Rolling Stones - Beast Of Burden

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   The comment for Rolling Stones' "Beast Of Burden" says that DJ copies run (3:20).  While there are no notations next to the CDs, several discs run (3:26) or (3:27).  Is this the DJ edit but longer, or is the printed time on the DJ 45 wrong?

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
aaronk Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Online Points: 268	Post Options Post Reply Quote aaronk Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: Rolling Stones - Beast Of Burden Posted: 27 October 2007 at 1:25am
	The comment for Rolling Stones' "Beast Of Burden" says that DJ copies run (3:20). While there are no notations next to the CDs, several discs run (3:26) or (3:27). Is this the DJ edit but longer, or is the printed time on the DJ 45 wrong?

jimct Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Music Fan Joined: 07 April 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote jimct Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 27 October 2007 at 8:36am
	Aaron, my promo 45 has a listed time of (3:20) and an actual time of (3:21).

aaronk Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Online Points: 268	Post Options Post Reply Quote aaronk Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 27 October 2007 at 9:28pm
	Thanks, Jim. It looks like we'll have to get to the bottom of the :05 difference between your vinyl promo and the CD versions.

eriejwg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Music Fan Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 123	Post Options Post Reply Quote eriejwg Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 28 October 2008 at 6:54pm
	Aaron, were you able to determine what the :05 difference was? Speed, length or edit?

aaronk Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Online Points: 268	Post Options Post Reply Quote aaronk Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 29 October 2008 at 12:54am
	Honestly, I don't think we ever went any further than just talking about it on this thread! I'll catch up with Jim in the near future, unless someone else comes to the rescue.

eriejwg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Music Fan Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 123	Post Options Post Reply Quote eriejwg Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 27 January 2011 at 5:25pm
	Bringing this one back, since it was never determined what the :05 difference was.

eriejwg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Music Fan Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 123	Post Options Post Reply Quote eriejwg Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 01 February 2011 at 10:25am
	I've got a promo 45 on order, so hopefully I can report back on the fade of the short version.

eriejwg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Music Fan Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 123	Post Options Post Reply Quote eriejwg Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 04 February 2011 at 1:55pm
	Just got in the promo I ordered. The 'short version' has a listed time of 3:20, actual time of 3:22. The promo 45 runs about .8% slower than the digital copy I have from Sucking In The Seventies. The fade on the promo starts at 3:06 and ends completely on "are hurtin'.