technically speaking, what is 'fake' stereo? (Duophonic, Electronically Re-processed, etc.)*

Right. Blaze was their first stereo non-soundtrack LP.

 

I'm sorry Larry, but that just isn't true. It was a patented, US Capitol only, process. EMI did release Duophonic processed stuff, but only from tapes sourced from Capitol. (i.e.: Sinatra, Dean Martin, etc.) EMI had their own music-garbling fake stereo mangler, but Duophonic wasn't it.

I own the UK Hollies LP with the rechanneled "If I Needed Someone" track and it's not Duophonic.

 

Correct, it's comb filtering and delay lines. But the truth is that Duophonic meant different things at different times. The Duophonic process they were originally using in the Tower in 1962 was not what they were doing in 1970. It changed over time. I've heard some Duophonic releases that were bathed in echo and all kinds of crap, so I think it was up to the decision of the engineer (and/or reissue producer) to decide how far to take the process.

It's all hideous, if you ask me -- a sham of a mockery of a travesty of a sham.

 

Great thread.
In the past I've had fun doing fake stereo (with a 16 band graphic EQ) on some old recordings. But it's nothing I would ever share with a serious listener.

 

Message From the Country,and Looking On,in particular as US Capitol pressings used to be very common up until maybe the early to mid 90s around Albuquerque,even in the thrift stores.Never was able to locate a Fly or a Harvest though.

 

The monos are listenable,but not great.Were the Roy Orbison and Animals (pre 1967) fold downs?

 

In my somewhat limited experience, there's a dramatic difference in quality between Pickwick UK and Pickwick U.S. vinyl.

In general I've found Pickwick UK releases to be quite good... and Pickwick U.S. releases to sound like poop.

As a couple of others have posted, one of the reasons that U.S. Pickwicks sounded so crappy was recycled vinyl, but the main reason, IMHO, is they were crappily mastered, too.

.

 

I am curious.In the time I have been here,I have learned a number of 60s mono rock LPs that I thought "sounded good" were not what I thought they were,so I am starting to question everything as far as 60s rock LPs are concerned.

 

OK. Listening to this UK Polydor Hendrix Smash Hits. It's all fake stereo ... trebley left channel, bassy (and very dead sounding) right channel. Looking at the deadwax, it does appear to have old stamper numbers scratched out. Perhaps someone can confirm whether these match the old, bad "stereo" Track pressing:

Side A: Machine stamped 6 13004A B (preceding has a line drawn through it) 1 1 1 2 4. Above that is a hand-etched 2310268A
Side B: machine stamped 6 13004B (line thru it) 1 1 backwards 1 9. to the left of that is a hand etched 2310268B

Guess I got "lucky." heh.

 

Of all the record labels around in the US, Decca has the worst pressing quality of any major label in that era.
They were the first to record on tape, only to press it up on some brittle platter that probably used sand as a filler along with reground records. Very noisy and bumpy surfaces. I would love to do a Louis Jordan 40's set for MCA from the metal parts if they exist and UK 78 pressings for the rest.

Track issued some nasty sounding records.


This has to be one the all-time worst sounding records in my collection, not the mono but the fake stereo. The fake stereo also has some bad tape damage to make things worse.

 

It's still painful even nearly 50 years later. I only learned of this recently. I picked up a beautiful looking Animals comp for $1, and "hey look, it's even in true stereo! I didn't even know these songs recieved stereo mixes, but there's no way they would make such a proud proclamation like that on a record with reprocessed tracks!"

Finally got it home, dropped the needle... Yeah, how about no.

 

Whoa! Are you saying that versions of these two tunes exist that aren't compressed to death? The story goes that the compression may have been applied by EMI engineers b/c Paul's radical bass-recording technique (using a five-foot high speaker cabinet as a mike) on "Rain" & "PW" would otherwise have resulted in overmodulated grooves (apparently, far more so than usual, since bass compression was pretty standard in those days). So this story has always implied to me that every released mono or stereo version of either track was likewise compressed to death. I'd LOVE to find relatively uncompressed versions, which I bet sound a heckuva lot more like what the band had originally intended. I've gone through many pressings & relereases over the years and never heard such a version. Just ordered red & black-vinyl Japanese Odeons of the 45s -- which Geoff Emerick recently reported as being "spot on," at least from an EQ perspective (see Fremer's "EMI Masters" piece on Analog Planet) -- but I don't have high hopes even for those.

 

The Beatles wanted to make a single with a mighty bottom-end, similar to what was being regularly released on 45 by Motown and other record companies in the USA at the time. The recording and mixing of Paperback Writer and Rain was done with that in mind. Part of that was that the mixes were compressed really hard to make the songs "jump" from the speakers, along with a really hot and prominent bass guitar in the mix. (Courtesy of Geoff Emerick minding his tracks so Paul's bass could occupy one whole track by itself as opposed to sharing one with the drums.)

EMI originally rejected the mixes based on the level of low end (and wanted to truncate it in the cutting room) until the "back room boys" came up with a box that would allow a level of bass to be cut onto the disc that was higher than previously thought safe without making the disc impossible to track on the cheap phonographs thought to be the main market for Beatles' 45's. (As explained, it wasn't a compressor so much as a transient limiter that helped "massage" the peaks to a more manageable level without destroying the "feel" of the bass in the mix.)

But the original mono mixes themselves were always heavily compressed; there isn't a mono version of either song that isn't as heavily processed. It was on purpose. That was what the Beatles' wanted - a record that would smack you upside the head (so to speak.) In fact, Capitol may have even added MORE when they mastered the 45 for the USA...which REALLY makes the 45 just explode out of the speakers! LOL

The stereo mix of Paperback Writer on the other hand isn't as heavily compressed, nor is the bass as mightily upfront as the mono mix, making it sound limp, wimpy as heck and NOT what the band intended. The Paperback Writer stereo mix is also missing the proper slap back echo effect on the ends of the verses. These differences aren't too surprising since the stereo mix of the song was done well after the mono.

Rain's stereo mix fares a bit better, despite being mixed even later, in 1969. It has about 85% of the punch the mono mix has. (IMO)

So you're not going to find uncompressed mono mixes of the songs. They don't exist, it's not what The Beatles wanted. You want uncompressed versions of the songs, go to the stereo mixes (especially for Paperback Writer), the mixes they had nothing to do with.

 

I mentioned recently in another thread,about Bill Haley records how horrible those polystyrene US Decca LPs from the 50s are.That the best sounding,best quality pressings of the 50s Haley LPs,and other US Decca LPs from the 50s,are the British Brunswicks,with the German Brunswicks and Australian Festivals tied for second.The pre Tommy Who Deccas stereos are an abomination.I was playing my US Decca mono Happy Jack the other day,and really enjoyed it.

I'm waiting for someone to tell me it's a fold down.

 

Isn't there a Japanese Animals Greatest Hits LP from the late 70s or early 80s that's true stereo?

 

Possibly. Unlikely that it'll ever end up in the dollar bin though haha. Although this is something to look out for, thanks for the tip.

 

Heartbreak Hotel is particularily awful on that. I'd not really heard the song much beforehand and had been told of its "huge influence" on pop/rock. I couldn't figure out why when it sounded like an "ambient" recording of someone playing the record at the bottom of a stairwell. And this was an 80s UK re-issue!

 

I was referring to US Decca 78 singles, the ones that crack just looking at them. I have a few Brunswick Crosby 78's that look like the US metalwork was used. If so I would like love to do a Louis Jordan comp and use the UK Brunswick 78's where the masters are gone. I read where the master for Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" was worn out from all the re-pressings, and a new master was made using a Brunswick 78. For a label that was cutting edge in the technical department and being the first label to use tape, they have the worst pressings of any major label until the late 50's. Whenever I come across any Decca polystyrene LP's they look and sound like they were played on a ancient record player with a heavy steel tone arm and a spike for a stylus, or someone was stacking pennies on the tone arm since the record skipped. Yes, they are worn almost white from being played on such medieval gear.

I scored this 1960's Turtles Japanese hits comp on London,



The whole entire LP except for one song (You Showed Me) is all in fake stereo.
It's done in the bass on one channel, treble on the other with some phasing in the sound. But when folded into mono, it sounds quite good. The tracks from the first two albums sound somewhat listenable. If it's from Japan and it says "stereo" proceed with caution. That late 70s or early 80s Animals comp sounds like the one on Abkco and that's all mono, even the UK 2LP set I have on RAK is all mono, but it sounds killer.

 

I was asking if it existed.I had heard there was such a record out there.

 

I think all the Turtles LPs through Happy Together WERE recorded in mono.

 

Everything was mixed in stereo.
The first two albums were mixed like the early Beatles albums with vocals and instruments coming out of different speakers, the hits from those two albums (It Aint Me Babe & You Baby) were remixed into "real" stereo for the Golden Hits LP where all the CD's are derived from.
My guess is some foreign affiliates got only mono mixes and that's what that Japanese LP used, but in fake stereo.

Very strange