[[email protected]]

I need a little help.

Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through each verse and pans left to right.


It was probably from that era but I'm not 100% sure.

Anybody help?

thanks

Mark

[[email protected]]

Mako:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aTLU1Qx5ioI ?

(Though every instance of "When I was Young"
by the Animals, on YouTube, is in mono )

Then there is Eric Carmen's "All By Myself" -
opening lyrics are "When I was young .. .."

Plenty of that in stereo on YouTube, but
Carmen stayed basically in the middle
during that song.

[Phil Allison[_4_]]

wrote:



Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I
went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought
it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through
each verse and pans left to right.


** The song you heard is "Closer to the Truth", the third track on Eric Burdon and the Animals "The Twain Shall Meet" album from 1968.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1Q5...BB35&index= 3

Hit singles "Monterey" and "Sky Pilot" are on the same album.

The Beatles had astonished the pop music world with Sgt Peppers about a year earlier, I thought this album from the Animals was rather better.


..... Phil

[[email protected]]

Phil Allison wrote: wrote:



Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I
went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought
it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through
each verse and pans left to right.


** The song you heard is "Closer to the Truth", the third track on Eric Burdon and the Animals "The Twain Shall Meet" album from 1968.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1Q5...BB35&index= 3

Hit singles "Monterey" and "Sky Pilot" are on the same album.

The Beatles had astonished the pop music world with Sgt Peppers about a year earlier, I thought this album from the Animals was rather better.


..... Phil "

Wow! The panning on that may not be natural, but
it's still a cool effect for a captive audience(listening
in the car or a room with spread out speakers).

Hey at least one of my guesses was for the right
band.

[JackA]

On Saturday, April 23, 2016 at 10:49:39 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I need a little help.

Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through each verse and pans left to right.


It was probably from that era but I'm not 100% sure.

Anybody help?

thanks

Mark


Since you are no longer talking to me, allow me to gripe...

I liked Rock And Roll Hoochie Koo, by Rick Derrigner. It had a bit of interesting guitar panning. Sadly, on CD (All American Boy album), it sounds poor (missing high end). Should have a nice sounding crisp tambourine, but on CD it doesn't. Besides, sounds like someone ran over the master tape with a bus!!

Also, Meat Loaf's, Bat Out Of Hell album - Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad song, across two CD renditions of this album, it lacks bass!! I can repair that though.

Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD!

Jack

[[email protected]]

JackA wrote: "Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD! "


#1. That's THEKMANROCKS to you, sir.


#2. I do not think everything automatically sounds
better on CD. CD provides the canvas: flat response,
low noise floor, wide dynamic range, stereo separation.

What matters above all is what is put on that canvas -
the source. The writing, the composition, the
performance, the capture, the mixing, and the mastering.

Interspersed with all of that is are the choices and
placement of microphones, processing choices, quality
of digital converters, types of dithering employed, etc.

If it is a legacy item(something previously released on
LP decades ago), how it sounds on CD depends again
upon the SOURCE - original master tape vs safety
tape vs mix tapes - plus, is it transferred flat to digital
master tape, or is it "futzed" with(EQ or excessive
dynamics applied, etc).

I own lots of CDs, of albums from 1970 to 2010, which
sound boomy and edgy at the same time. Analysis
confirms what I heard: Everything from 100Hz up to
5-8kHz was "scooped" out. Or, lots of bottom and top
were added to it. Either way, a smiley face EQ was
applied to the master for CD that didn't exist on the
original vinyl. So I do prefer the LP version in those
cases. Some edginess on earlier CDs(pre 1990) might
be related to the quality of converters used at that time,
and not to EQ or dynamics choices.


So no, I do not automatically think "everything sounds
better in digital/on CD". It depends upon the source, so
I take it case by case, Jack.

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 6:23:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD! "


#1. That's THEKMANROCKS to you, sir.


#2. I do not think everything automatically sounds
better on CD. CD provides the canvas: flat response,
low noise floor, wide dynamic range, stereo separation.

What matters above all is what is put on that canvas -
the source. The writing, the composition, the
performance, the capture, the mixing, and the mastering.

Interspersed with all of that is are the choices and
placement of microphones, processing choices, quality
of digital converters, types of dithering employed, etc.

If it is a legacy item(something previously released on
LP decades ago), how it sounds on CD depends again
upon the SOURCE - original master tape vs safety
tape vs mix tapes - plus, is it transferred flat to digital
master tape, or is it "futzed" with(EQ or excessive
dynamics applied, etc).

