RCA LIVING STEREO (and MONO) "GAITE PARISIENNE" listening shoot-out

I listened to all of my copies of the 1954 Arthur Fiedler/Boston Pops performance of "GAITE PARISIENNE" this evening - one after the other. The copies I have on hand are:

• Classic Records 45 RPM 200g set (LSC-1817-45)
• BMG Hybrid SACD (82876-66419-2)
• Original RCA Victor Red Seal Living Stereo LP (LSC-1817)
• Original RCA Victor Red Seal Mono LP (LM-1817) (2 copies; I listened to side 1 of one copy and side 2 of the other copy)

My impressions (with my recommendations at the end of each entry):

Classic Records 45: It sounds like someone sucked the air out of the instruments! The top end is filtered down, yet the upper midrange is boosted. And while the bass-ment is boosted, the heart of the low end is hollow. The end result is a rather incoherent-sounding mishmash, attributable in part to Mr. Grundman's questionable EQ choices. For $50, you can do better than this, IMHO.

BMG Hybrid SACD (SACD Layer): It sounds pretty close to the original Living Stereo vinyl, except that it somehow lacks that last bit of magic which makes the best Shaded Dog Living Stereos so special. It sounds a bit dry compared to the original Living Stereo vinyl. Still, it sounds better than the Classic Records vinyl - and at one-fifth to one-third the price.

BMG Hybrid SACD (CD Layer): Similar to the SACD layer, but a bit more uninvolving and "lifeless".

Original Living Stereo LP: Now that's more like it! There is "air" around the instruments, the strings and brass have the right amount of "bite". Sonically one of the very best early Living Stereo originals that I've ever heard! It's well worth the $78 I paid for it - but is it really worth $200+?

Original Mono LP: Now here's something different. It has a bit better bass than any stereo pressing. But the rest of the sound is compressed compared to the original stereo LP pressing. I wonder if squeezing a lot of minutes into a relatively narrow space had something to do with the relatively compressed sound? (Strange, because my first-pressing copies of LM-1806 and LM-1807 sound great, despite being recorded the same year as LM-1817.) I wouldn't pay more than $4 to $5 for this edition.

Any thoughts on my findings? Do you agree or disagree with them?

Happy listening,
RJL2424

 

And not all Living Stereo originals respond well to such wackiness. There will always be many mediocre-sounding LSC originals, and quite a few titles that are sonically a load of crappy-crap-crap.

 

Yep. I've read somewhere that there are only four pressings of LSC-1817: 5S/5S, 10S/10S, 10S/11S and 11S/10S (the one- or two-digit number immediately before the S refers to the cuttings). In the case of this LP, the 10S and 11S cuttings are generally preferable to the 5S cutting.

 

Not true. LSC-1817 was in print for less than one year (from the introduction of Living Stereo LPs in September 1958 to around mid-1959) before being replaced by the 1958 re-recording on LSC-2267. And note that all known copies of LSC-1817 have the very first version of the Living Stereo label (1958 into early 1959), with the bottom print "LIVING STEREO" in smaller type than is common.

 

Actually, a lot of lacquers for LSC-1817 were rejected and discarded for mechanical flaws. Thus, you will NEVER see a 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, 6S, 7S, 8S or 9S cutting of LSC-1817 anywhere.

And RCA's lacquers are (reputedly) good for only about 10,000 copies total. Thus, around 30-something thousand copies of LSC-1817 were pressed during its several months in print.

 

I've underestimated somewhat the number of copies of LSC-1817 that were pressed. Actually, it was the stamper which was good for only about 1000 pressings. And RCA does not like to reuse its metal masters for more than three mothers (which is why you will seldom see a mother letter above C on any vintage RCA pressing). A mother can, indeed, make as many as 50 stampers (but RCA during the late '50s did not like to reuse mothers to make more than 10 stampers). As a result, a cutting at RCA during the '50s is practically limited to a 30,000-copy life.

 

Sorry. I meant the metal master prepared from the lacquer.

 

That could also have been the "recut" date for the first cutting of its Victrola-label reissue, VICS-1012. (VICS-1012 is the 1964 reissue of LSC-1817.)

 

Beats me. I'm pretty flummoxed about that.

It's also possible that RCA had stockpiled old printed labels and old inner sleeves of LSC-1817 for future use when they released LSC-2267 in 1959 to "replace" LSC-1817. And when RCA "upgraded" its cutting equipment to a Neumann in 1960, it did not immediately retire the old Westrex/Scully cutter.

 

Nope. The Vic version is a remastering, from circa 1963. Its matrix codes are different - it starts with "PVRS-####" instead of "J2RY-####".

And now I know why another Living Stereo LP, the Reiner "PICTURES AT AN EXHIBITION" (LSC-2201), may have carried the first LIVING STEREO label into 1962: The 23S cutting (on both sides), was also made around 1961 or 1962 (and such pressings used the 1958 variant of the "LIVING STEREO" label). But by the time of the next usable cutting (25S), LSC-2201 began sporting the post-1960 variant of the LIVING STEREO label, with "LIVING STEREO" in the common large type and omits "CAMDEN, N.J." from the small rim print.

 

Not really. I have a 6S/5S and a 9S/16S pressing, of which the 9S cutting (on side 1) sounded seriously distorted (could have been the result of a dirty stamper).

 

That's the case with Side 1 of both of my mono pressings on LM-1817.

Neither my first-pressing copies of LM-1806 (the Reiner/Strauss "ALSO SPRACH ZARATHUSTRA") nor LM-1807 (the Reiner/Strauss "EIN HELDENLEBEN") suffer from that problem.

 

From what I've seen of RCA "Living Stereo" pressings (both pop and Red Seal), they started using Neumann lathes (of the AM-32 variety, I.I.N.M.) around early to mid 1961, before that both stereo and mono were cut with Scullys. I have a Living Stereo copy of The Slightly Fabulous Limeliters (LSP-2393) and both sides were lacquers cut on Neumanns. The lacquer numbers were M2 PY0352-8S and M2 PY0353-4S (pressed in Indianapolis, natch). Based on that, perhaps the 1962 10S/11S of Gaite Parisienne, yielded a somewhat better sound from the Neumann than from the Scully? I agree with all the points about the different variables in mastering, though . . .

 

Hi Steve,

My Mono LP of this has that same "Honk" This was made to sound better on cheap phonographs of the era. The RCA Victrola LP Phonos were really deficient at 5 Khz. I love my Mono original of "Gaite Parisienne" With the changer close to that speaker, the audio range had to be held back as well as compensating for the limits of poor phono cartridges.