[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] stereo or double mono
David Lennick wrote:
For starters, just listening in mono and stereo should tell you if there's any
Some labels used to reissue old recordings by playing mono tapes in stereo
(Atco on LP, London on CD) and those sometimes had a bit of stereo spread (or
the result of dirty playback heads or unbalanced channels) and sounded pretty
slushy in mono.
Two other cases may be of interest: Electronically enhanced for stereo
(which sounded bad either way); and stereo recordings sold as mono.
Suppose the publisher had a good stereo master of a title with a limited
market. He could publish two versions, the stereo listing for a one
dollar premium. Or he could publish the same pressing with different
jackets, thereby keeping the customers who wouldn't pay the stereo
premium. Complicating matters further, if the title sold the publisher
might create a monaural master for a repressing so that the same issue
would be either mono or stereo depending on when it was pressed.
My copy of Westminster's "Flaming Angel" (by Prokofiev) rescued a friend
from a major problem. He needed it in stereo and his was mono. Though
mine had the same labels and packaging, it was in stereo.