![]() |
bto bachman turner "you aint seen... |
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
edtop40
Music Fan
Joined: 29 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Topic: bto bachman turner "you aint seen...Posted: 29 January 2010 at 10:13pm |
|
my commercial 45 issed as mercury 73622 states the run time as 3:29 but actually runs 3:31 and is a quick fade of the full length version....thanks john for the fade and pitch correction...
|
|
|
edtop40
|
|
![]() |
|
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 260 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 March 2012 at 4:06pm |
|
Ed indicates that the pitch needed to be corrected on is re-created 45 version. I noticed that some CDs have faster speeds than others. Is this a mastering error or was there a speed difference between the 45 and LP?
|
|
![]() |
|
The Hits Man
Music Fan
Joined: 04 February 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 March 2012 at 5:59pm |
|
The single version is on Bachman-Turner Overdrive's "best
Of" CD. It matches my commercial 45. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
Todd Ireland
Music Fan
Joined: 16 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 23 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 April 2013 at 6:29pm |
I too have suspected that the 45 speed of Bachman-Turner Overdrive's "You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet" is slightly faster than the LP speed. Can anyone who has a vinyl copy of both confirm for certain? |
|
![]() |
|
crapfromthepast
Music Fan
Joined: 14 September 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 160 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 February 2017 at 9:08pm |
|
I don't have the song on vinyl at all, so the best I can do is compare CDs.
LP length (3:53, plus or minus a second) I have five different analog transfers of the LP length. I prefer the version on Time-Life's Guitar Rock Vol. 1 1974-1975 (1993). The same analog transfer is used on Warner Special Products' 2-CD Rock Box (1994). JCI's Rockin' Seventies (1988) is a close second, and sounds just about as good as GR. Priority's Seventies Greatest Rock Hits Vol. 11 Heavy Hitters (1991) is mastered too loud and clips a lot, and may have some additional noise reduction or some other odd processing. It just sounds weird on this disc. JCI's Only Rock 'N Roll 1970-1974 (1994) sounds good, but fades a second or two before the others. The same analog transfer is used on:
I didn't explicitly compare the speeds of any of the above; I just chose to use Time-Life's Guitar Rock Vol. 1 1974-1975 (1993) in my library and left it at that. GR fades from 3:33 to 3:53. 45 length (3:31) The version on BTO's Greatest (1986) runs about 0.9% faster than Guitar Rock Vol. 1 1974-1975, runs 3:36, and fades from 3:15 to 3:36. This disc sounds quite nice, and is about as good as it's going to get for the 45 length. I don't know how well it corresponds to the actual 45 fade points, though. The same analog transfer is used on:
Silver Eagle/Capitol's 2-CD Rockin' Down The Block (1987) sounds pretty good, but not quite as good as the above. Rhino's Millennium Classic Rock Party (1999) runs about 0.8% slower than Guitar Rock Vol. 1 1974-1975, runs 3:26, fades from 3:11 to 3:26, and has a pretty severely boosted high end. Not good. I chose to use BTO's Greatest (1986) in my library. |
|
|
There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one Crap From The Past.
|
|
![]() |
|
eriejwg
Music Fan
Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 109 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 February 2017 at 10:56am |
|
There's a copy of the 45, here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdZKd8a1YQ |
|
![]() |
|
eriejwg
Music Fan
Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 109 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 28 February 2017 at 11:08am |
|
I just recreated the 45 version again, using BTO's
Greatest. I slowed it down by 1% and faded to 3:31 with the 45 in the video as a guide. |
|
![]() |
|
Bill Cahill
Music Fan
Joined: 27 June 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 03 March 2017 at 4:13pm |
|
Maybe it's just my ears, but on the CDs that I own that feature "You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet" or "Takin' Care of Business", the songs
seem to be lacking "something" and I can't put my finger on it.. these songs might be a victim of heavy noise reduction in the digital age.. recently I dubbed them from vinyl and thought OK THAT'S how I remember them sounding.. Is it just me? |
|
![]() |
|
eriejwg
Music Fan
Joined: 10 June 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 109 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 03 March 2017 at 5:58pm |
|
I recreated the short promo edit of "Takin' Care Of
Business" several years ago. When I was dubbing my promo 45, it seemed like the 45 jumped out at me. I tried to give the digital file a bit of a compression boost to semi-simulate the promo 45. |
|
![]() |
|
AndrewChouffi
Music Fan
Joined: 24 September 2005 Status: Offline Points: 43 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 March 2017 at 5:40am |
|
To Bill & John:
Part of the reason those records had that special "something" can be attributed to the vinyl mastering engineers of the time. Many of them really brought the best out of the tape that they were handed to work with. For example, Gilbert Kong mastered a lot of Mercury LPs in that era - They were all excellent sounding, even if he wasn't given the first-generation master to work with. Andy |
|
![]() |
|
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 |