The Rumor Mill

[Deleted]

We don't know the specs of some if the songs. Just that if the label paid for the recordings, they own the recordings. They shelve albums for many reasons, and the question of marketability is a consideration, since it is very expensive to record, release, and promote songs, and these days, with piracy and file sharing and youtube etc., the payoff is mininal. Youtube and some file-sharing sources are free. ITunes is around 0.69cents (US) by the time they get their share. Streams from sites like Rhapsody and Napster are 0.02cents(US) per stream. Not to mention, all the ripping from movies/shows etc. which eventually end up on free sites. Then they have to split that with the band, and anyone who has "points" in it (common industry standard for producers, managers, engineers, booking managers to get a % of the sale. It is usually on a tiered scale, meaning when it hits a certain amount, they get a higher percentage. So by the time it's divvied up, they barely get anything unless is sells 3 million, or something like that - which is almost unheard of these days..

Recording labels are businesses, not fans, so to them, they would rather invest money in touring, which guarantees a high profit. Thinking of it from a business standpoint, they would probably make more money if the band plays the songs live, because it will coax people to buy a ticket so they can hear it and feel special. But thinking as a band, especially if they are pulling away from the label, why would they do that? They'd wait till they were jndependent and release it then so they can use it in their own marketing strategy. Even then, we'd have to wait until they rerecord them, if they rerecord them.

Remember what happened to Ben Moody's record? He finished it near when TOD came out. I think but the label decided to shelve it, and didn't release it till a few years lates, but even then, it was only a digital release.

Meanwhile, when the band is no longer with the label, the label can release those songs in conjunction with the rerelease of all their back catalog, to get you to buy the album you already have, just so you can get your hands on that song. Greedy, yes, but greed runs both ways. If people would only revert back to the proper avenues of buying music, instead of sharing them, it would fix our music jndustry. We, as "rabid" (hehe) fans, do that anyway - get our hands on a free track, then buy it as soon as the official version comes out. But a casual fan wouldn't even think twice about just taking the song, nevermind that it's a PRODUCT that costs work, money, and various resources to be able to "assemble."

Sorry to go off topic a little, but that's my explanation of why songs get shelved.

[Thomas]

Nov 17, 2012 18:44:41 GMT -6 AeternusAmatorius said:

That response doesn't make any sense because IYDM was for TOD and Your Love was something Amy wrote and recorded independently... right?

Yep. She didn't know if YL was going to make it to the album, I read an interview which she says but they didn't record it for this last record, but she does have the demo version.

And I think IYDM was already recorded since 2005-6. Kinda obvious, huh? lol!

It doesn't make sense, though. Why am I posting this?!

[Deleted]

Quick thoughts about the 1999 Live Demos:

I think there is a second version of Exodus, but not a different version for WWYG or Lies.

The versions of WWYG and Lies used can both easily be created using your average audio editing software, e.g. Audacity, and I'm sure they had something similar in the late 90s. All they have to do is loop the drums and create a fade in or the effect used in the track.

Exodus, on the other hand, would be easier just to rerecord. The beginning sounds like it has a new piano part, and it's much faster than the original. Also, the guitar throughout and the new lyrics at the end would be easier to add it in with a new piano and vocal track rather than add to the original with editing.

Just speculation.

EDIT: Relistening to Lies Live, it does sound different to the one on Origin, so maybe there is another version of it.

[Vexing.Rune]

"Catherine", however, is right there in front of you. Just with a different title."

So. um... What!?

[AeternusAmatorius]

Dec 31, 2012 12:40:22 GMT -6 Vexing.Rune said:

"Catherine", however, is right there in front of you. Just with a different title."

So. um... What!?

People thought "Bleed" was "Catherine", though that is incorrect because "Catherine" was written by Ben and Amy in a movie theatre parking lot, and was only performed twice. David was not in the band at the time.

[DarkFlare89]

Dec 31, 2012 18:54:07 GMT -6 AeternusAmatorius said:

People thought "Bleed" was "Catherine", though that is incorrect because "Catherine" was written by Ben and Amy in a movie theatre parking lot, and was only performed twice. David was not in the band at the time.

