| Author |
|
edtop40
MusicFan
Joined: 29 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4991
|
| Posted: 05 March 2005 at 8:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
anyone know if the 45 version of "cat's in the cradle" by harry chapin was every issued in it's 45 version........the 45 face says the run time is 3:29 but it actually runs 3:35.......all the cd versions i've found run between 3:48 to 3:50........the 45 and the cd version is the same to the break at the 2:24 mark and the 45 edits the guitar loop.........
the cd "once upon a song" issued in 2001 on sony could have the 45 version........does anybody have this cd in their collection.........any info would be helpful
__________________
edtop40
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
EdisonLite
MusicFan
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2235
|
| Posted: 06 March 2005 at 8:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I know that the single edit of Harry Chapin's "Cats ..." appears on Rhino's "Have a Nice Decade" box set.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
jimct
MusicFan
Joined: 07 April 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3906
|
| Posted: 31 May 2007 at 3:20am | IP Logged
|
|
|
My commercial 45, which is stereo, has a listed time of (3:29), but an actual time of (3:45). My timing conflicts a bit with Ed's earlier report of a listed (3:29), actual (3:35) timing. We probably have 45s with different deadwax info. Mine is "ES-45203 A-SP". Appearing later in the deadwax is "ESR-TD-8-7-74".
Edited by jimct on 31 May 2007 at 3:23am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Todd Ireland
MusicFan
Joined: 16 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: 31 May 2007 at 5:05am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Jim:
Do you know if the shorter 3:35 version of "Cat's in the Cradle" exists anywhere on a promo 45?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
jimct
MusicFan
Joined: 07 April 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3906
|
| Posted: 31 May 2007 at 11:35am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Todd, my mono/stereo promo 45 has a listed time of (3:44) on both sides, and both sides actually run (3:45), just like my commercial 45 does. Perhaps a 2nd promo 45 was put out for this song in 1974?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
sriv94
MusicFan
Joined: 16 September 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1453
|
| Posted: 24 August 2009 at 7:09pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
And to add to the confusion, the Rhino Digital 45 uses a version that runs (3:32). Haven't bought yet, so I don't know whether there's any further edit aside from the one that appears on the Have A Nice Decade box.
__________________
Doug
---------------
All of the good signatures have been taken.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
sriv94
MusicFan
Joined: 16 September 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1453
|
| Posted: 28 August 2009 at 6:47am | IP Logged
|
|
|
sriv94 wrote:
| And to add to the confusion, the Rhino Digital 45 uses a version that runs (3:32). Haven't bought yet, so I don't know whether there's any further edit aside from the one that appears on the Have A Nice Decade box. |
|
|
As it turns out, no additional edit--it's the same version as on the Have A Nice Decade box, yet with a very truncated early fade.
__________________
Doug
---------------
All of the good signatures have been taken.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1372
|
| Posted: 28 August 2009 at 5:21pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Has anyone else run into really bad pressings of singles from that era? I ended up throwing out my copy of CITC (since I had the song on an album anyway) because it sounded so bad. I examined the 45 with a magnifying glass and there were lots of small pits in the grooves, almost like there were bubbles in the plastic and they eventually popped. My copy of "Lady" by Styx from around the same time was similarly affected.
I don't recall either of these singles sounding like this when I first got them.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
bwolfe
MusicFan
Joined: 24 May 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
| Posted: 29 August 2009 at 4:09am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I've been told there was a lot of recycled vinyl being used in those days.
Motown stuff was like that.
Upon close discovery you would see white specks through the vinyl.
I returned three copies of "Can't Slow Down" from Lionel Richie until I got a decent one.
Even that copy wasn't perfect.
I think the local record store got tired of my complaining.
__________________
the way it was heard on the radio
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
EdisonLite
MusicFan
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2235
|
| Posted: 29 August 2009 at 9:09am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Interesting - I returned many copies of Diana Ross' "To Love Again" in 1981 for the same reason. It took many copies until I got a decent sounding one.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
edtop40
MusicFan
Joined: 29 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4991
|
| Posted: 14 September 2013 at 5:22pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
my commercial 45 issued as elektra 45203 which contains the
edited version running 3:34; listed 3:29 has 'EX45203 A-SP'
etched in one area, and 'ESR-TD-9-9-74' etched in another
__________________
edtop40
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
davidclark
MusicFan
Joined: 17 November 2004
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1079
|
| Posted: 28 January 2016 at 2:51am | IP Logged
|
|
|
ed kindly sent me a dub of his short 45, and I have the following to report:
The version on Time-Life AM Gold does not match the 45 (can't comment
on the other similar length versions...). The actual edited part is fine,
however the short 45 begins to fade at about 3:26, ending by 3:34 (cutting
off the tail end of the cold ending fadeout). The AM Gold version runs 3:37
and does not fade the same as the short 45, rather it fades like the long 45
(cold ending fade). I know 3 seconds is our usual limit for indicating
different versions, however the fade being present on the short 45 but not
on the AM Gold version to me disqualifies it from being considered the
short 45. Other similarly labelled versions should also be checked.
I wonder if the Rhino digital 45 (discussed above), running 3:32, is an
attempt at getting the short 45 fade (but it is 0:02 short).
Edited by davidclark on 28 January 2016 at 2:53am
__________________
dc1
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Smokin' TomGary
MusicFan
Joined: 26 June 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 186
|
| Posted: 28 January 2016 at 5:30pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Promo 45 E-45203-A has a listed and actual time of 3:44. Mono one side, stereo the other. Deadwax on the stereo side is ES-45203 A SP/ESR-TD 8-7-74. Deadwax on the mono side is EM-45203 A SP/ESR-TD 8-7-74.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1372
|
| Posted: 29 January 2016 at 7:45am | IP Logged
|
|
|
So all promos are 3:44, but some commercial copies are ~:10
shorter?
