____twoism

since this has been derailed into a peel session thread, i just edited the bad day hc a little bit to make it sound better and start and end better.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/892b9t12bb4xxz4/happy_cycling_%28bad_day%29.mp3

(with thanks to neuromute for upping it of course)

orion wrote:oh and Neuromute, do you happen to have the Happy Cycling bad dy version? i cant find it anywhere

You aren't missing anything. Dreadful song.

wait wait wait

where is Bad Day from?

It was part of peel session that just didnt make the cut if I am remembering correctly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/johnpeel/se ... sofcanada/

I think it needs to be added to bocpages

Dmitrii wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/johnpeel/sessions/1990s/1998/Jun16boardsofcanada/

I think it needs to be added to bocpages

Already there.

http://bocpages.org/wiki/Peel_Session

I've often wondered if there was more of an interview, and if someone out there has a recording of it...

So what is up with XYZ not being listed? Odd.

And bad day is definitely my least favorite version of happy cycling. too cluttered and noisy

northernlite wrote:I've often wondered if there was more of an interview, and if someone out there has a recording of it...

I'd imagine so since you hear Peel talking about, what I assume to be, "you don't even have a telephone, is this true?"

bad ay is my fav version. makes sense when the 'voice' says "fuck it!". bad day indeed

TOYOTAセ&#1 wrote:I decided to upload my FLAC version of XYZ, but I kindly request that someone could please run spectral analysis on it to see if it's a different recording from the radio show or if It's a re-encoded MP3.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/neaue16i40ns0av/04%20XYZ.flac

You'll want a 2nd opinion, but it looks almost like a transcode, with a weird twist (pic https://www.dropbox.com/l/0L2zve8dlEir9IiOTeATbw). There's a pretty pronounced 16khz cutoff, so it's probably been compressed at one point (looks like 128kbps). The only catch I can think of would be if any of these copies we've got were recorded from say a Peel broadcast online or off radio. If it were broadcast from a source that was say 128kbps streamed then of course that would explain it. That just makes zero sense to me since of course the other tracks are freely available as full redbook (so I'd assume they'd rebroadcast a stream from that, not 128k).

It doesn't look much like Neuromute's copy either...that's 1 of 2 copies I've got, and btw that copy looks like it was compressed at 128k at least at one point, not 256 like it's labeled. There's a hard cutoff and almost nothing above 16khz.

Your FLAC copy's patterns look more like a 192kbps copy I've got, but with more frequency content below 16k. There's also this weird pair of bands at 16khz and 20khz that's catching some frequency. You can really see it in the left channel of the FLAC file (it's in the right channel too but faint). It's in the same band as the top stripe of content in the 192k copy. I'm wondering if that's actually broadcast/stream noise because in the 192k copy it continues on through John talking w/the duo, and that's just voice.

There are tons of other matches in the patterns of those two cuts too, so if I had to guess I'd say these two came from the same source, although if that's right it looks like someone did some editing on your cut (volume increase, fade-out at the end, maybe some tone-down of those upper bands). Otherwise the 192k one looks almost like a compressed version of your FLAC copy. Here it is https://www.dropbox.com/l/4lc6ALEfqbRYYulDlqXu29 if anyone wants it, but if I remember right it came off of some public fileshare somewhere so I don't think I could trace its origin. Out of the copies I've seen, yours looks the best signal-wise that I've seen (most frequency content, least cut-off). To my (not very sharp) ears it sounds better too. Like I said though, you'll probably want a 2nd opinion.

Hmm...you know, the more I think about it, it's possible these came from a net broadcast where they actually did play a lossless recording, but their web content served a low quality stream (I don't believe BBC did/does much above 128kbps), and that was the only available source to record from for people like us. Even normal FM radio spectra look better, but aside from radio recordings and the few copies of the Warp release that might have gone out w/XYZ on them, this would probably be the best we could get.

mr3 wrote:

TOYOTAセ&#1 wrote:I decided to upload my FLAC version of XYZ, but I kindly request that someone could please run spectral analysis on it to see if it's a different recording from the radio show or if It's a re-encoded MP3.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/neaue16i40ns0av/04%20XYZ.flac

You'll want a 2nd opinion, but it looks almost like a transcode, with a weird twist (pic https://www.dropbox.com/l/0L2zve8dlEir9IiOTeATbw). There's a pretty pronounced 16khz cutoff, so it's probably been compressed at one point (looks like 128kbps). The only catch I can think of would be if any of these copies we've got were recorded from say a Peel broadcast online or off radio. If it were broadcast from a source that was say 128kbps streamed then of course that would explain it. That just makes zero sense to me since of course the other tracks are freely available as full redbook (so I'd assume they'd rebroadcast a stream from that, not 128k).

It doesn't look much like Neuromute's copy either...that's 1 of 2 copies I've got, and btw that copy looks like it was compressed at 128k at least at one point, not 256 like it's labeled. There's a hard cutoff and almost nothing above 16khz.

Your FLAC copy's patterns look more like a 192kbps copy I've got, but with more frequency content below 16k. There's also this weird pair of bands at 16khz and 20khz that's catching some frequency. You can really see it in the left channel of the FLAC file (it's in the right channel too but faint). It's in the same band as the top stripe of content in the 192k copy. I'm wondering if that's actually broadcast/stream noise because in the 192k copy it continues on through John talking w/the duo, and that's just voice.

There are tons of other matches in the patterns of those two cuts too, so if I had to guess I'd say these two came from the same source, although if that's right it looks like someone did some editing on your cut (volume increase, fade-out at the end, maybe some tone-down of those upper bands). Otherwise the 192k one looks almost like a compressed version of your FLAC copy. Here it is https://www.dropbox.com/l/4lc6ALEfqbRYYulDlqXu29 if anyone wants it, but if I remember right it came off of some public fileshare somewhere so I don't think I could trace its origin. Out of the copies I've seen, yours looks the best signal-wise that I've seen (most frequency content, least cut-off). To my (not very sharp) ears it sounds better too. Like I said though, you'll probably want a 2nd opinion.

Hmm...you know, the more I think about it, it's possible these came from a net broadcast where they actually did play a lossless recording, but their web content served a low quality stream (I don't believe BBC did/does much above 128kbps), and that was the only available source to record from for people like us. Even normal FM radio spectra look better, but aside from radio recordings and the few copies of the Warp release that might have gone out w/XYZ on them, this would probably be the best we could get.

Thank you so much for all of that. I can't thank you enough.

When is the "fuck it"?

nick47 wrote:So what is up with XYZ not being listed? Odd.

And bad day is definitely my least favorite version of happy cycling. too cluttered and noisy

xyz: http://bocpages.org/wiki/XYZ

and i'm not sure why there's so much dislike for "bad day." it's really just a less polished version of "happy cycling." the elements and the structure are pretty similar to what was finally released. it's like the difference between "aquarius" versions 1 and 2. and to my ears at least it seems quite minimal, as opposed to "cluttered." but in my estimation "rue the whirl" is minimal and "seven forty seven" is cluttered.

and i've always thought that vocal sample was saying "pop tin" but mostly likely it's just decontextualized syllables.

while we're on the point, I would like to note that the "U.S. Version" subtitle of Happy Cycling on Peel Session CDr can explain existence of two different versions of HC. Bad Day then may be the "U.K. Version"

UPD

Peel described the band's one session as "excellent ... wonderful ... one of the best received of the year" when it was repeated on 10 December 1998. The track 'Aquarius' was a big favourite with the DJ, being selected as a Peelenium choice for 1998. The original single was later found in John Peel's Record Box.
http://peel.wikia.com/wiki/Boards_Of_Canada

are there any full radio recordings of BoC session?

breadmaker wrote:

nick47 wrote:So what is up with XYZ not being listed? Odd.

And bad day is definitely my least favorite version of happy cycling. too cluttered and noisy

xyz: http://bocpages.org/wiki/XYZ

and i'm not sure why there's so much dislike for "bad day." it's really just a less polished version of "happy cycling." the elements and the structure are pretty similar to what was finally released. it's like the difference between "aquarius" versions 1 and 2. and to my ears at least it seems quite minimal, as opposed to "cluttered." but in my estimation "rue the whirl" is minimal and "seven forty seven" is cluttered.

and i've always thought that vocal sample was saying "pop tin" but mostly likely it's just decontextualized syllables.

I just find that extra little loop that plays throughout the entire song quite distracting

and forreal 747 cluttered? its crazy how different we see that song

I'm sure that this has been noticed before, but only today did I notice that Sixtyniner contains the same voice sample as Sir Prancelot Brainfire.

I'm sure that this has been noticed before, but only today did I notice that Sixtyniner contains the same voice sample as Sir Prancelot Brainfire.

nick47 wrote:and forreal 747 cluttered? its crazy how different we see that song :D

maybe "dense" or "layered" would be better terms. "happy cycling"/"bad day" is mostly just a handful of carefully chosen looping elements, whereas "747" is more of a wall-of-sound experience. there's a LOT going on in that track, especially when you consider how minimal it was when it first appeared in that early 2000s BOC website game. a similar thing happened with the live version of "julie and candy" vs. what ended up on geogaddi - an eerie, spare track became a "let's cram in all the sonic detail we can" track. my preference is for the former but i don't mind the more fussed-over sound of their post-"beautiful place" EP work either.

and FYI "747" is one of my all time favorites.

Okay, now that everything is out of the way, can we get to this threads intended purpose? Also, can ANYONE tell me what Phase 5 Stereo is?