I was just looking up Robert Johnson on the Wikipedia and they mentioned that some people have hypothesized that the recording might have been sped up at some point. It certainly does sound a bit more high-pitched than seems desireable, though I’d personally suspect that it’s more likely an issue of the quality of the recording and that he really did have a sort of high pitched voice and guitar.
So while I doubt that it is sped up, I actually suspect that I’d like it better if it was played 5-10% slower.
Is there any sort of freeware that one can use to modify the speed of an MP3 and save out as a new file? (Or alternately, copies of slowed down versions of the songs?)
I was messing around with this trying to convert an MP3 into a wav file so I could open it in sound recorder, slow it down, save it, then reconvert to MP3. No luck so far.
If you open play it as an MP3 in windows media player hitting CTL+Shift+S will slow the playback down and CTL+Shift+G will speed it up. Unsure how much though. Sounds like more than the 5-10% you’re looking for.
Weird - I used Audacity and slowed down “Stop Breaking Down Blues” by 8%, and it actually sounds quite amazing. I came to the experiment a skeptic, but there could be something to the theory that it’s all sped-up. I don’t have a website where I can post mp3s, but I can slow down a few more and put them on Sendspace or something.
Same thing with Miles Davis’ Kind of Blue - the original CD versions were too fast because there had been a problem with the original tape machines - I think they were too slow and so playing them back at the normal tape-rate made the recordings too fast. My cite is the well-researched book about the making of Kind of Blue that came out a few years ago…
Isn’t that the case with the old silent movies, too? Where the standard because 24 frames/sec, the silent movies had few frames per sec, so if you played them at 24 they would appear too fast, which is part of the reason we tend to think of them as primitive and jerky-looking?
I suppose there are countless examples of either technology breaking down or not having an established standard that then leads to the art sounding/looking different when standards are applied to it…
After listening to the recordings on Riker1384’s link I’m unconvinced. There’s something odd about the guitar sound in the slowed-down recordings. It doesn’t sound like a naturally plucked note. It would be interesting to isolate the waveforms of individual notes and study them graphically. My guess is that the slowed-down version will ramp up too slowly to be consistent with how Johnson is plucking his guitar. A musician can play the notes more slowly, but he can’t slow down how the string responds once it leaves his finger and that should come through in the waveform.
I think he just had a high-pitched voice that sounds unusual to modern ears.
I find that very persuasive. I always thought Johnson’s voice warbled in an unnatural way, which I guess is part of his spooky appeal - but slowed down he sounds more like an actual person.
I’ve decided not to post the tracks here, as I’m uncertain of what the legal status of that would be. Drop me a PM or email, though (this goes for anyone else who’s interested as well).
I’ve slowed down 5 songs so far, all slowed by 8%, and results vary. “Terraplane Blues,” for example, sounds incredibly rich and realistic, but “Love in Vain” and “Come On In My Kitchen” sound warped and too deep. The Wikipedia page makes a good point about the difficulty of slowing down tracks recorded at different times and places. Perhaps some were sped up more than others, and some not at all? The mystery deepens.
It depends. In some cases, films were replaced at too fast a speed. In other cases, however, films were filmed at one speed and replayed at another as an actual artistic goal. Moreover, speeds range by era in silent film, and there have been quite a few cases of films being reproduced to home video at far too slow a speed.
I made some samples of Robert Johnson’s “Cross Road Blues” from the 1990 “Complete Recordings”, with the audio changed to different sample rates. The samples below all differ by 1 semitone from one to the next, with the fastest first.
These are all mp3s, and are all about 25 to 30 seconds, so they should be fair use.
[minirant]God damn it. DO NOT USE uploading.com to upload files. You have to have Javascript turned on, and then there are NSFW banner ads. There was some kind of popup that Firefox couldn’t completely block. Also, you have to wait while a timer ticks down for sometimes 60 seconds or sometimes for 60 minutes. Here’s one of the uploading.com links, if someone’s interested. Home - Uploading.com The links below are on mediafire.com instead.[/minirant]
It’s interesting how different his voice sounds as the pitch changes. I’ll spoiler which track is the original, in case someone wants to make a blind attempt at selecting which speed sounds most natural. Might make for an interesting poll.
Sample 2 is the original speed. I think he sounds best slowed down 1 or 2 semitones.
