General Discussion => Fan Forums => Topic started by: D. Sulpy on May 04, 2007, 09:42:01 AM

Title: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: D. Sulpy on May 04, 2007, 09:42:01 AM
The pitch on "Respect" is an entire step too fast - both on the Stress cassette, and the material from it on "Discovered Covered."

For those of you with waveform editors, knock it down and you'll see what I mean - suddenly the entire album's in the right key, and that guy singing it sounds like Daniel Johnston instead of one of the Chipmunks... and suddenly, I like the thing a whole lot more!  :-D

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Stevos Marlos on May 04, 2007, 11:25:25 PM
I really like the album how it is. But your suggestion is great, I wish I had waveform editor!

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Stevos Marlos on May 04, 2007, 11:27:42 PM
Saying that though. I don't think anything could improve the sound of 'Have Respect" it works well because it is fast

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Rob Wheeler on May 08, 2007, 09:39:52 AM
Doug, see why I think they should be giving you the reigns on this catalog? Someone who knows about these sort of things needs to be at least giving the stock mastering guys a hard time.

I remember when I had my Beatles Bootleg mp3 site and every Let it Be era track had to have a DDSI number! :)

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: D. Sulpy on May 08, 2007, 09:05:42 PM
Thanks, Rob - and I agree with you, I'd love to be involved with compiling some of the unissued tapes.  :lol:

Oh, and have those DDSI* numbers come back to haunt me! I'm currently preparing the new edition, and I realize now it'd be a BAD thing to renumber the performances, because so many bootlegs and websites have come to use them. Trapped by my own numbering system!


* DDSI = "Drugs, Divorce and a Slipping Image," a book on The Beatles' "Get Back" sessions I wrote with Ray Schweighardt. This was issued by St. Martin's Press as "Get Back" several years later.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Rob Wheeler on May 09, 2007, 04:50:51 AM
Oh my days! Don't renumber them! Please! That will cause warfare!

Don't know if I mentioned this before, but right after I closed down my site, my nan, of all people, mentioned that she knew Mark Lewishon. She used to take him to speedway with my auntie. A couple of years ago it was my auntie's 50th wedding anniversary and I ducked out of the party citing work commitments. The next week my nan said "You should have gone! Mark Lewishon was there!".

What is more, he had been drinking... how much info could I have got out of him!?!?!?

For those not in the know, Mark Lewishon is the researcher who helped catalog the archive of Beatles recordings for the Anthology series. He has heard pretty much every single Beatles recording in existence. He has also cataloged an reviewed a large chunk of the BBC's comedy archive. If you go to the BBC website and look up almost any programme, he has wrote the review :) So he is liek the daddio...

In regards to speed, I'm sticking by my guns that "Walking the Cow" is presented fast on the releases I've heard.  I think the chords as presented on this site are incorrect as well. I shall try and post a correction later on.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Rob Wheeler on May 09, 2007, 05:29:59 AM
Just thought I'd add, had flick through the first half of "Hi, How are you?" and I reckon is around (but not exactly) 3% fast as presented on the copy I have.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: zack26 on May 09, 2007, 11:28:42 AM
I've tried a few of these as well and have been amazed at how much better they sound.  Would it be possible for one of us to post some sample tunes?  It would be great to hear two versions of the same song next to each other for comparison.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: D. Sulpy on May 09, 2007, 01:07:44 PM
Here are some after & before samples from "Respect."

http://www.dougsulpy.com/DJSAMPLE.mp3 (http://www.dougsulpy.com/DJSAMPLE.mp3)

I've kept these very short, and I presume the Johnstons would have no problem with me making this available (if you do, fellas, let me know and I'll take it down). :-).


Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: zack26 on May 10, 2007, 09:09:01 PM
Thanks Doug!  That's what I was hoping to hear... what a difference

It would be so easy to fix this problem.  If High Wire is planning a reissue of Respect and Retired Boxer I really hope they correct the speed first.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Henry Long on May 11, 2007, 03:46:29 PM
Wow. What a difference.

I wonder how many other Daniel songs we've come to know and love are too fast.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: zack26 on May 11, 2007, 05:06:01 PM
I'm with Rob on  Walking The Cow being too fast.  It sounds in C# but he plays it in C live. 

Chords to Walking the Cow are posted both on this message board and on the Rejected Unknown website.  If you're referring to the chords on The Official Tab/Chord Request thread, those are mine.  Let me know if you hear something different.


The ones posted in the Tabs section of Rejected Unknown website need some serious revision in my opinion... oh well... different topic altogether.

Title: Re: Fixing "Respect"
Post by: Rob Wheeler on May 16, 2007, 05:48:26 AM
Yeah, I think both of those sets of chords are wrong. I'm useless with chord names, but im pretty sure its more a gut driven composers song rather than a piano players song. A lot of it is in the rythums and voicings rather than the notes themselves. The chords don't diverge much from simple fingerings but they are very complicatedly arranged. That may give the impression that there are more chords than there actually are. The notes I've written that I have written in brackets are chords which I can't be bothered to look the name up of, or that I feel would be wrong to describe as chords as technically they are not a chord more a voicing of notes.

I make Walking the Cow to start:

C              Am                    C                                 Am
Tried to remember but my  feelings cant know for sure

F                            Dm                Am          C

Tried to reach out,           but its gone

Am                        C                   A                    C                 A

Lucky stars in your eyes

        Dm              F          (f+a+b)        Am       C      Am     C

I am walking the cow

I can see how Daniel Johnston came to write this song. Its a real meander around the instrument. You can see the song was rather bonded to the sound of the instrument in its birth as a composition. I think it is a magnificent song.

I'm very skeptical about the possibilty of their being 6ths and 7ths in full chords  as the backside would have dropped out of the instrument with that many notes, even with Daniel hitting the keys as hard as he appears to be. I've got to say I hear no hint of 7ths in there at all. I think where there are 7ths and 6th recorded it may be an illusion from him wandering with the bass note on such a small keyboard. It would be a bit misleading to reproduce them as 7ths and 6ths in the chord.

I may have the advantage over you guys as I have been listening to the song much near to being in tune.

I can say with little doubt however, that almost the entire catalog is presented at the incorrect speed. No offense to the Johnston family, but I think the remainder of the reissues would benefit from some slightly more technical overseeing an approval from a dream team (Sulpy and Wheeler does have a nice ring to it, doesn't it?) :)

Edit: After I carefully positioned all the chords in the editor, I noticed it moved a few around a bit when I actually posted, so you probably have to cut and paste in a mono-spaced font to get them in the right positions, or wing it...