SH Spotlight Recording and Mastering Questions---Answered here. Any more?

Yup. The Capitol stereo version has lots of added echo. The Capitol mono has added echo too, but not as much as the stereo.

 

Listen to the edit after the solo.

I'll pull it out again, but in the past it sounded like every other stereo version I have. The EQ is a bit odd on the box, but that's it.

I'll try and post clips later.

 

Steve,

Do you know if there were other studios who regularly compressed "echo returns", other than Gold Star or; was Gold Star unique in this practice? I believe I am hearing this "effect" on non-Gold Star recorded vintage tracks as well. Of course, this could simply be compression added to the Mono or Stereo "master" when it was executed...

Bob

 

Thanks Steve!

That helps and I appreciate the history as well...

Bob

 

No added echo/reverb on I Feel Fine or She's A Woman? But I get your point. However I believe there is additional compression (in varying degrees) on the Capitol "cutting masters" (thus making any echo or reverb more noticable).

Oooops. Thread crap. Sorry.

 

The following clip has a transfer from a Parlophone "-3" pressing as well as the Capitol box version EQ'd and level adjusted to (more or less - it was quick) match. The only other processing was some light click reduction on the LP dub, although the vinyl was pretty quiet to begin with. I won't say the order, but it shouldn't be too hard to tell.

I'll Be Back stereo sample

I don't hear any difference in echo. Do you?

 

The stereo IFF/SAW were certainly processed Duophonic. I don't know if anyone really knows if the US mono mixes had the echo on them before they got to Capitol, though.

Check out the I'll Be Back clip...

 

Interesting! I get the impression that this echo could be punched "in" and "out" during the recording in order to achieve certain effects during the recording. Is this correct? An example might be the different echo effects at different places on "No Reply" by The Beatles. You can especially hear this on the Stereo mix...

Bob

 

When did the word re-master come into use and what does it mean?!?

Surely everytime a master is used to cut a lacquer in order to make a vinyl record or a master is used to prepare a digital "production master" in order to make a CD/SACD/DVD-A the process is called "mastering" - why the redundant "re...."?

 

I'd like to expand a bit on the DUB part of Overdubbing. I've read discussions here about a couple of the CD's you've mastered from the "undubbed" master. And other times on other CD's, even newly recorded ones, where a track is listed as the DUB mix. Could you clear that up. I understand from my earlier pre-digital radio days we'd make a dub of a spot to send to another station or dub a spot or song to a cart. But I don't get the "undubbed" master and DUB mix.

 

My guess would be that the first time around it is mastered. When it is redone at a different date it is remastered. (and we get to talk about the digital masters vs. the remasters)


Q. Why is it that two CDs from the same pressing (first run, for example) made with the same masters can sometimes sound different?

 

Yeah, I'm still hoping you'll "remaster" that Chris Montez CD this time using the master of "Call Me" instead of the underdub - doesn't sound the same without the chinking of the wine glasses.....

 

You mean the original master never had that on? Or they lost the master and ony have the underdub and, now, the effects tape too?

 

You mean the lacquers were cut from three tapes running together with the mix going straight to the lathe or the mono mix tape?

If so does that mean that any CDs with the full effects laden "Call Me" are needledrops?

 

Got it!

It is too bad that these wonderful chambers were later used for storage instead of being used in recordings...

Bob

 

Gotcha - although all that post editing freaked me out there for a moment!