"layla" - derek and the dominoes
Printed From: Top 40 Music on CD
Category: Top 40 Music On Compact Disc
Forum Name: Chat Board
Forum Description: Chat away but please observe the chat board rules
URL: https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1899
Printed Date: 17 June 2025 at 4:04am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: "layla" - derek and the dominoes
Posted By: jrjr
Subject: "layla" - derek and the dominoes
Date Posted: 31 March 2007 at 8:59pm
| just had a chance to check out the original 45 edit of "layla", clocking in at whopping 2:43... aside from the early fade and lack of piano coda, is there anything that distinguishes this from the 7:10 version??? thought i detected an edit in the intro, but besides that??? no chirping birds, for sure... |
Replies:
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 31 March 2007 at 10:05pm
| Jrjr, you're right about an edit point at the start of the listed and actual (2:43) version. On that version, the vocal begins at :12; on the full-length version, however, vocals begin at :25. For "Top 40" purposes, however, "Layla" first charted Billboard in March 1971, on Atco 6809, only peaking at #51 (info courtesy Mr. Whitburn/Paul Haney!) ALL 1971 45s featured the short version. Just over a year later, it re-entered Billboard, again using the same stock #, Atco 6809. But all 1972 commercial 45 pressings I know of featured the full (7:10) version. So, technically, for Pat's database purposes, the "Top 40 hit version" is the (7:10) version, coda and all. I do have two promo 45s for this, however; one vinyl and one styrene. Both feature the (2:43) version only, with mono on one side, and stereo on the other. I am curious to know if anyone knows if a (7:10) "Layla" promo 45 exists? This is a similar situation to Aerosmith's "Dream On", which did not reach the Top 40 in its initial 1973 edited form, but later became a 1976 #6 hit in a "full length" re-release. The 1976 promo for this song DID contain the "old" short version on one side, and the long, full-length version on the other. |
Posted By: jrjr
Date Posted: 01 April 2007 at 7:24am
|
thanks for the info, jim... the promo 45 of "Layla" that i have has the short version on one side and the long version on the other, both mono, and both sides say "plug side"...
i wonder how many AM stations played the long version originally, because i imagine the FM stations were playing the song off the stereo LP anyway... |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 07 May 2007 at 11:19pm
| My listed (7:10) commercial 45 for this, which is mono, has an actual time of (7:02). |
Posted By: sriv94
Date Posted: 08 May 2007 at 9:04am
|
Just for my own clarification, the (2:43) version features an edit somewhere in the opening (that trims about 13 seconds off the intro), and it also fades well before the piano exit. Correct? ------------- Doug --------------- All of the good signatures have been taken. |
Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 17 May 2008 at 6:37am
|
There are two edits on the intro, one to make the solo guitar open just play once, not twice, following that instead of four bars there are two bars on the intro.
Couple of other notes on the short version: One copy I own is a DJ mono/stereo and was marked by the station as arriving in March of 1971. On that copy, the mono side is a faster pitch than the stereo side and the fade outs don't exactly match. The stereo side starts fading earlier but takes longer, the mono side, has a pretty fast dump which matches the short stock single. Mono runs 2:44 Stereo runs 2:45. I have another DJ copy which I believe might be a boot. It has the stereo short Layla on one side and a mono "I Am Yours" on the B side. But Layla fades up on the intro a bit, sounds compressed, and might be from another record (hard to tell as it's scratchy). "I Am Yours", while mono, is off a little to the left channel. Pretty suspicious to me. It also doesn't quite fit right on the 45 adapter, the hole seems slightly too small. Anyway that one matches the other stereo DJ side as mentioned above but runs slightly slower than that and to make up for that, fades out slightly sooner, though still clocking in at 2:45. |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 17 May 2008 at 3:22pm
Jim, the answer is yes. While the 1971 stereo/mono promos ran 2:43, the '72 promos were 7:10/2:43. My college station received redundant Atlantic singles service from both the Plastic Products and Specialty pressing plants. Pictured below are the 1972 mono/mono 7:10/2:43 DJ pressings from each plant. A second variation arrived from Specialty: a 7:10/2:43 blue-label stereo/stereo DJ 45 that became the control room copy. Both the '71 and '72 promos from Plastic Products have "PLUG SIDE" printed on both sides. Short version matrix numbers for both '71 and '72 promos are "71-C;" the '72 long versions are "72-C." The 1972 promos have either "short"/"long" or "short version"/"long version" notations. 
