For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
rayrad
properly annoyed about amazon.co.uk...
but thanks to all here who provided alternative options
just secured a copy at recordstore.co.uk
Quote
jackflash27
variaworld.nl
349,90 and until 8th January 10% discount with code varia1
315 is not bad at all.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
jackflash27
variaworld.nl
349,90 and until 8th January 10% discount with code varia1
315 is not bad at all.
meanwhile at amazon.ca, an already overpriced box (relative to everywhere else) at $555 goes up to $621!
We a three days away from tons of moans about poor packaging, delayed delivery, bent corners, warped records, surface noise etc.Quote
VoodooLounge13
We are just 3 days away from this release!! Can't wait to hear everyone's reviews of the set!!! Very excited!!
Quote
ironbellyWe a three days away from tons of moans about poor packaging, delayed delivery, bent corners, warped records, surface noise etc.Quote
VoodooLounge13
We are just 3 days away from this release!! Can't wait to hear everyone's reviews of the set!!! Very excited!!
Pretty colours were already discussed to death in unboxing videos. Like this oneQuote
treaclefingersQuote
ironbellyWe a three days away from tons of moans about poor packaging, delayed delivery, bent corners, warped records, surface noise etc.Quote
VoodooLounge13
We are just 3 days away from this release!! Can't wait to hear everyone's reviews of the set!!! Very excited!!
but but but...what about all the pretty colours?!
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
ironbellyWe a three days away from tons of moans about poor packaging, delayed delivery, bent corners, warped records, surface noise etc.Quote
VoodooLounge13
We are just 3 days away from this release!! Can't wait to hear everyone's reviews of the set!!! Very excited!!
but but but...what about all the pretty colours?!
Quote
ironbellyPretty colours were already discussed to death in unboxing videos. Like this oneQuote
treaclefingersQuote
ironbellyWe a three days away from tons of moans about poor packaging, delayed delivery, bent corners, warped records, surface noise etc.Quote
VoodooLounge13
We are just 3 days away from this release!! Can't wait to hear everyone's reviews of the set!!! Very excited!!
but but but...what about all the pretty colours?!
video: [www.youtube.com]
We need something new
Because the early Rolling Stones meant to sound that way. Keith said.Quote
wiredallnight
Why should I buy vinyl records in mono? It's like buying a VHS cassette in black & white.
Quote
wiredallnight
Why should I buy vinyl records in mono?
Quote
Irix
... in mono it's staggered into the depth.
Quote
RobberBrideQuote
Irix
... in mono it's staggered into the depth.
Oooooo, I like that expression. "Staggered into the depth".
Quote
Davie137
Let’s hope it does arrive in decent packaging. Wasn’t the 2016 box set in a cardboard box but placed inside polystyrene? If my courier leaves it on the door step in this weather (U.K) I won’t be best pleased
Quote
wiredallnight
Why should I buy vinyl records in mono? It's like buying a VHS cassette in black & white.
Quote
MrEchoQuote
wiredallnight
Why should I buy vinyl records in mono? It's like buying a VHS cassette in black & white.
Stereo for consumer use was first introduced in 1958. In the late 1950s and in the 1960s most LPs were usually released in separate mono and stereo versions. Singles were always in mono up until the late 1960s. In the late 1950s stereo LPs had a market share of well under 20% in the US. Even in 1966 over 60% of all LPs sold in the US were still mono. Radio was always in mono. As a consequence musicians and producers concentrated on getting the mono versions of their records right and regarded those as the primary products. The stereo versions were seen as novelties for a niche market. The stereo mixes were often made without personal supervision by artists and producers and therefore differed from the carefully constructed mono mixes authorized by the artists. Complicated overdubs and edits that were made on the mono mixes often were not recreated for the stereo versions.
When stereo became the new worldwide industry standard by 1970 (1968 in the US, 1969 in the UK), the mono versions of old records were no longer repressed and the stereo versions were accepted as the "standard" versions (especially by younger consumers, who did not know the mono versions).
In addition to a lack of artistic supervision early stereo mixes also suffered from the shortcomings of stereo technology in the 1960s. When cutting stereo lacquers loud bass notes tended to distort. Furthermore stereo pick-ups of the period often had problems tracking the grooves of loud bass notes and skipped. For those reasons the bass was usually dialed back in the stereo masters, which resulted in a rather "thin" bass sound on early stereo mixes. In comparison the mono mixes have much more bass and simply sound much heavier and rocking. Furthermore early stereo mixes were made in a way that overstated the stereo effect: the elements of the music were placed far apart in the stereo soundscape. Far to the left, far to the right and in the center. You do not hear a band, but separate elements that often distract from the overall effect.
