Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

*song BPM only--The Speeds of The Beatles' RUBBER SOUL

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Ian Schneider

unread,
Apr 10, 2007, 8:39:06 AM4/10/07
to
Rubber Soul is the sixth album by the Beatles, which was first
released in December 1965. It was recorded in just over four weeks to
make the Christmas market, and was a major achievement, with reviewers
taking note of the Beatles' developing musical vision. Like most
Beatles albums, the record was produced by George Martin and achieved
widespread commercial success.

The speeds of the songs on Rubber Soul were measured as:
1. "Drive My Car"
meanspeed=123 beats per minute
meanspace=490 milliseconds per beat

2. "Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown"
meanspeed=60 beats per minute
meanspace=1000 milliseconds per beat

3. "You Won't See Me"
meanspeed=116 beats per minute
meanspace=515 milliseconds per beat

4. "Nowhere Man"
meanspeed=121 beats per minute
meanspace=495 milliseconds per beat

5. "Think for Yourself"
meanspeed=130 beats per minute
meanspace=460 milliseconds per beat

5. "The Word"
meanspeed=123 beats per minute
meanspace=490 milliseconds per beat

7. "Michelle"
meanspeed=116 beats per minute
meanspace=515 millisconds per beat

8. "What Goes On"
meanspeed=194 beats per minute
meanspace=310 milliseconds per beat

9. "Girl"
meanspeed=97 beats per minute
meanspace=630 milliseconds per beat

10. "I'm Looking Through You"
meanspeed=172 beats per minute
meanspace=350 milliseconds per beat

11. "In My Life"
meanspeed=104 beats per minute
meanspace=575 milliseconds per beat

12. "Wait"
meanspeed=128 beats per minute
meanspace=470 milliseconds per beat

13. "If I Needed Someone"
meanspeed=128 beats per minute
meanspace=470 milliseconds per beat

14. "Run for Your Life"
meanspeed=177 beats per minute
meanspace=340 milliseconds per beat


Ian Schneider
www.meanspeed.com
April 10, 2007

Robert Johnson

unread,
Apr 10, 2007, 4:26:53 PM4/10/07
to
I'm a bit skeptic about your method of calculating tempos. How have you
verified your method? What sort of results you get when you use your
method on a metronome playing steady for 2:30 minutes and doing it with
various tempos? Have you compared your results with results from various
software that can be used to calculcate tempo?

The faster the tempo is the less accurate your method comes because of
reaction times (same applies to tap tempo software). I think it also
depends on the listener where he or she senses the beat to exist. It's a
subjective matter.

I downloaded an application called MixMeister BPM Analyzer from here
<http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/win95/MUSIC_CALCULATORS/>
and used it to calculate tempos on Rubber Soul.

Ian Schneider wrote:
> Rubber Soul is the sixth album by the Beatles, which was first
> released in December 1965. It was recorded in just over four weeks to
> make the Christmas market, and was a major achievement, with reviewers
> taking note of the Beatles' developing musical vision. Like most
> Beatles albums, the record was produced by George Martin and achieved
> widespread commercial success.
>
> The speeds of the songs on Rubber Soul were measured as:
> 1. "Drive My Car"
> meanspeed=123 beats per minute
> meanspace=490 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 122.61 bpm

> 2. "Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown"
> meanspeed=60 beats per minute
> meanspace=1000 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 90.21 bpm
I believe 90 bpm is closer (in 12/8 meter).

Online BPM Database shows 89.67 bpm.
<http://www.thebpmbook.com/bpmdatabase/bpm/80-89/236>

> 3. "You Won't See Me"
> meanspeed=116 beats per minute
> meanspace=515 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 115.23 bpm

> 4. "Nowhere Man"
> meanspeed=121 beats per minute
> meanspace=495 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 121.34 bpm

> 5. "Think for Yourself"
> meanspeed=130 beats per minute
> meanspace=460 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 130.07 bpm

> 5. "The Word"
> meanspeed=123 beats per minute
> meanspace=490 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 121.02 bpm

> 7. "Michelle"
> meanspeed=116 beats per minute
> meanspace=515 millisconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 119.20 bpm

> 8. "What Goes On"
> meanspeed=194 beats per minute
> meanspace=310 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 97.58 bpm
97.58 x 2 = 195.16

> 9. "Girl"
> meanspeed=97 beats per minute
> meanspace=630 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 96.31 bpm

> 10. "I'm Looking Through You"
> meanspeed=172 beats per minute
> meanspace=350 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 85.82 bpm
85.82 x 2 = 171.7

> 11. "In My Life"
> meanspeed=104 beats per minute
> meanspace=575 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 103.69 bpm

