Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > The Seven Seas Of Rhye (Instrumental)

forum rss feed
Author

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 20 Mar 11, 20:35 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I just did a comparison of 2011 instrumental, the 1991 Hollywood Records Album Version and the 2008 Singles Collection 1 Version and found that the Instrumental is running just a tad fast. It falls out of synch almost immediately and looking at the peaks and valleys in the waveform, this is clearly illustrated.

The HR version and SC versions are at an identical speed, but the Instrumental is not, despite being the same, complete performance. It begs the question, which is correct? Is the Album Version the correct speed or is the Instrumental, which would mean the Album got slowed down at some point.  

It does appear to be running at the correct pitch, but someone with a more musical ear may be able to discern for sure.

The simplest test, if you don't believe me, would be to play the two (Album and Instrumental) at the same time.

Thoughts?

Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 20 Mar 11, 22:32 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Not that this will help, but the instrumental runs a hair fast, but the original album version runs SLOW!


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 20 Mar 11, 22:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

OK, here's my research:

Original version: Runs about 50 cents slow
2011 remaster: Runs correct
Instrumental: Runs slightly fast.


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
Rick user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 4796 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 04:05 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

This bonus track is ace. I wish they had added more rarities like these.


John: "It's the one thing I wish I could do - sing."

pittrek user not visiting Queenzone.com
pittrek
Deity: 10070 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 04:14 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Well I can only guess, but since the instrumental was newly created from multitrack masters, it should be the one which is running at correct speed

sbazb user not visiting Queenzone.com

Champion: 76 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 07:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Hmmmm. Curious. Although Queen are known to have slightly speeded up or slowed down tracks in the past (e.g. Another One Bites the Dust and No-One But You both play about 50 cents sharp), I presume that would have been done at the mastering stage, so like pittrek says, the original multitracks should be correct, so why is the instrumental playing slightly fast.

To the poster above who checked the various versions: When you say "original version", what is your source? Unless it's the original vinyl release then there could have been a mastering error since then that none of us ever noticed that left the tracks 50 cents out. If it's on the original then I'm sure it was intentional like the other examples I gave above. That raises the question of why it wasn't retained for the remaster though...

Soundfreak user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 378 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 08:16 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

As the song was obviously recorded using a tuned piano - and those are always tuned to A= 440 Hz - the instrumental track is the first one playing correct.
Easy to find out as you can play along with a tuned instrument.
You can't do that with the regular version which plays too slow. Whether this was an incident or intention....who knows...

rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 10:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I'm not sure if the technology existed in 1973 when the track was recorded, but these days there are many devices and programs to allow one to change the pitch, but not the speed, and to change the speed, but the not the pitch (so it stays in the same key and in tune) and to do both at the same time, if need be. I have software in the theatre that can do both and a twin-tray CD player with speed control that we use for some dance performances and competitions (it doesn't change the pitch). I also have and effects processor on the rack that can change pitch, as well. I've also looked at professional DJ consoles that do both.

I think we need first determine which releases are correctly pitched and then figure out which is playing at the correct speed (and pitch).

Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 11:37 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

sbazb wrote: Hmmmm. Curious. Although Queen are known to have slightly speeded up or slowed down tracks in the past (e.g. Another One Bites the Dust and No-One But You both play about 50 cents sharp), I presume that would have been done at the mastering stage, so like pittrek says, the original multitracks should be correct, so why is the instrumental playing slightly fast.

To the poster above who checked the various versions: When you say "original version", what is your source? Unless it's the original vinyl release then there could have been a mastering error since then that none of us ever noticed that left the tracks 50 cents out. If it's on the original then I'm sure it was intentional like the other examples I gave above. That raises the question of why it wasn't retained for the remaster though...
========

The "original" version was the one I listened to off of Queen II. I also compared it with the 1991 Hollywood remaster, and the version on the "Greatest Hits--Platinum collection." All three of those sources have the track playing slow.