Bill, your second copy is most definitely a boot. I spotted it in the oldies 45s at the distributor I was working for in 1976. One of those boots is pictured on the left below; on the right is my college station's original 1971 on-air promo from Specialty. 
In addition to the red flag raised by the white label (legit ATCO promos carried no promo markings, either) the mastering is not typical of Atlantic releases. The font used on the "Layla" side of the boot was not in use by Specialty until later in 1971, whereas the font on the "I Am Yours" side of the boot matches that of the March, 1971 release. The pressing is not from Specialty: the vinyl quality is sub-par, matrix numbers are etched in an unfamiliar handwriting and the Specialty logo is not pressed into the wax. A true Specialty stereo DJ pressing of "Layla" bearing the 1972 font would appear on a baby blue label, not white; this boot appears to have been photocopied in b&w from the short side label. The booted 45's label has a matte finish; Specialty labels were always glossy. So why the boot? Atlantic's US license expired, and the Derek & The Dominos catalog reverted to Polydor, which reissued the Layla And Other Assorted Love Songs LP in the US, but not a "Layla" 45. The demand was there, but legitimate product was not. Polydor didn't issue a "Layla" 45 until the late '80s. By then, the master tapes had been found, and Polydor's full-length stereo reissue 45 sounded great. |
jimct wrote:Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 17 May 2008 at 8:00pm
| Great stuff Yah Sure! I appreciate the detail! |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 26 May 2008 at 8:01am
|
Hi,
After the Atco version was deleted, the label switched to RSO Records (Distributed by Atlantic Recording Corp.). The 45 RPM was likely available a short while on RSO. I remember owning a RSO US copy of "Layla" on 45. It was the short version in Mono. It's long gone. Just researched this, found a listing for RSO 861. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 28 May 2008 at 11:09am
|
KentT, welcome to the board!
RSO 861 was actually Eric Clapton's then-current "Hello Old Friend." There is no indication from my research that "Layla" was ever released in the 45 format on the RSO label. Between the time that the RSO imprint first appeared in 1973 to the last Atlantic-distributed 45 prior to the move to Polydor distribution, the release numbers ran from #400-410, then 501-519 (the last one being the Bee Gees' "Fanny.") During that time, there was only one Derek & The Dominos single released on RSO, and that was the label's very first 45, RSO 400. It was comprised of edits of the live versions of "Why Does Love Got To Be So Sad" / "Presence Of The Lord" from the Derek & The Dominos In Concert LP (RSO 8800.) The first Polydor-distributed RSO 45 (#851) was a Paul Nicholas non-charter. Between #851 up through #1059, (Andy Gibb's "Time Is Time," by which time the RSO Top Line 45 reissue label had begun) only one RSO 45 was issued featuring back catalog material from the Atlantic-Atco era. RSO 873, "Can't Find My Way Home"/"Presence Of The Lord" was only available briefly in 1977 to help promote the reissue of the Blind Faith LP as a part of the RSO Collectors' Editions album series. The two songs had originally been proposed as a single on Atco in 1969, but no single was released at that time. 
RSO also issued a promo-only double-LP, Classic Cuts From RSO's Collectors' Editions (PRO-2-015) which included both "Can't Find My Way Home" and the original Derek & The Dominos' "Layla." But "Layla" never appeared as a single on RSO. There were no Derek & The Dominos recordings included in RSO's Top Line 8000-series of 45 reissues. "Layla" finally surfaced on Polydor's Timepieces 45 reissue series, which marked the first commercial appearance of the full-length track in stereo on 45. (Left: the original 1971 "Layla"/"I Am Yours" commercial issue. Right: Polydor Timepieces reissue. B-side is "Bell Bottom Blues.") 
|
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 28 May 2008 at 6:16pm
|
Hi,
Thanks for the clarification. My copy apparently was a counterfeit. It didn't sound as good as my Atco pressing. My Atco pressing was the long version. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 6:04pm
|
Pat:
I was curious. The database would give the indication that both the short 2:43 version and the 7:10 version hit the top 40 in 1972. Wasn't the short version actually 1971 and the long version 1972? |
Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 6:42pm
|
I guess that would depend if you were buying the 45 or getting it from a radio station, as radio stations were given fresh copies of the 2:43 versions in 1972. Along with the long version. I believe that all stock in 1972 was the long version.
