A List of true mono albums vs folddowns - UK and US

Bonzo Dog Band:The doughnut in granny's Greenhouse .. uK mono fold?

 

Why did the UK issue so many mono fold-downs of US albums? They certainly understood the concept of dedicated mono mixing with their own artists. Why would they assume that a stereo mix from the US would fold any better than their own stereo mixes?

 

What about Liberty UK mono's of both The Bonzo Dog > Gorilla and Doughnut albums. Are they fold downs ?

 

There was no mono mix done of those US albums, so the only thing to do was fold the stereo down to mono for a UK mono release.

 

Honestly I don't know, never compared with corresponding stereos. I believe they are. Both sounds balanced enough - Gorilla a little thin at parts, but Doughnut very heavy and on the spot. UK Liberty is tricky - most late mono's sound great though some may be folds. Impossible to say without thurough comparisons.

 

I was not referring to any specific albums. So I will ask again:

Why did the UK issue so many mono fold-downs of US albums? They certainly understood the concept of dedicated mono mixing with their own artists. Why would they assume that a stereo mix from the US would fold any better than their own stereo mixes?

 

As I mentioned up thread, my mono UK Elvis Speedway appears to be from the US mono stamper. So if the UK is a fold, I'd guess the US is too. I don't own a US mono to compare to the UK though.

How was it determined that the US is a dedicated mix? This is such a rare LP I doubt many of us have ever had the chance to listen to it.

 

I have both monos of first two albums. And they sound alright if thin tinny sounding. I would have thought with ' Doughnut' A gimmickery echoesque Gus Dungeon production late '68 you would have thought a dedicated mono mix would be passé.

 

Someone mentioned this earlier but it's not on the list: The UK mono Pet Sounds is a fold of the duophonic mix where it's true mono in the US.

 

I don't know. Doughnut mono sounds very good to me and if Aynsley Dunbar's 1968 "Prescription" isn't true I don't know what. One of the best white blues monos I've heard ever...and I've heard a few. Enthralling. Do You have that one?



http://monolover.blogspot.se/2013/06/the-aynsley-dunbar-retaliationdoctor.html

 

They needed mono mixes for their market. There was none available and they could not mix it themselves from scratch, so they took the available stereo mixes and folded them down.
Nothing to do with assuming the US stereo mixes would fold down better.

 

Not a hung jury on that one. Its in this forum; the tape box (or one of them if I recall right) actually has the instructions for mono cutting.

 

Captain Beefheart & His Magic Band - Safe as Milk
US true mono - UK fold down

 

I'm always mystified as to why people like mono. Wouldn't a good stereo mix always be better than a good mono mix?

 

This is anecdotal, but makes sense. I was talking with an old timer from the hi-fi / stereo industry whose experience goes back to about 1970. The gist was that in 1968-69 mono hi-fi systems were the majority in the UK, especially amongst younger people. So if you're producing a pop record in 1968, and release it it stereo, you're missing a large chunk of your potential sales market. A mono permits everyone to play it regardless of the system. And as here, how many of us from in the pre-teen / teen age years were really that aware of the difference? You just wanted the record.

The US consumer market was very different in size and culture than in the UK. In the late 60's stereo's started to catch on in the US and we had the production capabilities to meet the demand. We also produced records on a larger scale that the UK did. The UK hi-fi consumer & industry were smaller and more discreet. Whereas we might do a particular production run of 150,000 of a popular album, UK manufacturing and its higher quality control punched out 25,000. (This accounts too for why UK titles of popular groups / albums are often harder to find.) So even with record production, the labels and manufacturers had to gage it to the market.

 

True, as long as it is GOOD stereo mix. And therein lies the problem. It took a while for GOOD stereo mixes to become the norm in pop music.

 

If it helps, here's the mono mix of "Our Love Was" and here's the stereo mix.

 

Thanks for the replies. I guess my question wasn't clear:

Why would the UK issue mono folds of US stereo masters when actual mono mixes were made for the US? Were they trying save money on shipping costs by by having one set of tapes sent rather than two? UK engineers understood the concept of dedicated mono mixing with their own artists. Why would they assume that a stereo mix from the US would fold any better than their own stereo mixes?

 

Don't know. It could have been the UK subsidiary's request. For example: having a stereo tape now means a mono can be made for the present market and when the times comes, a stereo. (This presumes the labels would be thinking 'ahead' in time). It could also be what the US label's policy was. And if we're talking 1968 - it may have been because many monos were being made for promo / radio purposes mainly.

This is an era where stereo mixing was by and large being experimented with - to get it right, the hi-fi market is in a state of flux, the longevity of pop music was not certain, young consumers were not discriminating about 'which mix' they wanted, nor were they audiophiles. Decades later us audio nerds decry mono fold downs when in reality most sound just fine to the average listeners ears. We over think it!

 

HA! Even as a kid, when I played a stereo record on my Dad's mono tube hi-fi, I could tell that the balance was off. If it was a rock record, the vocals were almost always too loud!

 

More punch!

Here's a 14 page thread you can read: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/why-do-you-like-mono-recordings.256630/

 

I've just always felt mono was anemic compared to stereo.

 

Now I'm mystified.