| Author |
|
Tunestony
MusicFan
Joined: 16 March 2016
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12
|
| Posted: 20 March 2017 at 7:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just grabbed another great singles collection from Real Gone. This one has an
oddity though. Right smack in the middle of mono versions, there's a stereo
mix of "A Beautiful Morning." I checked my copy, and indeed, it is stereo...a
little early for stereo, 1968, don't you think?
But, here's the crazy part: the label lists it as "compatible mono - stereo"
when, in fact, it's stereo. Odd...
We learn in the liner notes that there's a different harmonica part on the mono
vs. stereo of "Groovin" as well.
...and sorry, I can't figure out how to post a picture from my local computer
(not on the web).
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
eriejwg
MusicFan
Joined: 10 June 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: 20 March 2017 at 8:32pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Welcome aboard, Tony!
According to the following thread, It's a Beautiful
Morning was stereo on the stock and promo 45s. All
appearances in the database are also stereo.
http://www.top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?
TID=6618&KW
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 20 March 2017 at 9:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tunestony wrote:
| the label lists it as "compatible mono - stereo" when, in fact, it's stereo. Odd... |
|
|
Hi, Tony! The label says "COMPATIBLE MONO & STEREO." Since modern cartridges were becoming more widely available in phonographs in 1968, that was a reassurance that the 45 could be played on both mono and stereo phonographs equipped with such cartridges, without any worry of damaging the record. In previous years (late '50s to mid '60s), most stereo albums contained warnings on the back to play the record only on phonographs equipped with stereo cartridges, since playing it with a mono cartridge back then would cause permanent groove damage. Buddah also issued a few stereo singles that year, designated "'Dual 45' Playable Stereo As Well As Mono" on the label.
1968 was the first year of stereo 45s v.2; check around for other threads on the board which discuss this. The first stereo 45s came out in the late '50s, but they faced three major obstacles at the time: they weren't widely available, cost more than the mono 45 of that same title (which was widely available), and the number of stereo phonographs on which to play them was comparatively small. The format fizzled, and would not be revived until nearly a decade later, beginning with a few promo 45s (and one or two likely erroneously-pressed commercial ones) in 1967 and commercial 45s in early 1968.
"A Beautiful Morning" was also encoded using the Haeco-CSG process, which was designed to make stereo records more compatible with mono playback systems. While that may have worked on making the records sound more balanced on a mono player or on AM radio, it adversely affected the stereo playback. Do a search on "CSG" and you'll find several threads that go into further detail. Fortunately, the CSG process was never widespread, and gradually disappeared by the end of the '70s.
It took several years for stereo 45s to become commonplace after 1968, so the isolated Rascals CSG stereo single isn't as unusual as you might think. It was a gradual transition, and not at all consistent, even within the same labels.
Tunestony wrote:
| ...and sorry, I can't figure out how to post a picture from my local computer (not on the web). |
|
|
Perhaps that's just as well, since there isn't much need for that here anymore. Sites that host tons of label scans, like 45cat and discogs, were still in their infancy when the handful of photos you see here were originally posted. More importantly, those photos eat up bandwidth, and Pat asked long ago that we no longer post them.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
maciav
MusicFan
Joined: 02 June 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: 21 March 2017 at 10:22am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yah Shure wrote:
Tunestony wrote:
the label lists it
as "compatible mono - stereo" when, in fact, it's
stereo. Odd... |
|
|
Hi, Tony! The label says "COMPATIBLE MONO &
STEREO." Since modern cartridges were becoming more
widely available in phonographs in 1968, that was a
reassurance that the 45 could be played on both mono
and stereo phonographs equipped with such cartridges,
without any worry of damaging the record. In previous
years (late '50s to mid '60s), most stereo albums
contained warnings on the back to play the record only
on phonographs equipped with stereo cartridges, since
playing it with a mono cartridge back then would cause
permanent groove damage. Buddah also issued a few
stereo singles that year, designated "'Dual 45'
Playable Stereo As Well As Mono" on the label.
