REC
Active topics
  1. Anybody ever figured out that "I could have lost you" intro? Thought that was the coolest thing ever with Zoo Station
  2. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    Amazing, sounds much better than the (already very good) JEMS recording that @biggirl uploaded a few months back. It runs slightly fast though, it's a bit sharp and faster than it should... But that should be an easy-enough fix.
    It doesn't sound faster than normal to me? Have you checked the bpm? According to one of my softwares ( ) that Zoo Station live version is 128.62 BPM.

    Edit: Measured album version which is 128.73 so that's pretty much identical. Don't know about other live versions though
  3. Originally posted by melon51:Anybody ever figured out that "I could have lost you" intro? Thought that was the coolest thing ever with Zoo Station
    Probably a vocoder. Yeah but what a great synth hymm
  4. Originally posted by melon51:Anybody ever figured out that "I could have lost you" intro? Thought that was the coolest thing ever with Zoo Station
    Remembering bringin‘ it on stage in Dortmund while leaving the house lights on - the crowd went nuts! What a phantastic intro to the show. But I never really figured out the words Bono sang. Nevertheless I loved it and I still do ...
  5. Originally posted by melon51:[..]
    It doesn't sound faster than normal to me? Have you checked the bpm? According to one of my softwares ( ) that Zoo Station live version is 128.62 BPM.

    Edit: Measured album version which is 128.73 so that's pretty much identical. Don't know about other live versions though
    I was just comparing the samples on the show page by ear: 1992-04-12 - Los Angeles, California - Sports Arena... and I noticed that Bullet runs noticeably faster than the version we got. Had no way to check it but I was rather sure.

    I have now checked it proper and well, judge for yourself (new version on top, sample of the existing JEMS version below):



    5 seconds in 5 minutes is quite the difference! Glad my ears didn't deceive me
  6. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    I was just comparing the samples on the show page by ear: 1992-04-12 - Los Angeles, California - Sports Arena... and I noticed that Bullet runs noticeably faster than the version we got. Had no way to check it but I was rather sure.

    I have now checked it proper and well, judge for yourself (new version on top, sample of the existing JEMS version below):

    [image]

    5 seconds in 5 minutes is quite the difference! Glad my ears didn't deceive me
    Sergio check your pm
  7. Haha lol I answered it in the Guitar thread before reading the PM, and I thought one answer was enough Sorry for that! Been away from U2start for 2 months!
  8. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    Haha lol I answered it in the Guitar thread before reading the PM, and I thought one answer was enough Sorry for that! Been away from U2start for 2 months!
    Hahahaha I know my bad, I wanted your opinion in particular but good to have you back hope all is well
  9. The link is dead
  10. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    I was just comparing the samples on the show page by ear: 1992-04-12 - Los Angeles, California - Sports Arena... and I noticed that Bullet runs noticeably faster than the version we got. Had no way to check it but I was rather sure.

    I have now checked it proper and well, judge for yourself (new version on top, sample of the existing JEMS version below):

    [image]

    5 seconds in 5 minutes is quite the difference! Glad my ears didn't deceive me
    That looks clear yes.. . (I use this dj tool to measure bpm). Are they both live versions from the same concert then? I've noticed some bootleggers (especially with the older stuff) sped things up (either by accident or by many transfers of source files)
  11. Originally posted by melon51:[..]
    That looks clear yes.. . (I use this dj tool to measure bpm). Are they both live versions from the same concert then? I've noticed some bootleggers (especially with the older stuff) sped things up (either by accident or by many transfers of source files)
    Yes, that's the whole point. It's usual that old recordings suffer from speed/pitch issues. Many many bootlegs from the 80s have the wrong speed and/or pitch. Sometimes it was done on purpose and sometimes by mistake, but the result is the same: the music is altered in a very bad and unpleasant way. Our super remasterer @biggirl usually fixes that using the intro/outro PA song (which is taped and therefore has an established pitch and speed, unlike the live versions that can fluctuate) as a reference.

    Oh, and also: it's better to measure pitch rather than bpms. Tempo can (and usually) change between tours and even between concerts - tuning/pitch are usually much more stable.
  12. Originally posted by LikeASong:[..]
    Yes, that's the whole point. It's usual that old recordings suffer from speed/pitch issues. Many many bootlegs from the 80s have the wrong speed and/or pitch. Sometimes it was done on purpose and sometimes by mistake, but the result is the same: the music is altered in a very bad and unpleasant way. Our super remasterer @biggirl usually fixes that using the intro/outro PA song (which is taped and therefore has an established pitch and speed, unlike the live versions that can fluctuate) as a reference.

    Oh, and also: it's better to measure pitch rather than bpms. Tempo can (and usually) change between tours and even between concerts - tuning/pitch are usually much more stable.
    Ah I get it. Smart idea to match it on the PA songs And pitch indeed can be helpful (unless you use a song the band changed pitch for mid-leg of the tour, haha)