What was edited?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6428
|
| Posted: 29 January 2016 at 9:13am | IP Logged
|
|
|
edtop40 wrote:
| the 45 and the cd version is the same to the break at the 2:24 mark and the 45 edits the guitar loop......... |
|
|
__________________
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Smokin' TomGary
MusicFan
Joined: 26 June 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 186
|
| Posted: 29 January 2016 at 5:13pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hykker wrote:
Has anyone else run into really bad pressings of singles from that era? I ended up throwing out my copy of CITC (since I had the song on an album anyway) because it sounded so bad. I examined the 45 with a magnifying glass and there were lots of small pits in the grooves, almost like there were bubbles in the plastic and they eventually popped. My copy of "Lady" by Styx from around the same time was similarly affected.
I don't recall either of these singles sounding like this when I first got them. |
|
|
I worked for an FM station that converted to Hot AC from Beautiful. We played vinyl because stereo carts didn't hold phase very well. We had issues with cue burn. The Music Director complained to the Columbia rep. My office was next to the MD's office and overheard the discussion. The MD showed the rep two different pressings of the same song. One was hard vinyl, the other was softer polystyrene which did not cue burn as easily. The rep called his boss who insisted there was no difference between the two.
At that point I entered the discussion and told the rep to give his boss the deadwax info. It turns out the better pressings were made at a North Carolina plant. We were put on the mailing list for that plant so our on-air quality improved at least for Columbia 45's.
While colored vinyl may look cool it is made from recycled materials and has poor quality sound.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1315
|
| Posted: 29 January 2016 at 11:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Smokin' TomGary wrote:
| One was hard vinyl, the other was softer polystyrene which did not cue burn as easily. |
|
|
That's interesting, Tom. My experiences were the exact opposite: styrene cue-burned far, far more easily than vinyl.
I've never noticed much of a difference between standard black and colored vinyl 45s, especially if they were pressed by Columbia's Santa Maria plant. Those were just as quiet as their black vinyl counterparts from that same plant. Ditto for the 45s pressed by Specialty in Olyphant, such as the gold vinyl "Roundabout" DJ 45.
Getting back to what Steve said upthread, there was a time when Specialty had some quality control issues with their 45s during the early '70s. Either the temperatures weren't quite right during the pressing cycles or there were non-fill issues, but occasionally some of the Specialty vinyl 45s, promo or stock, would be uncharacteristically noisy. You could usually see where the vinyl looked a bit lighter as the record spun around, with an accompanying swishy or crackly sound as the stylus passed that area with each revolution. This would have been from about 1971 to 1974. These problem pressings were definitely the exception, rather than the rule, as far as Specialty-pressed 45s. When that manufacturer switched to thinner title and artist fonts and thinner vinyl in 1975, the quality control improved as well.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
crapfromthepast
MusicFan
Joined: 14 September 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2192
|
| Posted: 31 January 2016 at 8:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
The song turns up on a handful of common compilations, and they're definitely a mixed bag.
LP and long 45 version (3:45)
The compilation to feature the LP version is Razor & Tie's 2-CD The '70s Preservation Society Presents Easy '70s (1993). It's definitely not the lowest-generation tape source (sounds a little warbly when summed to mono), and it cuts off the attack of the opening note. On the plus side, there's no noise reduction, it has a reasonable EQ, and has a great dynamic range.
I have two CDs that use the same analog transfer as Easy '70s and have the same issues as Easy '70s:- JCI's Only Rock 'N Roll #1 Radio Hits 1970-1974 (1996)
- Time-Life's 2-CD Singers And Songwriters Vol. 3 1974-1975 (1999)
One more CD has the opening note intact and isn't based on any of the above: Time-Life's 2-CD Seventies Music Explosion Vol. 1 Sunshine (2005). It sounds a teeny bit better than all of the above, but may possibly have noise reduction. (Not sure here - the're no hiss at the end of the fade, but the treble doesn't disappear during the fade.) NR or not, I'm going to recommend this disc as my preferred source for the song, out of my admittedly small collection of compilations.
Short 45 version (3:34)
The short 45 version edits out eight beats from 2:21 to 2:27 of the LP version, starting two beats after the word "then", and (I think?) fading early? Not sure about the fade or the true 45 ending.
I think the edited version first showed up on Rhino's Have A Nice Decade box (1998).
I have the edited version on Time-Life's AM Gold Vol. 29 #1 Hits Of The '70s '70-'74 (2000), and I'd bet that it's a digital clone of Have A Nice Decade. The version here sounds great, and is definitely from a lower-generation tape source than everything listed above. This version ends with the same last note as the LP version, but shortens the very tail of the fade by a few seconds.
Edited by crapfromthepast on 24 February 2017 at 8:18am
__________________
There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one Crap From The Past.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
sriv94
MusicFan
Joined: 16 September 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1453
|
| Posted: 23 February 2017 at 6:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Now that you're working on 1974, Ron, were you ever able to figure out how the end of the song on the short 45 was handled?
__________________
Doug
---------------
All of the good signatures have been taken.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
crapfromthepast
MusicFan
Joined: 14 September 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2192
|
| Posted: 23 February 2017 at 8:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
No - I haven't run across any new versions of the song since my post last year.
__________________
There's a lot of crap on the radio, but there's only one Crap From The Past.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: harry chapin--cat’s in the cradle
