"One More Try" - Timmy T
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=356
Printed Date: 18 June 2025 at 7:54am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: "One More Try" - Timmy T
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Subject: "One More Try" - Timmy T
Date Posted: 30 July 2005 at 4:51pm
|
Pat:
In the 10th edition, the various artist CD Body Talk - Romantic Moments (Time-Life R834-18) shows Timmy T's "One More Try" with a run time of 3:13. This is at least :14 shorter than on all other CD releases, including the commercial single. Do you know if this 3:13 version is a remix, an edit, an early fade, or simply sped way up? |
Replies:
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 31 July 2005 at 12:23am
| Hmm. My old, old German CD single for this has a 3:29 version and what they call "Slow Version" at 5:12. Maybe the 3:13 version was on the promo??? |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 31 July 2005 at 10:01pm
| I saw a promo DJ CD copy once for "One More Try" (I almost bought it) and it contained the same track listing as on the cassette single: 1) Radio Version/Vocal (3:28); and 2) Original Version (5:28). The Radio Version/Vocal is the hit version that also appears on Timmy T's Time After Time CD (Quality 15103). The Original Version is a much different mix and much slower. (This may be the "Slow Version" on Brian's CD. I've never heard it played on the radio.) |
Posted By: Moderator
Date Posted: 01 August 2005 at 7:41pm
|
I can answer one part of this question and that is the version of "One More Try" on Time-Life R834-18 - Body Talk: Romantic Moments is not the hit version as found on the Timmy T cd "Time After Time". It is a slower version and my guess is that it is an edit of the "Original Version" but since I don't have the cd single I can't tell for sure. For now I will just say it is "neither the 45 nor LP version". ------------- Top 40 Music On Compact Disc Moderator |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 06 January 2008 at 2:07pm
|
I can add a little info here.
The "hit" version of "One More Try" runs about 3:28 and has a synthy backing track that runs about 75 BPM. It turns up as the A-side of the commercial 45 ("Radio Version" - printed and actual 3:28). The commercial 45 is just black printing on a white background, on both sides, with no Quality Records logo anywhere. As far as I know, this was the first (only?) big hit for the Canadian Quality label in the US - to me, they were best known for their line of low-end compilation CDs in Canada. The "hit" version is also on:
There's a third version that turns up on two of my compilations that's yet another completely different recording. This is just Timmy singing over a simple piano backing track, with no synths at all. It's an entirely new vocal take, so it's not a remix of any existing version. It turns up on:
|
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 06 January 2008 at 5:49pm
|
My promo CD single (Quality CD Promo 15114-2) has the following:
1-Radio Version (listed & actual 3:28) 2-Original Version (listed 5:18; actual 5:13) |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 21 February 2009 at 10:41am
|
my commercial cassingle issued as quality 15114 states on the cassingle's sleeve and face "radio version" (vocal) (3:28) on side 1 and "original version" (5:18) on side 2......it's interesting that the "origianl version" is NOWHERE to be found on cd....puzzling!...if it was original, was it THAT bad that they never issued it commercially! ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 21 February 2009 at 10:56am
|
I think the "original version" was on the flip side of Timmy T's 12-inch single "Time After Time" (released before he had a real 'record deal'.
I suspect some radio programmers sensed the 'hit potential' in the B-side if reworked to more contemporary radio trends. Andy |
Posted By: prisdeej
Date Posted: 30 September 2023 at 8:12pm
|
As Ron mentioned earlier there's a significant change in EQ
between the Radio Version from the promo CD single versus the track on Time After Time. It's not subtle. Would this constitute as a LP/45 difference? ------------- DJ L. |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 01 October 2023 at 5:23am
|
To Prisdeej:
I'm not convinced the "Radio Version" is simply the album version with a lot of extra high-end. I think it's actually a different MIX (it's so drastically brighter) so that would (in my estimation) warrant a LP/45 difference. Andy |
Posted By: thecdguy
Date Posted: 01 October 2023 at 6:54am
|
I would vote "Yes" for a 45/LP Difference even if the only difference was a brighter EQ. It's still worth mentioning even if it was given a notation
of the LP and Single Versions being the same. ------------- Dan In Philly |
Posted By: prisdeej
Date Posted: 06 October 2023 at 9:51pm
Bumping. ------------- DJ L. |
AndrewChouffi wrote:Posted By: prisdeej
Date Posted: 05 March 2025 at 2:36pm
|
Bumping for LP/45 designation. ------------- DJ L. |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 05 March 2025 at 3:58pm
|
The Radio Version and CD version from Time After Time stay perfectly in sync. I gave the full-length CD version a huge high end boost, and I hear no mix differences between the two. As such, I'm going to notate the CD as "poor fidelity" or something of that nature. ------------- 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: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 6:33pm
|
Though I agree that the EQ difference between the single and album release of Timmy T's "One More Try" is quite stark, I'm in the camp that doesn't think EQ alone should be enough to warrant a 45/LP designation. If we grant such a distinction here, then what about, say, the EQ difference between the 45 and LP release of Glass Tiger's "Don't Forget Me (When I'm Gone)" in which the 45 also has a noticeably brighter high end than the LP? I'll certainly grant that the difference is not nearly as drastic as with "One More Try", though, so how can we draw the line between these two cases? In short, there's really no measurable way to do so, and that's why I'm personally against making "45/LP mix" designations of this nature.
