|
corey hart i am by your side |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |
edtop40 
Music Fan 
Joined: 29 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: corey hart i am by your sidePosted: 04 May 2011 at 7:19pm |
|
my commercial 45 for the corey hart song "i am by your side" issued as emi america 8348 states a run time as 3:52 and is an edit of the full length 4:35 cd/lp version...this vinyl 45 run time info s/b added to the db....thanks, paul for the edit you did a long time ago for me.....
|
|
|
edtop40
|
|
 |
|
|
Pat Downey
Admin Group
Joined: 01 October 2003 Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2011 at 1:29pm |
|
Ed you say the 45 "states" a running time of (3:52) but what is the actual 45 running time?
Edited by Pat Downey |
|
|
|
|
edtop40
Music Fan
Joined: 29 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 May 2011 at 4:19pm |
|
pat.....the actual run time is 3:52 just like the listed time....sorry for the confusion....
|
|
|
edtop40
|
|
|
|
|
EternalStatic
Music Fan
Joined: 28 September 2019 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 May 2020 at 5:04am |
|
Does anyone have edit details to recreate the 45 version? I have not located a good copy. Thanks for your help!
|
|
|
|
|
Bellenger1981
Music Fan
Joined: 18 July 2019 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 May 2020 at 4:41pm |
|
Remove approximately 2:34.4 to 3:17.3 (depending on your
CD source) of the LP version in order to recreate the 45 version. The 45 version can be heard in the promo video. You have to cut it at just the right part (just a bit late) so that Corey sounds like he is saying "and-die-am by your side". If you cut it a tad too early, it may sound right and fine, but he sounds like he is saying, "and I am by your side" without the "die" part. |
|
|
Jason Bellenger
Byron Center, Michigan, USA |
|
|
|
|
EternalStatic
Music Fan
Joined: 28 September 2019 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 May 2020 at 3:08am |
|
Thanks, Jason -- The description was very helpful. I had decided against using the video as a guide at some point in the past, as it fades a lot earlier than the actual 45, so I was not sure if it was indeed the same version (fade notwithstanding). This is another of those edits where, if the listener isn't aware of the cut then it's probably not going to jump out at them, but once you know what to listen for, it's a bit ugly, isn't it? It will still be good to have this one around, though.
|
|
|
|
|
EdisonLite
Music Fan
Joined: 18 October 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 211 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2020 at 12:31pm |
Yes, and other bad edits that fall into that category (that I didn't notice when I had the 45) but once I heard the album version, anytime I hear the 45 edit, it's hard on my ears: *Dream On - Aerosmith (1973 version) *While You See a Chance - Steve Winwood (perhaps the worst chop of all time) * Last Time I Saw Him - Diana Ross - this only became apparent when Motown released an unreleased long version of the song. (Both the LP and 45 have the choppy edit). |
|
|
|
|
EternalStatic
Music Fan
Joined: 28 September 2019 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 27 May 2020 at 4:00am |
|
I haven't ever noticed the Diana Ross edit, but the other two-- yeesh! The Steve Winwood one is so bad it's actually comical. It's interesting, though: every once in a while when I hear the song passively, the weird lyric jump just skates right on by in the background without me noticing. I think because I heard it so many zillion times in the '80s, it sounds strangely as "right" as it does wrong.
I've got another one for you, although I don't think it grazed the Top 40. One of the early singles from the Sammy Hagar line-up of Van Halen, "Best of Both Worlds", has one of the jumpiest and most un-smooth edits I've ever heard. Someone saw fit to cut the 2nd verse out (and drop it back in after the first chorus), I guess to get to the chorus sooner, but the edit point is so weird. The only way it sounds any kind of "right" is if you're just focusing on the guitar line and nothing else around it. But even with that, the way they snipped from the longer album version (without doing any additional remixing or muting etc) in the middle of two completely different vocal lines even makes a little pop at the edit point that makes you wonder if maybe the record just skipped! Small wonder it didn't get spun at Top 40 even after all the '1984' and previous '5150' hits. Edited by EternalStatic |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
| 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
EternalStatic wrote: