New DS Live Box Set, 3rd November 2023!

[Jules]

Can you remember at the time you signed up for the tour was it for a set period (such as the dates as played) or was it more open ended?  And whether there were any dates or territories that had been discussed or pencilled in beyond the final show in October 1992 that were then dropped?  thanks!

When I signed up it was going to be just over a year on the road (not including rehearsals). The tour was planned and all musicians contracted then the first Gulf war happened. DS couldn't get international insurance due to uncertainty with security etc. So everything was postponed for six months.
I never heard about any South American leg until way after the tour had ended. We were never scheduled to tour Japan either, which I thought was strange. However the reality is, the tour was super successful by anyone's standards. The last six months we played to huge sell out crowds in outdoor stadiums across Europe. We could have easily kept going around Europe from October 92 to the end of the year, but I think Mark and John felt like they had had enough.

More information about it:


And in this interview Ed Bicknell said the tour was a disaster in economical terms in Australia and New Zealand

[Chris W]

There were no shows planned in MY itinerary that never happened.
When we arrived in Australia there were gaps in the schedule. They were listed as days off, with 'potential show' as a foot note.
Mostly those shows never materialised, however the tour of Oz/NZ was still extremely successful by other similar bands standards.  it just wasn't as big as they had initially hoped. It is very expensive to take ANY major tour to the somewhat isolated Australia. Also, the fact we ended up with quite a few days off would have been terrible for the accounts. So I'm not surprised Ed says it was a financial disaster, but we still played a lot of shows to sell out crowds.
There was an element of OES tour that was making money. At one point we played 13 shows in a row, in different cities, without a day off.
After the first couple of legs the lighting rig got smaller.
Everyone was exhausted after more than a year. Mark had been in a bad mood most of the year, so if going to S America didn't seem profitable I am absolutely not surprised it never happened. In my memory I was never planning to go to S America, whether it was listed on a Phillipps bus or not.
No show that was in my itinerary over the entire tour was ever cancelled. So some dates or legs that were potentially planned never happened.

[Chris W]

Just read John Illslsey's comments in the article posted above.
I'm sure the band lost money in Oz/NZ and again in North America. Both tours were probably over ambitious in the planning.
However.......Mark and John did extremely well financially from that tour. As I said, the final six months or so we played a lot of huge, completely sold out football stadium shows across Europe. And could have continued with that for a few months more.

[Jules]

There were no shows planned in MY itinerary that never happened.
When we arrived in Australia there were gaps in the schedule. They were listed as days off, with 'potential show' as a foot note.
Mostly those shows never materialised, however the tour of Oz/NZ was still extremely successful by other similar bands standards.  it just wasn't as big as they had initially hoped. It is very expensive to take ANY major tour to the somewhat isolated Australia. Also, the fact we ended up with quite a few days off would have been terrible for the accounts. So I'm not surprised Ed says it was a financial disaster, but we still played a lot of shows to sell out crowds.
There was an element of OES tour that was making money. At one point we played 13 shows in a row, in different cities, without a day off.
After the first couple of legs the lighting rig got smaller.
Everyone was exhausted after more than a year. Mark had been in a bad mood most of the year, so if going to S America didn't seem profitable I am absolutely not surprised it never happened. In my memory I was never planning to go to S America, whether it was listed on a Phillipps bus or not.
No show that was in my itinerary over the entire tour was ever cancelled. So some dates or legs that were potentially planned never happened.

That's something I always wondered, how from the management were working with the possibilities of extend the tour to Eastern Europe, South America or even a second visit to North America, if the musicians hired for that tour didn't know about it?

There was any clause in the contract that allowed the management to extend the tour and automatically your contracts?

[Jules]

Just read John Illslsey's comments in the article posted above.
I'm sure the band lost money in Oz/NZ and again in North America. Both tours were probably over ambitious in the planning.
However.......Mark and John did extremely well financially from that tour. As I said, the final six months or so we played a lot of huge, completely sold out football stadium shows across Europe. And could have continued with that for a few months more.

