https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Fri, 01 May 2026 16:19:39 +0000 Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:33:38 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 360 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=8003 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum//images/Top-40-Music-on-CD-Forum-Logo.png https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63315&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63315 Author: crapfromthepast
Subject: 8003
Posted: 25 July 2023 at 11:33am

I have more sources for the LP version than I did nine years ago.

The oldest is likely Motown's Compact Command Performance 14 Greatest Hits (1984). It sounds pretty good here, with an excellent dynamic range, reasonable EQ, seemingly low-generation source tapes, and no evidence of added noise reduction on the fade. The same analog transfer is used on:

• Motown's Biggest Pop Hits (1986)
• Motown's Forever Diana (1993)
• Priority's Mega-Hits Dance Classics Vol. 12 (1993)
• Diana Ross's Ultimate Collection (1994)
• Rebound's Disco Nights Vol. 9 Motown Dance (1995)
• Time-Life's 2-CD Rhythm + Grooves Groove Is In The Heart (2002)

There's a new analog transfer on on the 2003 2-CD Diana Deluxe Edition. It's more compressed than those I listed above, but not brickwalled. The added compression really emphasizes the reverb; listen to the intro. In my opinion, the added compression and EQ choices make Diana's vocals a little more distant and less immediate than on Compact Command Performance 14 Greatest Hits.

Motown's All The Great Hits (copyright 1981) and Warner Special Products' 2-CD Good Times (1991) sound like they used the same high-generation source tape. Avoid for this track.

I haven't heard the 1999 reissue, or the hi-rez/MQA mastering.

Of the batch I listed above, Motown's Compact Command Performance 14 Greatest Hits (1984) is a clear winner for the LP version.

Edited by crapfromthepast]]> Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:33:38 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63315&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63315 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63314&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63314 Author: EternalStatic
Subject: 8003
Posted: 25 July 2023 at 9:55am

Thanks for this info. on the different masterings. I have the "Deluxe Edition" downloaded, and while it sounds good for loud, casual listening, it's certainly no
audiophile's dream as you noted. I may check out the hi-res remaster you (Gene) listed above. ]]> Tue, 25 Jul 2023 09:55:41 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63314&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63314 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63307&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63307 Author: NightAire
Subject: 8003
Posted: 22 July 2023 at 10:15pm

UPDATE: Well, while I haven't been able to get a 1987 / 1990 pressing of the "Diana" CD, I've gotten several others, and the results are interesting.

The 1999 "remastering" didn't exactly brickwall it, but it's pretty dense. Frequency response now goes all the way up to 22.05 kHz, but it has an average RMS power of -12 to -13 db. File times out to 4:04.578.

The 48 kHz / 24 bit (MQA) and 192 kHz . 24 bit remasters sound similar to each other, but amazingly less compressed than the 1999 CD. Stereo imagery, to my ears, seems more "stable" or "solid" than other versions. I don't know if this the greater bit depth / frequency response, or just being less compressed. These run about -16.5 Average RMS Power, and while they appear to have some peak control applied, I really think they sound the best of the ones I've heard so far. They run 4:05.562

I got one more copy of "Upside Down" from "Diana Ross - All The Best." It's a 96 kHz / 24 bit remaster... except the frequency response cuts off sharply at 21.78 kHz! I'd feel robbed if I paid extra for this. (Whether or not you could hear it is a discussion for another time.)

It runs an Average RMS Power of about -15, and looks dynamically controlled but not limited or clipped. Sound is a little flat.

Some may prefer this mastering but I think it sounds like it could have had noise reduction applied although the frequency display doesn't show it. I'm not sure if this was an early digital master or exactly what's going on. Seems a little gritty. Just not to my taste. It runs 4:05.421.

I';m still looking for a copy of the 1987 / 1990 original release. If I find it, I'll update this post.

--

Ron, you are SO right about the LP version. If it sounds decent, the wavefile shows it's been manipulated; if it's a good dynamic range, it sounds like either noise reduction has been applied (or maybe Dolby is switched on when it shouldn't be).

