____twoism

Hello, new person here! I've recently been listening to Peel Session and XYZ, and I've noticed that XYZ has a similar atmosphere as Reach for the Dead. I've also noticed the drums in XYZ sound familiar to the drums at the end of RFTD, especially at this part. I would like to know your opinions on this, and whether XYZ is a prototype for Reach for the Dead. Thanks!

Now that you highlight it, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a connection here. The pad in XYZ is sampled from an Edgar Froese song but the one in Reach for the Dead does have a similar tone.

15Dreams wrote:The pad in XYZ is sampled from an Edgar Froese song but the one in Reach for the Dead does have a similar tone.

Is it really? Which track? I've been trying to figure this out for a while hehe. I was personally under the impression that the kinda growling organ/pad sample was from 'Timeless' by John Abercrombie (+ Jan Hammer?), or are you just talking about a different sound?

In regards to the main point of this thread, I was actually listening to this track the other week and thought of RFTD, at least in terms of the harmonic progression's vibes. However the striking difference in tempos could perhaps be a tell that they're just different sessions after all...

When I first heard RFTD, I was ecstatic that they seemed to go back to their older styles. I always thought XYZ was an early prototype for RFTD, or at least some clear elements. The main pad on reach for the dead borrows tonal/harmonic elements to the overall pad sound on XYZ, but the progression feels more like Music Is Math for me though, and same with the hard hitting main beat, at least to me.

And as you said, the ending percussion is a dead giveaway to XYZ likeness

adecentman wrote:

15Dreams wrote:The pad in XYZ is sampled from an Edgar Froese song but the one in Reach for the Dead does have a similar tone.

Is it really? Which track? I've been trying to figure this out for a while hehe. I was personally under the impression that the kinda growling organ/pad sample was from 'Timeless' by John Abercrombie (+ Jan Hammer?), or are you just talking about a different sound?

In regards to the main point of this thread, I was actually listening to this track the other week and thought of RFTD, at least in terms of the harmonic progression's vibes. However the striking difference in tempos could perhaps be a tell that they're just different sessions after all...

It Would be Like Samoa, pretty solid track from Stuntman. And yeah it's the growling pad.

I hadn't really made the connection between the two tracks until just a few weeks ago after I'd fallen asleep and woke up when my itunes playlist had advanced to Reach For the Dead. In my half-conscious state I momentarily mistook it for XYZ. I thought about it more later and realized that RFTD is, in some ways, a very toned-down XYZ, in that they both share a similar structure (or narrative arc, if you will), both have a similar, firey drone sound that rises and ebbs, and (as was already pointed out) both end with skittering snare drums before returning back to the opening drone.

BOC definitely seem like a much more reserved and cautious band now than compared to 1999 so it would make sense that they'd release a shorter, less frenetic & more restrained take on the XYZ aesthetic in 2013. This realization has definitely made me like RFTD more now (I always found it just a touch overrated before.) Though I still find XYZ the superior track of the two.

Love that this is a thread, if only you knew...

Interesting, as XYZ was actually never released on the album. XYZ has a really nice tune, though BoC probably had a good reason to scrap it. They must have found it while listening to old tunes, and decided to remake it.

Or this could just be entirely a coincidence, and just the result of two brothers jamming

BoomerBoxer wrote:Interesting, as XYZ was actually never released on the album. XYZ has a really nice tune, though BoC probably had a good reason to scrap it. They must have found it while listening to old tunes, and decided to remake it.

Or this could just be entirely a coincidence, and just the result of two brothers jamming

XYZ got canned because of the aforementioned Edgar Froese sample (copyright and all that). I can see RftD's pad being a subtle attempt to recreate that sample.

BoomerBoxer wrote:Interesting, as XYZ was actually never released on the album. XYZ has a really nice tune, though BoC probably had a good reason to scrap it. They must have found it while listening to old tunes, and decided to remake it.

Or this could just be entirely a coincidence, and just the result of two brothers jamming

I think it is most likely because they might not have sample clearance on part of the arrangement that samples Edgar Froese. Legally, without sample clearance they couldn't sell it as part of their official release of Peel Sessions.

I still don't know why the brothers seemed to feel so badly about the 'Bad Day' version of Happy cycling to the extent that they replaced it with the album version on the Peel release. Very nice version of the track even if all we can hear is a radio rip.

Given that they were able to meticulously recreate the "Hair" soundtrack sample for the MHTRTC version (or, version 2) of Aquarius to (presumably) avoid copyright issues, I sometimes wonder why they couldn't have done the same for XYZ. Certainly they could have done a reasonable approximation of that drone from the Froese track? Makes me wonder if there was perhaps another reason why the track was left off the official Peel Sessions disc . . . maybe on sober second thought they found it too bloopy/bleepy? (which would be a shame as it's magnificent.)

