| rocknrolllover 25.12.2013 01:25 |
I do have question. The duration of the album "Hysteria" by Def leppard - 63 minutes. All the songs in full on vinyl. I think a lot of such examples. The duration of the album "Innuendo" - 53 minutes. Why were cutting duration some tracks? Thank you! |
| tero! 48531 25.12.2013 02:50 |
Some people will tell you it's because vinyl albums will inevitably be of poorer quality the longer they are, but I think Queen's decision is all about making an exclusive CD version of the album without using any new songs. Back in 1991 cd exclusive bonustracks were in fashion, and with Innuendo this was achieved by cutting 3,5 minutes of material away from the vinyl version. The cuts were deliberately made into several tracks, because most people would have thought it was a good thing that three minutes of guitar solo on Bijou was removed! :P |
| rocknrolllover 25.12.2013 02:57 |
tero! 48531 wrote: Some people will tell you it's because vinyl albums will inevitably be of poorer quality the longer they are, but I think Queen's decision is all about making an exclusive CD version of the album without using any new songs. Back in 1991 cd exclusive bonustracks were in fashion, and with Innuendo this was achieved by cutting 3,5 minutes of material away from the vinyl version. The cuts were deliberately made into several tracks, because most people would have thought it was a good thing that three minutes of guitar solo on Bijou was removed! :Pwhat can you say not referring to some other people ? |
| tero! 48531 25.12.2013 03:05 |
Only the first sentence ("it's because vinyl albums will inevitably be of poorer quality the longer they are") is what other people say. The rest is what I say. |
| jacksonmerc 25.12.2013 11:06 |
Makes sense to me. I remember when you had the option to buy either a tape, record or cd, the cd was always the more expensive option. There had to be some encouragement to choose the more expensive option. |
| mooghead 25.12.2013 13:15 |
Queen used the whole CD thing to make a profit from its 'fans'. It's almost like they see us as nothing more than cash cows...... ?! |
| DLCVinnuendo 25.12.2013 14:21 |
1981 GH UK version, is 58 minutes, and it's one vinyl, each side counteins 29 minutes |
| the dude 1366 25.12.2013 23:59 |
As a lover of vinyl I can tell you that the Innuendo vinyl sucks! The cuts are unbelievably bad. Even the reissues did not fix it. The could have spread the album over 2 records. They chose to go cheap. And in this case, original CD's (not remasters) are more dynamic. The best sounding version of Innuendo is 1st Dutch pressing on CD. Find it and turn it up. |
| rocknrolllover 26.12.2013 00:46 |
, Well, my question was about why some tracks on vinyl edition has not same duration as on CD? |
| tero! 48531 26.12.2013 03:09 |
The previous Queen albums had a length of 40 minutes on vinyl, and the cd versions had a few extra tracks (remixes and b-sides). When the Innuendo album was finished, they chose to put all their material on the album, because they didn't know if they would have the opportunity to release anything afterwards. The first single of the album featured the complete version of Bijou, making it in effect a "B-side song" which was inlcluded as a bonus track on the cd version of the album. Together that makes for a nice theory that the edits on the vinyl album were designed to create an exclusive cd release, but you won't find any interviews to prove it conclusively. |
| brENsKi 26.12.2013 04:27 |
rocknrolllover wrote:I do have question. The duration of the album "Hysteria" by Def leppard - 63 minutes. All the songs in full on vinyl.. tero! 48531 wrote:Some people will tell you it's because vinyl albums will inevitably be of poorer quality the longer they are, but I think Queen's decision is all about making an exclusive CD version of the album without using any new songs.i do think that quality comes into it - I had Lepps' Hysteria on vinyl on initial release and the sound quality was cack. It had an empty sound to it on vinyl - and the CD release sounded so much better.- so maybe there is something in this? I've heard that the best length for a 33 1/3 LP side is about 17 minutes. Vinyl surface noise is quite high so if you want to hear bass frequencies on a 30 minute long side all other frequencies would need to be reduced which brings surface noise to much more audible levels.. This doesn't apply to mono LPs though. |
| tero! 48531 26.12.2013 06:23 |
brENsKi wrote: I've heard that the best length for a 33 1/3 LP side is about 17 minutes. Vinyl surface noise is quite high so if you want to hear bass frequencies on a 30 minute long side all other frequencies would need to be reduced which brings surface noise to much more audible levels..I don't have any first hand exprience about this, so maybe you can help? We know that the usual album around 1980 was 40 minutes, but was that due to sound quality or was it because people simply expected albums to be 40 minutes long? Was the sound quality of the vinyl albums an actual issue, ie. are there (m)any examples of an artist dividing a 60 minute album into two vinyls before 2000? Today of course vinyl is an exclusive product and we expect a maximum of 15 minutes of material on each side, but back in 1992 (just over a year after the release of Innuendo) Queen's Live At Wembley album was divided into two vinyls, leaving 33 minutes of material onto the first side. |
