anne murray - "you won’t see me"
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=2170
Printed Date: 06 June 2025 at 7:51pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: anne murray - "you won’t see me"
Posted By: jrjr
Subject: anne murray - "you won’t see me"
Date Posted: 03 June 2007 at 12:07pm
| my commercial 45 says "stereo" on the label, but in fact is mono... same is the case with "what about me" from 1973 (not top 40, but thought i'd mention it)... does anybody have a dj promo 45 which may actually have the 45 version of "see me" in stereo??? and, what was up with capitol records mis-labeling their 45's in the early 70's (a la "go all the way" and others???)... |
Replies:
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 03 June 2007 at 6:56pm
| John, I agree, it is a very iffy claim to say this 45 is in stereo. I just pulled out my mono/stereo promo for you, however, and gave both sides a listen. To me, the female background singers appear to me more dominant in my right headphone speaker on my stereo version, whereas they, predictably, sound exactly, "right down the middle" on the promo's mono side. We could easily start a new message board, naming it "Why did the label do it this way?" We could quickly cite hundreds of such issues, within days, I believe. But I kinda prefer this Board's current mentality, though, which is more like, "How do we recreate the original 45 version from our CD versions, warts and all?" This topic alone keeps me MORE than busy, my friend, without trying to speculate what the label execs might have been thinking back in the day. Whether their decisions were good or bad, it's now history, and that's what I try to concentrate on. The "You Won't See Me" "stereo" claim, however, in my opinion, is HIGHLY dubious at best. |
Posted By: jrjr
Date Posted: 04 June 2007 at 6:54pm
|
jim, after reading your comments about "dubious" stereo on this song, i re-listened to my commercial 45, and to these ears it sounds mono, unless of course, it's in the nrrwst of stereo, e.g. "proud mary"...however,
at about 2:22, on the "doo-doo's" fade out, it is in real wide stereo, similar to banilow's "it's a miracle" 45... some weird stuff goin' on in the editing room... i also think the 45 could not be created from the lp version, because they sound like different mixes altogther, esp. the vocals ("dry" on the 45).. |
Posted By: The Hits Man
Date Posted: 13 June 2007 at 12:49pm
|
I just found the 45 and did a nice needle drop of it because it is a unique single mix.
It is indeed stereo, but it's very narrow. They added overdubs and probably mixed them to the center, which is why the mix is so narrow. And, yes, it is different from the LP version and cannot be created from the LP version. I'm happy to have the 45 now because i've been wondering why the song on CD just doesn't sound right, like I remember it from the radio in 1974. So, I mastered my 45 and slipped it into my 1974 comp. Now everything is like 1974 again! ------------- |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 13 June 2007 at 4:30pm
| "Anne Murray's Greatest Hits" has the song in very narrow stereo. It really does sound like a different mix than what is on her other CDs, much more like the 45. |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 13 June 2007 at 5:23pm
| Came across a version from "Her Greatest Hits and Finest Performances" on CD from Reader's Digest. Matches the 45 label time of 3:07 but sounds mono or very narrow stereo. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 13 June 2007 at 5:48pm
|
<Came across a version from "Her Greatest Hits and Finest Performances" on CD from Reader's Digest. Matches the 45 label time of 3:07 but sounds mono or very narrow stereo.>
I have this same CD but mine has the full-length 4 minute version in stereo. However, my Readers Digest CD says "Printed in Canada". Was yours printed in Canada or the US, eriejwg? |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 13 June 2007 at 5:55pm
|
Actually, it was my Mom's disc. I'll have to check when I head over there again.
I was able to create a (not too bad I think) 45 version matching the other file time wise. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 10 July 2007 at 1:01pm
|
<Actually, it was my Mom's disc. I'll have to check when I head over there again. >
Eriejwg, have you been able to check this CD in the past month for the version of "You Won't See Me"? I'm just surprised Reader's Digest would go to the trouble of substituting a single mix for an album mix on one song on a 50-song set. And as I mentioned, mine has the 4-minute album version, so I was wondering if you could verify that your mother's CD has the single mix and what the catalog/pressing number is. |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 10 July 2007 at 3:21pm
| I read your post earlier today Edison and stopped by her house. She's done some cleaning over the last few months. She may have thrown some boxes out, as I tried searching for it to no avail. |
Posted By: The Hits Man
Date Posted: 11 July 2007 at 6:47am
|
The differences between the 45 mix and the LP mix are that the strings are up much louder, the horns are louder, and they are present throughout more of the song. There are more background singers too. There is slightly less reverb. In other words,the 45 sounds like they finished the mix. The LP version sounds sparse. ------------- |
Posted By: davidclark
Date Posted: 17 September 2007 at 7:42pm
|
I just listened to a dubbed 45 of this (a Canadian pressing) and have the following to report.