But I absolutely heard the short version on the radio in 1972, especially in morning drive where the long version wouldn't fit. |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 10 June 2008 at 7:47pm
| John and Bill, you're both correct. Commercially, the 2:43 was '71 and the 7:10 was '72. However, it is entirely probable that any unsold '71 copies made it back into the retail pipeline the following year, even though no new 2:43 commercial 45s were pressed in '72. |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 20 July 2012 at 9:14pm
|
has anyone been able to re-create the 2:43 version from the
7:02 full length album version? ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 22 July 2012 at 6:36am
|
I don't see any reason why it can't. My 45 of Layla is the second Atco Long Version stock copy. Pressed at Plastic Products in Nashville, TN. The first version was available in dime store 4/$1.00 bags for a long time. I have one still in the bag unopened. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 07 August 2012 at 6:20pm
|
john was kind enough to forward me his re-creation of the
vinyl 45 and it's close to matching the vinyl 45 and after i tweaked it it's spot on.....for what it's worth, my vinyl 45 clocks in closer to 2:45 than 2:43 even though it states the run time on the label as 2:43....and is pitched down versus the full length version....(77.3 bpm's for the 7:10 version and 75.8 bpm's for the vinyl 45)..in addition the 1972 list of 45's states the 45 is in mono while i have a vinyl 45 issued as atco 6809 that says stereo on the label and does sound like stereo.....also...the vinyl 45 fades in for 0:02 while the cd version starts cold.........the run out groove info is '7 71-C - 21302'...does anyone else have this commercial 45 listed in stereo? ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 07 August 2012 at 9:22pm
Your copy is a counterfeit, Ed. For the sake of comparison, here are the differences between the bootlegged 45 I showed upthread in post #7 (lower left corner label scan) and the 1971 stereo DJ 45 shown to the right of it (with the "X" markings on the label): Deadwax matrix number Boot: 71 - C - 21302 DJ 45: ST-71-C-21302-1 (The boot also has a scratched-out "OL 64 B" with diagonal upper left to lower right hash marks drawn through each of those letters and numbers. This number appears to the left of the "71 - C...." number.) Actual time Boot: 2:45 DJ 45: 2:45 Placement of drums in the stereo soundstage Boot: Left channel DJ 45: Right channel Volume level at the beginning of song Boot: Fades in for first :01 DJ 45: Begins at full volume Overall sound quality Boot: Highly compressed DJ 45: Normal Vinyl sound quality Boot: Crackly DJ 45: Quiet Every U.S. Atco stereo DJ 45 of "Layla" - be it the 1971 short/short, stereo/mono original or the 1972 short/long, stereo/stereo release - had a deadwax matrix number beginning with an "ST" (for "stereo") prefix. The "7 71-C..." prefix on your copy does not follow the pattern of legitimate U.S. Atco pressings. Legitimate copies also have a dash, followed by a number following the matrix number. It's a "-1" on the Specialty (SP) DJ 45 shown, and a "-2" on my Plastic Products (PL) stereo DJ 45 of the same 1971 release. Neither the boot nor your copy have this number. The SP and PL stereo DJ 45s also have "AT-SP" etched in the deadwax. That's missing from the boot. The faded-in intro on the boot is an indication that it was mastered from a vinyl source: namely, the stereo DJ 45. The reversed channels and heavy-handed compression are other major smell test failures. Counterfeit "Layla" 45s weren't all that uncommon at retail during the late '70s. |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 08 August 2012 at 8:18am
|
why would someone, or better yet some organization, go the lengths to bootleg a commercial 45?.....makes nada sense to me.....yah sure, it's not that i doubt what you are saying, but, what's the point in counterfeiting a commercial 45? ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 08 August 2012 at 1:38pm