> 12. "Wait"
> meanspeed=128 beats per minute
> meanspace=470 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 127.66 bpm

> 13. "If I Needed Someone"
> meanspeed=128 beats per minute
> meanspace=470 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 127.61 bpm

> 14. "Run for Your Life"
> meanspeed=177 beats per minute
> meanspace=340 milliseconds per beat

MixMeister BPM Analyzer: 88.40 bpm
88.40 x 2 = 176.8

I created simple drum tracks, one with 100 bmp tempo and one with 180
bpm tempo. MixMeister BPM Analyzer reported tempos as 100.01 and 90.02.
So, I guess it's not able to detect faster tempos correctly, but halves
them. Therefore, "Norwegian Wood" seems to be the only one with a
significant difference.

Despite my skeptism your method seems to calculate the average tempo for
a song rather well. Yet I'd rather use an application like MixMeister
BPM Analyzer than your method and save time.

> Ian Schneider
> www.meanspeed.com
> April 10, 2007

An interesting website and theory anyway.

Ian Schneider

unread,
Apr 11, 2007, 11:53:15 AM4/11/07
to
Thanks for taking the time on this!--my reply is below

On Apr 10, 4:26 pm, Robert Johnson <robert.john...@yahhoo.com> wrote:
> I'm a bit skeptic about your method of calculating tempos. How have you
> verified your method?

yes--wGoogle and write Dr. manfrd Clynes, Dr, Russell van gelder--I;ve
been doing it for almost 20 years--I've tried to *prove myself wrong*
(lest I look like an ass in public) a million times!

What sort of results you get when you use your
> method on a metronome playing steady for 2:30 minutes and doing it with
> various tempos?

rarely good, dude--great question. every recording like to put heir
little "stamp" on bpm--well, I can name the hadfew of albums I've
measured where the speeds are 104.000000000---The Way We Walk by
Genesis---that's the speed to no son of mine, and that whole album is .
0000000---so if yiou like Genesis, that was teh cd you could play and
have the metronome----done in the most hypontizing and cool way with a
light blinking in a dark room--but for the most part you have stuff
like Eminem: Stan: 80.14 bpm---so what happens is, of course, that you
get the overlap--still cool, but very few are boldl enough to go naked
whole numbers. I never used to round off my numbers---I refused for
18 year---UNTIL iTunes built a great catalogue *and* a way to
incorporate BPM with ease that is almost miraculous to me (I'm 44
years old--this stuff still freaks me out!)

Have you compared your results with results from various
> software that can be used to calculcate tempo?

yeah--I beat everyone. because: the beats are not necessarily where
the loudest dynamic is, and more importantly, a computer program has
to guess at silences. A group of 5 people at a TOP software CO in
Princeton NJ tried to replicate what I did---they had my method, they
tried other methods---they determined I could not be beat (sorry)
because of what I say above. That and $1.50 will get me a pint of
soda, but it is true. Also, increasingly, silences are *by intention*
placed mid-song to foil the MixMeister profiteers.


>
> The faster the tempo is the less accurate your method comes because of
> reaction times (same applies to tap tempo software). I think it also
> depends on the listener where he or she senses the beat to exist. It's a
> subjective matter.

You are right about that--at the saem time, my theory of speed and
emotion cuts off at 128 beats per minute--however, once one is playing/
listening to anything over 150 BPM, a beat off one ---179 versus 180--
is not very important. nevertheless: good point.

Ian Schneider

unread,
Apr 11, 2007, 12:02:15 PM4/11/07
to
Also: you make anothe rgood point in re: Norweigan Wood--claearly, my
61 BPM is a whole note counting th esong as a waltz. You are
absolutely right, when you measure as a 12/8, you are going to get
90. Speeds in 3s are fairly rare in pop music, and my bias may not be
another's. meaning: sometime I hear all three beats of a waltz a a
hard, driving beat, and I will count the higher speed: I think kelly
Clarkson's 6/8Breakaway is approx 148 BPM, and while some may hear it
as a 98 BPM 12/8--well, that's totally cool and the reason it's so
great that you can program your OWN bpm's. On my post today, for
example, I was frankly torn over the same issue on Hide Your Love
Away--sometimes I hear it as the 12/8 122 BPM--but I listened to it 10
times last night--and maybe it ws my mood (!)---but I heard the slower
61 BPM as the beat.

Thanks again for taking the idea and *working with it and providing
constructive questions and help*----


ONE MAN A DATABASE DOES NOT MAKE!

Ian


On Apr 10, 4:26 pm, Robert Johnson <robert.john...@yahhoo.com> wrote:

0 new messages