1968 was the first year of stereo 45s v.2; check
around for other threads on the board which discuss
this. The first stereo 45s came out in the late '50s,
but they faced three major obstacles at the time: they
weren't widely available, cost more than the mono 45
of that same title (which was widely
available), and the number of stereo phonographs on
which to play them was comparatively small. The
format fizzled, and would not be revived until nearly
a decade later, beginning with a few promo 45s (and
one or two likely erroneously-pressed commercial ones)
in 1967 and commercial 45s in early 1968.
"A Beautiful Morning" was also encoded using the
Haeco-CSG process, which was designed to make stereo
records more compatible with mono playback systems.
While that may have worked on making the records sound
more balanced on a mono player or on AM radio, it
adversely affected the stereo playback. Do a search
on "CSG" and you'll find several threads that go into
further detail. Fortunately, the CSG process was
never widespread, and gradually disappeared by the end
of the '70s.
It took several years for stereo 45s to become
commonplace after 1968, so the isolated Rascals CSG
stereo single isn't as unusual as you might think. It
was a gradual transition, and not at all consistent,
even within the same labels.
Tunestony wrote:
...and sorry, I can't figure out how
to post a picture from my local computer (not on the
web). |
|
|
Perhaps that's just as well, since there isn't much
need for that here anymore. Sites that host tons of
label scans, like 45cat and discogs, were still in
their infancy when the handful of photos you see here
were originally posted. More importantly, those
photos eat up bandwidth, and Pat asked long ago that
we no longer post them. |
|
|
__________________
Mike C. from PA
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
maciav
MusicFan
Joined: 02 June 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: 21 March 2017 at 10:43am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hello Yah Shure.
Are you saying all commercial stereo 45 versions from
the late 50s and early 60s also had a mono version
that was sold commercially? I had been trying to
determine the answer to this question for years, and I
had finally given up and just assumed that some
singles from that time period were only released in
stereo. However, your post implies otherwise when it
says one of the reasons stereo singles had difficulty
taking off at that time was the wider availability of
the cheaper mono versions. An example that I am
curious about would be "Why" by Frankie Avalon. I had
assumed that it was only released by Chancellor
Records in stereo. Was there in fact a mono 45 that
was also released for "Why," and was there indeed a
mono 45 that was always released during these years of
the stereo 45's infancy? I am not talking about a
separate mono mix, a mono LP version, or a mono
promotional 45. I am talking about two separate 45s
being released in tandem in every instance a stereo
single was commercially released -- one in stereo and
one in mono between the approximate time period of
1958 and 1961.
Thanks for your help.
__________________
Mike C. from PA
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 21 March 2017 at 2:20pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mike, yes, any new release stereo 45 during that time would have been in tandem with a mono 45, and here's why (Frankie Avalon pun unintended): Stereo records played with mono phono cartridges at the turn of the '60s would have been chewed to bits, as those carts were not physically capable of tracking these records without inflicting severe damage on them. Few grown-ups had stereo phonographs at the time - not surprising, considering how new the technology was - and even fewer teenagers could afford such luxuries.
Case in point: my folks had the 78 RPM turntable in the living room's old Crosley hi fi refitted with a new stereo cartridge-equipped Voice Of Music automatic changer in 1959. Even so, the fi stayed hi, not stereo, since the point of the upgrade was so that we could play LPs and 45s without them sounding like the Chipmunks on helium. Stereo wasn't even a part of the equation. My sibs and I didn't get our own stereo phonograph until 1963, at which point the stereo gloves officially came off. ;)
If a major hit like "Why" had been only released in stereo, record dealers across the country would have heard from boatloads of angry customers that their 45s had been mauled on the first playing. Mono 45s were compatible with both mono and stereo cartridges, but stereo 45s were only playable with stereo cartridges. From a retail standpoint, it would have been a disaster to release only a stereo 45 of a hot title. Making a 45 available exclusively in a format that was incompatible with the equipment of 99% or more of those customers who bought it would have made no sense whatsoever.