A little research on Discogs suggests it was first released on CD in 1987.

It was then re-released in 1999 with the following notes: "Digitally remastered using 24-bit technology."

The 2003 two-disc version is the one that I understand is limited to death, stomping out all of the dynamics.

Edited by NightAire]]> Sat, 22 Jul 2023 22:15:04 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63307&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63307 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63302&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63302 Author: NightAire
Subject: 8003
Posted: 19 July 2023 at 1:42pm

Great info... so it's more looping than actual new audio from the original master tapes.

Thanks for the clarification!!]]> Wed, 19 Jul 2023 13:42:02 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63302&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63302 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63301&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63301 Author: crapfromthepast
Subject: 8003
Posted: 18 July 2023 at 2:49pm

Gene - I'm 99% sure that it's a homemade edit. It can be reconstructed using pieces from the LP version. If there was a real 12" version, I would have run across it by now (I've been a huge fan of this track since 1980).

Those "Dance Classics" CDs are great for what they are, but they're not striving for authenticity. I get the sense that they just wanted to put out cool versions of the songs that they DJed with, and the labeling (and possibly the licensing) were afterthoughts.]]> Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:49:33 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63301&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63301 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63300&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63300 Author: NightAire
Subject: 8003
Posted: 18 July 2023 at 1:05pm

Do we know the origin of the 5 minute version that sounds to my ears like an extended version of the LP mix?

It's on Dance Classics Volume 23 & 24, a 2009 compilation from the Netherlands.

I'm not aware of it showing up anywhere else, and I can't find evidence it was released at the time (based again on Discogs).

If this was available in 1980, I'd want to play it on my station. The CD labels it as the "12" version" but I couldn't find a 12" single that had anything labeled that long. (Some had the LP length; others had the single edit.)

I'd also love to know where the company in the Netherlands got this version!]]> Tue, 18 Jul 2023 13:05:01 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=63300&title=diana-ross-upside-down#63300 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40753&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40753 Author: sriv94
Subject: 8003
Posted: 17 March 2014 at 9:11pm

crapfromthepast wrote: The 45 length is 3:38, the LP length is 4:04. I noticed that both the 45 and LP versions have a glitch at 0:29, right after the syllable "up". It sounds a little like a record scratch, even though that's not really what it is. I confirmed from a needledrop that it's actually on the 45, and would assume from its presence on some LP-length CD versions that it's also on the vinyl LP.

OK, I must be nuts. Listening to my version on iTunes from the Billboard 1980 disc, I don't hear a glitch. (And my copy on iTunes is an M4A file, so I pulled it
in directly form the disc.)]]> Mon, 17 Mar 2014 21:11:29 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40753&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40753 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40749&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40749 Author: crapfromthepast
Subject: 8003
Posted: 17 March 2014 at 4:54pm

Nice catch, Mark. I was using the notation from my 1955-2003 book, and never compared the 45 to the LP.

There is indeed an edit.

To create the 45 from the LP, remove the 48 beats from 3:21 to 3:48 of the LP version. The edit points fall two beats before the little crash cymbal. The 45 fade points are the same as the LP, so that one edit is the only difference.

Edited by crapfromthepast]]> Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:54:17 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40749&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40749 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40748&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40748 Author: Smokin' TomGary
Subject: 8003
Posted: 17 March 2014 at 4:36pm

My white label Motown promo 45 M1494F (65967) has a listed and actual time of 3:37. It has the guitar ending. Deadwax is M1494F-B-6597-08B M-1494-A It appears that some minor effort to obscure the "B" was made. Side 1 is both sides.]]> Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:36:27 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40748&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40748 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40747&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40747 Author: MMathews
Subject: 8003
Posted: 17 March 2014 at 1:14pm

Ron,

You note 45 length and LP length .. was there not an edit? I thought the guitar ending had an edit in it on the 45...

MM ]]> Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:14:47 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=8003&PID=40747&title=diana-ross-upside-down#40747