| Author |
|
edtop40
MusicFan
Joined: 29 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4996
|
| Posted: 01 June 2007 at 9:21pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
the commercial cd single issued in 1998 as reprise 17174 contains the "remix" version of the song which runs 2:51......i don't know how much different it is than the version from the cd "stunt".....can anyone explain the differences??
Edited by edtop40 on 04 June 2007 at 5:32am
__________________
edtop40
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6513
|
| Posted: 02 June 2007 at 9:46am | IP Logged
|
|
|
It just has some slight mix differences, but they are certainly noticeable when you compare the two side by side.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Todd Ireland
MusicFan
Joined: 16 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4219
|
| Posted: 02 June 2007 at 9:52am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Aaron:
In your opinion, do you think "version" or "mix" comments should be noted in the database to distinguish the commercial single from the Stunt CD?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6513
|
| Posted: 03 June 2007 at 6:24pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
What exactly constitutes a "mix" versus a "version" notation? To me, they are one in the same. If the difference is more than just an early fade (i.e. "length"), I just call it "version." The remix, which is the version my old top 40 station played, has more of a polished sound to it. Glossy might be another word to describe it. I don't own a copy of the album version, but I've heard it many times, and it just sounds like there's something missing when compared to the remix version. It's much like when you compare the LP and single mixes for Pearl Jam's "Jeremy."
Also, I noticed that Ed's original post says 3:51, but it should probably be 2:51.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
eric_a
MusicFan
Joined: 29 June 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 442
|
| Posted: 04 June 2007 at 1:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
aaronk wrote:
| The remix, which is the version my old top 40 station played, has more of a polished sound to it. Glossy might be another word to describe it. |
|
|
It's been years since I've heard the LP version, but I remember the most obvious difference. The LP version has an loud guitar strum on the second beat of each bar during the chorus, coinciding first with the word WEEK(i.e. "it's been...ONE WEEK").
On that remix, that strum is buried in the production, which is pretty slick, as Aaron mentioned.
When this was a hit, we were still playing CDs, and someone misplaced (stole) the single from my radio station at the time, so we went to the LP version until I could track down a replacement. The difference was obvious enough to be bothersome, at least to my ear.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: barenaked ladies "one week"
