Posted March 14, 200619 yr Very poor. I'm only going to leave this up for an hour then I'm deleting it ok. deleted Edited March 14, 200619 yr by Pete-S
March 14, 200619 yr INteresting. A lot more crossover-y than the released take. However - the flip to the actual release is a bit more in that vein, if a bit slower than this. Cheers for sharing. Hammy
March 14, 200619 yr Author INteresting. A lot more crossover-y than the released take. However - the flip to the actual release is a bit more in that vein, if a bit slower than this. Cheers for sharing. Hammy Yeah I thought this was a very very strange take because it bears such little resemblence to the original, and sounds a couple of years later too. It gets better, but I don't want whoever owns the acetate to have a fit so I only put a minute on.
March 14, 200619 yr Yep, interesting one Pete, like the organ (ooh err ) and the rawer vocal - thanks for that
March 14, 200619 yr Yeah I thought this was a very very strange take because it bears such little resemblence to the original, and sounds a couple of years later too. It gets better, but I don't want whoever owns the acetate to have a fit so I only put a minute on. It's an earlier studio take by John Bowie, which when you play it, the singing and sparse backing sounds a touch too slow. The last time I saw it Rob Thomas had just bought back from the US so god knows where it is now he as 'retired'. There's probably a recent cut of it from when I cleaned and speeded up the original for him a couple of years ago.
March 14, 200619 yr yeah thanks pete..Been out all night and missed it..post it up for me again please smiffy
March 15, 200619 yr Author It's an earlier studio take by John Bowie, which when you play it, the singing and sparse backing sounds a touch too slow. The last time I saw it Rob Thomas had just bought back from the US so god knows where it is now he as 'retired'. There's probably a recent cut of it from when I cleaned and speeded up the original for him a couple of years ago. Yes Andy sent it me, but he says he's lost the cleaned up version!
March 15, 200619 yr Author yeah thanks pete..Been out all night and missed it..post it up for me again please smiffy Just for you then... Edited March 15, 200619 yr by Pete-S
March 15, 200619 yr that's great that pete, thanks for posting it up. better than the proper one at first hearing, and i love that to bits
March 15, 200619 yr This version has a deeper and more soulful beat, not such a tinny sound as the other version. Organ and drum's sound brilliant and love how it build's up toward's the end of track. His voice has more depth to it and thank god those awful backing singer's are absent. Can understand some not being keen, but to describe as Crap. Karen
March 25, 200619 yr Yes Andy sent it me, but he says he's lost the cleaned up version! Pete Here's a snippet of it cleaned up and at the right speed. Vocal's UK don't you think?
Very poor.
I'm only going to leave this up for an hour then I'm deleting it ok.
deleted
Edited by Pete-S