Now, having said that, I also respectfully disagree with the "poor fidelity" comment on the Time After Time CD. I just don't think this is an accurate description. For one, I bought the Time After Time disc in early 1991 during "One More Try"'s chart run, so I am well accustomed to hearing the song in this "warmer, murkier" sound and actually personally prefer it over the much brighter "Radio Mix" counterpart (and, yes, I realize that I may represent a minority opinion here). Therefore, I don't attribute anything being "wrong" with the sound quality, per se. I think that's just the way the song was initially designed to be heard when this uptempo mix was first created and released on CD. Also, I performed an A/B of "One More Try" from the Time After Time disc to the same track appearing on the Hard To Find 45s On CD, Vol. 15: 80s Essentials & Beyond various artists CD (Eric 11534), mastered by a record label that has long prided itself on providing exceptional sound quality. To my ears, the audio is virtually identical between the two sources (it's a pity that the disc's audio engineer and our old friend Mark Matthews is no longer here to chime in about this recording :-(). This means, for consistency purposes, we'll need to go through each and every database disc containing "One More Try" to determine all that have the "poor fidelity" and identify them as such. I'll concede that this is a difficult case and that I'm currently unable to think of a better database comment suggestion for the Time After Time CD. Maybe we should consider leaving it with no comment like before, I don't know? For now, it just looks strange to me to see a parent album released in 1990 being presented as though it contains a dubious mastering error! |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 6:58pm
|
I put my headphones on, and I agree. "Poor fidelity" is not quite accurate. I think what might be going on here is some incorrectly applied Dolby noise reduction settings. The promo CD sounds hissy, like someone forgot to turn the Dolby on when they transferred the tape. That's not to say the parent LP sounds "great," as I think the NR is too aggressive on that CD. The best I can describe it is slightly muffled. Nevertheless, it is the same mix. ------------- 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: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 7:03pm
| Ooo... I didn't even think about the possibility that Dolby noise reduction could have been used here, though it certainly does sound like the so-called "Radio Mix" also received a sharp bump in the upper frequency range. |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 7:07pm
|
Hard to know for sure, but in any case, I removed the comment for the parent CD for now. I don't hear any mix differences that would warrant an "LP version." The only difference is EQ (or Dolby decoding). The puzzling part about the Dolby theory is that the two files stay perfectly in sync. If it were Dolby, I would expect it to be a different transfer of the tape. As such, maybe it truly is just a major high frequency boost to the original CD version. ------------- 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: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 7:19pm
| I suspect it was more likely a major high frequency boost, Aaron. It was certainly commonplace in the pop music climate back in the '80s and early '90s for songs to be mastered with heavy mid-range and treble. Therefore, it makes sense that Timmy T's record label might have deemed it was necessary for "One More Try" to undergo the same treatment as a single release for radio airplay consideration. |
Posted By: prisdeej
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 8:25pm
It's so funny you mention this. I started my broadcast radio career in 2000 and this track was a power recurrent at the AC station I started at. It was recorded in real time in stations digital library from TM GoldDisc. Whomever recorded it before I started potted to Mackie too hot, so I redubbed it myself, (this was first song I ever dubbed in, as I was learning how to do this) Come to think of it, the Radio Version is hissy, but it's the only version that I'm used to hearing. The "warmer, murkier" sound from the album stood out to me like a soar thumb. It never sounded right, and it still doesn't. And I also agree this a very drastic change in EQ/NR for a track in 1991. Timmy -T- is active on social media, perhaps he may know the mastering history behind this platinum record. If my recollection is correct I don't even think he was signed to a major record label when this song hit #1. ------------- DJ L. |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 06 March 2025 at 8:40pm
| prisdeej, if you feel up to it, feel free to shoot Timmy a message on social media regarding the mastering backstory of "One More Time" and see if he replies! (I remain very "anti-social media", so I don't have any social media accounts at all.) The last I heard, he was working as a radio station DJ somewhere in southern California. He might possibly be able to shed some light on this, and it would be interesting to see what he says! |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 07 March 2025 at 5:02am
|
Does the original commercial cassingle & 45 sound like the
promo CD or does it sound closer to the CD album transfer? Andy |