Because there was money to be made at it. As I related in post #7 with regard to "Layla," the Atco 45 was out of print by 1974, after the Robert Stigwood Organisation ended its distribution deal with Atlantic, in favor of a new deal with Polydor. Polydor/RSO then chose not to reissue "Layla" as a single, effectively forcing customers to purchase its new (1974) Polydor-label reissue of the parent LP if they wanted to obtain the song. But just because the "Layla" 45 disappeared from the marketplace didn't mean the demand for it did. Jukebox operators, in particular, suddenly found themselves unable to fill account requests for the still-popular record. RSO's decision to not reissue a 45 of the title opened the door for counterfeiters to fill the resulting void in the 45 marketplace. The resulting single was win-win for the jukebox operators and the counterfeiters alike. The shorter 2:45 playing time meant each jukebox was freed up to play the next selection in the queue more than four minutes sooner, which translated to more coin$ being dropped into the machines. A second benefit: the louder counterfeit 45 was more easily heard in a noisy bar or restaurant than the older, much-quieter 7:10 Atco 45. A third benefit: an off-center counterfeit "Layla" 45 sounded more normal to the happy hour crowd. ;) Meanwhile, the counterfeiters made their own extra coin by not paying any publishing and mechanical royalties whatsoever. Couple that with the low overhead of pressing the records themselves on cheap vinyl and things begin to look lucrative even for such a seemingly-mundane title as "Layla." A counterfeit 45 like that could prove to be an even bigger windfall than some of their rare collector's 45 knockoffs. Until they inevitably get caught, that is. |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 10 August 2012 at 7:49am
|
yah shure,
thanks for the detailed explanation.....btw...i see that there is another atco 45 issued as 45-6809 with the added label info as '71-c-21302 sp'...do you know what the differences are between your '71c-21302 pl' and this '71-c- 21302 sp' version? ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 10 August 2012 at 9:48am
|
Ed, Atlantic contracted its record manufacturing out to several independent firms across the country, and the two-letter code at the end of the matrix number on the label indicates which of those firms pressed the record.
In 1971-72, Atlantic mainly used three firms to press the company's 45s. Here are their codes and the portion of the U.S. to which their respective commercial pressings were primarily shipped: SP = Specialty Records, Olyphant, PA.....Eastern U.S. PL = Plastic Products, Memphis, TN.......Central U.S. MO = Monarch Records, Los Angeles, CA....Western U.S. Generally, you'd find Atlantic/Atco 45s in your local stores from the same pressing plant, but pressings from one of the other two plants might show up on occasion, particularly if a store's distributor or rack jobber was located in a different region of the country. You could sometimes find multiple copies of the same title from more than one plant in the cutout bins. |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 10 August 2012 at 6:14pm
Curiously, were all Monarch pressings styrene? I have a number of Monarch pressings of Atlantic/Atco singles from the 60s & 70s and they're all styrene. Don't think I've come across an east coast one that wasn't vinyl. Unlike some labels, Atlantic seemed to use multiple plants to press promos too. |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 11 August 2012 at 8:22am
|
Most Monarch pressings were styrene. But not all of them were. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 11 August 2012 at 12:09pm
I've never run across a Monarch Atlantic/Atco 45 from that era that wasn't styrene. The first one I ever bought new in my neck of the woods was Buffalo Springfield's "Bluebird" in 1967. The only east coast Atlantic-related styrene 45s I'm aware of from '71-'72 were some occasional Shelley Products ("LY") pressings (Aaron has a Shelley styrene stock copy of the Stones' "Brown Sugar.") But Shelley wasn't Atlantic's primary east coast 45 presser.