| thomasquinn 32989 26.12.2013 07:33 |
tero! 48531 wrote:Bit of both. New techniques in the late '70s and '80s allowed for between 50 to 55 minutes of good-quality audio on vinyl, but albums were traditionally between 35 and 45 minutes long (dating from the time when albums were 10" rather than 12"), so that's what artists tended to aim for (disregarding certain exceptions). Note that this applies mainly to rock music, which used the audio spectrum differently from certain other kinds of music. For instance, classical music tends to have a greater dynamic range, so shorter LP sides give better results. Folk music (e.g. Dylan) is often less demanding on the grooves, resulting in 50+ minute albums in the '60s. There is not always a sensible reason. Some Beach Boys albums run just over 25 minutes in all, and even Dylan, who notoriously stretched his LP length to the max ("Highway 61 Revisited" ran 51:26 in 1965), released "Nashville Skyline" which ran for only 27 minutes. Sometimes, the record label an LP was issued on had a lot of influence on the final length. CBS LPs tended to be longish, and ESP LPs were often very short.brENsKi wrote: I've heard that the best length for a 33 1/3 LP side is about 17 minutes. Vinyl surface noise is quite high so if you want to hear bass frequencies on a 30 minute long side all other frequencies would need to be reduced which brings surface noise to much more audible levels..I don't have any first hand exprience about this, so maybe you can help? We know that the usual album around 1980 was 40 minutes, but was that due to sound quality or was it because people simply expected albums to be 40 minutes long? Was the sound quality of the vinyl albums an actual issue, ie. are there (m)any examples of an artist dividing a 60 minute album into two vinyls before 2000?Yes. I have a couple of ethno-musicological records from the '60s, and for reasons of audio fidelity they have a max of 14 minutes per side. I think Dylan's "Blonde On Blonde" was the first pop music double-album in 1966, which was just under 72 minutes in its original pressing. In the mid- to late '70s, audiophile double albums were popular for a while, for instance, Creedence Clearwater Revival had a live album ("The Concert", released in 1980) that ran 49:25 minutes and was released as a regular single LP as well as an 'audiophile' 2LP with exactly the same running time. Today of course vinyl is an exclusive product and we expect a maximum of 15 minutes of material on each side, but back in 1992 (just over a year after the release of Innuendo) Queen's Live At Wembley album was divided into two vinyls, leaving 33 minutes of material onto the first side.You can fit 23 minutes of good quality audio on one side of a 12" record without any trouble over quality, even if it's (e.g.) jazz music with a lot of brass and reed instruments, which have broad spectrums. |
| tero! 48531 26.12.2013 08:43 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: Yes. I have a couple of ethno-musicological records from the '60s, and for reasons of audio fidelity they have a max of 14 minutes per side. I think Dylan's "Blonde On Blonde" was the first pop music double-album in 1966, which was just under 72 minutes in its original pressing. In the mid- to late '70s, audiophile double albums were popular for a while, for instance, Creedence Clearwater Revival had a live album ("The Concert", released in 1980) that ran 49:25 minutes and was released as a regular single LP as well as an 'audiophile' 2LP with exactly the same running time.Thank you for the info! Of course I knew that 70 minute albums would be divided into two vinyls (as it still happened in the 80's and 90's), but it's interesting to know that even those 50 minute albums were divided into two vinyls. Of course the next question is just how popular were they? Are we talking about a CD vs. SACD type of situation, where only a marginal section of the customers are interested in a better quality product? thomasquinn 32989 wrote:You can fit 23 minutes of good quality audio on one side of a 12" record without any trouble over quality, even if it's (e.g.) jazz music with a lot of brass and reed instruments, which have broad spectrums.23 minutes of course, but what about 33 minutes? If Queen were worried enough about the sound quality of Innuendo to cut the side down to 25 minutes from the 27,5 minutes, surely they wouldn't have put out a 33 minute side he following year? |
| brENsKi 26.12.2013 09:12 |