Most of us were under the impression that most of the Stadiums part of the tour was planned in order to recover all the money they lost in Ozz and NA, as it's known that MK didn't like playing in stadiums.

[Brunno Nunes]

in theory yes. But in practice no.


Forgetting what Guitar you used on a song, or the particular eq settings on an amp is a totally different thing from having studio time booked at £1000 plus an hour, sitting in front of the recording desk, setting up amps, and trying to recreate said live sound. Totally different. That process wouldn't have been simple either, it would have involved several days of studio time, remember this is pre BG.

This is becoming conspiracy theory level stuff.

Finding and editing together sections of songs from different shows is more complex and takes longer than just fixing a few notes in the bass, or the guitar. So your theory about studio time is wrong.
Like I said, fixing any mistakes on a live recording is absolutely 100% standard practice in the music industry. It is counted as part of the final mix.
What every one does (and has done for decades) is record several shows (in this case 2 shows at Nimes and 2 shows at Rotterdam). Then you listen through and first choose the best overall version of each song, then you go through again and see if there are any better guitar solos, or vocal verses (for example) than the main song you have chosen. Then once all that is edited together you go through and fix any wrong bass notes, or out of tune guitar chords etc, etc...
That is how ALL live albums are made.

Thank you very much for bringing these clarifications, Chris, here you summarize exactly how I always perceived the preparation of the OTN, this further supports my research, as what I showed goes in the same direction that you brought us in this comment. His words carry significant weight from someone who has rich experience recording albums, as well as being a member of the band during this period.
It's great to have your participation here on the forum, gratitude!!!!

[herlock]

It may be standard practice to make overdubs in live albums, but this is a radical departure from Mark's philosophy. 9 years before, Alchemy was proudly advertised as a live album that does not contain overdubs of any kind, and Mark stated "we just wanted to record a concert". Which I believe it the way it should be. Or at least, record several shows, and pick the best rendition of each song, but don't touch the song itself. If you can't find one you are not ashamed of, something is wrong with your ability as an artist. Live shows do have mistakes, it's part of the fun. On Alchemy there are indeed small mistakes here and there. Yet it was a much more legendary live album than On the Night. Because it felt real, not some kind of overproduced Frankeinstein monster....

[qjamesfloyd]

This whole over dubbing and live mistakes thing is normal, whether it is a good idea to overdub or not is down to personal opinion. I am watching a documentary about Tubular Bells, and the guitarist Jay Stapley was saying that he expects to make a mistake playing live, and if he hasn't it makes him more nervous, once he has made the mistake it settles and him and he can move on, this might not be the case for all musicians, but, I found it an interesting statement.  Also, re-recording or overdubbing isn't always as great an idea as it might seem, the original Tubular Bells album from 1973 has lots of mistakes, out of tune instruments, out of time playing, but history has proved it being part of the albums charm, Mike decided to re-record the album in 2003 and made it perfect, it's sounds amazing, but there is definitely something missing, Mike admitted that the new version is hardly on display in shops, but the original is the 1st thing you notice!! So, things don't always need to be perfect, mistakes are nothing to really worry about.

[Chris W]

Most of us were under the impression that most of the Stadiums part of the tour was planned in order to recover all the money they lost in Ozz and NA, as it's known that MK didn't like playing in stadiums.

No that's not correct. These kind of tours are planned many months in advance.
At that time most major artist tours followed the same pattern. Start in large indoor arenas, then spend the warmer months playing outdoor stadiums.
The alternate to 60,000-80,000 stadiums is playing 20,000 seater arenas for several nights in a row. That IS uneconomical because you are paying the band, the crew and extra nights in hotels etc.
From what I saw, Mark disliked the whole rock and roll hoopla, which is no different when playing Madison Square Garden/Sydney Entertainment Centre to a large stadium like Rotterdam.

