CITR was leaked into the wrong pitch/speed

[WARose]

you`re right nesquick. my version was even faster and sounded like shit.


but this doesn?t sound like the real deal either...we`ll never know what`s legit or not unfortunately. get the fuckin album out allready!!

[DunkinDave]

I'm 99,9999% sure that the real version of "Catcher in the Rye" is:
1) a little bit faster
2) played higher

The leaked version was not representative of what we will hear on the record. I've heard a re-done version with a faster tempo and a higher pitch and it sounds absolutely better. More natural. This is a fucking great track.

The demo was sourced from an audio cassette tape - what do you expect?

[Steel_Angel]

theres another one imsorry remastered. sound cd qualitty  ask me and i'll send.

[agropolus]

nesquick, where can I find this version you are talking about? if you can, please pm me a link for it

[Neemo]

the one frozen inferno has i think is the correct one...imsorry is great at fixing audio files the slower version...5:38 long...the faster one i have heard is 5:31 is that the version you are talking about nesquick? the keyzremaster?

[agropolus]

the one frozen inferno was talking about is very good, but I'm looking for this faster one, I'm pretty curious to know how it sounds

[yorch]

imsorry's remaster is awesome, i would love to hear the faster one too

[yorch]

i've heard the faster demo and it's the old one we all have, someone has just changed the tempo, it's only a little faster. it sounds more natural, that's true. i would love to hear an imsorry's remaster with this tempo.

[Butch Français]

sounds decent. I guess the finished track will sound different than the demo we've heard. who knows how it will sound different, might be slightly faster cos it didn't sound bad at all!

[nesquick]

The pitch is higher also, not only the tempo. Try to listen to it for a couple of days, get used to it, after that you will never listen to the "slower" version again. The faster and higher version just sounds more natural.

[Neemo]

the high part @ about 0:45 sounds a bit too messed up...too fast

[yorch]

The pitch is higher also, not only the tempo. Try to listen to it for a couple of days, after that you will never listen to the "slower" version again. The faster and higher version just sounds more natural.

yeah, you're right.

[Butch Français]

The pitch is higher also, not only the tempo. Try to listen to it for a couple of days, get used to it, after that you will never listen to the "slower" version again. The faster and higher version just sounds more natural.

I barely listen to any of the demos anymore. I try not to wear them out before I hear a real version of them. with the exception of 'Better'...I just can't seem to stay away from that one for too long, I use it as my ringtone too

[nesquick]

Well no, this part doesn't sound too fast too me, it's just you get used with the slow version, but wait a couple of days and you'll the the faster one is more enjoyable/natural to listen to.

[AdZ]

This is just asking for trouble.

[nesquick]

This is just asking for trouble.

PM

[user FKA webmoster]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=n8Xal5lj3Ag

[ppbebe]

Maybe. maybe not.
Isn't the leaked one supposed to be an early demo?
In any case, the final cut will be different from that.

  By the way a week ago or so I heard the latest CITR in my dream. Previously I thought the song was although good, not really my cup but this new version changed my mind. It would hit the spot in the lingering heat of late summer if released, as a single or whatever.

[Steel_Angel]

i also like chinese69illusions version. you know.. the one without the glitch.

[KillKurtzKids]

The demo is at least 5 years old. The recording sounds damaged and cuts off too early. The song sounds pretty rough. The chorus is dodgy but it has a strong finish. Love the syth in the middle. The Na Na bits are great, but far too short. After the synth Na Na Na for two minutes, hit the final verse.. finish. No need for the chorus again. It has potential, sounds very much like a demo at the mo, lets see what 5 years have done to it.