Cut From the Stars: official mix vs. unofficial alternate edit

[Mr. Holland]

Someone uploaded an unofficial alternate edit from Cut From the Stars to YouTube, where the end solo/section is moved to the middle.

So, which mix do you actually like the best?

Official mix:

https://youtu.be/NdEF-vMO8vc

Unofficial Alternate Edit:

https://youtu.be/z4jPTT_ea2k

[Ceasar’s Palace]

Yes, solo in the middle makes sense. It’s funny, because as I understand it, Howe actually moved the solo…
Still don’t like the vision in vision stuff.
But I might use this edit as a starting point for my own edit.

[Ash Armstrong]

The one as released by the band. I don't get this need to fiddle about with tracks like this, on the presupposition that it can somehow be 'improved'? It seems rude and disrespectful. Just because the tech exists to enable you to do it.
Improving the sound of bootlegs or creating isolated tracks is one thing, but this practice I don't like. It's only be out a couple of weeks. It's not the greatest piece of music since sliced bread, but it should be taken on its various merits and flaws, and accepted, or disregarded, as is.

[JMKUSA]

I prefer the instrumental part as an outro, so it’s the original mix for me.

[Mr. Holland]

The one as released by the band. I don't get this need to fiddle about with tracks like this, on the presupposition that it can somehow be 'improved'? It seems rude and disrespectful. Just because the tech exists to enable you to do it.
Improving the sound of bootlegs or creating isolated tracks is one thing, but this practice I don't like. It's only be out a couple of weeks. It's not the greatest piece of music since sliced bread, but it should be taken on its various merits and flaws, and accepted, or disregarded, as is.

I kind of have difficulty deciding. In general I very much agree with what you say here. However I do like the result of moving the end solo to the middle.

[josuev80]

The one as released by the band. I don't get this need to fiddle about with tracks like this, on the presupposition that it can somehow be 'improved'? It seems rude and disrespectful. Just because the tech exists to enable you to do it.
Improving the sound of bootlegs or creating isolated tracks is one thing, but this practice I don't like. It's only be out a couple of weeks. It's not the greatest piece of music since sliced bread, but it should be taken on its various merits and flaws, and accepted, or disregarded, as is.

What's your take on FFH-RT?

[Ash Armstrong]

What's your take on FFH-RT?

I don't really have one. The band and production team did what they did with the material. I'm sure people have assembled their own versions of the parts of the two versions they most like. That's ok. That's not what has occurred here. I'm not in any sense a fan of Horn, on either side of the glass, so I only tend to listen to the original version, which isn't often, but I have both versions.
I don't really see how a fan/YouTuber using available digital editing software to tinker and modify a released track relates to the band and production team themselves opting to return (sorry, pun) to an album to redo it in the way Fly From Here was? Quite different as far as I can see.

[pianozach]

Listened to both versions. I found them both enjoyable, but neither jumped out at me as being better than the other.

[Enlighten]

The edit actually sounds more Yessy to me but the transition into the instrumental middle section isn’t quite seamless.

[Sharp On Attack]

I do like the official released version but the unofficial edit vastly improves the song, to the point of making it a later classic...The frantic strident vocal parts make so much more sense being the ending of the song... - Is it too late to put that one on the album ?

[Ceasar’s Palace]

The one as released by the band. I don't get this need to fiddle about with tracks like this, on the presupposition that it can somehow be 'improved'? It seems rude and disrespectful. Just because the tech exists to enable you to do it.
Improving the sound of bootlegs or creating isolated tracks is one thing, but this practice I don't like. It's only be out a couple of weeks. It's not the greatest piece of music since sliced bread, but it should be taken on its various merits and flaws, and accepted, or disregarded, as is.

No more rude and disrespectful than Marcel Duchamp copying the Mona Lisa and then painting a moustache over it.
And that is considered as art.

[Ash Armstrong]

No more rude and disrespectful than Marcel Duchamp copying the Mona Lisa and then painting a moustache over it.
And that is considered as art.

I don't see that as being the case at all. It's a false equivalency.

[Ceasar’s Palace]

I don't see that as being the case at all. It's a false equivalency.

Because?

[Ash Armstrong]

Because?

It doesn't matter. It can be whatever you want.
Anyone can rewrite Middlemarch with nude scenes and fucks and shits on every page if they want, or digitally replace Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris with David Attenborough and a butter dish.
I've stopped caring.

[Ceasar’s Palace]

It doesn't matter. It can be whatever you want.
Anyone can rewrite Middlemarch with nude scenes and fucks and shits on every page if they want, or digitally replace Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris with David Attenborough and a butter dish.
I've stopped caring.

Maybe you can take comfort in the fact that the originals are still there.