Welcome to the brand new Therapy? message boards! Find out what’s new or give us your feedback.

Should t? stay trio?

#

Started by lasereyes (peter vician) in General Therapy? Topics

Or maybe to get one more member again. This time maybe Nigel Kenedy? :D

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 13:51

You’re viewing replies 1–30 of 35 by 24 people

·

Page: First | Previous | | Last

#1

soul doubt (an) wrote:

YES, they’ve always been at their best as a trio in my opinion

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 14:04

#2

KJC Dublin (Karl) wrote:

Yay for Trio!

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 14:58

#3

fatboy wrote:

Snap

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 15:49

#4

Pip (Philip Kelly) wrote:

I’d like to see another guitarist live but remain a 3-piece if anyone gets where I’m coming from

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 16:31

#5

johnny_knoxville wrote:

naw they should become a barbershop quartet!

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 17:08

#6

FNYANKEZ wrote:

I’m for whatever makes the band play it’s best.

I think the songs have been better as a trio, but I also think the sound sometimes could use a second guitar…plus they have a lot of good stuff which needs two guitars

But I’d only expand if you could find the right person who would complement the band, and take them to another level.

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 17:18

#7

lasereyes (peter vician) wrote:

Shorly, he must be guitar player who is not that good as he knows to use procesor and effects. Someone like ME :D

I think they need multimusician (again) who also plays keybords, horns, bongos… Not ewery song need same instrument as backup. If there is no need for him in some songs he could easly headbang. Or bring beer for the others.

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 17:38

#8

french headbanger wrote:

soul doubt wrote:

YES, they’ve always been at their best as a trio in my opinion

it’st not original, but I’ve got the same opinion. the therapy? guys are on the top as a trio. I prefer seeing them on stage like this. And themselves also prefer being a trio. So do a lot of fans
Martin brought interesting elements to the band, but probably changed the direction of their music

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 21:02

#9

CS (Colin S) wrote:

I’d love Martin to come back for a while… just to see how it goes!

Never gonna happen though! :(

Colinx

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 21:27

#10

ctrlaltdelete (chris) wrote:

I really wouldn’t…

me as 2nd guitarist on ther hand, I think thats an amazing idea.

Posted on Thu, 29 March 2007 at 23:46

#11

vagabond wrote:

trio all the way.
though i really like martin too and it was also great when he was in the band.
but the trio-lineup has the extra-magic.

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 07:39

#12

gapu wrote:

Colin? wrote:

I’d love Martin to come back for a while… just to see how it goes!

Never gonna happen though! :(

Colinx

here too!
SPYF is probably my favourite T? album. it’s really one of the best records they’ve ever done. and i think martin had a lot to contribute on this one too..

further he’s a really smart guy and he suited perfectly in the band…

but anyway…

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 09:07

#13

buffalo-boy wrote:

Stay as trio gets my vote

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 10:24

#14

Cuchulain wrote:

They should leave Andy wielding his axe and get a new vocalist in , preferably James Blunt.

Or Robbie Williams , I’d be the first one stage to break his boll*x !

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 10:57

#15

Dennis wrote:

I think an extra, anonymous rhythm guitarist for live use only would help to thicken up the sound a little bit, but I think you miss it more in a live recording than at a live gig where the sheer volume helps to compensate.

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 12:11

#16

Gimme Back My Brainsaw wrote:

3 piece bands always have the best enigma to them.

at a gig you cant beat a nice tight 3 piece.

i hate bands with like 6 or 7 members, far too much going on and a lack of a sense of union between em

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 12:13

#17

viking_pooh wrote:

3 piece, theres so much stuff they play that they wrote with martin and it doesnt sound like its missing anything as a 3 piece. also 3 pieces improve each members playing and makes them work harder. plus, Andy has improved soooooo much as a guitarist seems he learnt alot playign with martin and he’s still a fantastic riff machine. plus if they ever want any cello on future recordings u know martin would pop in the studio and do it for them :)

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 12:24

#18

lasereyes (peter vician) wrote:

Maybe Sabrina!!!!
She has soul!:D

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 13:46

#19

CS (Colin S) wrote:

Is Martin still friends with the T? lads?

Colinx

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 14:02

#20

lasereyes (peter vician) wrote:

You think he is not?
Anythig is possible.
But it would be shame.

Imagion gig with all T? ex members and ewery one plays song he originaly played.

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 15:11

#21

CS (Colin S) wrote:

Fyfe & Martin on Bad Mother!! :eek::eek:

It’d be great!!!

Graham & Martin on Big Cave In!!! :D

Colinx

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 15:40

#22

abstract meat (jan) wrote:

I think it’s fine the way it is now, but sometimes a second guitar would come in handy. But 90 % of the songs live are great without a second guitar so…

Posted on Fri, 30 March 2007 at 15:52

#23

lasereyes (peter vician) wrote:

Just for the gigs…

Posted on Sat, 31 March 2007 at 12:56

#24

Superunknown wrote:

It definitely have its advantages to bring in another guitarist, if only for proper backing vocals and the second guitar some songs NEED. And although Andy handles all his guitar work in the studio well (just listen to “Troublegum” or “NANE”), a second opinion can never harm.

So: four piece it is for me.

Posted on Tue, 3 April 2007 at 23:30

#25

EverydayJoe wrote:

The exceptional thing about T? is that all of their albums have something that just makes you want to listen to them over and over again. None of my other ‘fave’ bands have accomplished that !

I’d hate to see that formula tampered with to any great extent by saying ‘we need to have a 4th member’. I think the lads prefer the trio and it certainly creates a great Live gig. But that’s not to say that songs can’t occassionally include something different, like the strings on Infernal Love - I LOVE that album.

Money availability finally allowed me to download the webgig yesterday - Marvelous, gets my vote for a yearly show…

Posted on Wed, 4 April 2007 at 11:01

#26

josepholney wrote:

They NEED a second guitarist for live stuff. I have to say, the times I saw them as a four piece live were much better than the recent shows..

Posted on Wed, 4 April 2007 at 11:35

#27

FNYANKEZ wrote:

A guitarist who can add backup vocals.

With Fyfe, he sung a bunch so no second guitarist wasn’t as big a deal. Plus the songs didn’t call for one.

And then with Martin and Graham, they both sung, that’s why they had such a fat sound live.

But Neil doesn’t sing, and Mike only does a bit.

Some songs from the Martin era definitely suffer live without the second guitar and backing vocals.

That being said, they shouldn’t get a permanent member unless they feel they want one.

Maybe when they tour with bands that are friends of theirs, they hijack one of the members to play or sing on a few songs.

That or just hire someone and pay them per show. [raises hand and volunteers :D ]

Posted on Wed, 4 April 2007 at 15:58

#28

Pip (Philip Kelly) wrote:

I’d pay T? to play for them :D

Posted on Wed, 4 April 2007 at 15:59

#29

lasereyes (peter vician) wrote:

Title: i would kill for that

How much would you pay?

Posted on Thu, 5 April 2007 at 06:22

#30

french headbanger wrote:

being a trio makes the originality of Therapy?

Posted on Thu, 5 April 2007 at 07:26

You’re viewing replies 1–30 of 35 by 24 people

·

Page: First | Previous | | Last

and become a member of the message boards. Sign in if you’re already a member.