[Chris W]

It may be standard practice to make overdubs in live albums, but this is a radical departure from Mark's philosophy. 9 years before, Alchemy was proudly advertised as a live album that does not contain overdubs of any kind, and Mark stated "we just wanted to record a concert". Which I believe it the way it should be. Or at least, record several shows, and pick the best rendition of each song, but don't touch the song itself. If you can't find one you are not ashamed of, something is wrong with your ability as an artist.

This is the kind of over the top commentary that spoils discussions. It's funny, I've read post after post criticising Phil palmer's 'mistake', or saying Mark's solo on a certain song was too fast, blurred. Then in the next breath people want to celebrate the honesty, 'mistakes' and all.
It is NOT about being 'ashamed' of a performance. That is just ridiculous. If you have recorded a fantastic performance of a song and the bass was out of tune (becuase a storm blew in and the temp on stage dropped - hypothetical example), or mark played a blinding solo but fluffed one of his signature moments towards`rds the end - you fix it....everybody fixes it....this is how live albums are made by everyone, which is why most artists do not like audience members recording their shows.

[Love Expresso]

I am really astonished how patient you are, Chris! This topic lost it's momentum a couple of days ago if you ask me...

LE

[Chris W]

This whole over dubbing and live mistakes thing is normal, whether it is a good idea to overdub or not is down to personal opinion.

Yes.
Recording in the studio and playing live are two separate things. Making a studio album is about accuracy, being as good as you can possibly be.
Playing live is about energy and often presentation. The audience doesn't want to hear the CD reproduced 100% accurately. Nor do they want to see the band with their heads down, standing still, (tongue out of corner of mouth) concentrating like crazy to avoid any 'mistake'.
In my experience at least - you go for it. Trying to play something (in the moment) you have never played before and it often doesn't come off. That isn't a mistake, it's about creativity, enthusiasm. The next night or the night after that you might nail that new bit. You have to make 'mistakes' to grow and improve. The studio guitar sound on 'Money For Nothing' was a mistake.

[Chris W]

I am really astonished how patient you are, Chris!

I don't mind.
I find a lot of times people have no insight to some realities. It's exactly the same on drummer forums that I post on.

[Love Expresso]

Are you aware of what is happening at British Grove Studios these days?

LE

[herlock]

It may be standard practice to make overdubs in live albums, but this is a radical departure from Mark's philosophy. 9 years before, Alchemy was proudly advertised as a live album that does not contain overdubs of any kind, and Mark stated "we just wanted to record a concert". Which I believe it the way it should be. Or at least, record several shows, and pick the best rendition of each song, but don't touch the song itself. If you can't find one you are not ashamed of, something is wrong with your ability as an artist.

This is the kind of over the top commentary that spoils discussions. It's funny, I've read post after post criticising Phil palmer's 'mistake', or saying Mark's solo on a certain song was too fast, blurred. Then in the next breath people want to celebrate the honesty, 'mistakes' and all.
It is NOT about being 'ashamed' of a performance. That is just ridiculous. If you have recorded a fantastic performance of a song and the bass was out of tune (becuase a storm blew in and the temp on stage dropped - hypothetical example), or mark played a blinding solo but fluffed one of his signature moments towards`rds the end - you fix it....everybody fixes it....this is how live albums are made by everyone, which is why most artists do not like audience members recording their shows.

I'm a bit saddened by your agressivity, Chris.
I've just expressed an opinion that I think I am entitled to, just like you are entitled to yours. Besides, it was Mark's opinion in 1984 when he released Alchemy, so it must not be that a ridiculous opinion.

In what way am I "spoiling the discussion" by expressing this opinion?

Besides, I am not guilty of the lack of consistency you are accusing me of. I personally never critized mistakes, and I never critized your drumming, which I think is fantastic, maybe too loud, but that's not because of you, as your clearly explained.

I would appreciate a bit more respect of each other's preferences. I don't share your opinion about overdubs, but I would not allow myself to say that your opinion is "over the top" and that you "spoil the discussion". Many thanks in advance. Cheers.