Lately I’ve noticed a terrible nuance plaguing Beatles’ stereo recordings. Basically(it’s far more variant than this), in the right speaker one might hear the drums/bass, and in the left, the vocals and guitar. Nothing, or very little, comes out of both speakers. Every instrumental/vocal track comes out of either the left or the right. It’s no keen observation to say that listening to the Beatles with headphones on absolutely murders the experience.
Now I’m not sure when stereo recordings were originally produced and released, or when the headphones introduced, but why are the songs like this? Did recordings made during the same time period sound the same? If so, when did this trend end?
And, most importantly, have there been any subsequent releases that remaster the recordings and fix this problem?
Without going into a long rambling digression on the Beatles and their recording history, the short answer is: most stereo mixes of rock and R&B records before 1967 or so sucked.
There are two reasons for this. One is that these records sold far more copies in their mono versions than in their stereo versions. (Stereo was only introduced in 1958.) So producers naturally put most of their efforts into the mono mix, with the stereo mixes often being a hasty afterthought.
The other reason is that stereo was still something of a novelty at the time. Producers figured the public wanted mixes that really showed off the stereo-ness of their sound systems, not reasonable soundstages. Hence the wildly separated mixes common in early 60s music.
This changed in the late 60s for a variety of reasons: more of the audience was listening in stereo, and rock records were getting more elaborate in their production and mixing. Ironically, two of the albums responsible for this change were Sgt. Peppers and the Beach Boys’ Pet Sounds. (I say “ironically” because both of these albums were originally mixed for mono … and Beach Boys mastermind Brian Wilson is deaf in one ear!)
Wumpus pretty much nailed it down. Stereo was seen as a sort of novelty in the recording industry when it was first introduced. One of the very The first artists to take adavntage of the new technology was Enoch Light who in 1960 made an album of instrumentals called Persuasive Percussion which was actually just a series of exercises to see what the new stereo technology could do and what the sound difference between it and mono would be. The album ended up spending more then 2 1/2 months lodged in the #1 spot on the Billboard Top 200 Albums Chart and sold more then 3,000,000 copies, which was an immense number in those days.
Interestingly enough, the Beatles weren’t too fond of stereo when it first came out as they were used to having everything come out of one speaker when they were listening to playbacks in the recording studio. They mentioned this on the bonus DVD in the Anthology DVD set that came out earlier this year.
When the first 3 or 4 Beatle albums came out on CD they were in mono at George Martin’s request. He had a poor memory- his reason was they were never mixed for stereo. Really? Then why did they all come out on vinyl in the 60’s in stereo too, including the Vee Jay"Please Please Me ?" The cynics all said it was to increase sales-they were correct-all eventually came out in stereo,w/the identical mix as the stereo vinyl. BTW, often singers don’t like stereo- listen to Mike Love’s isolated lead vocal on the stereo Pet Sounds’ " That’s Not Me." His off key voice was well hidden on the mono version.
Nothing useful to contribute but a funny story:
In college (early 90’s) I drove a beat-up old 69 VW Beetle with the finest sound system I could afford ($79 tape deck), installed by yours truly. The electrical system on that car was pushed to the limit constantly – I’d turn up the stereo and the headlights would dim – and I was constantly having to splice out sections of the speaker wire to repair the lights or the ignition systems, all MacGyver style.
I’d been a Beatles fan without actually having any of their records other than the White Album. I picked up a copy of Revolver, because I’d recognized almost all the songs by title but never owned recordings of them. I was starting off on a road trip, popped in the tape, and “Taxman” started. Yeah, I remember this song. Can’t forget that guitar riff. This is going to be a pretty good album. Hmm, I don’t remember the opening going on so long. Is this a special album-only version? I didn’t think they did remix versions back then. No vocals at all? I could’ve sworn there were lyrics to “Taxman,” about, you know, a taxman. And… it’s over. The hell?
Of course, my right speaker was out, and all the vocals were in the right speaker. But I got through the whole album before I realized it.
Heh - I bought an album by The Fall once, completely on spec (I had never heard them before). I listened to the whole thing and decided that the album sounded like shit. This band needs a new producer, I thought. Then, when I was taking it off the turntable, I noticed that I had played it at 45 RPM [/end hijack]
A lot of it had to do with EMI’s notoriously cheapskate ways at the time too - at least in terms of the tape decks and mixing desks they used from 1962 through to 1967.
In the first few years, The Beatles were essentially a “true live” band in the studio with the option of being able to add just one extra overdub. This stemmed from the Abbey Road studios only having 2 track reel to reels at the time. So what the boys would do is they would rehearse and rehearse and rehearse and lay down a killer take of a song - complete with mixed vocals, drums, harmonies and guitars all on one track.
Then they’d have a thinkey poo, and do some more rehearsing playing along to that killer take - but this time they’d take turns doing some extra guitar bits or extra double track vocals etc.
Before long, both John and Paul had become addicted to doing double tracked main vocals - and their typical recipe for laying down a song was as I explained above - with all of “initial take” mixed hard left, and then the supplementary double take on vocals and extra harmonies mixed hard right.
And for the mono mixes they were simply mixed all middle.
But by late 1966 Abbey Road had invested in synchronised 4 track reel to reels which allowed George Martin to start getting far more inventive in terms of doing mixdowns, and then doing more overdubs on top of that mix down.
And by 1967 they got so good at it that Sgt Peppers was created. But I’m pretty sure that Pet Sounds was recorded on a Studer 8 track at the same time in Los Angeles.
And by 1969 Abbey Road had also invested in a Studer 8 track and the album “Abbey Road” was produced - and it featured really gorgeous balanced mixes with lovely stereo panning without being in your face about it.
By 1973 Abbey Road had invested in twin synchronised 16 track Studer reel to reels. And the killer album which came out THAT particular year? Dark Side of the Moon.
But it really wasn’t “true stereo”. george Martin has pointed this out numerous times and the fault does not lie with him, it was just the way things were done at the time.
Correct-Muldoon-but Martin said before the CD’s came out in the early 90’s that the stereo, true or not, was not intended for release. Well, he never said that in 1963-64. Why not? I maintain Martin either has a bad memory or is lying.No one ever heard him protest in the 60’s like he did in the 90’s.
Apparently it never occured to you that no one asked him about back in the mid-early 1960’s.
But that aside, Christ cut him a little slack. He’s been working with a great many artists including the Beatles for over 50 years and you can’t expect him to remember every single instant of his time spoent with the Beatles. I doubt that when you are in your mid 60’s that you will be able to remember an exact moment from back in your early 30’s.
[/end hijack]