As a result, "Why" was issued in both configurations. In this particular case, Chancellor made things rather confusing by utilizing the same catalog number on both: C1045, unlike some of their other "SC" designations for stereo 45s. You can see both formats on 45cat.com. Do a search for Frankie Avalon, then click on the blue part of the link that says "Best match is Artist - Frankie Avalon (xxx records)." It'll come up with Frankie's USA 45s (there'll be other country tabs at the top); scroll down a ways and you'll see a picture sleeve of "Why" (the mono 45) and directly under it will be a label scan of the stereo 45. Click on both listings and have a look around. As you'll see, there are a multitude of label variations for the mono 45, largely due to the various independent plants that pressed the record. By contrast, there's only the one stereo 45 label posted. That's because the mono 45 vastly outsold the stereo 45 of this #1 hit. I wouldn't be surprised if the stereo 45 pressing amounted to a comparatively small run at just one plant.
Hope this helps!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Smokin' TomGary
MusicFan
Joined: 26 June 2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 186
|
| Posted: 21 March 2017 at 3:55pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
...and sorry, I can't figure out how
to post a picture from my local computer (not on the
web).
First, save your image to an image file sharing site like http;//imgur.com
Second, upload the image
Third, Copy the URL in the box
Fourth, when Replying here click on the right hand most box just under "Color" and paste in the URL.
As an example I post an image of the Rascals GH LP.
http://imgur.com/a/r5RGY
Edited by Smokin' TomGary on 21 March 2017 at 3:56pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Steve Carras
MusicFan
Joined: 29 July 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 177
|
| Posted: 21 March 2017 at 6:04pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tunestony wrote:
Just grabbed another great singles collection from Real Gone. This one has an
oddity though. Right smack in the middle of mono versions, there's a stereo
mix of "A Beautiful Morning." I checked my copy, and indeed, it is stereo...a
little early for stereo, 1968, don't you think?
But, here's the crazy part: the label lists it as "compatible mono - stereo"
when, in fact, it's stereo. Odd...
We learn in the liner notes that there's a different harmonica part on the mono
vs. stereo of "Groovin" as well.
...and sorry, I can't figure out how to post a picture from my local computer
(not on the web). |
|
|
Welcome from me,too,Tony!
__________________
You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
maciav
MusicFan
Joined: 02 June 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: 22 March 2017 at 3:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yah Shure wrote:
Mike, yes, any new release stereo
45 during that time would have been in tandem with a
mono 45, and here's why (Frankie Avalon pun
unintended): Stereo records played with mono phono
cartridges at the turn of the '60s would have been
chewed to bits, as those carts were not physically
capable of tracking these records without inflicting
severe damage on them. Few grown-ups had stereo
phonographs at the time - not surprising, considering
how new the technology was - and even fewer teenagers
could afford such luxuries.
Case in point: my folks had the 78 RPM turntable in
the living room's old Crosley hi fi refitted with a
new stereo cartridge-equipped Voice Of Music automatic
changer in 1959. Even so, the fi stayed hi, not
stereo, since the point of the upgrade was so that we
could play LPs and 45s without them sounding like the
Chipmunks on helium. Stereo wasn't even a part of the
equation. My sibs and I didn't get our own stereo
phonograph until 1963, at which point the stereo
gloves officially came off. ;)
If a major hit like "Why" had been only released in
stereo, record dealers across the country would have
heard from boatloads of angry customers that their 45s
had been mauled on the first playing. Mono 45s were
compatible with both mono and stereo cartridges, but
stereo 45s were only playable with stereo cartridges.
From a retail standpoint, it would have been a
disaster to release only a stereo 45 of a hot title.
Making a 45 available exclusively in a format that was
incompatible with the equipment of 99% or more of
those customers who bought it would have made no sense
whatsoever.
As a result, "Why" was issued in both configurations.