listen to the longer "greatest hits" type lps from the late 70s/early 80s - the general audio dynamic is poor i can give you two definite examples: Slade : Smashes (which ran at almost an hour) and - Deep Purple : 24 carat purple (54 mins) ...both lack any kind of real bass sound on vinyl as for the CD/SACD - thing - this is a weird argument: primarily because CDs chosen time length - by Red Book standards (circa 1980) was 74m33s - enough to contain a full mono version of Beethoven's 9th. However, we all know this is nOT a valid reason - beyond some posh t*at at Phillips/Sony "quite liking that recording"....I had a copy of a Thin Lizzy live CD that ran for 78m10 also CDRs were set at 80 mins and I also bought some 100min cdrs at a computer fair in the late 90s - and these worked fine on all my hifis with no listenable deterioration in sound quality |
| tero! 48531 26.12.2013 09:22 |
If 99% of the listeners were happy to have a standard 50 minute vinyl album, and 1% wanted to buy the audiophile version on two vinyl albums, it's the perfect analogy for CD/SACD. Just how common were these audiophile version back in the day? Is it something that would be regularily available from major artists, was it a phase when all record companies tried to push a "new format", or was it just an idea that was tried a few times? |
| thomasquinn 32989 26.12.2013 12:59 |
Sorry, I made a mistake: the Creedence album that was released in two versions wasn't the 1980 "The Concert", but the 1973 "Live in Europe". I can't find any concrete numbers on the sales of the respective versions, but the double LP version was pressed in a large number of different countries and went through several pressings, and nowadays (so 40 years after the original release) it is pretty much as common as the single LP version, implying that the sales were probably similar as well. I found a little tidbit that might shed more light on the whole subject of LP length: it isn't just a matter of sound quality, but also of damaging your records! In 1975, Todd Rundgren released one of the longest single LPs ever, "Initiation", which runs for 67:34 (!). Sound quality is pretty horrendous, but it also included a Technical Note on the inner sleeve about this: "Due to the amount of music on this disc (over one hour), two points must be emphasized. Firstly, if your needle is worn or damaged, it will ruin the disc immediately. Secondly, if the sound does seem not loud enough on your system, try re-recording the music onto tape" In the '70s, there were many, many people who used older record players, often mono record players, with coarser needles than later types. They would have good use for shorter LPs (or single LPs split out over two records), because those LPs would be much less likely to stick, and also much less likely to wear very quickly. |
| tero! 48531 26.12.2013 14:12 |
So... Perhaps longer discs were a bigger problem back in the 70's, but the problem diminished somewhat as the equipment got better? The only problem I've really noticed about the longer records is that worn out records tend to skip a lot more. I suppose it's no wonder when the grooves are shallower, and the same scratch would create bigger problems. I suppose even as early as 1992 vinyls were seen more or less as a collector's item instead of something that would be listened to regularily. |
| brENsKi 27.12.2013 07:31 |
and what is the current vinyl-cutting equip modeled on? with very little mass-production of vinyl taking place - would suggest new equipment is based on older "obsolete" tech |
| AlexRocks 28.12.2013 10:30 |
I doubt very much that many vinyls were considered collector's items. I think my view of them at the time when I was fifteen in 1992 was the same view most people are started to view them as and that was pointless. Audio cassette tapes made more sense and then c.d.s did as they were becoming more popular. That's still the case in some ways. |
| AlexRocks 28.12.2013 10:31 |
Edit please. Sorry. |
| people on streets 02.01.2014 16:29 |
the dude 1366 wrote: As a lover of vinyl I can tell you that the Innuendo vinyl sucks! The cuts are unbelievably bad. Even the reissues did not fix it. The could have spread the album over 2 records. They chose to go cheap. And in this case, original CD's (not remasters) are more dynamic. The best sounding version of Innuendo is 1st Dutch pressing on CD. Find it and turn it up.I have the 1st Dutch pressing on CD for sale. If someone is interested send me an email at: berotirecords@gmail.com |
| malicedoom 03.01.2014 11:03 |
I hear there are some Innuendo CDs out there that have the vinyl edits on them. Is that true? Anyone know for sure? |
| Pim Derks 03.01.2014 11:46 |
I think I heard once that some Brazilian or Argentinian copies of the CD included the vinyl edits? |
| QueenFan76 04.01.2014 01:13 |
What were the differences? Can anyone post them to YouTube for comparison? |
| Pim Derks 04.01.2014 03:35 |
