Hot Rocks or Singles Colection?

Luke,

There are a number of cases where I have chosen Stereo, asked for votes from this crew, etc. but, many of the Stereo tracks that I have listed, to date, are listed as Stereo because that is all that is available on CD. For instance, with Motown I will largely use Mono mixes with some exceptions. Another example, the Mono mixes of Neil Sedaka have never been issued on CD. Try to find a Mono mix of "A Lions Sleeps Tonight" by the Tokens?

On the Chess tracks, I will have to make some critical decisions, however. With "Satisfaction"--it is easy--Mono all the way because of the impact!

Bob

 

You know, one of the interesting things I've discovered in this forum is how different people have different priorities and agendas for music listening and collecting. I especially love these periodic debates between Luke (the stereo enthusiast) and Grant (the lover of original singles mixes). It provides much food for thought, and makes things very entertaining!

 

Again Luke, A LOT depends on how much of a deviation of the stereo mixes from the mono single mixes you're willing to accept. It appears you are willing to compromise some authenticity just for having stereo. Some don't really want to do that if they can avoid it.

 

If it was recorded in true stereo, give me stereo. If not, mono. Simple. Whether it's an original LP, single, box whatever.

 

Dave,

How about the Stereo mix of Satisfaction? Would you prefer that mix over the Mono mix?

I believe it is more difficult than "just" the original recording. Steve has indicated that Elvis was recorded in Stereo as early as 1956 but then mixed to Mono.

I love certain Stereo mixes of vintage material usually when the Stereo mix mirrors the Mono on "impact". In the case of Satisfaction, both the old Stereo mix and, apparently, the new Stereo mix do not accomplish that.

I have often wondered why so many here (it seems like it) will take the Stereo mix over the Mono mix even at the loss of the feel and impact of the original hit single mix. Can anybody answer that question?

Bob

 

I know you like simplicity in life but the issue isn't that easy! It's a downright complicated mess! Recording is one thing, but MIXING is quite another! Many of those stereo mixes do not match the mono singles mixes that were the hits that most people heard back then. Some stereo mixes were only done after the fact, as an afterthought. All the blood. sweat and tears went into the MONO mixes, which were labored over for weeks, while the stereo mixes were usually done in literally minutes, often with things missing too.

 

Grant,

Great point! In the 60's the real sweat equity went in to the Mono mixes--well documented.

Bob

 

"As-is" I'd take the mono. However, with some "tweaking" you can get the old stereo mix to sound just like the mono mix, yet with some separation.

On certain songs. Not everything from '56 on was done in stereo, just things here and there.

Obviously things must be taken on a case by case basis, but in general, when it comes down to it, I simply derive more enjoyment from the stereo mixes. That added dimension "opens up" the recordings for me. While "punch" might be more important to Grant, stereo is more important to me.

 

Er...what mono mixes that you know of took weeks?

And, we *are* talking about the Stones after all, and the stereo mixes aren't missing anything.

 

Please tell me how much "compromise" is involved for the songs I mentioned.

 

Luke,

Satisfaction--barring your "re-mix" of the new Stereo mix of Satisfaction, it is difficult for me to believe that you could replicate the "impact" and "power" of the Mono mix from that awful Stereo mix on the Japanese Hot Rocks?

So, what you are saying, in general (exceptions noted), is that you would rather have two distinct channels of recorded information over the original Mono singles mixes even if it means losing impact, power and the exact qualities of the mix that was played on the Radio all those years ago? Wow!, I find that hard to believe, honestly!

Bob

 

As I recall, the early Stones albums were released in the U.S. as either mono or "electronically-reproduced stereo" versions. At what point did they start recording in true-stereo?

 

Time Is On My Side
Satisfaction
Got Off Of My Cloud
Street Fighting Man

plus a few others where the stereo differs from the mono.

 

I was actually talking about the old Hot Rocks mix!

Well, yes.

Like I've said, different people like different things. To me, "impact" often doesn't stick out that much, unless the mixes are very different. On the other hand, stereo usually "opens things up" for me, and makes them more enjoyable.

Grant can tout the mono mix of My Girl all day long, but for my money, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Cooley High mix.

 

Bob,

I think to keep to the focus and spirit of your project that you really should go for the Stone's mono mixes if applicable. I'm not knocking the stereo mixes but they do have a different impact/flavor than what I think you're project is about. If the goal of your project was to aquire the "best" sounding (in audiophile terms, etc.) versions of every song then I think fine, go with some of the stereo versions but I think you're going for authentic from that time period of AM radio...

Todd

 

Er...those weren't the songs I mentioned! Besides, the above songs are not "missing" anything in stereo.

Are you comparing two different *recordings* or two different mixes? If we are talking about the same recording, there is nothing different between the mono and stereo.

 

They started *recording* in stereo as soon as they got to the US - all of the Chess and RCA tracks were recorded on multitrack machines. However, stereo *mixes* didn't start coming out until Aftermath.

Also, I believe their first single, Come On, was recorded on multitrack equipment.

 

Todd,

Certainly, I am leaning in that direction on this project because of the very reasons that you have stated in your post.

Bob

 

Luke,

For me, impact and power is what Rock music is all about--capturing the raw energy. I do have an affinity for Stereo mixes where those qualities are not supremely sacrificed. There are, however, other qualities in those Mono single mixes to consider such as: just the right amount of Reverb or Echo (analog produced), just the right amount of compression true to the Mono single mix and the balance of that original mix in terms of bass, mid-range and high-end. Many late 50's to mid 60's Stereo mixes are "off" in these qualities as well in addition to impact and power.

My Girl--I respect your preference. For you it is LP mix that you prefer over the original hit single mix. That is simply a matter of personal taste prevailing over historical record, and, that is fine for your personal musical listening enjoyment.

Bob

 

When was the last time you heard the 45 of "Street Fighting Man"? It is very different from the lousy stereo mix.

 

What "lousy stereo mix" have you been listening to? Then one I've heard sounds great!

 

BUT have YOU heard the 45 RPM mono single mix?????

 

Cloud Mix?

One of the songs that has changed drastically on the radio is The Rolling Stones's "Get Off My Cloud." I swear what I hear on the local classic Rock station today is not the same song I heard growing up. I'm not even sure it's the same performance!

When radio stations switched to CD, they started using the weird version I still hear today, with a higher-pitched instrument needling through and above the previously indistunguishable blob of Louie-Louie chords.

Is this a case of a stereo/mono difference? Is it a bad CD remix? Or is it simply the higher resolution of the CD?

Or is it just my 'magination, once again . . .

 

Re: Cloud Mix?

Sounds like the stereo mix. Same performance, it's just that the backing track is lower and the guitar overdub is much higher (what you're hearing). That guitar is on the mono mix, it just isn't as loud.

Of course, that stereo mix *can* be made to sound pretty much like the mono mix, but that's another story...