The 45 sounds sparse compared to the LP version (at least the one I have on the Greatest Hits CD in stereo). When Anne starts to sing, the LP version has a strumming guitar while the 45 does not (it comes in on the 2nd verse on the 45). At about :48 there are four hi-hat hits on the LP version that are not on the 45 (which also edits out one of the two "You Won't See Me" lines here). The 45 is completely mono up until the strings at 2:36 where they are very slightly off to one side (runs 3:06). The LP version is stereo throughout (4:03). Totally opposite to your findings Hits Man. Very strange... ------------- dc1 |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 18 September 2007 at 8:25am
| Could there have been 2 pressings of the 45? A Canadian version and a U.S. version? |
Posted By: davidclark
Date Posted: 18 September 2007 at 10:39am
|
anything's possible eriejwg, however I was sent an MP3 of the 45 from someone in the U.S. and it is identical to my Canadian pressing. ------------- dc1 |
Posted By: The Hits Man
Date Posted: 18 September 2007 at 5:35pm
I do not care if it's mono or narrow stereo. You know I don't worry about stereo/mono issues! ;) My concern is the overall sound and feel of the total mix. The 45 sounds like a hit single. ------------- |
davidclark wrote:Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 24 October 2009 at 11:34pm
| Has the mono 45 mix shown up on CD anywhere? Also, even though the LP version is a different mix, does anyone know where the edit would occur to essentially get the 3:07 45 version? |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 8:08pm
| LOTS to report on this one. With Pat's help, I was able to track down a CD that has the single mix (albeit a little slower and with the 1st half second of the fade-in intro clipped off.) There are US and Canadian versions of Anne's Readers Digest 3-CD set - US has the single mix and Canada has the typical album mix. I'll respond to many of the comments above individually. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 8:09pm
| First, as for the above comments that the single mix is mono or virtual mono, it really isn't. I, too, listened and thought "Hmm... close to mono", but then I went into the Stereo Imager in Wavelab and actually mono-ized it, went back and forth between the real mono and the actual mix, and I heard quite a difference - the single is more stereo than the ears might first realize! |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 8:14pm
And my findings are the opposite to David Clarks' -and in agreement with Hits Man. I feel the LP is more sparse than the 45 (but I have an asterisk comment to that, coming later). As for the comment above that the LP has the strumming guitar coming in on verse 1 and the 45 has it coming in on verse 2, I find that the strumming guitar comes in on verse 1 in both mixes. And it's quite apparent in the single mix, too. And at 0:48 I DO find the 4 hi hats on the single version (although I do agree with David that the 45 does edit out one "you won't see me" in this section.) So I believe there must be a Canadian mix different from the American mix for the 45, because I believe David is accurately reporting what he's hearing on his 45. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 8:24pm
|
The Hits Man wrote: "I can tell you that after the second verse, there is more instrumentation on the 45 mix. There are more strings and horns. "
This is a very interesting comment. On first listen, I thought so, too. But after the 2nd verse, the 45 actually edits out the whole "Time after time, you refuse to even listen" section and the FOLLOWING section "Though the days (though the days) of you (of you)" and SKIPS to the NEXT section (of the LP version) which has the same words "Time after time..." and "Though the days (though the days) ... of you (of you)" but with a different set of background vocals and much more strings and horns. So as far as the Hits Man comment above that there are more strings and horns in the section, I think it's due the fact that the 45 skips to the next section with the same words! Also, I'm a fan of stereo much more than mono and near-mono, but I like having single mixes. This song presented a dilemma for me because of it being so narrowly stereo. So, very interestingly, I took the single file and (through knowledge I learned from fellow Chat member MMathews) I separated the tracks to be much more stereo, and ironically, I think I ended up (by accident) creating the stereo panning (or close to it) of the original album mix! And knowing that the 45 edits out the 2 sections I mentioned above, I'm not sure if my final result really isn't any different than the album version, but edited down to have the sections of the single version. I hope people follow that and it makes sense. There probably are some differences still, between what I created and what an edit of the album mix would be, but they're pretty darn close! |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 8:50pm
| Pat's database mentions that the Reader's Digest CD with the single version is NOT at the actual speed of the single version. I compared this CD version with the album versions on CD and found them to be the same speed. So can someone tell me what percent - or how many "cents" - you have to speed up the CD version on Reader's Digest CD to get the true single speed? (Or can someone email me an mp3 of the actual 45 - at correct speed - so I can figure it out myself?)) |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 9:30pm
| Gordon..also according to the database, the Reader's Digest CD is missing part of the introduction. I have a dub of the 45 I can send you for observation. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 03 November 2009 at 9:53pm
| Thanks for sending. |
Posted By: davidclark
Date Posted: 04 November 2009 at 6:36am
|
I would also like a dub of the US 45, so that I may a-b it with my CAD one.