I own lots of CDs, of albums from 1970 to 2010, which
sound boomy and edgy at the same time. Analysis
confirms what I heard: Everything from 100Hz up to
5-8kHz was "scooped" out. Or, lots of bottom and top
were added to it. Either way, a smiley face EQ was
applied to the master for CD that didn't exist on the
original vinyl. So I do prefer the LP version in those
cases. Some edginess on earlier CDs(pre 1990) might
be related to the quality of converters used at that time,
and not to EQ or dynamics choices.


So no, I do not automatically think "everything sounds
better in digital/on CD". It depends upon the source, so
I take it case by case, Jack.

Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please, include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Thanks!

Jack

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:01:30 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 6:23:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD! "


#1. That's THEKMANROCKS to you, sir.


#2. I do not think everything automatically sounds
better on CD. CD provides the canvas: flat response,
low noise floor, wide dynamic range, stereo separation.

What matters above all is what is put on that canvas -
the source. The writing, the composition, the
performance, the capture, the mixing, and the mastering.

Interspersed with all of that is are the choices and
placement of microphones, processing choices, quality
of digital converters, types of dithering employed, etc.

If it is a legacy item(something previously released on
LP decades ago), how it sounds on CD depends again
upon the SOURCE - original master tape vs safety
tape vs mix tapes - plus, is it transferred flat to digital
master tape, or is it "futzed" with(EQ or excessive
dynamics applied, etc).

I own lots of CDs, of albums from 1970 to 2010, which
sound boomy and edgy at the same time. Analysis
confirms what I heard: Everything from 100Hz up to
5-8kHz was "scooped" out. Or, lots of bottom and top
were added to it. Either way, a smiley face EQ was
applied to the master for CD that didn't exist on the
original vinyl. So I do prefer the LP version in those
cases. Some edginess on earlier CDs(pre 1990) might
be related to the quality of converters used at that time,
and not to EQ or dynamics choices.


So no, I do not automatically think "everything sounds
better in digital/on CD". It depends upon the source, so
I take it case by case, Jack.

Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please, include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Thanks!

Jack

5E-507-2 THE CARS/CANDY-O ELECTRA

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 4/24/2016 5:01 PM, JackA wrote:
Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I
will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please,
include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Did you have to make it so hard? I think that most of us who support
good sounding CDs aren't talking about top 40 charting hits.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:50:55 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 4/24/2016 5:01 PM, JackA wrote:
Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I
will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please,
include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Did you have to make it so hard? I think that most of us who support
good sounding CDs aren't talking about top 40 charting hits.


Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

____
I don't agree that good sounding CDs and
top 40 hits are mutually exclusive.

One just has to listen.

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:36:40 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:01:30 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 6:23:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD! "


#1. That's THEKMANROCKS to you, sir.


#2. I do not think everything automatically sounds
better on CD. CD provides the canvas: flat response,
low noise floor, wide dynamic range, stereo separation.

What matters above all is what is put on that canvas -
the source. The writing, the composition, the
performance, the capture, the mixing, and the mastering.

Interspersed with all of that is are the choices and
placement of microphones, processing choices, quality
of digital converters, types of dithering employed, etc.

If it is a legacy item(something previously released on
LP decades ago), how it sounds on CD depends again
upon the SOURCE - original master tape vs safety
tape vs mix tapes - plus, is it transferred flat to digital
master tape, or is it "futzed" with(EQ or excessive
dynamics applied, etc).

I own lots of CDs, of albums from 1970 to 2010, which
sound boomy and edgy at the same time. Analysis
confirms what I heard: Everything from 100Hz up to
5-8kHz was "scooped" out. Or, lots of bottom and top
were added to it. Either way, a smiley face EQ was
applied to the master for CD that didn't exist on the
original vinyl. So I do prefer the LP version in those
cases. Some edginess on earlier CDs(pre 1990) might
be related to the quality of converters used at that time,
and not to EQ or dynamics choices.


So no, I do not automatically think "everything sounds
better in digital/on CD". It depends upon the source, so
I take it case by case, Jack.

Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please, include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Thanks!

Jack

5E-507-2 THE CARS/CANDY-O ELECTRA

Thanks. It's Just What I Needed!!

Jack

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:50:55 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 4/24/2016 5:01 PM, JackA wrote:
Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I
will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please,
include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Did you have to make it so hard? I think that most of us who support
good sounding CDs aren't talking about top 40 charting hits.

Mike, I know where you are coming from. However, I know US Top 40 well enough to gauge remastered quality, that's all.

