B.J. Thomas - Long Ago Tomorrow - speed issues

[Harry]

This little problem of mine goes way back to the early 70s. Listening to the radio back then, I heard the song "Long Ago Tomorrow" many times while it was a hit and sometime afterward too. It was another in a long line of B.J.'s hits that I liked, and this one was a Bacharach-David tune too. And here's where the issue begins:

I bought a copy of B.J. Thomas' GREATEST HITS VOLUME TWO and enjoyed all of the tracks, but when it got to the last track, "Long Ago Tomorrow", for some reason it sounded like it was dragging - too slow - not the way I remembered it. I didn't dwell on the problem, it wasn't that important, but every time I played the song on that album, I got the feeling it was going too slow. After a time, the song was no longer played on radio, and all I had reference to was the GH VOL TWO album. You'd think that I'd eventually get used to it, but I never did. Every time it's played, I still feel like it should be running faster.

If I'm right about this, then what I heard on the radio was either sped up intentionally (unlikely in the case of the station I listened to), or they were playing a single version or something that was intentionally sped up. Looking around on YouTube, I can find these two that may be an example of my point.

This is claimed to be the single version:


And this one is just a garden variety hit-album version:


One thing is for sure, the album version I have (and by the way, this was one of those songs that debuted on the GREATEST HITS album) has a running time of 4:03, and the single is pictured on Discogs of being 3:57. So the single supposedly finishes up 6 seconds sooner. But it also could be a case of the record company listing a time that's under 4:00 just to get airplay. That I can't say, as I don't own the single.

I'm hoping one of our perfect pitch people here can listen to those two and determine if one is on-pitch or off. Then we might have a clue as to which one is authentic and which one is altered. My collection also includes the song on the CD of THE REEL BURT BACHARACH and it sounds slow there too.

I'm usually right about these things, as I have good relative pitch abilities and can hear that something's too high or too low in reference to another. Another case that I solved was for the song "For Your Eyes Only" by Sheena Easton. The recorded versions all ran slower than the one heard in the Bond movie, and it was another case where I thought the CD/LP was running too slowly.

 

[Mike Blakesley]

I have a "Best of BJ Thomas" collection that's on Rhino, and I would feel confident saying that it has the slightly-faster version. That slower version is like nails on a blackboard to me! Slight problem, but it's definitely there. The two are SO close though, I can't say if I'd have noticed if not for the "A-B" comparison offered here. But the top one sounds "right" to me, and the other one just sounds off. I'm not even one of those perfect pitch guys, but I can usually spot a too-slow or too-fast recording.

 

[tomswift2002]

Maybe the album master tape for the song had “sticky shed syndrome” and was sticking to the playback heads as they made the 2-track album master.

 

[Harry]

Too convoluted. Much more likely that the single was sped up for time purposes, (radio hated records over 4 minutes long), and we all got used to hearing it at that speed. Then when we heard the album, it seemed a bit sluggish.

 

[Another Son]

This little problem of mine goes way back to the early 70s. Listening to the radio back then, I heard the song "Long Ago Tomorrow" many times while it was a hit and sometime afterward too. It was another in a long line of B.J.'s hits that I liked, and this one was a Bacharach-David tune too. And here's where the issue begins:

I bought a copy of B.J. Thomas' GREATEST HITS VOLUME TWO and enjoyed all of the tracks, but when it got to the last track, "Long Ago Tomorrow", for some reason it sounded like it was dragging - too slow - not the way I remembered it. I didn't dwell on the problem, it wasn't that important, but every time I played the song on that album, I got the feeling it was going too slow. After a time, the song was no longer played on radio, and all I had reference to was the GH VOL TWO album. You'd think that I'd eventually get used to it, but I never did. Every time it's played, I still feel like it should be running faster.

If I'm right about this, then what I heard on the radio was either sped up intentionally (unlikely in the case of the station I listened to), or they were playing a single version or something that was intentionally sped up. Looking around on YouTube, I can find these two that may be an example of my point.

This is claimed to be the single version:


And this one is just a garden variety hit-album version:


One thing is for sure, the album version I have (and by the way, this was one of those songs that debuted on the GREATEST HITS album) has a running time of 4:03, and the single is pictured on Discogs of being 3:57. So the single supposedly finishes up 6 seconds sooner. But it also could be a case of the record company listing a time that's under 4:00 just to get airplay. That I can't say, as I don't own the single.

I'm hoping one of our perfect pitch people here can listen to those two and determine if one is on-pitch or off. Then we might have a clue as to which one is authentic and which one is altered. My collection also includes the song on the CD of THE REEL BURT BACHARACH and it sounds slow there too.

I'm usually right about these things, as I have good relative pitch abilities and can hear that something's too high or too low in reference to another. Another case that I solved was for the song "For Your Eyes Only" by Sheena Easton. The recorded versions all ran slower than the one heard in the Bond movie, and it was another case where I thought the CD/LP was running too slowly.

What a great song! B.J’s recording of this is superb. Harry, I have this on a number of CDs and, probably, a couple of LPs.

One copy I have is on a CD of mainly original mono single mixes called “The Complete Scepter Singles.” I also have it on the CDs, “All the Hits”and “Greatest Hits Vol 2”, as well as, maybe, one or two others. I don’t have any news on which versions are sped up and which aren’t. But I love the song!

 

[JOv2]

Too convoluted. Much more likely that the single was sped up for time purposes, (radio hated records over 4 minutes long), and we all got used to hearing it at that speed. Then when we heard the album, it seemed a bit sluggish.

The practice of speeding up 45s became commonplace by the late '60s. A music friend recently sent me about a dozen late-'60s air checks from some western mid-market areas (e.g., Seattle, Albuquerque, San Diego) and I was surprised at how many numbers were sped up. The goal was to "put more hours in the broadcast" as it were...to create more time for commercial announcements.

 

[Harry]

The practice of speeding up 45s became commonplace by the late '60s. A music friend recently sent me about a dozen late-'60s air checks from some western mid-market areas (e.g., Seattle, Albuquerque, San Diego) and I was surprised at how many numbers were sped up. The goal was to "put more hours in the broadcast" as it were...to create more time for commercial announcements.

While commercial time was a driving force, of course, there were also two other factors. Music stations in tight competition with other stations, typically in larger markets, would want to speed up songs for bragging rights - "We play more songs per hour than they do." - and would up the speed faster than the competition.

It was also thought among the consultant-types that a song playing faster than on the competition, made the fast station sound "brighter", "better", "more energy" than the other guys.