I always found that interesting, considering that all of the DJ 45s my college station received by mail from Atlantic were always Specialty pressings. The other two plants were used to supply promo 45s to the WEA branch offices within their respective geographical territories (for example, the extra DJ 45s I routinely picked up at the Minneapolis WEA branch office were invariably from Plastic Products.) After PP closed in 1976, Atlantic switched its central U.S. 45 pressing to PRC ("RI") whose styrene stock and DJ 45s were several notches down the quality ladder even from the often-iffy Plastic Products. (Coincidentally, this coming Friday, August 17th, the Shelby County Historical Society will dedicate a historic marker at the row of quonset huts in Memphis that housed Plastic Products from 1949 until it closed.)
Can you cite some examples of those vinyl Atlantic/Atco Monarch 45s? As I mentioned, I've never seen any from the late '60s through the early '70s. Of course, Monarch did produce a few vinyl stock 45s for other labels. The first one I encountered in the stores was Shawn Phillips' "We" on A&M. |
Posted By: TomDiehl1
Date Posted: 11 August 2012 at 7:37pm
I was in Memphis in June for a couple of days and sought out a few historical music areas including the area for Plastic Products. I'm not really sure but it looked to me like that row of quonset huts had been turned into residential homes (the one that I'm told housed PP primarily, is up for sale last time I had heard). When did Plastic Products close? (Pressing plant history is one area of music I am not familiar with at all) ------------- Live in stereo. |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 11 August 2012 at 8:04pm
And this was just three years after the company had reached its peak in 1973. For a time in the late '60s, Plastic Products had shifted all of its 45 pressing to its other plant in Coldwater, Mississippi before resuming pressing activity at the Memphis site. The loss of some key label accounts, coupled with a downturn in sales of 45s prompted William Buster, the company's founder/owner, to fold up his tent and move on to another field even closer to vinyl: oil! |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 11 August 2012 at 10:32pm
Forgive me if this is a silly question, but this isn't the same Bill Buster who eventually went on to become the founder and CEO of Eric Records, is it? |
Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 12 August 2012 at 5:41am
|
A silly question? Not at all. A brain fart on my part? Definitely. :)
PP's owner was actually the late R.E. "Buster" Williams. |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 12 August 2012 at 9:52am
|
To Todd:
I *think* Bill Buster of ERIC Records is the same man who produced the Assembled Multitude hit "Overture From Tommy". Can anyone verify? Sorry for thread derail... Andy |
Posted By: TomDiehl1
Date Posted: 12 August 2012 at 10:41am
Yes one and the same and that 45 first came out on.... ERIC records. ------------- Live in stereo. |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 13 August 2012 at 8:20am
|
To Tom Diehl:
Wow! There's my proof! Andy |
Posted By: Santi Paradoa
Date Posted: 13 August 2012 at 8:34am
|
I know it's off topic but that Assembled Multitude track has only shown up on CD domestically three times and never on a Eric Records disc (I'm surprised Bill has never put it on one of his Eric Records CD compilations). I had no idea it was an Eric 45 before. I've only seen the 45 on Atlantic. Thanks for that info Tom. ------------- Santi Paradoa Miami, Florida |
Posted By: eric_a
Date Posted: 11 November 2017 at 10:25pm
|
To bring this full-circle, I picked up a Layla reissue tonight, on ERIC 6104
(backed with Bobby Bloom's "Montego Bay"). The Eric label is marked (c) 1986 Polygram. This may have varied regionally, but I think the font on the Polydor/Time Spaces reissue came from later in the '80s. Might this Eric reissue have predated the Polydor/Time Pieces series?
|
Posted By: TomDiehl1
Date Posted: 13 November 2017 at 9:48pm
|
The Eric reissue predates it. The Polydor
45 is from about 1989 or 1990. ------------- Live in stereo. |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 5:59am
|
Ugh. I'd been dreading wading into the "Layla" waters, knowing the messy release history. Here goes...