Some mono versions are so-called fold-downs, which means that instead of creating two separate mixes the music was mixed in stereo and than the two channels were combined or folded down for the mono LPs. But even then engineers were always monitoring the mix in mono to make sure the mono worked. And again the bass was usually reduced in the stereo master for the reasons pointed out above. Furthermore you have to remember that the art of mixing mono sound had been perfected over a long period of time, while stereo was still a new thing in 1960s pop music. Consequently a carefully made fold-down from the period is still preferable to a crude stereo mix.
If you want to hear the sound that musicians of the late 1950s and the 1960s wanted their audience to hear, you need to listen to the mono mixes.
Quote
bitusa2012Quote
MrEchoQuote
wiredallnight
Why should I buy vinyl records in mono? It's like buying a VHS cassette in black & white.
Stereo for consumer use was first introduced in 1958. In the late 1950s and in the 1960s most LPs were usually released in separate mono and stereo versions. Singles were always in mono up until the late 1960s. In the late 1950s stereo LPs had a market share of well under 20% in the US. Even in 1966 over 60% of all LPs sold in the US were still mono. Radio was always in mono. As a consequence musicians and producers concentrated on getting the mono versions of their records right and regarded those as the primary products. The stereo versions were seen as novelties for a niche market. The stereo mixes were often made without personal supervision by artists and producers and therefore differed from the carefully constructed mono mixes authorized by the artists. Complicated overdubs and edits that were made on the mono mixes often were not recreated for the stereo versions.
When stereo became the new worldwide industry standard by 1970 (1968 in the US, 1969 in the UK), the mono versions of old records were no longer repressed and the stereo versions were accepted as the "standard" versions (especially by younger consumers, who did not know the mono versions).
In addition to a lack of artistic supervision early stereo mixes also suffered from the shortcomings of stereo technology in the 1960s. When cutting stereo lacquers loud bass notes tended to distort. Furthermore stereo pick-ups of the period often had problems tracking the grooves of loud bass notes and skipped. For those reasons the bass was usually dialed back in the stereo masters, which resulted in a rather "thin" bass sound on early stereo mixes. In comparison the mono mixes have much more bass and simply sound much heavier and rocking. Furthermore early stereo mixes were made in a way that overstated the stereo effect: the elements of the music were placed far apart in the stereo soundscape. Far to the left, far to the right and in the center. You do not hear a band, but separate elements that often distract from the overall effect.
Some mono versions are so-called fold-downs, which means that instead of creating two separate mixes the music was mixed in stereo and than the two channels were combined or folded down for the mono LPs. But even then engineers were always monitoring the mix in mono to make sure the mono worked. And again the bass was usually reduced in the stereo master for the reasons pointed out above. Furthermore you have to remember that the art of mixing mono sound had been perfected over a long period of time, while stereo was still a new thing in 1960s pop music. Consequently a carefully made fold-down from the period is still preferable to a crude stereo mix.
If you want to hear the sound that musicians of the late 1950s and the 1960s wanted their audience to hear, you need to listen to the mono mixes.
Great post. I agree. To my ears The Stones and The Beatles in mono sound better. It is personal, I appreciate. But to me, the mono sounds like they’re all standing right in front of me playing as a single unit. The stereo records sound like they’re somewhat in separate rooms. I prefer my band to be in front of me. As one.
But yours is a great reasoned post. Thanks
Sure, Aftermath on West German CD [London 820 050-2] is not that 'novelty stereo' as The Hollies - 20 Golden Greats [EMI CDP 7 46238 2] or early records of that other, lesser known, beat band from Liverpool. But still - it is WIDE.Quote
Spud
Mr Echo does indeed explain the history wonderfully...
... The only caveat I would add is that the Stones 60's output in Stereo [certainly from Aftermath onwards ] did not suffer too badly from the "novelty Stereo" issue of the day.
The low end was Ok and the stereo images reasonably natural when compared to woeful sound of many 60's Stereo releases.
I've always appreciated the qualities of the mono mixes but have never felt the need to acquire them . [Though I do own and occasionally spin a couple of original mono pressings]
With good quality playback equipment it's usually a case of different, not better or worse.