Ain't That Lovin' You Baby - Fast Version / Composite

[brotherjon]

Greetings all!

I'm new here & have a query about one of my favourite songs.

The fast version of "Ain't That Lovin' You Baby" was originally released on the "Reconsider Baby" Blues compilation in 1985 & then the following year on 7inch/12inch single in the UK, as a double A-side with "Bossa Nova Baby" (I owned the 7inch, lost it unfortunately...)

According to Keith Flynn's website, this version (clocking in at 2:30) is a composite of Takes 1, 8, 9, 10 & 11. What is confusing is that according to the the same website, the fast version covers only Takes 5-11 (which are all included on the FTD version of "50 Million Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong"). http://www.keithflynn.com/recording-sessions/580610.html#04

From my understanding, since the release of The 50's Masters Boxset in '92, Take 11 (running time 1:58) has been used to represent the "fast version" as opposed to the longer 1985 "composite" version.

Does anyone know the truth about the composite version? Does this version exist in any form on any other release? Is it available in digital form - high res Mp3/FLAC/WAV? (Can't really find a good quality version on YouTube...)

Thanks in advance!

regards,

Jon

[When In Rome]

Greetings all!

I'm new here & have a query about one of my favourite songs.

The fast version of "Ain't That Lovin' You Baby" was originally released on the "Reconsider Baby" Blues compilation in 1985 & then the following year on 7inch/12inch single in the UK, as a double A-side with "Bossa Nova Baby" (I owned the 7inch, lost it unfortunately...)

According to Keith Flynn's website, this version (clocking in at 2:30) is a composite of Takes 1, 8, 9, 10 & 11. What is confusing is that according to the the same website, the fast version covers only Takes 5-11 (which are all included on the FTD version of "50 Million Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong"). http://www.keithflynn.com/recording-sessions/580610.html#04

From my understanding, since the release of The 50's Masters Boxset in '92, Take 11 (running time 1:58) has been used to represent the "fast version" as opposed to the longer 1985 "composite" version.

Does anyone know the truth about the composite version? Does this version exist in any form on any other release? Is it available in digital form - high res Mp3/FLAC/WAV? (Can't really find a good quality version on YouTube...)

Thanks in advance!

regards,

Jon

Hullo Jon and welcome! Come on in, the waters warm...
The Composite version is available in digital form on the 'Reconsider baby' CD? As for the truth, well it's probably out there somewhere...
Further to that, I'm pretty sure just by the tempo alone there surely isn't any part of take 1 in the composite version. It just doesn't add up? Perhaps it's a mistake?

[DayVee Bee]

I believe this is how it was made:

AIN’T THAT LOVING YOU BABY—FAST VERSION (RECONSIDER BABY)
0:00—0:21 = #9 (0:00—0:21)
0:22—1:15 = #11 (0:22—1:15)
1:16—1:25 = #8 (1:14—1:23)
1:26—1:35 = #11 (1:27—1:36)
1:36—2:00 = #11 (1:03—1:27)
2:00—2:16 = #11 (0:05—0:21)
2:17—2:22 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:22—2:27 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:27—2:32 = #1 (2:20—2:25)

[brotherjon]

Thanks for your response
Think i'll have to track down a second hand copy of the "Reconsider Baby" CD, i was obviously looking for a lazy download option...
Regarding the composite of takes, it's probable that no-one actually knows except for the RCA A&R & Engineers behind the compilation..

[Scoobie]

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 16.32.48.png

Loads of vinyl on Ebay, 1 cassette and 1 CD, expensive though...,

[keninlincs]

Welcome Jon

[brotherjon]

I believe this is how it was made:

AIN’T THAT LOVING YOU BABY—FAST VERSION (RECONSIDER BABY)
0:00—0:21 = #9 (0:00—0:21)
0:22—1:15 = #11 (0:22—1:15)
1:16—1:25 = #8 (1:14—1:23)
1:26—1:35 = #11 (1:27—1:36)
1:36—2:00 = #11 (1:03—1:27)
2:00—2:16 = #11 (0:05—0:21)
2:17—2:22 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:22—2:27 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:27—2:32 = #1 (2:20—2:25)

Thanks for that, much appreciated. That definitely makes sense. But 2:27-2.32 from Take#1 ? I was under the impression Take#1 was the mid-tempo version, and Take #5 was effectively the first take of the faster tempo arrangement. It's all good anyway

[brotherjon]

Welcome Jon

Thank you, good to be here!

[drjohncarpenter]

I believe this is how it was made:

AIN’T THAT LOVING YOU BABY—FAST VERSION (RECONSIDER BABY)
0:00—0:21 = #9 (0:00—0:21)
0:22—1:15 = #11 (0:22—1:15)
1:16—1:25 = #8 (1:14—1:23)
1:26—1:35 = #11 (1:27—1:36)
1:36—2:00 = #11 (1:03—1:27)
2:00—2:16 = #11 (0:05—0:21)
2:17—2:22 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:22—2:27 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:27—2:32 = #1 (2:20—2:25)

Thanks for that, much appreciated. That definitely makes sense. But 2:27-2.32 from Take#1 ? I was under the impression Take#1 was the mid-tempo version, and Take #5 was effectively the first take of the faster tempo arrangement. It's all good anyway

Here's the ending of take one, is this not how the composite ends?