I know the quote off-handedly said "once or twice" but was this song really that . . . umm . . . not good (?) enough for them to perform it so rarely? We are talking about 2000 or 2001 here after all. I mean, can't we say the same about ANY of the pre-Fallen songs? I doubt they had infinite chances to sing Forgive Me (for example) live (if that song was, after all, ever sung live). The same for any of the songs on the two EP's. Can't any of the pre-Fallen songs be said the same - we (i.e. Ben + Amy + David give or take) sung most of those songs either once, twice, or three times (at most) since they wouldn't have had enough money to do concerts that frequently anyways?

We have the set list of the 1999 and 2001 live sets. We kinda-sorta have an idea of what happened with the 2000 live set. And, according to the Exodus forums, all the Evanescence EP songs were performed at least once in their career. Soo . . . is it really that remarkable that "Catherine" was only performed once or twice? Weren't they all that limited in performances?

Also, isn't it interesting how "Catherine" (written on "acoustic guitar") and "Spanish" (rumored to have a "Spanish acoustic guitar") seem musically similar based on those descriptions? Is that why neither were on Origin? Were their acoustic origins (ha pun!) not suitable for Origin, a CD which had heavy electronic-ish and metal-ish songs?

Eh, here I am speculating again.

[AeternusAmatorius]

What were the 2000 and 2001 sets?

[DarkFlare89]

Dec 31, 2012 21:58:01 GMT -6 AeternusAmatorius said:

What were the 2000 and 2001 sets?

We don't know the *exact* setlist for the 2000 set, but it was in essence the Origin release party (Live @ Little Rock River Market Pavillion, November the 4th 2000). People say "Lies" was played live there (i.e. the Origin one, not the 1999 pre-Origin one xD). People also have it in their heads that Field of Innocence was, at some time, played live - so it is most likely that it was played live here in the 2000 set. Also likely is that they played all of the songs that they played in the 2001 set. *Maybe* they played Catherine and/or Spanish here, but that's jumping a bit xD.

So for 2000, they most likely played (not in this order): Whisper/Even In Death/Lies/My Immortal/Don't Fear the Reaper (popular cover it seems - 1998/1999/2001)/Where Will You Go/Field of Innocence/Imaginary/Away From Me/Anywhere.

We know less of the 1998 set list (when the Ev EP was released, Dec. 1998) or the late 1999 set list (when the SA EP was released, Aug. 1999).

For the Live @ TNT Powerhouse
Bryant, February the 3rd, 2001 live set, they did this:

1. Whisper
2. Even In Death
3. Everybody's Fool
4. The Dolphin's Cry
5. My Immortal
6. Don't Fear The Reaper
7. Where Will You Go
8. Imaginary
9. Away From Me
10.Anywhere

Note, this is the live set where that video clip of The Dolphin's Cry originated from. That man was going to try and sell the footage to Wind-Up (but obviously THAT never happened grrr . . . )

Also note that this set list is the earliest Everybody's Fool has even been played, likely that THAT particular song was an early 2001-2002 demo (i.e. made in 2001, rather than 2002 like Whisper). I dunno which version they would have played though (v1? A version we have never heard of before?)

As a final note, isn't it interesting that Whisper (EP) and Understanding (SA EP) versions were already done/made/ready to go before the SA EP was released? Notice how the 1999 live set (May 7th 1999) has both Whisper/Understanding and yet the SA EP was released three months later (not to mention we have Lies played in 1999 almost a year before it was released!)

So . . . yeah, interesting stuff here.

[Deleted]

I learned a lot from this thread and I spent hours reading for the rumors. I want to learn more about Lies. There are three versions of this song according to the Evanescence Reference site namely:

Lies (The Origin Version, released 2000)
Lies (Remake, recorded 2001 - 2002)
Lies (The Live Version, 1999 @ Vino's Bar)


So, the Origin version is made up of Bruce Fitzhugh of Living Sacrifice and Stephanie Pierce and the remake version is made up of Amy and David's vocals. This is the proof:

This song is considered to be one of Evanescence's trademark songs. Bruce Fitzhugh of Living Sacrifice provided the male vocals on the Origin version and Stephanie Pierce provided the female backup vocals (soprano) for this version. Later, this song was remade with Amy and David's vocals, and different lyrics. This is the strongest Evanescence song, with heavy guitars and drums in it. It is one of the shortest titles of all Evanescence's songs, sharing this feature with Sick. The live version of the song doesn't feature the choir at the beginning and at the end, where there is a long guitar solo is played.

