https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:23:45 +0000 Sun, 30 Aug 2020 01:00:11 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 360 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=4100 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum//images/Top-40-Music-on-CD-Forum-Logo.png https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55537&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55537 Author: LunarLaugh
Subject: 4100
Posted: 30 August 2020 at 1:00am

The "Central Park in the Dark" section was producer James
William Guercio's brainchild from the get-go. He wanted
that "A Day In The Life" vibe. It was very much a product
of the times.

When the band tracked the song, there was nothing but
silence connecting the two surrounding sections which
Guercio then filled in without the band's involvement.
If you listen to it, you can actually hear Guercio
himself saying the name 'Susan' played backwards 2 or 3
times during that section. ]]> Sun, 30 Aug 2020 01:00:11 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55537&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55537 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55536&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55536 Author: MMathews
Subject: 4100
Posted: 30 August 2020 at 12:11am

TallPaulInKy wrote: Actually according to interviews with the members of the band the 2:17 was probably the original version. The the producer inserted the so called "psychedelic" portion which was actually an excerpt of another piece in the Columbia classical catalog..without the bands knowledge. It's been a while, but seems to me it was an ""Leonard Bernstein excerpt conducting Charles Ives' composition, "Central Park in the Dark." That's why a proper edit cannot be made from the released hit single.

Ok.... Paul, I can tell with 100% certainty that
whatever the band member might have said or think they
recall, this is NOT the case. The DJ edit can be 100%
properly made from the original hit mono 45 mix. As
indicated in my post above that is the only way to re-
create the accurate DJ edit - and I have done so,
perfectly.
SO ... let's really think this this thru. The song was
recorded with that abrupt "transition" from the chorus
to the end part...a very abrupt transition ...and ran
2:17?
...and then LATER they decide to add the montage part
to it to what?? Make it ..what?? LESS appealing to AM
radio?   I'm sorry but, NO.
The DJ edit was edited from the commercial 45 as a
rush-re-service for AM radio to REMOVE the montage and
make it more commercial for radio. This has been
documented in more than one place many times over.

The montage was part of the original commercial single
and then edited as a rush re-service to radio.
There is NO way they "added" that montage after the
fact to make a longer commercial single. For starters,
how did they find a perfect "montage" that would match
the 2nd half of that horribly abrupt edit, so it
sounded natural? Well you know the
answer...impossible.

The DJ edit is an edit of the commercial 45, period.

MM


      ]]> Sun, 30 Aug 2020 00:11:36 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55536&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55536 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55532&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55532 Author: LunarLaugh
Subject: 4100
Posted: 29 August 2020 at 5:33pm

Does anyone else notice that the strings on the mono 45
version are perfectly in sync with the track? Yet on
the original stereo mix and the stereo remix, they fall
out of sync with the rest of the track?

My theory is the string parts might have been tracked
to a second multitrack and then manually sync'd to the
original multi-track during mixing (The Beatles and
other artists used this practice a handful of times
back in the day to avoid losing a tape generation of
sound quality... very tricky to pull off and often made
mixing very time consuming). By the time they got the
mono mixdown just right, they had to start over again
with the stereo mix and the string parts were just
slightly off the mark.

If I had to guess, I would say that the remix was made
with only the original stereo mix as a reference so the
strings sounded right to them.

It's one of those things that once you hear it, you
can't un-hear it. ]]> Sat, 29 Aug 2020 17:33:40 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55532&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55532 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55522&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55522 Author: TallPaulInKy
Subject: 4100
Posted: 29 August 2020 at 9:01am

Gary Mack wrote: The short edit promo was made at the request of MOR and some Top 40 stations.

Actually according to interviews with the members of
the band the 2:17 was probably the original version.
The the producer inserted the so called "psychedelic"
portion which was actually an excerpt of another piece
in the Columbia classical catalog..without the bands
knowledge.
It's been a while, but seems to me it was an ""Leonard
Bernstein excerpt conducting Charles Ives'
composition, "Central Park in the Dark."
That's why a proper edit cannot be made from the
released hit single.

Edited by TallPaulInKy]]> Sat, 29 Aug 2020 09:01:31 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=55522&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#55522 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=46360&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#46360 Author: MMathews
Subject: 4100
Posted: 09 October 2016 at 6:54pm

Ok in a quest to re-create the DJ 45 version as closely
as possible, I analyzed the various mixes. Here's what I
found.
1) The mono stock 45 is a dedicated mix. There's not
really any one thing that stands out, but one small
detail is in all the stereo mixes, the strings at the
music break come in before the downbeat, but in the mono
mix the strings start right at the downbeat.
2) The promo DJ edit is simply a quickly made, poorly
mastered edit of the stock mono mix. It sounds so
different because they made a low quality copy of the
mono, made the quick edit, and then added a ton more
compression (as mentioned earlier, much like modern
brick-walling). That's why the edit point sounds
different, the high compression maximizes all the reverb.
So, I guess the words "rush re-service" on the label were
quite literal, they rushed.