Non-hit (2:43) 45 version from original pressings of the 45 from March 1971 The 1971 promo 45 featured a stereo 2:43 version on one side, and a mono 2:43 on the other. I think the stereo 2:43 version can be edited down from the LP version, with two edits and an early fade. I think the commercial short-version 45 is mono. Not sure if the mono 2:43 version is a dedicated mix or a fold-down. The 2:43 version doesn't exist on CD. Hit (7:10) 45 version from later pressings of the 45 from 1972, and LP version The commercial long-version 45 is mono. I think it's a fold-down of the stereo version, but can't confirm. The 1972 promo 45s were short/long, both in mono, or short/long, both in stereo. It sounds like quite a few 1971 promos of the short version mono/stereo found their way to radio in 1972, as well. The original (7:10) mix has the vocals (starting around 0:25) panned way off to the left. If you listen starting at 0:20, you'll notice the contrast between the panning of the lead guitar line (not much, if any) and the vocals (way left). The original (7:10) mix has the piano break (starting around 3:11) roughly centered in the mix, and essentially mono. I bring these two things up, because there are remixes floating around out there. I have the original (7:10) mix on a variety of CDs, with a huge variation in sound quality:
Non-hit (7:10) remix by John Jansen from 1988 Crossroads box set This remix is intended to spruce up the sound, without departing too much from the original mix. It's not like the '80s-era ZZ Top remixes, which drowned everything in digital reverb. This remix is tasteful, in comparison. The 1988 remix has the vocals centered, rather than panned left. Listen starting at 0:20, and you'll hear the lead guitar line and the lead vocals both roughly located in the center of the mix. Listen starting around 3:11, and you'll hear the piano break with some stereo-like effect, probably like the electronically-reprocessed-for-stereo stuff from the '60s. It's very noticeably NOT mono on headphones. I have the remix on Polydor's Eric Clapton box set Crossroads (1988), and a few others that all use the same analog transfer as Crossroads:
Non-hit (7:10) remix by Steve Rinkoff from 1990 rerelease of Layla And Other Assorted Love Songs The Polydor CD Layla And Other Assorted Love Songs (The Layla Sessions - 20th Anniversary Edition) from 1990 includes the credit of "20th Anniversary Edition. Remixed May-June 1990 at Power Station, NY." The remix is attributed to Steve Rinkoff. I don't know what it sounds like, or what CDs use it. I have one more that I can't identify: Priority's Seventies Greatest Rock Hits Vol. 13 Request Line (1992) may be the original mix, but narrows the soundstage? I can't say for sure. Plus, I learned that the group is spelled "Dominos", not "Dominoes". I discovered that I'd misspelled all the versions in my library. ------------- There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one http://www.crapfromthepast.com" rel="nofollow - Crap From The Past . |
Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 7:28am
|
I believe it was remixed twice, once for Crossroads, and a new remix for the Derek and the Dominos Boxed set. Both eliminated the distortion on the
vocals you'll hear on the original mix.The first part of the song on Crossroads sounded pretty faithful to the original mix but the piano led second part didn't sound the same at all to me, as the mix separated the two pianos and the guitars didn't sound right either. For the Dominos box set, they did a better job with that piano section, but the first part of the song sounded less faithful to the original mix, all of this is to my ears only of course and I'm writing this from memory which has been proven wrong in the past! |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 26 April 2018 at 8:51pm
|
Thanks to Dave, I can pick up where my last post left off.
Non-hit (7:10) remix by Steve Rinkoff from 1990 rerelease of Layla And Other Assorted Love Songs Compared to the 1988 remix, the 1990 dials the high end WAY back, pushes the tamborine deep into the background, and seems to emphasize the lead guitar a little more. On the plus side, the piano in the second half of the song sounds much more natural than the 1988 remix. Listen starting at 0:20, and you'll hear the lead guitar, then the vocals, both roughly centered. Listen starting around 3:11, and you'll hear the piano with a relatively natural-sounding stereo, not the weird electronically-reprocessed-for-stereo style of the 1988 remix. Priority's Seventies Greatest Rock Hits Vol. 13 Request Line (1992) uses the same analog transfer as The Layla Sessions 20th Anniversary Edition (1990), and is mastered just a teeny bit loud. Having listened to all three mixes, I prefer the original hit mix from 1971. It's a sonic mess, for sure, but it blasts out of the speakers and headphones with authority and power. It most definitely sounds like a hit, distortion and all. ------------- There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one http://www.crapfromthepast.com" rel="nofollow - Crap From The Past . |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 27 April 2018 at 6:45am
This 45 was out of print for quite a number of years when Atco lost the license for Robert Stigwood recordings. The bootleg copies satisfied demand from jukebox operators and other 45 buyers for the single. Also, the bootleggers/counterfeiters did press 45 singles of in demand records and made a killing. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 27 April 2018 at 10:46pm
|
Found a decent sounding copy of the
original mic on "Duane Allman An Anthology." I don't think its listed in the database. Ron is right about Time Pieces. High end is a bit much. ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 27 April 2018 at 10:46pm
|
Original mix rather. ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 4:09am
|
So what's the verdict on the mono singles (short and long)? My guess is that it's a stereo fold down, probably with a CSG mono result.
