Aretha Arrives and sound engineering question

[musicology kate]

Hello!

I've been doing some sonic sleuthing and I have a question for those of you with Aretha LPs. I've been listening to the 1993 Rhino remastered CD release of Aretha Arrives, and I noticed that it sounds to be panned "straight up" - I can't hear a difference between the left and right channels.

If anyone has the original 1967 Atlantic LP, could you tell me if there is any noticeable panning going on in that recording? I'm trying to figure out if it was Tom Dowd that made the recording that way, or something that happened during the remastering process.

I thought I could find a copy of the LP at one of my local libraries, but no such luck!

Thanks!

[soulster]

Hello!

I've been doing some sonic sleuthing and I have a question for those of you with Aretha LPs. I've been listening to the 1993 Rhino remastered CD release of Aretha Arrives, and I noticed that it sounds to be panned "straight up" - I can't hear a difference between the left and right channels.

If anyone has the original 1967 Atlantic LP, could you tell me if there is any noticeable panning going on in that recording? I'm trying to figure out if it was Tom Dowd that made the recording that way, or something that happened during the remastering process.

I thought I could find a copy of the LP at one of my local libraries, but no such luck!

Thanks!

You have the mono version. I have that CD too, and I love it!

In 1967, Atlantic Records was still mixing and issuing mono albums along with stereo versions. This is not bad at all. The mono mixes were focused and sound better than the stereo mixes during this period.

Rather than focus so much on L+R information or stereo panning, focus on how well the instrumental and vocal balance is on those mono mixes. The drums are louder and the bass is solid. The vocals are loud and clear, not in another room somewhere. Not only that, the 45s you bought, and what they played on the radio back in the day were those mono mixes.

Last, but not least, as this 1967 mono album is concerned, the mixes are different than stereo mixes. They are not just combined stereo mixes. For example: if you have the strereo mix of "Prove It" around, compare that with this CD. On the mono mix, which is also on the 45, you will hear extra background vocal parts. Listen to "Baby I Love You". The mono sounds clean and clear, while that stereo mix sounds "soft". But, that mono mix is what the hit single was.

In the 60s and early 70s, producers put their mixing efforts into the mono mixes, and Motown was no different. In fact, some mono mixes were so different from the stereo that they almost may as well been different recordings! If you only have stereo, you may not even have the hit versions!

This is all why I collect all the mono mixes I can, because they were 98% more likely to have been the hit single versions. Sometimes the stereo mixes do match the mono singles, but that is actually uncommon.

Atlantic Records stopped producing mono albums in 1968, which is why "Aretha Now" is just in stereo. But, the 45s were still mono, or, in Atlantic, and some other labels, like A&M, something called "CSG" compatible http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haeco-CSG stereo was used. It was a useless mixing process that sought to make stereo mixes sound better on mono radio, but they usually sounded terrible. But, that is a little beyonf the scope of this thread and what you wanted to know. I digress.

If you are unhappy with the mono version, the stereo is still available. But, I recommend you keep that mono version for the superior sound. Bringing it back to Motown, mono is the reason for those massive The Complete Motown Singles volumes, and the first Hitsville box. They all feature the mono singles.

[musicology kate]

Thank you so much for your very helpful response! I don't know that much about the mixing process - I just assumed that it was possible for a multi-track mono recording to still have panning. So I guess my follow up novice question is, is panning only possible with stereo recordings? Or just more likely in stereo than mono?

Based on what you wrote though, it makes perfect sense to me that if you were mixing a single you might want to avoid lots of panning for the same reason as avoiding stereo - so you would end up with a really crisp, clear recording. Especially if that recording was going to be heard a lot through the small speakers of portable radios and record players, through car radios, etc. and not just on state-of-the-art home stereo systems. I guess nobody would be able to hear the panning that much in those situations anyway, so why bother?