Some people mentioned the Post Origin Demo and Pre Origin Demo (as mentioned by DarkFlare89) but I don't have any idea about this two versions of the song. Do you think that the Post Origin Demo version is the remake version of Lies? How about the Pre Origin Demo?

[AeternusAmatorius]

Mar 13, 2013 21:30:20 GMT -6 @theriseandthefall said:

I learned a lot from this thread and I spent hours reading for the rumors. I want to learn more about Lies. There are three versions of this song according to the Evanescence Reference site namely:

Lies (The Origin Version, released 2000)
Lies (Remake, recorded 2001 - 2002)
Lies (The Live Version, 1999 @ Vino's Bar)


So, the Origin version is made up of Bruce Fitzhugh of Living Sacrifice and Stephanie Pierce and the remake version is made up of Amy and David's vocals. This is the proof:

This song is considered to be one of Evanescence's trademark songs. Bruce Fitzhugh of Living Sacrifice provided the male vocals on the Origin version and Stephanie Pierce provided the female backup vocals (soprano) for this version. Later, this song was remade with Amy and David's vocals, and different lyrics. This is the strongest Evanescence song, with heavy guitars and drums in it. It is one of the shortest titles of all Evanescence's songs, sharing this feature with Sick. The live version of the song doesn't feature the choir at the beginning and at the end, where there is a long guitar solo is played.

Some people mentioned the Post Origin Demo and Pre Origin Demo (as mentioned by DarkFlare89) but I don't have any idea about this two versions of the song. Do you think that the Post Origin Demo version is the remake version of Lies? How about the Pre Origin Demo?

The Post Origin Demo and the "Remake" are the same. Amy told us that the "remake/remix" is more like a "Post-Origin Demo" because it's not really a remix. The "Pre-Origin Demo", as DarkFlare89 has said, is probably the version they had put together before they decided to add Stephanie and Bruce in on the album.

[Deleted]

Is there possibly a demo of the acoustic cover of "Orestes"? I hear some sort of backing vocal in it, and it sounds too good to be someone in the audience. They did use the background vocals for the acoustic version of "Whisper" at Juanita's, I believe.

[AeternusAmatorius]

Mar 21, 2013 6:32:15 GMT -6 @jakebryan said:

Is there possibly a demo of the acoustic cover of "Orestes"? I hear some sort of backing vocal in it, and it sounds too good to be someone in the audience. They did use the background vocals for the acoustic version of "Whisper" at Juanita's, I believe.

Can you link the version you are listening to?

[Deleted]

It's most audible to me around 4:55. Wait, "which version"? Is there's more than one version?

Here's "Whisper". You can hear the "don't give into the pain", "though they're screaming your name", etc. in it.

[AeternusAmatorius]

Mar 21, 2013 14:23:48 GMT -6 @jakebryan said:

It's most audible to me around 4:55. Wait, "which version"? Is there's more than one version?

Here's "Whisper". You can hear the "don't give into the pain", "though they're screaming your name", etc. in it.

Well there are multiple versions of live songs since they can't always be 100% the same each time. For Orestes, I think it's just reverb from the microphone, speakers, the venue, and an effect programmed on the microphone like they do in so many live songs. The backing vocals, are probably from a recording they had of the song and used. You can hear that the backing vocals from 4:20 to 5:00, they are clearly male.

For Whisper, they'd probably have to have those in there since they're such an important part in the song. There's also a lot of reverb and echoing in this song too. 

[Deleted]

Another question. In reference to the 1999 live demos, wouldn't there also be one of Solitude? The intro is on an electric guitar and there are extra drums. Also, the extended outro.