James Brown-"It’s A Man’s Man’s Man’s..."
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=5644
Printed Date: 19 June 2025 at 5:10am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: James Brown-"It’s A Man’s Man’s Man’s..."
Posted By: jimct
Subject: James Brown-"It’s A Man’s Man’s Man’s..."
Date Posted: 14 May 2010 at 11:56am
| My commercial 45 (confirmed as King 6035, is vinyl, with deadwax of "101-A (-7) K12097") has a listed time of (2:52) and an actual time of (2:53). I only post this info because every current decent-quality database CD that includes the original recording of this song runs either (2:45) or (2:46), including the normally-quite-reliable, Hip-O Select Singles series! It has been previously discussed that Brown would, more than any other artist, re-mix/re-release a 2nd 45 version of his current hits, with either "less of this" or "more of that". Perhaps the version of this song on my 45 is either, 1) such a second mix, which has eluded all previous CD compilers/researchers or, 2) just another case where a different tape was wrongly thought to be the correct hit 45 master. Anybody else with an original King 6035 45 out there? |
Replies:
Posted By: Gary Mack
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 6:51am
|
Mine sayeth 2:52, it runs 2:53 and reads "101-A (-2) K-12097 LH X-4603".
GM |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 9:08am
| Thanks for the info on this, Jim and Gary. I'm also wondering if perhaps the time discrepency between your 45 and the commercial CD appearances could at least partially be explained by a pitch difference? |
Posted By: Gary Mack
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 6:39pm
My Technics turntable has a strobe pitch control and I'm always careful to set it properly. GM |
Todd Ireland wrote:Posted By: Yah Shure
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 9:23pm
|
Gary, I think Todd meant the differences in mastering speeds (as opposed to "pitch") between the 45 and CD, not your turntable's speed.
I have two copies of the commercial 45, but they differ in appearance. The labels are the same, but although King had its own onsite manufacturing facilities, one copy (#1) has a higher quality vinyl content than the other (#2) which has King's more typically hissy cheap plastic. #1 also has a raised lip around the record's edge on both sides, while the edges on #2 are flat. Copy #1's deadwax info is almost identical to Jim's copy: "101-A (-7) K-12097". The difference is the hyphen in that last number. Copy #2's deadwax is closer to Gary's copy, but differs: "101-A (-2) K-12097 LH". There's no "X-4603" (or anything else) following the "LH". Both #1 and #2 are (2:52) listed and (2:54) actual. To be even more precise, copy 1 runs (2:54.315) and #2 runs (2:54.319). It doesn't get much closer than that. |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 9:43pm
Yes, that's what I meant. |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 15 May 2010 at 10:20pm
|
Posted By: Robert
Date Posted: 16 May 2010 at 9:13am
| Mine also has a raised lip but deadwax # 101-A (-5) K-12097. |
Posted By: edtop40
Date Posted: 07 January 2013 at 5:32pm
|
this is very odd fellows!!....my commercial 45 for the
james brown song 'it's a man's man's man's world' issued as king 6035 states the run time on the label as 2:52 but actually runs 2:46 and matches my cdr version perfectly....the run out groove info is '101-A (-4) K- 12097'.....if anyone wants a copy for their review send me a pm and i will forward them a copy... ------------- edtop40 |
Posted By: MMathews
Date Posted: 12 March 2017 at 3:14pm
|
Ah just remembered to update this thread... I can answer
the ages old question about the times for this song: the only difference between the (2:46) singles and the (2:53) - (2:54) singles is the pitch. So just slow down any of the CD sources and you got it. The pitch change is drastic, almost a full semi-tone. I can add that once I heard it this way, the slower speed sounds like the actual recording speed and the faster speed sounds unnatural. MM |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 04 February 2025 at 10:14pm
|
Unreleased 1964 recording
It runs about 3:17. It was mixed to mono in 1985 on Polydor's CD Of JB. It was mixed to stereo in 1991 on Polydor's 4-CD Star Time. 1966 hit version It exists only in mono; the hit version was never mixed to stereo. It runs 2:46 on some pressings and about 2:53 on other pressings. Mark M discovered that the 2:46 version just runs faster than the 2:53 version. The 2:53 version seems to be in the same key as the unreleased 1964 recording, so I'd bet that the 2:53 version is how it was recorded, and the 2:46 version was sped up from the original performance. The 2:46 versions are well-represented on CD. To recreate the 2:53 45 version, Mark slowed down the version on Rhino's Billboard Top R&B Hits 1966 by 5.25%. Get this: it appears that all the CD versions of the hit are taken from vinyl! On Rhino's Billboard Top R&B Hits (1989), there's a tick/pop at 1:33 in the word "man". This version is pretty clean-sounding (listen to "you see" at 0:37), but it fades about 4 beats sooner than others. The same analog transfer is used on:
Polydor's The 50th Anniversary Collection (2003) seems to also use the same vinyl transfer as 20 All-Time Greatest Hits, but mastered too loud and having a squashed dynamic range. I think it cleaned up some of the tick/pops, compared to the 1991 releases. Hip-O Select/Polydor's The Singles Volume 4: 1966-1967 (2007) sounds about as clean as the Rhino disc, with relatively little distortion on the vocals (listen to "you see" at 0:37) and all the cracklies removed. Plus, it runs out to the end of the word "loneliness", like the 1991 masterings. But the clean-up software left some stereo-like artifacts behind (listen from about 0:17 to about 0:25 in headphones). There are also some unnaturally large mike-pop effects from the vocals (listen starting at 1:01 to the words "take us out of the dark", and you'll hear the T and the D have an unnaturally large bass bump). I would think that would have been EQ'd out of the vinyl pressings, to avoid having the needle bounce out of the groove. The bass bumps aren't on any of the earlier masterings. My recommendation Boy, this isn't an easy choice. You get to pick among: (1) an early fade, (2) severe vocal distortion, or (3) bass bumps from vocal mike pops and some noise-reduction artifacts. I'm going to hesitantly pick Rhino's Billboard Top R&B Hits (1989), which has some cracklies and fades a bit early. I prefer these artifacts over the severe vocal distortion of the 1991 masterings. I also prefer these artifacts over the bass bumps and the weirdness left behind from the clean-up software. In an A/B/C test among the Rhino disc, STar Time and The Singles, the Rhino disc sounded more natural to me. Your results may vary. Amazing to me that for such a big hit that peaked at #8 in 1966, the two-track mixdown tape seems to be missing, and the multi-track session tape seems also to be missing (or Dennis Drake surely would have produced a clean remix for the Star Time box set). ------------- 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: Santi Paradoa
Date Posted: 05 February 2025 at 3:11pm
|
Great info Ron. That Rhino disc is the 1966 volume, correct? ------------- Santi Paradoa Miami, Florida |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 05 February 2025 at 7:21pm
|
I've gone so many years hearing it sped up that it sounded
strange to hear it at the proper speed. First, I went to Qobuz and downloaded the track from Universal's Soul Hits Of The 60's which runs the full 2:46. Then, I took the Billboard Top R&B Hits (1989) and pasted on the ending of the Soul Hits file, slowed it down by 4% and ended up with a file running 2:53. ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: crapfromthepast
Date Posted: 05 February 2025 at 9:47pm
|
Santi - Yes, it's 1966 (sorry for the typo).
John - If you use 5.25% instead of 4%, you'll get the speed that Mark M used. You can also use the Star Time ending. In listening carefully to the endings, I noticed an edit at 2:22 (in the fast version), where the strings abruptly drop out. It would be interesting to hear the full performance of the song (I assume that all the released versions are edited down from the full performance). ------------- There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one http://www.crapfromthepast.com" rel="nofollow - Crap From The Past . |