I have the Rhino reissue of Lady Soul that has both stereo and mono versions of few songs on it, so I'll have to go give them some close listens to see what I hear! I love my Aretha Arrives cd with the mono versions - I just was curious if I was hearing something similar to the folks who were listening to her singles back when they were originally released [[I wasn't quite born yet, too bad). It's neat to know that I am! The more I think about it, the mono mix seems like it conveys a sense of immediacy and "in-your-face-ness" that really works with the sound of Atlantic era Aretha.

Great stuff - you've given me lots to think about. Thanks again!

[musicology kate]

Alright, I may have finally wrapped my little brain around this, and now I think my last question didn't quite make sense. Of course I can't hear panning in a mono recording, since I'm only actually hearing one channel. There could be plenty of panning going on during the mixing process, but it will all sound balanced to me the listener once it's in mono. I think. Phew.

[soulster]

Dammit! I wrote a nice, detailed response to your second question and my internet connection crapped out on me. I won't bother to write it again right now, but I will tomorrow.

[brooklyn_soul_king]

I wonder if the powers that be, at Atlantic heard how bad the CSG process can make a great record sound. Haeco-CSG processing was used as late as 1979 on the Sire [[Warner Bros) promo 45 of Pop Muzik by "M" , which contained both long and short versions in stereo. The public is not as stupid as they think....what garbage.

[soulster]

I wonder if the powers that be, at Atlantic heard how bad the CSG process can make a great record sound. Haeco-CSG processing was used as late as 1979 on the Sire [[Warner Bros) promo 45 of Pop Muzik by "M" , which contained both long and short versions in stereo. The public is not as stupid as they think....what garbage.

Quite interesting! I didn't know that!

[soulster]

Alright, I may have finally wrapped my little brain around this, and now I think my last question didn't quite make sense. Of course I can't hear panning in a mono recording, since I'm only actually hearing one channel. There could be plenty of panning going on during the mixing process, but it will all sound balanced to me the listener once it's in mono. I think. Phew.


Well, there is no stereo panning when mixing to mono. It's done deliberately. The point is to eliminate phase cancellation that a stereo mix, especially an improper stereo mix, may cause upon playback. Other things that may cause a stereo mix to sound out of phase besides a poor mix is a misaligned playback head on a tape deck, such as the one used for running the master tape, an amplifier, bad cables, a misaligned phono cartridge on your turntable, or your home tape deck.


A good way to check if something in your system, or your stereo recording is out of phase is to hit the mono button on your amp if you have one. That's actually what they should have done in the studio as they mixed. When you hit mono, your stereo sound should evenly collapse into mono, should remain solid, not swishey, not lose bass or treble, and not lose any sound information. But, if there is nothing wrong with your stereo, it may point to faults in the recording or mastering itself, which does happen from time to time. You can also check it with software. These problems at the mastering level can also happen if the engineer plays a mono tape on a stereo head stack, and that machine isn't properly aligned.


The reason inmate Phil Spector, the famous producer of hundreds of hit singles from the 60s and early 70s, insisted that all of his music be issued in mono up to the 70s because he felt that he could not control the playback variances of the listener's stereos, and he wanted the listener to hear his recordings exactly as he wanted them heard. Mono did that.



I have the Rhino reissue of Lady Soul that has both stereo and mono versions of few songs on it, so I'll have to go give them some close listens to see what I hear! I love my Aretha Arrives cd with the mono versions - I just was curious if I was hearing something similar to the folks who were listening to her singles back when they were originally released [[I wasn't quite born yet, too bad). It's neat to know that I am! The more I think about it, the mono mix seems like it conveys a sense of immediacy and "in-your-face-ness" that really works with the sound of Atlantic era Aretha.


A very long book could be written about the differences between most mono singles and their stereo counterparts. During the early 60s and into the early 70s, most record companies issued mono singles, and both mono and stereo albums. Stereo was originally seen as a premium product for audiophiles, and was typically priced a dollar or two more than the mono albums. 1968 was the year the labels stared phasing out mono albums, which is why "Aretha Now" is only in stereo. On the other hand, mono singles were gradually ended in the 70s. Sometimes, a mono single was a dedicated mix, and other times it was just "folded over" stereo mixes.