..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaZBZn3Anc&t=2m17s

[brotherjon]

I believe this is how it was made:

AIN’T THAT LOVING YOU BABY—FAST VERSION (RECONSIDER BABY)
0:00—0:21 = #9 (0:00—0:21)
0:22—1:15 = #11 (0:22—1:15)
1:16—1:25 = #8 (1:14—1:23)
1:26—1:35 = #11 (1:27—1:36)
1:36—2:00 = #11 (1:03—1:27)
2:00—2:16 = #11 (0:05—0:21)
2:17—2:22 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:22—2:27 = #11 (0:16—0:21)
2:27—2:32 = #1 (2:20—2:25)

Thanks for that, much appreciated. That definitely makes sense. But 2:27-2.32 from Take#1 ? I was under the impression Take#1 was the mid-tempo version, and Take #5 was effectively the first take of the faster tempo arrangement. It's all good anyway

Here's the ending of take one, is this not how the composite ends?


..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaZBZn3Anc&t=2m17s

Yes absolutely! Apologies my mistake...I've just purchased/downloaded the composite version on mp3 from Google Play (from a 2011 remaster of "Reconsider Baby" on 1960 Old Style label - thanks to DayVee Bee for the link) and yes - it's the end drum roll from Take #1. A fairly sneaky edit i have to say! So great to hear this version again

[brotherjon]

Thank you all for your replies. Nice to have such a warm response to my first post on here. Mystery solved now regarding the composite takes & it's so nice to hear this version again pumping loud on my hi-fi

[drjohncarpenter]

Thanks for that, much appreciated. That definitely makes sense. But 2:27-2.32 from Take#1 ? I was under the impression Take#1 was the mid-tempo version, and Take #5 was effectively the first take of the faster tempo arrangement. It's all good anyway

Here's the ending of take one, is this not how the composite ends?


..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaZBZn3Anc&t=2m17s

Yes absolutely! Apologies my mistake...I've just purchased/downloaded the composite version on mp3 from Google Play (from a 2011 remaster of "Reconsider Baby" on 1960 Old Style label - thanks to DayVee Bee for the link) and yes - it's the end drum roll from Take #1. A fairly sneaky edit i have to say! So great to hear this version again

Sneaky? Nah, it was a crafty edit of an incomplete master. I'll never forget how many non-Elvis fans I knew heard this uptempo rocker when the LP was released in 1985 and were immediately hooked. It was only years later I discovered how much work went into it, and kudos must go to project engineer Rick Rowe and project A&R director Gregg Geller.

850300_RCA ‎AFL1-5418_01.jpg

850300_RCA ‎AFL1-5418_02.jpg

Elvis Presley Reconsider Baby (RCA AFL1 5418, March 1985)



Glad you dug it, and welcome to FECC.

[brotherjon]

Thanks for that, much appreciated. That definitely makes sense. But 2:27-2.32 from Take#1 ? I was under the impression Take#1 was the mid-tempo version, and Take #5 was effectively the first take of the faster tempo arrangement. It's all good anyway

Here's the ending of take one, is this not how the composite ends?


..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpaZBZn3Anc&t=2m17s

Yes absolutely! Apologies my mistake...I've just purchased/downloaded the composite version on mp3 from Google Play (from a 2011 remaster of "Reconsider Baby" on 1960 Old Style label - thanks to DayVee Bee for the link) and yes - it's the end drum roll from Take #1. A fairly sneaky edit i have to say! So great to hear this version again

Sneaky? Nah, it was a crafty edit of an incomplete master. I'll never forget how many non-Elvis fans I knew heard this uptempo rocker when the LP was released in 1985 and were immediately hooked. It was only years later I discovered how much work went into it, and kudos must go to project engineer Rick Rowe and project A&R director Gregg Geller.

850300_RCA ‎AFL1-5418_01.jpg

850300_RCA ‎AFL1-5418_02.jpg

Elvis Presley Reconsider Baby (RCA AFL1 5418, March 1985)



Glad you dug it, and welcome to FECC.

Yep superb editing and a quality album. RCA A&R at it's best

[skatterbrane]

That was (is) a great CD. I had it on vinyl once upon a time as well.

[MysteryTrain]

Here it is: http://www70.zippyshare.com/v/zEnP8pST/file.html

MT

[brotherjon]

Here it is: http://www70.zippyshare.com/v/zEnP8pST/file.html

MT

Thanks! Nice to hear it in high quality

[Walter Hale 4]

Very good topic here. Worth bumping this to complement my new two'fer poll