https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Sun, 05 Apr 2026 07:58:40 +0000 Mon, 18 Apr 2022 13:30:26 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.07 360 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=5567 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum//images/Top-40-Music-on-CD-Forum-Logo.png https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/ https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60707&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60707 Author: Brian W.
Subject: 5567
Posted: 18 April 2022 at 1:30pm

eriejwg wrote: I found some UK 45's on YouTube that fade out as early as 3:15 and then found a U.S. 45 that runs 3:21. I had to slow the Rolling Stones in Mono version by 1.3% and fade slightly earlier to match the 3:21 45 which matches Jim's 45 timing.

It's possible that the 45s were faded on the fly during the mastering process. I've heard of that happening before.]]> Mon, 18 Apr 2022 13:30:26 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60707&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60707 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60706&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60706 Author: eriejwg
Subject: 5567
Posted: 18 April 2022 at 10:31am

I found some UK 45's on YouTube that fade out as early as
3:15 and then found a U.S. 45 that runs 3:21. I had to slow
the Rolling Stones in Mono version by 1.3% and fade
slightly earlier to match the 3:21 45 which matches Jim's
45 timing.]]> Mon, 18 Apr 2022 10:31:40 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60706&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60706 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60704&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60704 Author: Brian W.
Subject: 5567
Posted: 17 April 2022 at 10:00pm

PopArchivist wrote: Interestingly enough the only correct mono version for the 45 is on the The Rolling Stones In Mono (Box Set). Otherwise it seems all appearances in mono run 20 seconds too long....

The mono box actually runs a little longer than the U.S. 45
as well. The single drops the last two "hmm-hmms" of the
fourth line. There are four "hmm hmm hmm, hmm hmm hmm hmm,
hmm hmm, hmm hmm hmm...' lines in the mono box, but the 45
doesn't quite have the complete fourth one; it cuts off the
final two "hmm hmms." ]]> Sun, 17 Apr 2022 22:00:39 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60704&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60704 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60684&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60684 Author: PopArchivist
Subject: 5567
Posted: 13 April 2022 at 5:02pm

Interestingly enough the only correct mono version for the 45 is on the The Rolling Stones In Mono (Box Set). Otherwise it seems all appearances in mono run 20 seconds too long.... ]]> Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:02:24 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=60684&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#60684 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59231&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59231 Author: NightAire
Subject: 5567
Posted: 23 September 2021 at 6:35pm

Thanks, David! So the "hit" version is mono, the LP version is stereo, and both are the same length. The mono long version is the single mix faded about 20 seconds later.

...I wonder if the later fade has ever made it out in stereo?

This is good info; thanks again.]]> Thu, 23 Sep 2021 18:35:30 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59231&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59231 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59227&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59227 Author: davidclark
Subject: 5567
Posted: 23 September 2021 at 2:16am

NightAire,

This is what I have for "Paint It Black".

The 1966 commercial 45 was most certainly mono. For the most part,
stereo singles were not introduced until 1968 (a few), then more each year
until becoming the norm in 1973.

It was issued on the US issue of "Aftermath" in true stereo. So yes, the
stereo mix was done "at the same time".

The much longer, 3:45-ish versions I believe first came in the CD era, but I
could be wrong on that. But the 45 and "Aftermath" were in the 3:20 range.

Edited by davidclark]]> Thu, 23 Sep 2021 02:16:55 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59227&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59227 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59214&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59214 Author: NightAire
Subject: 5567
Posted: 21 September 2021 at 9:13pm

I've noticed some of the versions are mono (I assume the original single mix) and some are stereo:

Aftermath: mono
Grrr!: stereo
Hot Rocks 1964-1971: stereo
Through The Past Darkly (Big Hits 2): stereo on two versions, mono on a third

I also have a couple of two-track CD singles that both have it in mono.

I'm curious if the single was only issued in mono, and if the stereo mix was done at the same time. It reminds me of some of those two track recordings that were later "remastered" in stereo with the drums all in one channel, etc. I also thought of some of the early "throwaway" Beatles stereo recordings that was done just because stereo would sell while the mono mix had blood, sweat, and tears poured into it.

It's also odd to me that this thread reports the single running about 3:20-ish, which is the length of all of the stereo versions I have, while all of the mono versions I have run closer to 3:45-ish.

What's the story on the longer mono version, and should the stereo version be held in equal regard with the mono?

The stereo versions seem to be an early fade of the mono version, and the mono version tracks so tightly with the stereo version on Grrr! that I'd almost think Aftermath was a mono folddown of the stereo digital master used on Grrr! (I assume that's not the case; coincidence, or very well maintained reel to reel decks?)

Any insight on the mono vs. stereo mixes and the 3:20 vs. 3:45 lengths would be greatly appreciated!
]]> Tue, 21 Sep 2021 21:13:43 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=59214&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#59214 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37563&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37563 Author: Yah Shure
Subject: 5567
Posted: 29 April 2013 at 8:31pm

jimct wrote: It's all good, Ed! We're both longtime "Downey Board Teammates"

Are you sure about that, Jim? ESPN is reporting that you've been traded to BSN for a first round draft beer pick and a 25-count box of Head East's "Never Been Any Reason" DJ 45s (A&M 1718, vinyl Columbia Santa Maria pressing, deadwax A&M 11834 (STEREO) -S2.)    ;)

Thanks for the kind words, although there are others who know far more about this stuff than I do. You're absolutely right about how fascinating it all can be. I'd seen differences between pressings within the singles bins even as a kid, but it was in my college radio days when I began to notice that the postmarks of the DJ 45 packages were seldom the same as the city of the labels' home offices. Working in the distribution end of the business was a great education in learning exactly where the records were made.

College radio was also when I noticed that the Atlantic DJ 45s that came in the mail had different color schemes on the stereo labels than the ones obtained from the local WEA branch office. And no wonder: the regionally-contracted plants such as Specialty, Monarch and Plastic Products (and PRC, after PP closed) all pressed Atlantic DJ 45s in addition to stock copies. So much for making the DJ 45 the de facto 45! :) Fortunately, the Atlantic lacquers were all cut in New York back then, rather than at each manufacturing plant.

And I'm not going to even mention Columbia. :)

]]> Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:31:09 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37563&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37563 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37551&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37551 Author: jimct
Subject: 5567
Posted: 29 April 2013 at 12:35pm

It's all good, Ed! We're both longtime "Downey Board Teammates," and, for
both as long and as deeply as both of us have been into 45s, guys like Mark
Mathews, you and I are all *still* learning new particulars about 50-year-
old+ 45s. Incredible. (And Mark, I absolutely *love* your suggestion about
using the promo 45's timings as the "definitive" time, when several
commercial pressings existed.) I mean, Yah Shure alone has increased my
knowledge of "pressing plant particulars" 1000-fold. That whole subject is
just so interesting to me! And also how some reprint 45s look 99% like the
originals did! I also agree with Yah Shure's last point, about one of your
"added detail" posts rekindling further song discussions. So Ed, if it ain't
broke, don't fix it, I say!   :)]]> Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:35:49 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37551&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37551 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37550&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37550 Author: Yah Shure
Subject: 5567
Posted: 29 April 2013 at 12:14pm

I like the fact that Ed's (or anybody else's) timing postings often spark or rekindle further discussion, leading to findings that may not even be related to the actual timings. The knowledge shared through these exchanges is what makes this place unique.]]> Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:14:10 +0000 https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5567&PID=37550&title=rolling-stonespaint-it-black#37550