Does anyone believe it's a dedicated mix? |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 8:41am
|
It is a fold down, but not CSG, Equalization adjusted to
the needs of AM radio playback. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: Bill Cahill
Date Posted: 28 April 2018 at 3:07pm
|
I just did a comparison of the 1971 short single, comparing the Mono/Stereo DJ side to the mono stock. As expected, the DJ mono side matches
the stock 45. But that mono release is 0.83% faster than the stereo side of the DJ 45. Both sides have a label time of 2:43 but a run time of 2:45, with the mono side fading out ever so slightly later in the performance than the stereo side, due to the speed difference. |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 04 August 2019 at 3:31pm
|
Bill,
In assembling 1972's top 40 from what I have read in this thread, both the mono 45 and mono radio edit, and stereo 45 and stereo 45 edit were released versions? Based on the list for 1972 that was posted on the board awhile back that lists the stereo and mono, it has it as mono only notation. Should that be changed to stereo and mono? My understanding was that for 1972 only, both the 45 and the radio edit were stereo only releases, not mono. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks in advance for clarification. |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 06 August 2019 at 6:39am
|
Rich, the stereo long and short versions were issued only on promo
45s. The 1972 list is correct: commercial copies were only issued in mono. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 06 August 2019 at 10:16pm
The mono is not on CD is it? I take it that this is another one of those revisionist "it's in stereo only" tracks, similar to Elton John's Your Song that get released on numerous compilations leading everyone to believe it came out in stereo, not mono? |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 07 August 2019 at 6:59am
|
No mono on CD for "Layla," but as others have pointed
out, the mono is not a dedicated mix; it's a simple fold-down of the stereo. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Steve Carras
Date Posted: 14 August 2019 at 12:55am
|
In '11, on a Princess Cruise headed back from Alaska,
they had a British rock show that opened with a version of Layla that stayed till the piano part, then when that had been on for 45 seconds, faded..making that around 4:45! (didn't pay attention to the intro there..) ------------- You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney. |
Posted By: Santi Paradoa
Date Posted: 20 October 2021 at 1:23pm
|
There is a 1999 UK CD release with this song on it that
runs 2:46 but all they did was an early fade and missed the early edit that the original short 45 has. This 2CD set is Music Of The Millennium (a Universal Music/Virgin/EMI release). ------------- Santi Paradoa Miami, Florida |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 24 February 2023 at 10:23am
Can anyone confirm it is a fold-down. Assembling my 1972 jukebox and realized that the only versions out on CD of the 7:10 are in stereo. ------------- Favorite two expressions to live by on this board: "You can't download vinyl" and "Not everything is available on CD." |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 24 February 2023 at 11:03am
|
I compared the mono 45 to a fold-down of the stereo a few
years ago, and I didn't hear any differences. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 11 March 2023 at 2:52pm
|
"Layla (piano exit)" (3:52) appears on the Goodfellas Soundtrack - which is
basically part 2 of the song, the whole piano piece. Prior to this CD release in 1990, does anyone know if this edit ever existed back in the day? It would have made a great AC single, being a piano based instrumental (even though it didn't chart AC back then). I also wonder if Part 1 & Part 2 were ever split into 2 sides of a 45 (maybe even an import), like so many other 7-8 minute songs have done. Does anyone know of this shorter version existing in any way back then? |