Re: [ARSCLIST] Early stereo LPs: subject to mononuclearosis?

[Roger and Allison Kulp <thorenstd124@xxxxxxxxx>]

Tom,
    I assume you mean the 35mm ones your mom did with Svatiaslav Richter.Killer stuff.I also think the Mercury/Philips first pressings of the Szell/Concertebow,and London Monteuxs of the period,are actually superior,to the European pressings of the  time.I have some of both.The US-pressed Philips Mengelbergs of the time,are well worth seeking out,too.You mention RCA pressings.I have quite a number of White Dog era,deep groove pressings of Deutshce Gramophon,and London Lps.(They sound as good as you would think.)The latter,being both rock and classical,the former marked RCA "Made in USA",at six o'clock,on the labels.Some of these DGGs have US cardboard covers,some have the German.All are large "tulips",of course.I always thought these were record club issues.They are some of the most underappreciated pressings of the period.
   I have a couple of the late 50s/early 60s US Mercury pressings you speak of.They DO sound really different.(They both have thier charms,IMHO.)The later ones I have, have photo covers like the stereos,but retain the original 50000 series numbering.
  Roger Kulp

Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  Yes, I think Philips did do a discount crapo label in the mid-60's, mainly to issue some of their 
old mono stuff in North America. Philips tried from Day One to establish a brand but they never 
really did it here. I notice that the Philips classical label has been dormant since Universal 
bought Polygram. London, Decca and DG continue to be active labels. The other one I could never 
understand is why Sony killed off Columbia Masterworks -- a very well-established brand -- and 
changed it to Sony Classics.

On the other hand, Philips did some really fine jazz records under their own brand, moving Jack 
Tracy over from Mercury as soon as they took control. I'm speaking of the excellent Dizzy Gillespie 
and Woody Herman records made in the early and mid-60s. And on their front-line (non-discount) 
issues, Philips whipped some good pressing knowhow into the Mercury plants. As you probably know, 
Mercury Living Presence was pressed by RCA due to Mercury's inability to meet the expected quality 
levels. The jazz, unfortunately, was pressed in-house. Philips took the classical pressing in-house 
by late 1964, but they did a better job of it. Many Mercury titles remained in print until the 70's. 
In fact, I just bought a used copy of Quincy Jones' 1964 "Plays Henry Mancini." The label and vinyl 
quality were early 70's Mercury, in excellent condition. Sound quality was very good indeed. Sleeve 
material was that late 60's/early 70's non-laminated paper over cardboard, not the first-issue 
litho/laminated stock Mercury used until about 1966.

One more Mercury tidbit I recently discovered. As stereo LPs were dawning, before the format reached 
a mass-market, but while there was sudden new attention to high-fidelity, Mercury went back and 
remastered and reissued the original MG5000 series mono records from the very early 50's. You can 
tell these reissues if the record title is printed on the spine of the jacket and if the inner vinyl 
is stamped either P followed by a number (for George Piros) or JJ for John Johnson. The vinyl will 
also be more flexible than the 1951-53 thick/hard material. These versions generally sound superior 
because RCA's pressing was fabulous by then and also because they were cut in real-deal RIAA curve 
(early 50's Mercury were AES curve, which was close but not RCA's New Orthophonic, which became 
RIAA). Also, the very first Mercury's, from 1951 and 1952, were before the excellent Miller cutter 
head with 200 watts of McIntosh behind it was used. So the net-net was more dynamic cutting, quieter 
vinyl, genuine RIAA curve and the album title on the spine. It also might be true, but I'm not 100% 
on this, that the tapes were played back on Ampex tape decks, which had better playback specs than 
the old Fairchilds.

-- Tom Fine


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lennick" 
To: 
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Early stereo LPs: subject to mononuclearosis?


>I remembered another "compatible" label from the same people, something like Philips World Series. 
>Cut
> very low level, or maybe only the Canadian pressings had this problem.
>
> dl
>
> Tom Fine wrote:
>
>> Wing was also a recession-fighter, introduced during the early 60's downturn. The series was
>> discount price and cheaply packaged. Not all Mercury executives thought it was a good idea but 
>> the
>> pop guys prevailed and the rack-jobbers loved it because they could stack 'em high and sell 'em
>> cheap. Simulated stereo was just a bad idea on all fronts, but it prevailed up into the 70s. 
>> There
>> were some interesting experiments done in a better reprocess method, both at Columbia Studios and 
>> at
>> Fine Recording. But it was costly -- book expensive studio time, set up an excellent full-range
>> speaker in a nice live room like the 30th St. studio of the Ballroom and then play the mono 
>> material
>> thru the speaker and record a stereo pickup to a new master. It actually works very well, 
>> especially
>> with recordings originally made close-mic'd or in a dead room. But it begs the question, why 
>> bother.
>> Just enjoy a well-mixed mono presentation. Electronic reprocess of mono into psuedo-stereo is a
>> degradation 99+% of the time.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine 


 		
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.