|
Post by historywak on Sept 12, 2010 17:32:44 GMT -5
Several Apple Records' albums were released both in Mono and in Stereo. Those albums were:
James Taylor - James Taylor (1968) The Modern Jazz Quartet - Under The Jasmin Tree (1968) Mary Hopkin - Postcard (1969) Jackie Lomax - Is This What You Want? (1969)
From what I found, they were only released in mono in the UK.
A couple of questions/discussion points are:
(1) Are these original mono mixes or are they mono mixdowns of the stereo mix? (2) If they contain original mono mixes, would you like to see them released? (3) How do the mono mixes compare to the stereo mixes? I know there have been endless discussions about that in terms on the Beatles' catalog but about in the case of these albums? (4) I would also like to note that this applies Apple singles as well.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 13, 2010 10:04:28 GMT -5
I don't know the differences in the stereo or mono mixes for these Apple releases but if I were to buy them I'd pick stereo if given the choice.
There is only one band I'd play the stereo/mono game for and buy both sets and that is The Beatles. I wouldn't even do it for the solo material. I'd pick stereo only. I don't need a mono Dark Horse for instance (even though I don't think such exists). ;D
I didn't have to pick on that 25th year anniversary Pet Sounds release because it came in both mono and stereo on one disc!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2010 4:20:03 GMT -5
I'm wondering, if i had an album that was recorded in mono and stereo, and i listened to it in both formats,in any order,would i be able to tell the difference...
|
|
|
Post by historywak on Jan 1, 2011 12:00:04 GMT -5
I'm wondering, if i had an album that was recorded in mono and stereo, and i listened to it in both formats,in any order,would i be able to tell the difference... On most songs you should be able to tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Blackguard on Aug 8, 2011 11:45:16 GMT -5
Given that the four albums in question were released in 1968 and 69 I would be more likely to have bought the Stereo version. It was at the time when stereo was replacing mono as the preferred format. My guess is that the mono mix was made from the stereo by combining both channels into one.
|
|
|
Post by Earl Purple on Apr 25, 2016 8:41:44 GMT -5
Some have been remastered but when I bought the CD of Sgt Pepper in 1987 I was very disappointed with the fact that on many songs the vocal came out of only one ear and I found that uncomfortable.
I don't know if they thought that was a good idea at the time.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Apr 25, 2016 23:18:01 GMT -5
Some have been remastered but when I bought the CD of Sgt Pepper in 1987 I was very disappointed with the fact that on many songs the vocal came out of only one ear and I found that uncomfortable. I don't know if they thought that was a good idea at the time. My understanding was that the thinking of the time was that people listened to mono. Only serious audiofiles listened to stereo and they were more interested in hearing the separation, hearing the vocals over here and the guitar parts over here. The Beatles, George Martin as the leading expert, were a little slow in recognizing that stereo was becoming the new medium for the listening experience for the average person. I don't think the Beatles themselves had good in home stereo equipment. I remember seeing photos of them into the seventies with little portable record players. Remember though, those things could sound pretty good. One speaker, but pretty good. The new Beatles 1 release was supposed to fix this. I wasn't that impressed. Although the songs on 1 tended to be the songs with the better stereo mixes anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Earl Purple on Apr 26, 2016 4:56:52 GMT -5
Listening that way would be like, instead of them performing on a stage and me standing facing them, instead having John Lennon on one side singing direectly into one ear whilst the other 3 were on the other side playing their instruments directly into my other ear.
Whilst it might be flattering to have the Beatles performing directly into my ears, I'm not sure musically it would be the best way to enjoy the music.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2018 16:05:05 GMT -5
Personally, even as "lopsided" as the stereo mixes generally were/are (pre-dating MMT --- though, the ones used on FOR SALE/'65, certainly, sound good!): I've always liked how that isolated L/R channel separation actually creates more of a sense of insight into the recording by making one aware of a lot more little details -and even mistakes- in the process of it. It makes the production of a song sound, in a unique way, "organic"; how the spatial quality of stereo allows these things to be heard while, mono is just a monolithic wall of sound (which, as so many people like to throw the "intended" argument about to try to justify mono as somehow being "superior": mono was simply a NECESSITY of the infrastructure promoting and selling Pop records to their target audience). I, for one, can only see mono as being an alternate curiosity...if the mix makes the song sound radically different.
|
|