|
James Brown - Night Train |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
davidclark 
Music Fan 
Joined: 17 November 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 46 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: James Brown - Night TrainPosted: 15 July 2006 at 8:16am |
|
does anyone have a copy of James Brown’s “Night Train” running the correct 45 speed? The database indicates that the 45 runs faster than all CD appearances. CD or original 45 will do.
|
|
|
dc1
|
|
 |
|
|
jimct
Music Fan
Joined: 07 April 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 July 2006 at 11:49am |
|
David: I have the original 1962 45 (King 5614), and will shoot it out to you over the weekend, so you have an accurate re-creation reference as to its correct speed.
|
|
|
|
|
davidclark
Music Fan
Joined: 17 November 2004 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 46 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 16 July 2006 at 2:22pm |
|
thanks Jim! looking forward to receiving it! David
|
|
|
dc1
|
|
|
|
|
eriejwg
Music Fan
Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 123 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 February 2008 at 8:49am |
|
The correct 45 run time is: 3:16
|
|
|
|
|
Indy500
Music Fan
Joined: 29 January 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 February 2008 at 9:09am |
|
The sped up version is on the 2007 release
James Brown -- The Singles Vol 2 1960-1963 On Hip-O Select The 45 version of "Lost Someone" can be found there also. |
|
|
|
|
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 273 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 February 2010 at 12:27pm |
|
The database indicates "original session recording speed" for the disc that Indy500 mentions. I just listened to a song sample of The Singles Vol 2 on Amazon, and I found something interesting. It has the same tempo as the original, but the key is higher. I wonder if this was a case where the engineer was trying to re-create the single version, but used their software to change the key without changing the tempo.
Anyhow, I don't have the original 45 to compare it with, so can anyone shed some light on this release? |
|
|
|
|
Gary Mack
Music Fan
Joined: 06 February 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 February 2010 at 4:25pm |
|
My original King 45 runs 3:18.
GM |
|
|
|
|
Indy500
Music Fan
Joined: 29 January 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 February 2010 at 5:49pm |
|
According to the liner notes of the Hip-O release, besides the note that "all songs mastered from the original mono single masters," it mentions that "James (Brown)- or King Records - sped up the tape a half-step." So they were aware of the difference and you can certainly,as aaronk mentions, hear the higher pitch on the Hip-O release.
Edited by Indy500 |
|
|
|
|
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 273 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 February 2010 at 9:08pm |
That's true, but what I'm also saying is that the song on the Hip-O release is not truly "sped up," as the liner notes say. The key has been changed, as Indy500 correctly points out, but the tempo remains the same. This technology, as far as I know, was not available in 1962. If the song was really "sped up" on the Hip-O disc, not only would the key be different, but the tempo would be slightly faster. This would also mean that the song should run 3:18 like the 45. According to the database, it runs the same length as the "original recording speed" versions. I hope I'm making sense here. The bottom line is that it sounds like it's sped up, but when you put it in a multi-tracker next to the "original recording speed" version, they line up---but they shouldn't! The sped up version should run faster. Edited by aaronk |
|
|
|
|
MMathews
Music Fan
Joined: 18 August 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 February 2010 at 5:34pm |
|
Hi All,
I was curious on this one, but didn't have the Hip-O Cd so i found it on Rhapsody. Aaron is quite correct - whoever mastered this for Hip-O made a slight error. The pitch was changed on the track but not the tempo. Doing this also leaves a digital artifact which I can clearly hear. The artifact is the same as you'd get if they had taken the sped-up version, and time-stretched it to be 3:30, without changing the pitch. How can this happen? Easy, if you're not careful. There are quite a few options for digital "pro" software out there, i happen to use one called WaveLab. In my software, when you want to change the pitch, it has 2 different settings you need to adjust, one is the measurement of your pitch-change (in semi-tone percents)...the other is called "length compensation" which by default is set to "100", meaning it will preserve the length of the song. When i want to speed soemthing up, i must remember to change that setting to "0" so it will behave just like speeding it up analog, and *not* preserve the length. In this case, the engineer did the equivalent of forgetting the change that setting, so you have a higher pitch but the track is now artificially stretched out to be the old tempo and length. Not good. Now, they may very well have had the 45 master, speed decisions are not always made on the tape, sometimes they are made at cutting, so they might play a tape faster while cutting the disc. As for this CD, i see they meant well trying to correct the pitch, but no one caught that it wasn't quite there yet. Good catch, Aaron. -MM |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Indy500 wrote: