middle pickup, neck pickup blend-in is about mid-way (2 o'clock when looking at it straight from the front and in a horizonal position). At least it was in 2006-2007 when he played the backup ("copy") 360.

I would be interested in any pics of him using the treble pickup only in the earlier days though. Everything I can remember seeing has been middle-pickup, even back then.



(330, sure, but still)

Look at the picture here; middle position:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXIskkvb ... re=related

Do you have other information?

/D

[Sweden]

Jdawe: My response is this:

Not sure what those pics are intended to show. While I think you may be right that Mike did more guitar work on that album than on many others, he played guitar on essentially all albums they ever recorded, so those pics don't say much really.

[Ain'tGotNoPokemon]

Oh lord... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNi7Kt0iOH4 <<< Right there. Peter is playing in the treble position. You can even hear it; you don't even have to look, but if you do, it's in the treble position. Those two pic you posted: It's in the treble position. If you don't believe me, fine. IDC.

As for the Mike thing: It's my hypothesis. If you don't wanna believe it, that's your prerogative.

[Folkie]

David,

Do you have any personal theories about how Peter's tone has evolved over the years, so that even when he's playing the same material (ie. the early I.R.S. catalog) his sound and approach are different now than they were in the early to mid-eighties? You seem to know his work inside out, which is why I'm asking.

Robert