I was around in the 60s and 70s, and I like to collect all the mono mixes I can because they are somewhat rare these days. They usually sounded very different from their stereo sibling, not for the technical reason, but they were mixed and/or recorded differently. If you just have all stereo mixes, you probably don't have the hit single version.


When the compact disc came out in the early 80s, and record companies started scrambling around for things to reissue on the new format, they invariably picked stereo. This was for several reasons, but the main one is that no one remembered hos the hit singles sounded. The people who didn't like mono thought of it as an archaic technology, and wanted stereo at all costs, even if the stereo mix didn't resemble the mono hit single in any way. In fact, that's why mono mixes didn't even make it onto the vinyl albums.


Perhaps the biggest reason is quite embarrassing for the record industry: many mono tapes were lost or destroyed! Part of this was the subject of a famous Billboard article written back in 1987. Here is the pdf version of it: http://www.billholland.net/words/Labels%20Strive%20to%20Rectify%20Past%20Archival%2 0Problems.pdf


As for Motown, Motown always kept logs on everything, and has most of it's mono tapes. It's library is in excellent shape due to the work of several modern-day engineers and tape archivists, such as Bill Inglot. That's why they are able to pull together great comps like the Complete Motown Singles Collection, and Stax has their singles boxes. But, other companies' mono tapes had more sinister fates, such as Chess, Brunswick, ABC/Dunhill, Columbia, RCA, you name it! All is discussed in that article, and more.


Anyway, Kate, I thought I saw a second post of yours with a good question that I did address yesterday, but either I can't find it now, or I am so tired I missed it. Anyway, I know most on this forum glaze over this stuff or any post with my name on it, and are more interested in talking about their favorite singers or what they are doing today, but I get off on the technical part of the recording, mixing, mastering, and playback. And, I am especially impressed by your interest in this because you are a female, and it seems that most females just aren't interested, or they don't display any interest in the technical stuff. And, i'm certain that there are a few who think I just wait around here for these types of discussions because i'm supposedly self-important or some crap like that. Not true. I just seem to have different interests than the majority of this forum, and love technical stuff, even if it does relate to Motown. I spend a lot of time at sites like gearslutz, where you will find some of the legendary engineers talking about the nuts and bolts of recording, mixing, and mastering. Even some of the Motown guys are there.

[musicology kate]

Thanks for your amazing and helpful replies! There's a ton of stuff that happens in the recording and mixing process that I think I take for granted or don't even think about, but it's neat to learn more about what a difference this stuff makes. I grew up playing classical music, and to a certain extent I got used to the idea that whatever the musician plays/sings is what you get. I think the engineer's role as a band member is really interesting because it's both musical and technical - and as someone who has mixed feelings about being a performer, this type of behind the scenes role is really appealing to me. Now if I just had time for another hobby...

One last thought/question - are there some tracks that you prefer the stereo over the mono mix? I was just listening to some of the Motown singles sets you mentioned, and I think I actually prefer the stereo version of Gladys Knight and the Pips' "If I Were Your Woman." In the mono mix the drums and bass overshadow all of the other instruments - it does make the track sound more driving and exciting, I guess, but I think I miss some of the nuance provided by the strings/harp/vibes. I could also be biased because I heard the stereo version first, though!

[soulster]

Bias makes a huge difference! I think most of us tend to default to whatever we heard first. I was around in the 60s and grew up with mostly 45s and what was on the radio.

Let's see...what Motown stereo mixes do I prefer..."Stop In The Name Of Love" by The Supremes, and "You're My Everything" by The Temptations are the only tracks I can think of. Seriously!

I grew up hearing just about everything except country, and that came in the 70s if it was on the pop charts. I loved jazz, so I totally understand what you mean by liking unprocessed recordings. But, popular music is a 'nother world, where you can do anything to a recording and all that matters is the end result.

If there is an instrument I have always focused on, it's the drums, because I am a drummer. But, i've been that was since I was a little toddler watching the record labels spin around on the record player.