Melissa Manchester-"Just Too Many..."

As far as Top 40 hits from the '70s, '80s, and '90s go, Jim, it looks like you've uncovered what is probably one of the last remaining commercial 45 and LP version/length distinctions not yet accounted for in the database. Bravo!

Edited by Todd Ireland

Yes, I generally don't get too picky about a two or three second difference in fade length, depending on how long the fade is. If it's a long, drawn out fade, for example, a few seconds shaved off the ending isn't going to spoil my listening experience; however, if someone has taken the time to find a discrepancy, no matter how small it is, I think it should be posted.

Edited by aaronk

Edisonlite wrote: I can only think of one "con" reason, which might not have been considered when the subject (and decision) came about a year or more ago. And that is -- when we all check in on the site to see what's been discussed in the past day, there may be a whole new page of topics added just since the day before, and at times it seems like 90% - 95% of these could be about the short time discrepancies, making it harder to find the few new posts that deal with subjects other than this

I don't really see that as a con, since you can easily check the date/time of the last post for each thread. And it doesn't take very much time to quickly scan through the new posts, in my opinion. Besides, pretty soon, there won't be too many time discrepancies left to report on! Keep 'em comin,' Jim, Ed, and everyone else who has been posting.

Edited by aaronk

Jim, keep those "3-second" posts coming! I also enjoy all the "non-Top 40" posts as well. Jim, what you're doing is a great service to the collectors here and they would be sorely missed.

Let me just say right off the bat that Jim's knowledge, expertise, and resourcefulness when it comes to providing valuable information on this board is second-to-none. I think it's safe to say that Jim has uncovered and contributed more highly useful DJ and commercial 45 info to this message board over the past 20 months than the rest of us could collectively come up with over a period of five years! You won't find a person who works harder on this board to dedicate an ENORMOUS amount of his time and resources to help out his fellow Top 40 collectors.

That said, I too would be highly offended if I had received an unsolicited private message from another board member suggesting I stop posting certain information because that particular member just doesn't find it useful. Well, I happen to be one of those members who DOES find tremendous value in each and every one of Jim's posts not only because I'm a "completist" when it comes to collecting Top 40 music on CD, but I also consider myself a "preservationist". In other words, I strive to collect 45 versions, LP versions, etc. in the exact run time length as the record labels produced and presented them to the public. To me, they're like "historical documents" of exactly how Americans heard their favorite music. Does having a 45 version on CD that runs :03 too short ruin the listening experience for me? Absolutely not. But from a purely historical perspective, this run time length is not 100% accurate. Therefore, I take it upon myself to seek out and even create what I'm looking for, and I'm thankful there are good folks out there willing to donate their time to supply this info for selective collectors like me!

Now, I may not personally care if a song on CD differs in length from the vinyl 45 by as little as :01 or :02, but there are folks on this board who do. For instance, I know Ed (edtop40) doesn't like any discrepency of any kind to exist, and he has every right to be as selective as he wishes! We all have our own personal reasons for why we collect music. I also know that Paul Haney, who works for Joel Whitburn's fantastic Record Research publications, specifically documents all the actual run times Jim regularly reports and they get printed in future editions of Whitburns' books! And if Pat is willing to include all this info in the database without any objection, then why should someone who's only been posting on the message board for a few days care?

As Jim pointed out, we all have our personal preferences on this board. For instance, I like reading about all the :03 run time discrepencies Jim runs across (and I've been able to verify for myself that these time differences are usually caused by early fades, and definitely not turntable speed differences). By the same token, I tend to tune out posts containing specific instructions on how to re-create a particular 45 version from CD because I personally prefer to only use an actual vinyl 45 dub as a reference point to ensure my edits are 100% exact. But I know there are many fellow music collectors on here who DO find that info very interesting and valuable and I think that's super! I can simply choose to move on to another thread that may address something of greater interest for me.   

I've been posting very actively on Pat's fantastic message board since it was first launched in October, 2004. I thank Pat immensely for providing us with this forum and it's been nothing short of remarkable to see how much our little community has grown over time. We now have a greater number of knowledgable members than ever with lots of excellent info to contribute. But as a byproduct of this message board's blossoming popularity, I realize messages are getting posted at a faster rate and threads tend to become quickly "buried" within a couple days. I would not be opposed to creating separate folders on this message board dealing with a variety of topics so that readers can proactively search out the type of info they desire. This may help benefit good people like Gordon who visit the board looking for particular info and don't want to sift through a lot of miscellaneous posts to find what interests them. Here are a few examples of topics that perhaps these individual folders could represent:

General Top 40 on CD Info
Run Time Discrepencies
How to Create a Specific Version from CD
Is This Song Available on CD?
Database Errors
Non-Top 40 Hits

These separate forums should help spread out and organize the increasing mumber of message board posts. On the down side, this could lead to other issues. For instance, let's say someone posts a message about a song's run time discrepency in the appropriately designated folder. Then let's say, someone discovers a special remix on 45 for that same song. Should that remix difference be pointed out in the "Run Time Discrepency" folder, or should a new thread be started in the "General Top 40 on CD Info" folder. In other words, how possible would it be to keep all the folders completely on topic, while maintaining some sense of uniformity for discussion regarding individual songs?

Sorry for the long post and for taking us further away from the original thread topic, but these are some things I'm throwing out there for all to think about. For now, I'm going to echo Aaron's encouragement for everyone to keep the posts coming. After all, this is a public message board and we all love collecting Top 40 music on CD!

Edited by Todd Ireland