jeand@ihlpg.UUCP (AMBAR) (08/02/85)
> Well, I was referring in particular to two things. The first is the obvious > one of the word "house" in referring to the body. Obvious, if you've ever READ it, but if not.... [a couple quotes] "Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit..." {II Corinthians ?} "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.....but he was speaking of the temple of his body." {John ?--I'm lousy at references} {also understanding that the word translated 'temple' means 'house of --'} > The second is the use of the word "feet". In the Bible, "feet" is often a > euphemism for "private parts". Thus, for example, some angelic beings are > described as having wings with which they "covered their feet". There is > also a story in the book of Ruth, in which Ruth is being instructed on how > to go about finding a husband, that is much more understandable if you > realize this fact. Wow. I missed this one entirely. > Tell me this... in the opening lines, > > The first time I died, > It was in the arms of good friends of mine. > * * * > Say, why do it now, when I won't be around? > I'm going out. > > What does "it" refer to? This is something that puzzles me, in either > interpretation. I just thought the word 'it' was a redundancy referring to her death (maybe for the demands of the music.) Am I being too simplistic, or are you perhaps being too demanding in wanting every little work to carry some vast signifi- cance? /*finally, what I intended to comment on in the first place! ;-)*/ > > But actually it is Kate Bush's high voice (not her low voice) that is her > > natural voice. > > Well, it's hard to know this, but I suspect her natural voice is her low > voice, and that she just cultivated the "high" one because it was better > suited for a female lead vocalist. Like you say, it's hard to know, but I somehow doubt that anyone could manufacture something as striking as her high voice. Think about "Violin" (NEVER FOR EVER) for a while. I'm a mezzo-soprano, and sometimes if I'm in one of my weirder moods, I'll go ahead and (attempt to) sing along with that particular song. (Ah, the things my roommate puts up with....) You don't develop that range; either you have it or you don't. AMBAR "But there's no room on my desk for ME!"
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (08/04/85)
> I just thought the word 'it' was a redundancy referring to her death (maybe > for the demands of the music.) Am I being too simplistic, or are you perhaps > being too demanding in wanting every little work to carry some vast signifi- > cance? If you have ever written poetry, then you will know that "every little word" contains significance, if it is good poetry. The reason I decided I like Kate Bush is that I decided that she was a fairly good poet. > Like you say, it's hard to know, but I somehow doubt that anyone could > manufacture something as striking as her high voice. Think about "Violin" > (NEVER FOR EVER) for a while. I'm a mezzo-soprano, and sometimes if I'm in > one of my weirder moods, I'll go ahead and (attempt to) sing along with that > particular song. (Ah, the things my roommate puts up with....) It is tempting to make an ad-hominem comment here, but I won't. It wouldn't be hard to manufacture something like that. You could do it like this. Record all the instrumen-tals on a multitrack tape machine. Slow down the tape machine a whole lot. Play it back; record your voice as you sing along with the music at your normal vocal range, but at a much slower tempo, and an octave or two higher than the music you hear playing back. Presto! "Double-speed voice," like Mike Oldfield's "Double Speed Guitar". Not that Kate Bush would do that, but you asked how you would MANUFACTURE such a thing. -- Shyy-Anzr: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Vg frrzf yvxr hc gb zr."
nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (08/10/85)
> From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) > It is tempting to make an ad-hominem comment here, but I won't. It > wouldn't be hard to manufacture something like that. You could do it > like this. Record all the instrumen-tals on a multitrack tape > machine. Slow down the tape machine a whole lot. Play it back; > record your voice as you sing along with the music at your normal > vocal range, but at a much slower tempo, and an octave or two higher > than the music you hear playing back. Presto! "Double-speed voice," > like Mike Oldfield's "Double Speed Guitar". Not that Kate Bush would > do that, but you asked how you would MANUFACTURE such a thing. No, no, no! Then you get something that sounds like The Chipmunks! Not Kate Bush! (Comments saying that Kate Bush sounds like Alvin (or any of the others) will NOT be appreciated!) "Go right to the rose Go right to the white rose I'll be waiting for you" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)
ryan@fremen.DEC (Mike Ryan DTN 264-8280 MK01-2/H32) (08/13/85)
> >> It is tempting to make an ad-hominem comment here, but I won't. It >> wouldn't be hard to manufacture something like that. You could do it >> like this. Record all the instrumen-tals on a multitrack tape >> machine. Slow down the tape machine a whole lot. Play it back; >> record your voice as you sing along with the music at your normal >> vocal range, but at a much slower tempo, and an octave or two higher >> than the music you hear playing back. Presto! "Double-speed voice," >> like Mike Oldfield's "Double Speed Guitar". Not that Kate Bush would >> do that, but you asked how you would MANUFACTURE such a thing. > >No, no, no! Then you get something that sounds like The Chipmunks! Not >Kate Bush! (Comments saying that Kate Bush sounds like Alvin (or any of >the others) will NOT be appreciated!) > > Doug Alan Double speed wouldn't work, but you can "increase" your range somewhat without the Chipmunk effect. Pink Floyd did this on one of the tracks on "Wish You Were Here" (Welcome to the Machine, if I'm not mistaken). Roger couldn't quite hit a high note, so they recorded the instruments at normal speed, played it back a step flat as he sang the vocal track, and mastered it at the normal speed. Mike Ryan ARPA: ryan%fremen.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA UUCP: {decvax,allegra,ihnp4,ucbvax,...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-fremen!ryan
nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (08/15/85)
> From Mike Ryan > Double speed wouldn't work, but you can "increase" your range somewhat > without the Chipmunk effect. Pink Floyd did this on one of the tracks > on "Wish You Were Here" (Welcome to the Machine, if I'm not mistaken). Hey! You must have read the same Pink Floyd book as me! Yes, it was on "Welcome to the Machine". Hey! Here's a great chance for me to plug the great Roy Harper! Did you know that it is Roy Harper who does the vocals on "Have A Cigar"? > Roger couldn't quite hit a high note, so they recorded the instruments > at normal speed, played it back a step flat as he sang the vocal > track, and mastered it at the normal speed. Yes, this sort of stuff works very well for adjusting a voice a semitone or so, but certainly not an octave! Okay... I'll admit it. Kate Bush once used a tape effect to change the pitch of her voice, but it was to LOWER it a tiny bit, not raise it. It was done on the song "Houdini", and on what is not quite singing per se, but more of a scream. "You'd hit the water" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)