In this particular case, Chancellor made things rather
confusing by utilizing the same catalog number on
both: C1045, unlike some of their other "SC"
designations for stereo 45s. You can see both formats
on 45cat.com. Do a search for Frankie Avalon, then
click on the blue part of the link that says "Best
match is Artist - Frankie Avalon (xxx
records)." It'll come up with Frankie's USA 45s
(there'll be other country tabs at the top); scroll
down a ways and you'll see a picture sleeve of "Why"
(the mono 45) and directly under it will be a label
scan of the stereo 45. Click on both listings and
have a look around. As you'll see, there are a
multitude of label variations for the mono 45, largely
due to the various independent plants that pressed the
record. By contrast, there's only the one stereo 45
label posted. That's because the mono 45 vastly
outsold the stereo 45 of this #1 hit. I wouldn't be
surprised if the stereo 45 pressing amounted to a
comparatively small run at just one plant.
Hope this helps!
|
|
|
__________________
Mike C. from PA
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
maciav
MusicFan
Joined: 02 June 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 88
|
| Posted: 22 March 2017 at 4:42pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yah Shure,
Thank you for the time you took to answer my question
and explain it in a way that I could finally
understand what was happening at the time. I was born
in 1964; therefore, I missed these early stereo
records, and I can't visualize what was happening in
people's homes regarding their equipment, but now it
makes more sense.
I am wondering if you could answer a few other
questions for me:
1. Does the same apply for the Stereo-33 singles that
were released between 1959 and 1964? Did they also
have a mono counterpart that was always released
commercially?
2. Thank you for directing me to the website to
answer my question regarding "Why." As a side note, I
am probably zooming in on this record because my
parents were married on December 26, 1959 when this
song would have been topping the charts. But anyway,
is this version in mono? At times it sounds mono to
me, and at times it sounds stereo:
http://www.45cat.com/record/c1045
To help you find it, it was posted by BigBadBluesMan
(and I hope Pat doesn't mind us posting links from
other websites). I don't know what it is about this
record, but it always sounds like it is in stereo to
me. I have it on a Jasmine CD from the U.K. called
"The First Five Albums," and the back CD cover says it
was taken from "The Hitmakers (With Fabian)" and that
it is "Mono Only," but that version also sounds stereo
to me. The link above is about the best example I
have heard to convince me I am hearing a mono version,
but I am still not 100% sure even from this version.
3. Finally, and this is a dumb "chicken-or-the-egg"
question that I could ask any expert on this forum,
but since I just missed the early 60s, and since I now
know that there were mono 45s available even if a
stereo 45 had been released, why do so many compact
disc releases only have the stereo versions available
of certain songs, or make it nearly impossible to find
them in their mono versions. In addition to "Why," a
couple of other examples that I have noticed are "The
Battle of New Orleans" by Johnny Horton and some of
Connie Francis' records from the early 60s such as "My
Heart Has a Mind of Its Own." I could simply say that
the manufacturers don't care about these things like
collectors may, but that can't always be the reason
either when this phenomenon occurs scores of times for
scores of songs. I know there is probably not a
definitive answer, and you probably only have a hunch
or a guess, but I am just curious what you think.
Thanks again for helping me to understand the history
of stereo and mono 45 releases back when everything
started.
__________________
Mike C. from PA
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 22 March 2017 at 9:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mike, you're more than welcome.
maciav wrote:
| 1. Does the same apply for the Stereo-33 singles that were released between 1959 and 1964? Did they also have a mono counterpart that was always released commercially? |
|
|
Someone else can probably answer that one, since I never had any compact 33s. I can't imagine many retailers would have been thrilled with the idea of stocking four different formats for the same hit single, and even the two main labels issuing compact 33s (Columbia and RCA) weren't releasing every single on 7-inch 33s.
maciav wrote:
| 2.But anyway, is this version in mono? At times it sounds mono to me, and at times it sounds stereo: http://www.45cat.com/record/c1045 |
|
|
Mike, that BigBadBluesMan clip is in true stereo, warts and all. Funny you should mention the Fabian/Avalon The Hit Makers album on Chancellor 5009, because that was the very first rock and roll LP in our household (my sister asked Santa for it; the cover still looks new; the record... not so much.) It's true that it was only issued in mono, and I can confirm that it is, indeed, just that. If Jasmine stated that "Why" was taken from that LP, it most certainly would be a mono needledrop... *if* they're being accurate about its source. It's hard to tell with those public domain outfits.
It isn't hard to tell the difference between mono and stereo on this song; you can pick out specific instruments in the left and right channels, with Frankie's voice equally balanced between both channels. A true mono source would have everything - vocals and instruments - distributed equally between left and right channels. Only the surface noise, clicks and pops, would sound like they're coming more from one channel or the other, assuming both channels haven't been summed together from a mono vinyl record.
For example, on the stereo "Why" clip, the bells during the intro are coming from the left channel. In true mono, they'd be coming equally from left and right. BigBadBluesMan didn't help to clarify things: that clip's audio *is* from a stereo 45, but it shows a picture sleeve and the mono 45. There's another youtube clip showing the mono Chancellor 45 label, but the audio is true stereo. An American Bandstand clip has Frankie gamely lip-syncing in mono, but the screaming teens are a bit of a distraction.
maciav wrote:
| Why do so many compact disc releases only have the stereo versions available of certain songs, or make it nearly impossible to find them in their mono versions? |
|
|
Customer expectations, mostly. Given a choice between mono and stereo, most people will want stereo. They've been conditioned to hearing their favorite songs in stereo for decades. Some mono master tapes have been lost or destroyed over the years, some have been damaged, while still others have been sitting in tape vaults, untouched for decades, either because they've been forgotten or that stereo-is-always-better mantra has left them in the dust, so to speak.
I don't think it's that manufacturers don't care about mono, it's just that they cater to wherever they perceive the demand to be, and, aside from the Beatles and other big names, that's likely to be stereo. Sometimes, it's a matter of what the labels owning the masters do or don't deliver. Look at what happened with Varese, and their planned mono Buckinghams singles collection CD: Sony dropped the ball and gave them only stereo, when they'd specifically requested mono. Who knows whether it was because Sony didn't have tape archivists familiar with the mono masters, or because those masters are gone or misplaced, or that someone just didn't want to take the time to dig for the proper tapes?
As you can see, there really is no one-size-fits-all answer as to why so much mono has gone AWOL over the last couple of decades.
I agree with you about "The Battle Of New Orleans": those cannons have all the impact of a peashooter on the stereo mix. If you're gonna have a battle, you've gotta have more bass! ;)
Edited by Yah Shure on 22 March 2017 at 9:03pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: 23 March 2017 at 5:36am | IP Logged
|
|
|
maciav wrote:
1. Does the same apply for the Stereo-33
singles that were released between 1959 and 1964? Did
they also have a mono counterpart that was always
released commercially? |
|
|
I have a couple dozen or so of these, and all are stereo.
I believe these were mostly targeted towards jukeboxes,
most if not all of the ones I own came from a record
store that was co-owned with a company that serviced
jukeboxes, pinball machines, etc. I don't ever recall
seeing these mini-LPs sold to consumers, but for the most
part they pre-date my active record-buying years.
The BSN
website has a discography of these discs, you do
need to be a member in order to access the site.
Yah Shure wrote:
I don't think it's that manufacturers don't care about
mono, it's just that they cater to wherever they perceive
the demand to be, and, aside from the Beatles and other
big names, that's likely to be stereo. Sometimes, it's a
matter of what the labels owning the masters do or don't
deliver. Look at what happened with Varese, and their
planned mono Buckinghams singles collection CD: Sony
dropped the ball and gave them only stereo, when they'd
specifically requested mono. Who knows whether it was
because Sony didn't have tape archivists familiar with
the mono masters, or because those masters are gone or
misplaced, or that someone just didn't want to take the
time to dig for the proper tapes? |
|
|
From what I read (either here or on BSN) Columbia
adamantly refused to allow the mono tapes to be used. As
to why, who knows?
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Paul Haney
MusicFan
Joined: 01 April 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1742
|
| Posted: 23 March 2017 at 6:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
One thing I have noticed in recent years is the trend of releasing the mono versions of many 1960s hits, especially those with dedicated mono mixes. Hopefully most, if not all, will eventually see the light of day.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: Rascals - The Complete Singles A’s & B’s
