Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
From: Mike Richter <mrichter@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 16:10:44 -0700
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <003a01c68f37$07dcec50$6401a8c0@intel>
List-archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>
List-help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV?body=INFO ARSCLIST>
List-owner: <mailto:ARSCLIST-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-subscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Message-id: <448F45F4.40504@cpl.net>
References: <s48ebc38.048@gwia203.syr.edu> <003a01c68f37$07dcec50$6401a8c0@intel>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)

JOHN HALL wrote:

A stereo record was not cut prior to 67

That's a fascinating statement, considering that stereo recordings were in commercial distribution from 1956. Which, of course, says nothing about such predecessors as the movement of Mozart's Symphony 41 recorded by Thomas Beecham in 1934.

I can think of no sense in which that statement is valid. Please enlighten me.

Mike
--
mrichter@xxxxxxx
http://www.mrichter.com/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
  - From: JOHN HALL

References:
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
  - From: Robert Hodge
- Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
  - From: JOHN HALL

Prev by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Repairing (or purchasing) a Uher
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Looking for Tape for Analysis
Previous by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Stereo records.

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]