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 11:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Here's the audio comparison:

This is the version heard on the original 1974 album/1991 hollywood remaster/Greatest Hits

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2lTbY4SWjQ

This is the version of off Wembley 1986

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsXJ_bfy98c&feature=related

And here's the instrumental version

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJGiszfjhm8

Wembley is at the right pitch, the instrumental is a touch fast, and the original version is quite slow!


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 12:38 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

And, Greg, you said earlier that the 2011 Album Version is pitched and sped correctly? 

Also, to my hear, the Instrumental and the 1991 HR Album Version are the same pitch (as in it doesn't sound like everything is trying to climb up a key because it's going too fast), but different speeds. Would you agree or disagree?

strangefrontier user not visiting Queenzone.com
strangefrontier
Champion: 57 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 13:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I thought that it might be worth while reminding everyone of the rarest verson of SSOR that is rumoured to exist...the alternative mix wrongly pressed on the original demo's that were subsequently recalled. I wonder if we could hear the difference with that one!! I originally posted this on the wrong thread...sorry!

mooghead user not visiting Queenzone.com
mooghead
Deity: 3664 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 15:08 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Do you guys actually enjoy just listening to the music anymore or is the
boner you are getting thinking about waveforms and tempo too much of a
distraction?

YannickJoker user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 297 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 15:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

mooghead wrote: Do you guys actually enjoy just listening to the music anymore or is the
boner you are getting thinking about waveforms and tempo too much of a
distraction?
====

No man, I get way too distracted by Freddie's annoying sibilance.

Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 22:25 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote: And, Greg, you said earlier that the 2011 Album Version is pitched and sped correctly? 

Also, to my hear, the Instrumental and the 1991 HR Album Version are the same pitch (as in it doesn't sound like everything is trying to climb up a key because it's going too fast), but different speeds. Would you agree or disagree?
=====

I need to hear a sample of the Hollywood records 1991 version. I may be confusing it with something else. I do know that the Platinum collection, and the "1974" version play slow.


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
rhyeking user not visiting Queenzone.com
rhyeking
Royalty: 1566 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 22:43 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

The Platinum version and the 1991 HR version are at identical speeds, despite being different remasters. They likely trace back to the same master, from which copies were made and sent to HR for their re-issues.

Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 21 Mar 11, 22:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

rhyeking wrote: The Platinum version and the 1991 HR version are at identical speeds, despite being different remasters. They likely trace back to the same master, from which copies were made and sent to HR for their re-issues.
======

All right, thanks! Now, I can confirm that the Hollywood version plays slow!


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
Gregsynth user not visiting Queenzone.com
Queen fan since 2005
Gregsynth
Deity: 3183 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 04:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

br5946 wrote: Quick question: Is this refering to an instrumentalised form of the Queen II version (2:50 in length) or the half-written Queen I take (1:07 in length)??
===============

It's the 2011 Instrumental!


I always knew I was a star And now, the rest of the world seems to agree with me-Freddie Mercury
Catbert user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 17 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 04:50 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Soundfreak wrote: As the song was obviously recorded using a tuned piano - and those are always tuned to A= 440 Hz

It's also possible that the piano was not tuned to concert pitch. Often they are tuned to themselves as this is much easier than a full tuning. The rest of the band would tune to the slightly flat, ie lower pitch, piano.

Soundfreak user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 378 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 22 Mar 11, 06:04 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Studio pianos are always tuned correctly to avoid any tuning problems with other instruments. Also I guess that it was recorded in the same studio as the rest of "Queen 2" using the same piano. 

It's something that happened quite often in the late 60s/early 70s, that tracks were mastered incorrectly. In some cases it happened due to different tape machines in different studios. The complete first Doors album for example played too slow, they only corrected it recently. There are stereo and mono versions of early Bee Gees albums and although it's the same recordings the mono versions play a semitone faster.....

A de-tuned piano is most unlikely reason for SSOR playing too slow. And the new remaster of the backing track is proof enough, that they used a regular tuned piano. 

P.S.: I'm amazed that very few musicians seem to be here.