|
Carpenters-"I Need To Be In Love" |
Post Reply 
|
Page <123 |
| Author | ||
Kerry Jackson 
Music Fan 
Joined: 15 June 2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 29 April 2014 at 2:48pm |
|
|
I have 3 copies of the 45, the DJ Promo, a stock copy and the Memories 45. The promo has mono & stereo sides, but the stereo sure seems to be mono to me. Yah Shure mentioned above that it is in CSG stereo, and close inspection of the audio in Audition shows it to be mono.
The same is true for my other two stereo 45's. They are quite different from the A&M Records 25th Anniversary version of the song. The CD version shows to be stereo in Audition and has good separation when I listen to it. I also noticed the promo 45 is slightly faster than the other versions. But, to answer Brian's question, all of my 45's have what appears to be a mono intro. |
||
 |
||
|
Yah Shure
Music Fan
Joined: 11 December 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 April 2014 at 5:46pm |
|
Like Kerry, I also have a mono/stereo DJ 45 (Monarch pressing) and a stereo stock 45 (Columbia Terre Haute pressing.) My findings mirror what Brian reports above: expanding the stereo image on the stock 45's first :04 moves the flutes left and the piano (harp?) pretty much stays put (even further expansion pushes the flute hard left and the piano decidedly to the right.) Kerry does have a point on the promo single, however: the stereo separation isn't immediately apparent during the first four seconds of the stereo side of the DJ 45, and expanding the stereo image doesn't audibly change that to any appreciable extent. But once the right channel is phase-shifted minus-90 degrees to mitigate the effects of the CSG encoding, it matches the stock 45's opening :04 narrow stereo image exactly. Expanding the stereo image after the phase is shifted yields the same results as the stock's flute-left, piano-center. But yeah, that is a stark contrast at the four-second mark, where the stereo image suddenly opens up wide. The Wizard Of Oz effect strikes again. |
||
|
||
|
Michaeldila
Music Fan
Joined: 25 April 2014 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 April 2014 at 2:50pm |
|
|
so the 1989 remaster of 'a kind of hush' has the ONLY cd appearance of the
single version with the "fixed" opening (later versions of this lp on cd all contained the regular album version). pretty cool. Edited by Michaeldila |
||
|
||
|
jimct
Music Fan
Joined: 07 April 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 April 2014 at 3:43pm |
|
|
Michael, while I'm happy that you seem to be so pleased about your 1989
re-master CD's opening, the majority of us here on the board are interested in only what appeared on the originally-released, 1976 vinyl 45 and LP versions, "warts and all." I know I have no personal interest in having anything "fixed" on subsequent CDs. Having "remixed" details available to me about CDs in Pat's db is one of the main reasons I've been subscribing to it for years now. So I can steer clear of all of those CDs. Staying with this same mindset, since the numerous Richard Carpenter re- masters over the years were re-mixes that often added instrumentation not found on the original recordings, again, many of us on this board have either returned or re-sold our copies, once this fact was discovered, and have been in pursuit of the relatively few CD sources worldwide that omit all of Richard's 80s and 90s audio tinkering efforts, and feature *only* the original 45 and LP mixes. If you are interested, many old Carpenters' song posts offer detailed, further "remix" specifics, in addition to the complete domestic CD rundown of same found inside Pat's db. |
||
|
||
|
Michaeldila
Music Fan
Joined: 25 April 2014 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 May 2014 at 5:12pm |
|
|
i'm sorry i ruffled your feathers, jim. i am brand new here and just trying to
"fit in". now i just feel chilly. i too am interested in original 45 versions..does that mean i should i not make a point about a remaster? again, sorry everyone. my intention was not to offend. |
||
|
||
|
jimct
Music Fan
Joined: 07 April 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 May 2014 at 6:22pm |
|
|
Michael, please allow me to extend you my warmest personal welcome. It