The main tracks affected are Bijou which cuts out almost all the guitarwork, and the Hitman which is shortened by over a minute, cutting out some instrumental sections. I just listened to it and it's quite a good edit, I didn't miss anything obvious. Was never one of my favorite tracks anyway :-D Days Of Our Lives misses the intro and immediately starts with Freddie's "Sometimes...". The other tracks are very minor edits, early fade-outs etc. Slightly Mad: 4:23 vs 4:08 Can't Live: 4:34 vs 4:06 Don't Try: 3:40 vs 3:34 All God's: 4:22 vs 3:56 TATDOOL: 4:15 vs 3:56 Hitman: 4:57 vs 3:44 Bijou: 3:37 vs 1:20 TSMGO: 4:38 vs 4:28 |
| Pim Derks 04.01.2014 03:35 |
The main tracks affected are Bijou which cuts out almost all the guitarwork, and the Hitman which is shortened by over a minute, cutting out some instrumental sections. I just listened to it and it's quite a good edit, I didn't miss anything obvious. Was never one of my favorite tracks anyway :-D Days Of Our Lives misses the intro and immediately starts with Freddie's "Sometimes...". The other tracks are very minor edits, early fade-outs etc. Slightly Mad: 4:23 vs 4:08 Can't Live: 4:34 vs 4:06 Don't Try: 3:40 vs 3:34 All God's: 4:22 vs 3:56 TATDOOL: 4:15 vs 3:56 Hitman: 4:57 vs 3:44 Bijou: 3:37 vs 1:20 TSMGO: 4:38 vs 4:28 |
| adamdietrick 23.01.2015 16:45 |
Sorry to post on a year old thread, but I just bought a used copy of this LP and was unaware of the cuts until I was playing the album. The cut on bijou was jarring as it remove my favourite part of the song. The Hitman cut was great because I got less hitman-- they could have removed that song and left everything else in tact and I would be happy! |
| The Real Wizard 23.01.2015 17:58 |
Pim Derks wrote: Slightly Mad: 4:23 vs 4:08 Can't Live: 4:34 vs 4:06 Don't Try: 3:40 vs 3:34 All God's: 4:22 vs 3:56 TATDOOL: 4:15 vs 3:56 Hitman: 4:57 vs 3:44 Bijou: 3:37 vs 1:20 TSMGO: 4:38 vs 4:28And to think they could've avoided all that by just omitting Delilah... |
| Grizzly Adam 23.01.2015 18:39 |
I will take Delilah over Hitman anyday. Either way, you are correct-- leave the filler on the floor. |
| LucasDiego 23.01.2015 19:33 |
Posted: 03 Jan 14, 11:46 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote I think I heard once that some Brazilian or Argentinian copies of the CD included the vinyl edits? I have the Brazil copy of Innuendo, by EMI, and this version uses de 53 full version of the album! |
| LucasDiego 23.01.2015 19:37 |
Another question is the MIH vinyl If only exclude the track 13, and they really cut this, the album counteins 47 minutes, but despite this, they also edit i was born to love you, heaven for everyone, and you don't fool me, why this??? |
| cmsdrums 24.01.2015 10:36 |
I don't recall any massive effort or promotion at the time of Innuendo's release to highlight that the CD was longer, which to me calls into the question that it wasn't a marketing ploy to get people to buy the CD, and more that it was simply a case of keeping the vinyl to a reasonable audio quality. |
| winterspelt 24.01.2015 21:05 |
cmsdrums wrote: I don't recall any massive effort or promotion at the time of Innuendo's release to highlight that the CD was longer, which to me calls into the question that it wasn't a marketing ploy to get people to buy the CD, and more that it was simply a case of keeping the vinyl to a reasonable audio quality.I dont know if this happened in any other country but the mexican cassette version of Innuendo have the same edit as the vinyl. |
| Grizzly Adam 24.01.2015 23:44 |
I seem to recall that my cassette copy of The Miracle was also edited, may this was the norm. |
| joerijoerijoeri 25.01.2015 03:50 |
LucasDiego wrote: Another question is the MIH vinyl If only exclude the track 13, and they really cut this, the album counteins 47 minutes, but despite this, they also edit i was born to love you, heaven for everyone, and you don't fool me, why this???Really? Never even noticed this. If the choice is between slightly lesser audio quality and editing songs - just fucking release the album on a double LP. Never really understood why they chose to edit the songs instead, it's a shame. |
| winterspelt 25.01.2015 11:26 |
Grizzly Adam wrote: I seem to recall that my cassette copy of The Miracle was also edited, may this was the norm.AFAIR my cassette wasnt edited, the only difference is that it didnt had the scandal remix, hang on in there and chinese torture were also removed. |
| BETA215 25.01.2015 11:59 |
joerijoerijoeri wrote: Never really understood why they chose to edit the songs instead, it's a shame. "Costs more money" - Freddie Mercury, at the times of Queen Rocks. |
| ITSM 26.01.2015 05:20 |
I like that there's a difference, some small detailes to discover when putting on the LP. Also the track order... |
| 7thStranger 31.01.2015 15:18 |
It was due to the heavy inner groove distortion that the record would have suffered from. That being said, the album could have likely been reshuffled to prevent this. There was no need to butcher Bijou. |