Jack




--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:58:15 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:50:55 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 4/24/2016 5:01 PM, JackA wrote:
Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I
will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please,
include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Did you have to make it so hard? I think that most of us who support
good sounding CDs aren't talking about top 40 charting hits.


Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

____
I don't agree that good sounding CDs and
top 40 hits are mutually exclusive.

One just has to listen.

So, now you are agreeing with me?

Jack

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:36:40 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:01:30 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 6:23:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
JackA wrote: "Someone like KMA Rocks probably thinks these two songs sound marvelous on CD! "


#1. That's THEKMANROCKS to you, sir.


#2. I do not think everything automatically sounds
better on CD. CD provides the canvas: flat response,
low noise floor, wide dynamic range, stereo separation.

What matters above all is what is put on that canvas -
the source. The writing, the composition, the
performance, the capture, the mixing, and the mastering.

Interspersed with all of that is are the choices and
placement of microphones, processing choices, quality
of digital converters, types of dithering employed, etc.

If it is a legacy item(something previously released on
LP decades ago), how it sounds on CD depends again
upon the SOURCE - original master tape vs safety
tape vs mix tapes - plus, is it transferred flat to digital
master tape, or is it "futzed" with(EQ or excessive
dynamics applied, etc).

I own lots of CDs, of albums from 1970 to 2010, which
sound boomy and edgy at the same time. Analysis
confirms what I heard: Everything from 100Hz up to
5-8kHz was "scooped" out. Or, lots of bottom and top
were added to it. Either way, a smiley face EQ was
applied to the master for CD that didn't exist on the
original vinyl. So I do prefer the LP version in those
cases. Some edginess on earlier CDs(pre 1990) might
be related to the quality of converters used at that time,
and not to EQ or dynamics choices.


So no, I do not automatically think "everything sounds
better in digital/on CD". It depends upon the source, so
I take it case by case, Jack.

Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please, include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Thanks!

Jack

5E-507-2 THE CARS/CANDY-O ELECTRA

Not MFSL's CD album?

Jack

[JackA]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 8:50:55 PM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 4/24/2016 5:01 PM, JackA wrote:
Okay, then name ONE CD that you think SOUNDS pretty darn good, and I
will purchase, so I can get a better idea of what you like. Please,
include at least (1) one US Top 40 hit one whatever CD.

Did you have to make it so hard? I think that most of us who support
good sounding CDs aren't talking about top 40 charting hits.

Like, Jethro Tull. Love his "Living In The Past" song, but even though other recommended the CD for sound, it still sounds like crap (compared to vinyl). Not sure what happened to Tull's multi-tracks and Master tapes, maybe some went up in flames.

However, Joe Cocker's "Cry Me A River" (no, not you, Mike), but from day one, first verse sounded ill. Decades later, someone finally remixed it to my expectations. So, yes, remixing will sometimes exceed the best quality "Master".

Jack



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[JackA]

On Saturday, April 23, 2016 at 10:49:39 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I need a little help.

Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through each verse and pans left to right.


It was probably from that era but I'm not 100% sure.

Anybody help?

thanks

Mark

The [stereo] opening of The Grassroots "Let's Live For Today" pans lead vocals from center to left.

HOWEVER, I say, however, this stereo version [below] doesn't. Wonder why? It's because Steve Hoffman remixed it, after criticizing Steven Wilson for remixing!...

http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abps...ve42day-rm.mp3

Jack

[[email protected]]

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 5:40:20 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
On Saturday, April 23, 2016 at 10:49:39 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I need a little help.

Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through each verse and pans left to right.


It was probably from that era but I'm not 100% sure.

Anybody help?

thanks

Mark

The [stereo] opening of The Grassroots "Let's Live For Today" pans lead vocals from center to left.



YES
that's the song!
thank you
Mark

[Nil[_2_]]

On 29 Apr 2016, JackA wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

The [stereo] opening of The Grassroots "Let's Live For Today" pans
lead vocals from center to left.

HOWEVER, I say, however, this stereo version [below] doesn't.
Wonder why? It's because Steve Hoffman remixed it, after
criticizing Steven Wilson for remixing!...

Here he goes again: lying through his teeth, trying to get people to
refute his bogus claims and get drawn into a troll thread. Not to
mention trying to increase hits on his web site (which is full of
copyrighted material, by the way.) What a poisonous insect.

[JackA]

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 6:27:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 5:40:20 PM UTC-4, JackA wrote:
On Saturday, April 23, 2016 at 10:49:39 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I need a little help.

Last week I heard a song where the male vocal was panned left to right
during the verse. Next verse would start again on the left and pan to the
right during the verse.

Per my memory it was something like Eric Burdon and the Animals but I went through all of those and didn't find one like that. I really thought it was something like the song "When I was Young", the song builds through each verse and pans left to right.


It was probably from that era but I'm not 100% sure.

Anybody help?

thanks

Mark

The [stereo] opening of The Grassroots "Let's Live For Today" pans lead vocals from center to left.



YES
that's the song!
thank you
Mark


You are welcome. Actually, that is the longest published version, can be found on past MCA Vintage Music series CD. I boosted the amplitude.

Jack

[JackA]

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 6:39:50 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
On 29 Apr 2016, JackA wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

The [stereo] opening of The Grassroots "Let's Live For Today" pans
lead vocals from center to left.

HOWEVER, I say, however, this stereo version [below] doesn't.
Wonder why? It's because Steve Hoffman remixed it, after
criticizing Steven Wilson for remixing!...

Here he goes again: lying through his teeth

I am guessing Steve Hoffman was terminated from MCA because he felt he could do as he wished. The MCA Vintage Music series was supposed to be created from Master tapes, not remixing, that would come later. This is why Steve talks so little about this series.

Jack


, trying to get people to
refute his bogus claims and get drawn into a troll thread. Not to
mention trying to increase hits on his web site (which is full of
copyrighted material, by the way.) What a poisonous insect.

[Nil[_2_]]

On 29 Apr 2016, JackA wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

I am guessing Steve Hoffman was terminated from MCA because he
felt he could do as he wished. The MCA Vintage Music series was
supposed to be created from Master tapes, not remixing, that would
come later. This is why Steve talks so little about this series.

More bald-faced lies.

The fact is, you were kicked out of the Hoffman forums for exactly the
same bull**** you bring here. Ever since you are out to assassinate his
character by lying through your teeth. He would be well within his
rights to sue you for defamation, but you're such an ineffectual little
mosquito I'm sure he wouldn't bother. Hopefully, someone will get you
for hosting copyrighted materials on your web site. I'd be glad to help
in any way I can.

[JackA]

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-4, Nil wrote:
On 29 Apr 2016, JackA wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

I am guessing Steve Hoffman was terminated from MCA because he
felt he could do as he wished. The MCA Vintage Music series was
supposed to be created from Master tapes, not remixing, that would
come later. This is why Steve talks so little about this series.

More bald-faced lies.

The fact is, you were kicked out of the Hoffman forums for exactly the
same bull**** you bring here. Ever since you are out to assassinate his
character by lying through your teeth. He would be well within his
rights to sue you for defamation, but you're such an ineffectual little
mosquito I'm sure he wouldn't bother. Hopefully, someone will get you
for hosting copyrighted materials on your web site. I'd be glad to help
in any way I can.

Thank you.

Some strange things:

Steve Hoffman did a Heart (group) CD compilation (Audio Fidelity). I didn't expect studio talk, but there was faint studio talk heading one song. I amplified it. Oddly, when I purchased Sony's rendition, that same studio talk appeared, but with a different song!! Anyway, I told Steve's "partner", Marshall, I didn't think much of the audio quality.

Then, I find a Fleetwoods CD, might be a bootleg. Ron Furmanek did on for EMI.
Same thing above occurred, studio talk the same, but different song!! So, someone is fibbing!!

You know, I purchased some Japan (only) CD sets. I think (5) CDs, (100 Popular Songs, various artists). You know, they came and went so fast, but I was AMAZED at the price, about $25! You know what that tells me, Nil? Yes, record companies are basically GIVING AWAY this past music. Though, I found some goodies, like the extended version of the song, War, by Edwin Starr!

There is one person who is always thanking me about songs on my site. From what I can judge, he can't afford finding all of this, maybe poor, so I help him smile.

My goal was to do a deluxe, one of a kind radio show. However, since MP3 r=trading caused thousands of "Oldie" radio shows, people became tired of the same old thing. That's why I offer (sometimes) rare stereo, different Takes, studio talk, unedited versions - basically ANYTHING to make it a bit more interesting to other collectors.

But, to tell you the truth, others get upset with me modify sound, and they feel I'm competing with them, when I do it for fun, but takes a long time to get the sound to please me. You can never impress anyone with audio quality until you can impress yourself.

It was nice to be contacted by some artists, they gave me inside information, even a Producer or two contacted me. But, Mel Shaw (Canada) had to be the nicest Producer I even met, a wealth of information. Speaking of Shaw, even Sandy Shaw (UK) gave me a nice reply!!

Be well.

Jack