is always nice to have new participants. My feathers weren't ruffled in the least by your re-master post. You totally mis-read the intent of my reply. You just happened to pick the *one* group's remasters that have long garnered the most criticism on here - The Carpenters. Like you, many of us on here also love their music. Richard's re-masters were done with love, and with the intent of making their songs sound less hissy, and better sounding in the CD era. But, in doing so, Richard changed history, by adding elements. Then he re-filed them as the "go-to masters" in the A&M vaults, which meant they then appeared on all V/A comps, for a while. It took several years, and many complaints, before A&M stopped using his versions as the "master recordings". I have read that Richard was surprised at the amount of negative feedback his remasters had created, but now understands how many Carpenters fans preferred the original mixes - hiss and all - and is now fully on board putting those out. I know that you are brand new here. That was the entire reason for my earlier post. To try to assist you in fitting in. We are, by and large, a "very sick bunch of puppies" on here. I say that lovingly. And place myself near the top of the list. We are just not normal. We seemingly care about every little thing. We are fanatics. We disagree all the time. I hope you will post your opinions on here often. And I will look forward to reading them! |
||
|
||
|
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 92 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 May 2014 at 7:04pm |
|
|
Yes, welcome aboard, Michael! Please keep posting, and I also look forward
to learn what you know. |
||
|
||
|
EdisonLite
Music Fan
Joined: 18 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 May 2014 at 8:24pm |
|
|
I echo Aaron's remarks, Michael! We're so glad to have you here. A warm welcome to you. And I'm just like you, Michael - I often like fixed versions! You're not alone. There's a version of "Nadia's Theme" on CD that fixes a glitch (click) that was on all tape masters, and I was one of the people that was glad the "fixed" remaster was reported here. A strange, flawed edit was made flawless, and I prefer it that way. And to answer your question, I think you can make points about remasters. It's all good knowledge and good info to share.
|
||
|
||
|
Michaeldila
Music Fan
Joined: 25 April 2014 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 May 2014 at 7:17am |
|
|
thank you guys, i'm happy to finally be here! edison, i understand what
you mean....i much prefer the 45 version of "i need to be in love" but i'm happy to hear a clean "fixed" opening (especially through earphones). i've spent many years trying to fill my music collection with 45 versions so i'm so glad i'm not the only nutcase! jim, i realize now that the carpenters are a touchy subject here, too. i'm a huge fan and i know the debate has raged for many years about all of richard's remastering. at first i was vehemently against all the reworking, but truth to tell, i now prefer 'most' of the newer versions. i don't know how it happened, but after being exposed for so long to the newer stuff, the original versions sound kinda flat to me now. for example, while i like the original versions of "superstar" and "rainy days", the newer versions of "it's gonna take some time" and "sing" -to me- have an extra punch to them. and the 1991 remaster of "we've only just begun" (especially on the 'love songs' cd) has an extra touch of reverb and separation (to my ears) that make me sway to that version. also, there's some totally new versions of a few songs on the japanese 'treasures' double cd from the eighties that blow the originals away (as far as clarity goes). the newer stuff tends to bring karen more to the front and i can't blame richard for that...but regarding the carpenters, it's sort of become like a giant, very confusing buffet where you pick what you want. i've found it best to just "jump into" the total insanity of their catalogue...so now i have al the original versions in one playlist and all the new remixes in another and i cover all my bases that way and not get a headache. thanks again, guys! |
||
|
||
|
EdisonLite
Music Fan
Joined: 18 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 May 2014 at 9:52am |
|
|
I often prefer the single mixes/versions, but I go on a case-by-case basis. Like all the Jim Steinman produced/written songs - I like the unedited 7-minute-plus versions. As far as the Carpenters remasters, while I understand Richard's tinkering, I still prefer the originals. For instance, yesterday in my car, I heard "Goodbye to Love" with all the extra reverb on the voice, and it just sounded weird to me. I also have to admit I don't like the piano replacements Richard does, completely replacing the piano track with a different sounding piano. But fixing oddities like a mono-to-stereo intro (like your example), that I get. The "Nadia's Theme" fix I understand. I even took Al Stewart's "Midnight Rocks" and Manilow's "Could It Be Magic" and re-edited them to remove clicks (at editing points) that really bothered my ears. The editing technology in 1980 and 1975 just wasn't as good as it is now. I'm sure it wasn't the editor's intentions to add clicks to their new edits, so fixes on the originals (like these examples) I totally prefer.
|
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <123 |
| 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 |
Topic Options
Brian W. wrote: