The Last Album Released in Mono

Hot damn. Still trying to get a pristine one. Ever since that Saturday afternoon calling around through the yellow pages, 48 years ago. I always wondered which would happen first, mono US "Procol Harum" or Cubs finally winning the World Series. Or hell freezing over, take your pick. Maybe I'm finally getting close...

Meanwhile, for that title all I've got are my fake stereo vinyl, right-tape-wrong-speed Salvo and right-speed-wrong-tape Westside, and one Japanese K2HD based on the latter. Sheeeesh....

And don't try to tell me about the new Esoteric CD this year. Good ol' Charlie Brown has had the football pulled away by Lucy at the last minute too many times to fall for THAT again. Gotta actually hear it first...

 

This is exactly right. Something else that happened in the late 60s was that you could buy portable stereo record players.
I got my first one I think in 1968, it was a stereo player that was tubes ( the smell of dust on those hot tubes is a smell I will never forget). It had two flip out speakers. Stereo! I was in heaven.
The makers of home consoled caught up really quickly. It seems like the market changed a great deal between 65 and 70.
By 1973 or so audiophile shops started showing up on campuses and buying big dollar stereo gear was quite vogue.

 

If you got pushed, it wasn't by the industry. It was by the other consumers who didn't buy enough mono to make it desirable to still produce.

 

Okay.

Enough already.

I know I've got it spot on from memory. But time to look it up now (sheeesh, talk about being PUSHED!).

Billboard Magazine, June 3, 1967, page 1, et seq. Not one, but SEVERAL articles in Billboard magazine, announcing that Columbia and RCA hike mono LP prices to match stereo prices. And the purpose of the decisions taken on May 25, 2967, to move toward an all stereo industry. Note the box at the bottom, where 1966 mono LP sales outweigh stereo 61.4% (mono) to 38.6% (stereo) overall, just five months earlier. Another mention that in the small classical market stereo LPSs were outselling mono 8 to 1, apparently accounting for at least some of the 38.6% stereo buyers overall. That 38.6% (minus the classical buffs) who you insist were pushing ME into buying stereo Sgt. Pepper's against my wishes two days earlier, rather than a decision by the two biggest labels to do exactly that one week earlier. Note the related article on the same page, entitled "Dealers and Racks: Will Hurt at First - Boon in the Long Run". Even ANOTHER mention of EMI's development of a mono cartridge that will not damage stereo LPs. Even a mention of an expected "run on distributors for mono product during the next few days" (all dealers not "on board"?). And Stan Gortikov, of Capitol (ahem) records "said he felt it could LAUNCH the industry toward a stereo-only inventory", specifically citing "heavy inventory investment with mono and stereo records plus the NEW addition of SEVERAL tape cartridge systems which have added to the problems of stock inventory" (capitalization emphasis was mine).

Well, maybe I should have said I was "launched" instead of "pushed". I should have looked this up first instead of going from memory. I apologize for the error.

Two days after I walked into that record store to buy Sgt. Pepper's in mono, the industry decision was already in fresh print as the talk of the industry. As in page one of the industry bible. But hey, it's a free country, so believe whatever you want to believe. Be my guest, by all means.

Here is the link: https://books.google.com/books?id=4ScEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=first stereo lp to outsell mono&source=bl&ots=bcYvMswUgy&sig=c-M1HMMDcYlU-WWuqLLjRqRXmWA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBWoVChMI3aLFv-O1yAIVy5yACh1yAAbu#v=onepage&q&f=false

Now back to the main issue of this thread. The mono phaseout 1967-1969, and which LPs of that era had true, unique, artist/producer approved mono mixes worth seeking out for those who already have the titles, in what by that time was already pretty good stereo (with one very notable exception I'm not going to bring up yet again). NOT counting straight fold downs, (which we can all get at home, without the extra expense, simply by the push of a button or use of appropriate summing cables). NOT counting later compilations (I might still be interested in some of those, but original OP wanted to exclude them, so I defer), NOT counting vanity mono issues by latter day artists in mono only, for which by definition no choice exists for us to consider anyway, and even NOT counting citations by our esteemed host to some earlier hard panned stereo titles like "Rubber Soul", which can be used for home karaoke, damn fun to be sure, but having really nothing to do with qualities for actually listening.

BTW, many thanks, Google!

 

You got the ones listed in this thread:

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/a-list-of-true-mono-albums-vs-folddowns-uk-and-us.405789/

 

Once again, no doubt they wanted rid of mono. Because it was a white elephant by that time. Chances are they had to raise the price to keep from losing money on them anyway, mono sold so much less than stereo that it was likely a break even situation by that time.
A lot happened between 1965 and 1970, most notibly the fact that HiFi consoles were disappearing from department stores and replaced by stereo consoles. Classical fans at that time tended to be audiophiles and quite set in their ways, no doubt the disappearance of mono really cranked them considering they had what was at that time small fortunes tied up in mono tube gear. But they accounted for a very small segment of the buying public.
Also, as you say, stereo recording got better, mostly because the British were finally catching up with new technology which had to be shipped to them from halfway across the planet.
Mono was, by 1967, obsolete.
Again, remember that most album buyers at that time were not audiophiles or collectors. They were average Joe public who wanted to get the best out of that maple piece of furniture that costed them a months wages and played stereo records.

 

Not, it's NOT once again, it's WRONG again. I'm assuming that you actually read the three articles in the June 3, 1967 issue of Billboard, for which I posted the link, about the two biggest labels raising mono prices to match stereo, about the explicitly stated reasons WHY they were raising the mono prices, the GOAL they were trying to accomplish by doing so, and the sales figures showing mono still significantly OUTSELLING stereo even then. That article, coming from the industry bible, with quotes by top industry executives and most recent industry sales figures, is authoritative. You most certainly are not. Now my own previously recited personal experiences and observations are not in themselves authoritative either, but they jive 100% with everything in the three articles from that issue of Billboard.

And your comment about classical audiophiles being strictly into tube mono only by 1967 is just flat ludicrous, given the fact those same articles have classical music being the one category in which stereo was actually outselling mono, by a ratio of about 8 to 1. It's a bit funny how you have young pop and rock listeners with a stereo in every room at home and demanding only stereo at a time when mono was outselling stereo by a statistically significant margin, then in the same breath you have classical listeners as a bunch of old farts sets in their ways and refusing stereo when stereo was leading sales in that category 8 to 1 over mono. C'mon man, you just cannot be serious, can you?

Frankly, if you want to just keep ignoring the obviously stated and verified facts, from cited authoritative sources, and insist that mono was "obsolete" by June 1967, when mono was still outselling stereo even in the US, that is starting to move into troll territory. Give it up, man.

 

If you don't get it this time, please don't respond again.
OF COURSE they raised prices and wanted it gone. It was a white elephant. If you don't know what white elephant means, look it up.
Mono just didn't sell.
If mono was selling, the industry would have clung to it far longer, likely indefinitely or until it didn't sell.
Corporations do not quit making widgets when widgets are the hottest thing going. When widgets quit selling, they try to find a way to get out from under making them.
Look up 'red herring" while you are at it.

 

Fantastic!!! A one line treasure trove on a thread increasingly eyeball-deep in BS! Many thanks for that link!

 

If you want to take on the role of adding and subtracting to that list (it was my OP) feel entirely free.

 

One issue with the phaseout of mono, according to the Dot Records President, was that mono was often subject to discounts. Even though mono had increased in yearly sales by ten million records from 1960 to 1966, if it were subject to discounts in the marketplace sellers might increasingly look at mono as a cheap alternative to stereo. Though mono had increased in sales by ten million from 1960 to 1966, stereo records had increased in sales by twenty million units over the same time period. There wasn't a problem of mono not selling. The industry realized, however, that many people were moving into buying stereo, and that raising the price of mono would generally not dissuade people from buying either at the same price.

Really, though, the music was so good and popular during this era, that people had to have worried much less about whether or not they were buying stereo or not, and more about which great artists they could get great albums from.

 

Right you are. And the big thing was finally being able to play stereo on mono players as well. That was key because the first (and for a good while only) stereo in most homes was one of those consoles with color TV. And if you think stereo was getting hotter in the late 1960s, it was nothing compared to color TV. That console instantly became the TV of choice for everyone in the house. Good luck getting to use the stereo unless you lived alone, especially for kids limited to before bedtime non-school nights and weekends, as most were back then, when parents cared about that sort of thing. Now at least I could play a stereo record on the fairly recent portable mono changer handed down by my older sister. Up in my room, I could listen to what I wanted, when I wanted.

But I wanted stereo too, even then. That's why I bought my own stereo in 1968. I wanted components for high end sound. That sort of thing took a while for a 14 year old in the late 1960s. Took me until late 1968 to swing that. Thank God for Dynaco kits. In my case, I hate to say that those Allied and Lafayette catalogs back then fueled as many 14 year old fantasies in me as Playboy magazine.

 

Old thread, but this post belongs here.

It seems common knowledge says the Mary Hopkin "Postcard" mono is a straight fold. After comparing a first press stereo and mono I disagree. One can always discuss variations in audio and balance depending on equipment used and listening mode, but you can never argue with differences in timing or fade-outs which are clearly distinguishable for at least two of the tracks on it.

More on the subject here if anyone's interested...

MONOLOVER: Leta efter resultat för hopkin stereo vs. mono »

 

Think I have some rockabilly records of the 90s in mono where bands intentionally try to recreate the 50s sound. Beyond this is possibly "Ram" (1971) by Paul & Linda McCartney the latest I have.

 

So you have the Ram mono promo? That's nice. A couple of Southamerican countries issued records in both mono and stereo up to 1972. Last UK double issue was Tom Jones "I Who Have Nothing" at x-mas 1970. Brazil "Hey Jude" mono album has all the original mono mixes, but "Postcard" would be the last original Apple recording issued in true mono, as I believe Jackie Lomax "Is This What You Want" is a fold.

 

It seems to be accepted that the UK mono LP of "Aretha Now" (mid 1968) is a dedicated mix, not a folddown. Was that a fluke? I've also seen it written than other US Atlantic acts of this time merely had their stereo LPs folded for mono UK release (some have mentioned the Rascals, for instance). So, was there any policy in place here, or was it all rather arbitrary? Was "Aretha Now" her last LP with a dedicated mono mix? Was it the last dedicated mono mix released for an Atlantic LP in general (even if it wasn't released as such stateside)?

 

The album "Plate Spinner" by Myracle Brah was released only in mono. It was recorded in April 1999.

 

It seems we keep missing the OP's original point, the way I read it. We are not trying identify latter day "vanity mono" releases, which do not provide a choice between mono and stereo anyway. We are trying to identify releases during the ending of an era in which ALL releases were in mono AND true/fake stereo. And which provide a choice, a decision, as to which mono versions are worth seeking out (as opposed to folds, etc., produced for third world markets). I am quite certain that there have been numerous mono releases since 1999. Way beside the point, as no choice by a purchaser is involved anyway.

BTW Deram in particular continued to release true mono alongside stereo very late in the game (1970), long after US labels finished (mid-1968) and UK labels (end of 1968). Deram's last was "Cricklewood Green" by Ten Years After, which I understand is DEFINITELY not a fold. I have heard of one or two strays after that, including Tom Jones and Johnny Cash. In the latter case record execs may have presumed that the "rubes" who favored that type music probably didn't have stereos anyway, but just old crank-up machines with the big horns. Why not? They frankly DID assume that purchasers of "Music from Big Pink" would be listening primarily on "kiddie phonos" when they sucked all of the bass out of it, obviously having NO understanding of THAT purchasing demographic either.

 

When I was a kid, late 1969, we went to a five and dime store, probably Woolworth's, and there was a heaping table full of mono closeout LPs for really cheap. I talked my mom into letting me buy Magical Mystery Tour and Beatles '65, the first two albums I ever owned, both brand new and mono. I can date it pretty accurately because Here Comes the Sun was all over the radio and I got confused when I saw I'll Follow the Sun. I thought it was the song that I liked on the radio. That's why I bought '65. Oh, to have a time machine. I can only imagine what was in that pile.

 

I didn't read all the pages but the Beach Boys Smile album was first released in 2011 in mono.

 

What was probably in that pile was an investment that would bring a pretty sweet return on eBay had any one of us known the future. In truth, the best Beatles pressings on US Capitol would come in the late 1970s and beyond by Wally, but those were stereo only (except for an error mono pressing I can't specifically recall at the moment).

Most likely that pile consisted of dumped overstock from retailers who largely avoided mono like plague beginning in summer 1967, nearly a full before the last US mono release. As such, I suppose that same pile would also include some dreck like Mantovani and his cascading strings, etc. But you might also have found the Moby Grape debut LP, Buffalo Springfield "Again", Procol Harum debut, "Surrealistic Pillow" and a whole bunch of holy grails which go for big bucks on eBay today, even in "EX" condition. There likely would have been few UK imports, as imports of any kind were quite rare during that era. Those who had them in collection in those days likely brought them back from an overseas trip (as I myself did with some Beatles EPs after a trip to England after 6th grade summer 1965). With a bit of luck there might even be a pasteover butcher cover "Yesterday...and Today" in that bin.

BTW, any time machine fantasy I have ever had ALWAYS involved several stops at record stores at different key times. And a visit to Audio Consultants in Evanston, Illinois (where I still shop today). And I would have brought a DVD recorder along to pick up some long lost classic sports events that reman available today only as voiceover footage with cheesy music of the type popular with NFL Films in that day. I have even considered how I would have to deal with the big problem (aside from the obvious technological one) of getting today's money converted into cash dollars of that era. That would involve numerous stops through many years on the way back, each time swapping out newer bills for as many older ones as possible.

 

Actually that's the "Smile Sessions" compilation. The original "Smile" album was never finished, and as such has not been nor can ever be released as a completed 1967 album ever. And again it is a latter day reconstruction issued in mono ONLY, with bonus discs (depending on the version purchased) including some stereo mixes as well. So no real choice to ponder is involved. Again missing the real point of this thread. Which is LP titles originally released in BOTH mono and stereo, near the end of the mono era, readily available in stereo only since then, but for which the much rarer original mono version is well worth seeking out.