3) The closest thing to the mono mix in stereo is the
original stereo LP mix. This mix appears on only TWO
CD's.. the original Columbia "Best Of" (faded too early)
and the Varese Dick Bartley "On The Radio" CD as the DJ
edit attempt.
And since the Best-of master fades about 5 seconds sooner
than the original album did, the edit re-creation fades
too early as well. Too bad they didn't notice that and
request a new analog transfer.
NOTE: currently the DB comment on the above Cd
reads "(this is an edit of the "Mercy, Mercy, Mercy" CD
version in an unsuccessful attempt at recreating the dj
45 edit and mix)"
But it should read: "(edit of the LP version in an
unsuccessful attempt at recreating the DJ edit and mix)"

As for the edit point, the Bartley CD got it closer than
Varese's later attempt, but it comes in too late. One can
remove a snippet of audio just before the drum beat and
that will make it match.

4) Then there's the 2016 Varese Cd "The Complete Hit
Singles". Currently the DB states "(this is the DJ edit)"
but alas it is also a failed attempt. This CD uses the
"Mercy Mercy Mercy" CD remix. And this time instead of
making the splice too late, they made it much too early.
Yes it runs the correct length but that's because the
only version available in digital form that is long
enough is the remix.
So the correct description for this entry is the one
currently on the earlier Varese CD.

Bottom line: to create the true DJ edit, you'll
need to edit a dub of the stock 45. To create the best
stereo facsimile of the DJ edit, you'll need to edit a
dub of the original vinyl LP or Best-of LP. On CD, the
closest thing to it is on Varese's "On The Radio, Vol 2."

Hope this helps, and is not too confusing.

MM   

]]> Sun, 09 Oct 2016 18:54:04 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=46360&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#46360 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=46247&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#46247 Author: MMathews
Subject: 4100
Posted: 11 September 2016 at 8:51pm

Pat, just FYI for the database. You currently show the
"Rock Artifacts" CD as having the "LP Mix" but to my
disappointment it has the same remix that is on the "Mercy
Mercy Mercy" CD with the double tracked vocal at the end.

So I thought just maybe since their "Portraits" album is
available for download, I could get the original mix
there. Nope, the digital-revisionists at Sony replaced the
song with the remixed version. Sigh.
MM ]]> Sun, 11 Sep 2016 20:51:57 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=46247&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#46247 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=44407&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#44407 Author: TallPaulInKy
Subject: 4100
Posted: 21 September 2015 at 6:25am

I know this is an old thread, but let me offer another
possibility not mentioned here. According to an
interview with some of the band members I read, The
original version of Susan was recorded and the group
thought they had a hit. They went out on the road, and
while touring heard the song on the radio and realized
the producer had inserted the train wreck
(psychedelic) portion to make it sound more hip. So
maybe the 2:17 is not a DJ edit as most fans assume.
Maybe it is the original (non hit version) single
before the insert....

e/Buckinghams-SusanDJedit.jpg">[/QUOTE] ]]> Mon, 21 Sep 2015 06:25:47 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=44407&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#44407 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18369&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18369 Author: Hykker
Subject: 4100
Posted: 22 August 2008 at 11:01am

Yah Shure wrote: But how do you explain perhaps the biggest MOR eyebrow-raiser, whose highest Billboard placing (#6 !!) occurred on the Easy Listening/MOR chart: Bob Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues"? Yet The Beatles' "Yesterday" didn't make that same chart in the same year. It obviously took E-Z/MOR radio a lot longer to cotton to those Moptops from Liverpool than to that folksinger from the Iron Range.

I can't explain it. I remember noticing that when I first got Whitburn's easy listening book.
It almost had to have been some sort of chart fluke. ]]> Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:01:16 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18369&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18369 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18368&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18368 Author: Hykker
Subject: 4100
Posted: 22 August 2008 at 10:58am

Todd Ireland wrote: Based on Yah Shure's synopsis, it sounds like an inferior mix of "Susan" was used for the DJ 45 edit, which is too bad because it would've been nice if Columbia had opted to edit out the psychedelic passage on the punchier commercial 45 mix and instead serviced that to radio. Fortunately, we now have the ability and technology to create our own homemade 45 edits to cater to our preferences. But unfortunately in the case with "Susan", editing the stereo mix on CD doesn't quite produce the same result as the DJ 45.

Something else I noticed while dubbing the song for John & Andrew is that it is VERY compressed, almost to the extent of a 21st century recording. I'm sure that contributes considerably to the sonic differences.




Edited by Hykker]]> Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:58:05 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18368&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18368 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18367&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18367 Author: Yah Shure
Subject: 4100
Posted: 22 August 2008 at 10:27am

sriv94 wrote: I love the idea. :) As an aside, any post that mentions "My World Fell Down" is all right with me. What a great record.

I was going to add the final crescendo from "A Day In The Life", but that would have been just a little too over-the-top. ;)

Gary Usher's words in Sundazed's liner notes from the Sagittarius Present Tense CD were along the line of Clive Davis thinking that Gary had gone bananas with the psychedelia in the middle of the "My World Fell Down" and "Hotel Indiscreet" 45s, and gave him all kinds of trouble about it. When the Present Tense LP finally came out in July 1968 - nearly a year after the "MWFD" 45 - the label insisted that he eliminate the sound effects. Consequently, I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility that Clive Davis could also have been involved in the decison to issue the "Susan" DJ edit. ]]> Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:27:08 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4100&PID=18367&title=buckinghams-susan-217-dj-promo#18367