[78-L] Electronic stereo and Schwann

[Michael Biel]

Bertrand CHAUMELLE wrote:
> Le 28 déc. 08, à 14:00, Michael Biel a écrit :
>
>   
>> Bertrand CHAUMELLE wrote:
>>     
>>> I disagree.
>>>
>>> Fake stereo appeared long before Schwann made a segregation between
>>> records.
>>>
>>>       
>> But it was done selectively at that time.
>>     
> ***Right. But it would be useful to date precisely the whole thing. On 
> the classical side, I don't have the references, I just remember  the 
> French classical music magazine 'Diapason' reviewing (favorably) the 
> electronically re-processed Toscanini.
> I have kept a Schwann for each year beginning in May 1963. They list 
> several Presley LPs, and several new (old mono, in fact) LSP(e) 
> references were added the following years.
>
> For instance, Elvis' first LP LPM1254 appeared as LSP1254 as early as 
> February 1962. In fact all his mono LPs got the fake stereo treatment 
> in the course of the 'sixties.
> ***Well, as I said in reply to Chris Zwarg's mail, let's find out when 
> the Toscaninis were released, and then compare that to the February '62 
> Elvis.
>   
The numbers for the three albums are:
Dvorak Sym5  LME 2408
Pines & Fountains of Rome  LME 2409
Pics at an Exhibition    LME 4010

These numbers do not match their mono versions, and would probably be 
issued at much the same time as the numbers around them.  I have the 
April and Sept 1960 Schwann new listings here and show RCA Victor up to 
LM/LSP 2380 in April 1960 and down to LM/LSP 2436 in Sept 1960, so it 
seems likely that the three LMEs came out in mid 1960.   April 1962 
seems when some DuoPhonics come out of Lombardo and Bob Crosby.  So it 
might be around two years before some of the pop electronic stereo start 
to come out.  In the 1963 Artist Issue, the only other Toscanini in 
stereo is the two record set Plays Light Classics VCM/VCS 7001 which was 
pushed by the record club as a bargain.  It might have even been 2 for 1. 


> What about reel-to-reel stereo tapes? Were there fake stereo references 
> among them at the time ?
>
>   

There was no market for pre-recorded mono tapes (beyond the earliest 
years of 1954-57), so hit albums had to be faked if they were to be put 
out in pre-recorded form.  I have the Harrison tape catalogs from the 
60s but not the time to look.


>> Stereo itself was selling
>> only a small percentage of all recordings, and practically nothing in
>> regular popular.
>>     
> ***What period are you referring to ? The late 'fifties ? the early 
> 'sixties ? the mid-sixties ? 

Yes.  Stereo among the masses did not pick up until the prices equalized 
around 1966-67.

> All I know is that compared to other 
> countries (since you're talking about Britain), the American stereo 
> market probably was the strongest. In France, there was some enthusiasm 
> in 1959 but practically no sales and by 1963, some studios were 
> recording in mono only; record labels were issuing the dealers 
> instructions to "hide" the stereo discs.
> In the States, stereo's progress was regular (even if you would qualify 
> it as 'slow') and the dual-inventory a common fact. There was no stereo 
> "crisis".
>
>   
I certainly realized there was more sales here in the U.S. -- I was 
flabbergasted when my pen-pals told me in1963 they couldn't find certain 
U.K. releases I wanted in stereo, even in London, despite them being in 
the catalog.  Again, since I was an early adopter, I noticed and bought 
the stereo and shunned the mono earlier than the average buyer.  Kids 
did not buy rock in stereo, regular pops was not big in stereo either.  
Some people even bought the novelties like Persuasive Percussion in mono!!!

> ***I would be really interested  to know the exact figures (in units). 
> In August 1958, Sam Goody was already making 5 % of his sales in stereo 
> and that's not bad...


This was the novelty of people who were into stereo getting their fix of 
things to play around with.  If you look at the August 1958 catalogs you 
would see that there were pittifully few stereo LPs on the market!!!  
Maybe less than 150 different albums total.  So these people were buying 
anything to test out their system.

Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   But perhaps David and I should have been  more
>> precise.  We were discussing  historic re-issues  in an era when there
>> no longer was a dual mono / stereo inventory, but on;y one release that
>> was either mono or electronic stereo but not both.  When we could chose
>> to get a mono copy it didn't matter what they did for the "masses" but
>> when the decision was made to issue only one version it did matter.
>> And then when the companies went back and deleted all dual-inventory
>> monos, the situation became worse.  They should have chosen to delete
>> the electronic-stereo version, but this is where Schwann came in.
>>
>> The Schwann interaction is complicated.
>>     
> ****OK, but I think I have demonstrated that fake stereo itself wasn't 
> a by-product of Schwann's policy.
>
>   
>>   In late 1968 they put all pop
>> records over two years old -- mono or stereo -- into the semi-annual
>> Supplementary.   Eventually the dealers screamed that how could you 
>> take
>> all of the Beatles out of the monthly catalog?
>>     
> ***OK, if you're talking about dealers vs. Schwann at that precise 
> time, 1968, I follow you.
>   
>>  In 1970 Schwann also
>> moved the monos over, and that was at the same time when the dual
>> inventory was ending.  Groups of my Schwanns are in boxes so I can't be
>> precise right now, but somewhere around 73 they put back all of the
>> older records into the monthly IF they were stereo.  By this time most
>> of the companies had deleted the mono part of the dual inventory,
>> leaving us with only electronic stereo if there had been both.  But 
>> when
>> Schwann returned the older stereo and electronic stereo issues to the
>> monthly,  mono reissues were doomed because these were in the monthly
>> only if they were electronic stereo.  Mono reissues immediately were 
>> put
>> into the semi-annual.   By Spring 77 Schwann put the electronic stereo
>> back into Schwann Two alongside of the monos, and this is when the
>> companies stopped marking what the discs were.  I started pinpointing
>> the specific issues when these things happened when I did my ARSC talk
>> on the history of Schwann a couple of years ago, and I realize now that
>> I might want to prepare it for publication and need to get access to 
>> any
>> of the issues I am missing in order to get this down to specific 
>> months.
>>     
>>> It was a German "innovation" almost as old as 45/45 stereo itself. The
>>> first RCA (e) appeared around 1961 (Toscanini)
>>>       
>> Why do you claim it was a German innovation??  It was purely American.
>> R.D. Darrell the article about the three Toscanini LME discs -- I have
>> all three -- and the article was included as an insert.  He describes
>> one of the mixing sessions, probably done in NYC.  They sold 
>> practically
>> no copies.  It took me years to find my third one.
>>
>>     
>>>  then it quickly spread
>>> to pop (Elvis), and to other labels (Capitol Duophonic...).
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> Not so quickly.  Because of the dismal sales of the three LMEs, the
>> concept was almost abandoned.
>>     
> ***Well, as I said in reply to Chris Zwarg's mail, let's find out when 
> the Toscaninis were released, and then compare that to the February '62 
> Elvis.
>
>   
>>   Its resumption was fueled by the record
>> clubs, and as I said, it was done very selectively at first, only to
>> things that were selling big in the record clubs like Belefonte's
>> Calypso,  Perry Como Golden Hits, and a couple of the Elvis albums.  
>> One
>> of the reasons it was needed for things like these was that these
>> records were in the ads for new members and they did not want mono-only
>> discs in the ads so they could entice people into joining the stereo
>> division.
>> ***However, at least one record club, Citadel, made it clear on its 
>> lists if it was real or fake stereo.
>>     
>
>   
>>> In view of the stereo craze, record labels were anxious to make
>>> "obsolete" mono recordings more attractive to the public. So it wasn't
>>> public demand, but an anticipation of public demand !
>>>
>>>       
>> What stereo craze?  Even in the U.S. mono pop far outsold stereo until
>> the prices were equalized.  Even mono classical was selling well until
>> then.
>>     
>
>   
>>   In England in 1963 I had friends in the London area finding it
>> impossible to get stereo copies of some albums for me, and not all the
>> records were being issued in stereo versions -- even if they were 
>> issued
>> in real stereo in the U.S.  And this was with the prices having always
>> been equalized for mono and stereo in England!
>>     
> ***That's right, all the American stereo releases weren't available in 
> England. So, their stereo market was smaller. Same thing (but worse) in 
> France. That's why I was saying that, compared to Europe, America was 
> StereoLand.
>   
>
> BC
>   
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l
>
>
>