That said, "Smile Sessions" is definitely a must purchase, along with Brian Wilson's own 2004 version.

 

Now Ramones holds that title, reissued in 2016. Thread title should probably be updated to include the words "originally released"...

 

Reissues is another issue. See the new Stones mono box, already out I think (I am waiting for individual titles to cherry pick next year). And all of the Beach Boys albums at least through "Pet Sounds" STILL available in BOTH mono and stereo from Analogue Productions. To say nothing of the Beatles mono LP box from 2014. And a whole bunch of Sundazed reissues. Of course I pounced on those like a starving cat.

However, I do think even a less careful reading of the OP's original post clearly contemplates titles issued in BOTH stereo and mono before and during the mono phaseout of 1967-1969, many of which are truly superior in mono (as opposed to straight folds, which can be easily accomplished with the more commonly and cheaply available stereo version and proper summing on one's own gear). Which involves an actual CHOICE to be made when searching for such titles. He seemed particularly interested in avoiding folds for that reason.

The OP himself specifically mentions "Let It Bleed" from late 1969, but could well have included "Beggar's Banquet" from December 1968 as well. Both ARE indeed folds. But I would tell the OP himself that NOT all folds are straight reductions, and in a few cases have some real merits of their own. Those two late Stones titles in the new mono box are drawing raves on this forum right now from reviewers who are well aware that they are folds.

The original "Smile" is of course a special category, as the ORIGINAL 1967 LP was never finished, and never released in mono or stereo in any event. But the constant mention of mono only vanity releases by indie bands in the 1990s and later are so far off point as to amount to (perhaps unintentional) threadcrapping. What choice of mix is, after all, available in the case of such latter day releases?

The new Ramones set does INCLUDE a mono mix of the LP (along with stereo mixes and outtakes), but that was never released back in the day, which was years after the phaseout ended in any event. A worthwhile purchase to be sure, especially for fans. But not involving any choice or decision to be made regarding WHICH version to seek out, neither in the original release (stereo only) nor 2016 (mono LP mix, whether you want it or not).

 

For the OP, summing up what I know after plenty of research along the lines of intent of HIS original post:

1) From 1970: "Cricklewood Green" by Ten Years After (on Deram, their last true mono) MAY be well worth searching out on LP, but keep in mind that quality mixing to stereo by 1970 was already "old hat", such that one should not expect clear superiority of mono over stereo. Stereo that was fake or hard panned from four track was ancient history by that time.

2) From late 1969: "Arthur" by the Kinks. Definitely true mono, but the mono mix is not highly regarded. And if you want it, it is easily available in both better stereo and mono on deluxe CD sets that are well mastered. Ditto Procol Harum's "Shine on Brightly" and Tull's "This Was", both from fall 1968.

3) From early 1969: Joe Cocker debut album, with some true mono and some folds.

4) Target area of search for US titles should be titles released BEFORE June, 1968. Any US titles after that were stereo ONLY in US, and any UK mono versions of those titles would be folds. Later summer 1968 exceptions "Waiting for the Sun" (Doors) definitely a fold, and "Cheap Thrills" MAY be a fold.

5) Target area for search of UK titles should be titles released BEFORE end of 1968. (Almost) everything after, and even some before that (above exceptions noted) will likely be a fold.

6) Third world pressings of titles that were stereo only in US and UK, including everything 1969 and later, will be a fold.

7) One NOTABLE exception to (6) is a Brazil pressing of US Capitol of 1970's "The Beatles" (commonly though not officially known as the "Hey Jude" comp LP). That LP consisted of singles that had never previously made it onto earlier Capitol LPs, mainly from Sgt. Pepper's era and later. Given the fold mix to use, the Brazilian engineer (possibly an early Steve Hoffman type) "rebelled" and decided to grab all of the original mono single mixes already in house and used those instead when mastering the LP. Kudos to him. Find that if you can. But don't expect cheap.

8) DON'T just blow off ALL folds. It is true that most folds are just straight folds, meaning you can get the same result with a cheaper stereo version and pushing the mono button. But a few are NOT just straight folds of the stereo version, but stereo possibly somewhat remixed, and/or with other "enhancements", done with mono in mind. Based on recent reviews of the new Stones mono box, both "Let It Bleed" and "Beggar's Banquet" leap immediately to mind. US folds (the few that there are anyway, as folds were mostly a UK thing) are not worth bothering with.

9) And of course watch those reissues. Sundazed in particular if you don't want to spend a king's ransom.

10) BEWARE the Steppenwolf debut LP (US early 1968). Many "mono" pressings have side two error pressed in stereo. And the best killer mono mix of "Born tobe Wild" is on the single only, NOT the LP.

The above is by no means comprehensive, but I hope it proves helpful. Happy hunting.