Hello, I don't know if this has been asked before, but how do you tell if a mono version of a record is a "fold down" ? Weren't most things in the sixties(Pop and rock and roll mainly) done in mono anyway? Are there places online with info telling you if something was recorded in mono, and then released in stereo later? Sorry if this has been asked before. Thanks.
There is no way to know except to play the lp. There is no rule of thumb or no rhyme or reason as to whether an lp is was manufactured as a foldown stereo mix or a true mono remix of the session tapes. US labels stopped mono production by very early '68 but most UK labels produced mono lp's into 1970. Only general rule I've learned is that most (but not all) post '68 UK mono lp's are stereo folddowns since by that time mono lp sales were minimal.
Very, very few things in the 60s were "recorded in mono". Hardly anything. They were recorded as either 2-track, 4-track or 8-track. Then if the intent was to release them as mono they were MIXED down to a mono signal. Yes, lots of material was released in the 60s as mono. Most up to about '68 was mixed as what is known as a 'dedicated' mix... ie specific moves with the multi-track to a stereo soundpicture or a monaural balance. The easiest way to find out if mixes are mono is to learn about the different catalogue codings from the record companies. Kama Sutra would have for instance KLP for mono and KLSP for stereo and so on. But remember, it's not how the things were recorded it's how they were mixed. The classic example is the first Beatles UK album. Recorded on 2-track. As it was, with some eq and editing it was a stereo mix. But it was also mixed down to a mono signal as well for the mono issue of the album.
Owsley is right.The surest way of course is to listen and compare a stereo pressing and a mono pressing. But that can be hard with rare records. Some recordings released as stereo fold-down well, Everly Brothers RCA Recording Studio material folds down nicely, the intent was there during the recording and engineering to allow the stereo record to be played on a mono player and not to sound like crap. But some do not fold-down well. Simon and Garfunkels 'Parsley Sage...' sounds bad if you fold it down. Weird phasing and swooshing sounds on some tracks.
I've wondered about this myself, especially in cases where the mono version and the stereo version of a particular record sound identical. I always thought that in the case of a fold down some parts of the signal were altered, dulled or ? Dale
..or? Well sometimes the vocal is 'popped' forward in the mix when a fold-down has been done. The UK mono issue of Nilssons 'Aerial Ballet' is a fold-down and Harry's voice is way out in the front of the mix, but 'Everybodys Talkin' on that album was the dedicated mono 45 mix and it sounds great. Witness the kerfuffle that ensued when the Capitol 'Rubber Soul' was released on cd a while back. Accidentally the mono version was actually a fold-down of the stereo mix yet it was only some mix anomalies that signaled the error...the actual sound of the cd was fine, no phasing or dullness.
Steve is right, just ask here. But if you have a stereo copy of the song to compare to the mono mix, you can listen for differences between the two mixes to see if the mono mix is a dedicated mono mix or a fold-down. Some extreme cases of dedicated mono mixes have extra instruments or vocals that aren't present in the stereo mix, or, conversely, instruments or vocals that are missing from the stereo mix. Other dedicated mono mixes might just feature all the same instruments, but with different emphasis on the balance of those instruments. A lot of 60s mono mixes really seem to emphasise the bass compared to their stereo counterparts, although I think this may have something to do with the physical properties of mono versus stereo record grooves and stylus movement as well. Another clue as to whether a mono mix is dedicated instead of a fold-down is its length - is the mono mix longer or shorter than the stereo mix? Can you hear "extra" music at the beginning of the song or during the fade-out?
???! You mean 'Rubber Soul'? There is a cough evident in Norwegian Wood's mono mix not on the stereo. And a count-in on 'I'm Looking For You'....
Oh. I thought it had something to do with the overall sound. Do fold-downs sound different if the stereo mix didn't actually have any sounds mixed louder or less loud than the mono mix?
Those are the obvious examples, as well as the louder percussion and longer fade on the US mono "Michelle". However, the stereo "Please Please Me" has a vocal flub by John, some bad tape-syncing at the end and it appears to be a completely different take.
When the two channels of a stereo mix are mixed down to mono. As discussed earlier in the thread, this differs from a so-called dedicated mono mix, which is independently mixed down from the original multi-track recording, and can differ in subtle and no-so-subtle ways from a stereo mix prepared from the same multi-tracks. Fold-downs were primarily employed to create "mono" mixes for markets that still issued mono records after the U.S. and U.K. had moved exclusively to stereo. Hence once sees "mono" versions of the Beatles' Abbey Road from South American countries. These are fold-downs, not dedicated mono mixes.
Thanks for the info, I did mean when a record is MIXED to mono, then the stereo is an after thought. I just got a Thorens 165 and am getting back in the vinyl game so to speak, and have found a few mono LP's, I noticed thet they sounded fuller,so when I can I was going to go for the mono copy, when I can. I picked up " Red Rubber Ball' by The Cyrkle in mono, a 45 of " Crimson And Clover", and a 45 of " Homeward Bound" ( which looks and plays like new!), so long question even longer is, should I be on the lookout for certain labels,or what? I would hate to ask on every lp I'm interested in,and again, thnks for all the responses.
One characteristic of fold-downs is that the "center" (that which is mixed to both the left and right in a stereo mix) will come out louder than what was only on the left or right, so that usually means a louder vocal and bass (which are usually mixed to the center).
If you like Simon and Garfunkel enough to buy their 45 of "Homeward Bound," you owe it to yourself to track down a Columbia "two-eye" mono lp of their Parsley, Sage, Rosemary, and Thyme, which is my single favorite 60s mono mix. If you only know the stereo mix, the mono mix will blow you away. Another cool little Simon and Garfunkel mono oddity is the mono single mixes from the Bridge Over Troubled Water album, which was not itself released in mono. The mono mix of "Keep the Customer Satisfied" on the flip of the "Bridge Over Troubled Water" single is a keeper, and noticeably different from the stereo lp mix. Talk about some intense mono bass action - this track has got it! The mono mixes of all the Columbia Byrds and Simon and Garfunkel albums are worth tracking down if you can find them.
Yes, I'll second that. Any mono S&G is good. If you are getting back into vinyl you owe it to yourself to listen to your mono albums and singles with the channels combined, either thru the use of your amps mono button or a cheap and cheerful 'Y connector' which will combine the two signals coming from your TT into one lovely mono signal. I think a search for 'Y connector' should throw up some threads
I don't think my mono button has been turned off since i got my TT. That's how much mono i've been listening to!
Just as a point, it doesn't have to be stereo folded down to mono. When we recorded the Stanley Clarke album "Schooldays" we did everything specifically for quad (it was "in" at the time) , including the mix. The label loved the idea of a quad version only. Then of course, the day we were due to master, Atlantic changed their minds and told us they wanted to put out a stereo version instead. Our only option was a fold down and that's the way it's remained to this day. Cheers
Elvis' 1960 sessions engineered by Bill Porter were live mixed to STEREO! Way ahead of the game over EVERYONE. Those sessions mono releases were foldowns.
I have the mono Parsely Sage and it is great. One little curio I just discovered is "We Got A Groovy Thing Going", which appeared on this Columbia 1966 compilation LP, in mono. Wow, this is a VERY different mix compared to the stereo! I would say the differences here are much more extreme than any from Parsley Sage. The drums on Groovy in mono sound like some of the top end was filtered out, and then a massive reverb was added. It gives a totally different feel to the song.
It should be. But then there are a lot of tapes that "should be" around that have been destroyed to save space. Or just lost. Cheers