thanks. ------------- dc1 |
Posted By: Bwci Bo
Date Posted: 11 September 2015 at 2:18am
| Ok, it looks like I am a few years behind everyone else on this one, but I recently picked up a cheap copy of the aforementioned Reader's Digest 3CD set. I too would like to pitch up my copy to match the true speed of the 45. Did EdisonLite or davidclark ever determine what percentage the speed increase was? And if not, would someone be happy to shoot me out a reference copy of the 45 to match mine against, please? Many thanks. |
Posted By: Bwci Bo
Date Posted: 12 September 2015 at 9:02pm
|
I received a 45 dub - thanks to the sender!
For future reference, I had to pitch up the CD version 1.73% to match the 45. As the CD version also has a shorter intro and outro, a little extra surgery may be required for an exact match. |
Posted By: MMathews
Date Posted: 23 February 2020 at 12:00am
|
Hi all,
We'll need a database update for this one. At John G's request I did some sync-checks and Gordon provided me the version from this CD set: (S) (3:04) Reader's Digest CDL3-57300 Her Greatest Hits And Finest Performances (45 version but slower and faded earlier than the 45; part of the instrumental introduction is missing) This CD is not the 45 version, but rather an "edit of the LP version in an unsuccessful attempt to recreate the 45 version" - that's why it runs too slow - it's at the LP speed. The also messed up the edits, they are in the wrong places. They even narrowed the stereo to more resemble the 45 mix. But no matter because even if they got the edits right, the 45 is a dedicated mix. The reverb types are different. Also on the LP the acoustic guitar comes in clear at the first verse. But in the 45 mix it doesn't show up til the 2nd verse. Also the 45 is basically mono until the 2nd verse, then it is in very-narrow stereo, even narrower than those CCR hits. So bottom line, for the true single version you need a 45 dub for this one as no CD has the 45 mix. MM |
Posted By: davidclark
Date Posted: 23 February 2020 at 2:59am
|
Also clearly evident in the 45 mix is a kinda faint bell sound starting at around
the 45-seconds-to-go mark that I don't hear in the LP mix/version. ------------- dc1 |
Posted By: MPH711
Date Posted: 23 February 2020 at 12:07pm
|
I made my own stereo 45 version from the 45 using Moises. I’m not
sure it’s allowed to post a link to it here. You can PM me if anyone has an interest. It’s an MP3 since that’s what I started with. It turned out pretty good. Mike |
Posted By: Robert
Date Posted: 23 February 2020 at 2:01pm
| Good Catch, Mark, but here's a question for you: the promo 45 of this song is a stereo/mono w/printed time of 3:07 on both sides. Can you shed some light on this? It sounds like the very narrow stereo mix described here. |
Posted By: MMathews
Date Posted: 23 February 2020 at 3:19pm
|
Robert,
The stock 45 also runs (3:07) so I must assume the stereo side of the promo is the same as the stock 45. I also assume the mono side is a fold-down of the narrow stereo side, but I don't have a promo 45 dub to compare. MM |