[78-L] Unexpected US Releases was Calling all Goonatics

[David Lennick]

I was 13 when stereo hit the market, probably more like 16 before my dad 
finally sprang for a stereo turntable, which he then ran through whatever two 
amps he had. Nobody was jumping up and down to convert everything, and the 
gimmicky "stereo action" LPs didn't turn one serious music lover binaural. You 
didn't need stereo for a solo violin (even with accompaniment) or a solo piano 
or a stand-up comic..and by the way, the mono mix is still far better on many 
live comedy albums. If you read early 60s issues of High Fidelity (which I 
happen to be doing lately), you'll see that there was no push to turn contented 
monophiles into stereoaddicts..the reviews let you know if one version sounded 
better than the other, and many times they preferred the mono as well. Cast 
albums were an exception, and even then they'd let you know if the staging was 
false. I just read a review of a solo jazz piano album by a performer who sang 
a few vocals..it seems they separated the voice on the left and the piano on 
the right, and the reviewer took great delight in ripping this to shreds.

Radio stations bought the stereo pressings..at least one AM station in Toronto 
bought the stereo discs because they were pressed on better vinyl (RCA had a 
problem with the mix used for mono) but had to watch carefully for phasing 
problems, especially on Capitols (and not just the DuoPhonics). By the late 
60s, I was looking out for replacement copies for LPs that were no longer 
available and often I'd be able to find only a mono version over at Half Beat 
Harold's (a great Toronto store that had thousands of US cutouts for cheap).

I've told the story before but I'm the one at the keyboard, so here it is 
again. In the mid 60s I was buying Everest's Archive of Piano series, which 
were $1.99 for mono and $2.29 for stereo. Who needed stereo for one piano? Only 
years later did I find out why those records sounded compressed and 
clangy..they WERE stereo, with mono labels and jackets. Alshire (101 Strings) 
did the same thing..deleted "mono" LPs were 3/$1 at Twin Fair in Buffalo, and 
yep, the discs were really stereo.

dl

Michael Biel wrote:
> David Weiner wrote:
>> I still don't get why stereo discs were so hard to come by in the mid-60s -
>> not only comedy, but Beatles original issues, for instance - despite the
>> extra dollar in cost, hadn't all the ad copy screaming about stereo
>> superiority worked at all? Or had consumer interest in stereo waned by 1963?
>>
>> Was it easier to find a stereo issue say, in 1960 than in 1963? 
>>
>> Dave W.
>>
>>   
> 
> Of course part of this particular narrative concerned British sales, and 
> most of the companies there had the same price for mono and stereo.  The 
> Brits were slow in converting their equipment to stereo and had been 
> warned not to play stereo discs with mono cartridges.  Here in the U.S., 
> that extra dollar meant a whole lot.  After all, that was an increase of 
> price that could be 30% depending on discount.  There often were 
> wholesaler kickbacks on mono records that reduced their prices even 
> more.  Billboard had separate mono and stereo charts until mid-1964, and 
> pushing stereo copies of certain types might lower the chart position in 
> the more important mono chart.  It might be a good subject to study -- 
> and might have had an effect on the growth of electronic stereo we 
> discussed a few months ago. 
> 
> I worked for a rack jobber in 1966 and 67 and personally changed the 
> price stickers of every mono LP in Macy's 34th Street on the Sunday that 
> the mono prices went up.  Until that day -- and even after -- mono 
> always outsold stereo.  On rock albums it could be 5 to 1.  We sold 
> practically no stereo country albums.  Soundtracks like Sound of Music 
> might be closer, like 1.5 to 1.   Bill Cosby were our biggest comedy 
> sellers, and I made a point of having stereo in stock, but few were sold 
> until the price change.   I left for a better job soon after the price 
> change, but could see in the stores that mono still sold till the record 
> companies forced the issue and just deleted the monos -- where they 
> still sold in the cut-out bins!   Yeah, real smart.  Mono was 99 cents 
> and stereo was $3.29. 
> 
> Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com
>