Also curious about whether its easier or harder to get sample clearance from an artist *after* said artist has died.

Opothecary wrote:Love that this is a thread, if only you knew...

There will be no link or forethought (over such a long period of time) between these tracks, people look far too deeply with this stuff, give them way more credit for stuff that is coincidental.
All the tracks do is show that they are human and have limited chops, like all humans do. They probably have loads of unreleased sketches that sound like tracks we have heard, you have to work these out of your system to find new ways, i'll bet that's why they use themes and spend so much time on them so that they grow out of and learn new ways to make sure a new release stands on it's own. Eventually things will come around though and you'll get paralells between tracks and it'll be up to the artist to decide if there is enough in the new track for it to be acceptable. Which it is in this case. RFTD is a great track.

breadmaker wrote:Makes me wonder if there was perhaps another reason why the track was left off the official Peel Sessions disc . . . maybe on sober second thought they found it too bloopy/bleepy? (which would be a shame as it's magnificent.)

I've heard theories that it was recorded at the wrong speed and was taken off as it wasn't representative of the final song. Kinda silly considering the fact that XYZ was the only one they played live in the studio iirc.

Though I always thought it sounds much more appropriate for BoC at 33 rpm.

Opothecary wrote:Love that this is a thread, if only you knew...

Stop tickling our balls Opothecary, spill the damn beans.....

Tarkus wrote:

breadmaker wrote:Makes me wonder if there was perhaps another reason why the track was left off the official Peel Sessions disc . . . maybe on sober second thought they found it too bloopy/bleepy? (which would be a shame as it's magnificent.)

I've heard theories that it was recorded at the wrong speed and was taken off as it wasn't representative of the final song. Kinda silly considering the fact that XYZ was the only one they played live in the studio iirc.

Though I always thought it sounds much more appropriate for BoC at 33 rpm.

I agree.

I know there is another thread on the 33 rpm theory, but I wish we had confirmation because it does sound so much more natural and boc-detailed at 33 rpm's. As for naysayers referring to the band's comment that "it's one of our faster ones", I still think the drums and bleeps and what not are pretty fast. The slowed down version completely changed my view of the track, it just sounds right to me. The first few minutes are much more reflective of BoC imo, not to mention the voice clips sound normal instead of being high-pitched and fast in the Peel version (the ones at the 2:19 mark of the Peel release).

Either way, you can enjoy whichever you prefer obviously, but I'm just curious as to what they actually intended.

North by North wrote: As for naysayers referring to the band's comment that "it's one of our faster ones", I still think the drums and bleeps and what not are pretty fast.

"It's the longest track and fastest track that we've done in probably the last two years" is the exact quote.

North by North wrote:

Tarkus wrote:

breadmaker wrote:Makes me wonder if there was perhaps another reason why the track was left off the official Peel Sessions disc . . . maybe on sober second thought they found it too bloopy/bleepy? (which would be a shame as it's magnificent.)

I've heard theories that it was recorded at the wrong speed and was taken off as it wasn't representative of the final song. Kinda silly considering the fact that XYZ was the only one they played live in the studio iirc.

Though I always thought it sounds much more appropriate for BoC at 33 rpm.

I agree.

I know there is another thread on the 33 rpm theory, but I wish we had confirmation because it does sound so much more natural and boc-detailed at 33 rpm's. As for naysayers referring to the band's comment that "it's one of our faster ones", I still think the drums and bleeps and what not are pretty fast. The slowed down version completely changed my view of the track, it just sounds right to me. The first few minutes are much more reflective of BoC imo, not to mention the voice clips sound normal instead of being high-pitched and fast in the Peel version (the ones at the 2:19 mark of the Peel release).

Either way, you can enjoy whichever you prefer obviously, but I'm just curious as to what they actually intended.

I made that thread years back in regards to the 33rpm version of XYZ.

back when i'd first heard XYZ, i thought the song sounded cluttered and boring. then i heard the slowed down version and was like, wait a minute, this is amazing. the guitar, synths and drums seemed to blend more naturally to me.

also, when listening to it at 33rpm, you can actually hear the voice saying, XYZ. if i remember correctly, someone had a theory that the voice saying XYZ may be the reason it was sped up in the first place, to hide a sample they didn't have permission for. i may be confusing that with the peel version of aquarius.

everyone has there own standpoint, and we all interpret things differently. so i am def biased in the sense that I like the 33rpm version of the track more, so of course I'd lean towards the theory that its the way the track is meant to be heard. but i am kind of intrigued by those of you who enjoy the "original version" more, its comes off as dreary to me.


side note. the 45rpm version of 747 is UNREAL.