måndag 20 april 2015

SMALL FACES/OGDENS' NUT GONE FLAKE IMSP 012 UK STEREO (1st matrix) VS. IMLP 012 MONO

Posted the mono here over a year ago and then pretty convinced that was a fold, but after finding a first press stereo and thus able to make a throrough comparison it appears I was wrong. Initial impression remains they sound rather similar, but mimicking a fold by pushing the mono button on the stereo shows on deviations. Balance differs at a few places in a way that could only be the result of separate mixes. Thanks to a post by "Tristero" on Steve Hoffman's I was also made aware the track "Rene" has diverging drum parts - a fact that confirms it once and for all. Another interesting thing with this is the matrix swap. Very first issue has "IMSP 012 1Y/IMSP 012 2Y", but those were withdrawn rather quickly and replaced by ones ending with "1Y-2/2Y-2", which became the standard version. I've seen claims on the net the two differ in audio as well as some of the edits. Unfortunately I lack means to dig deeper into that for now so I'll save it for a future post... (SXÅH*) (YDÄ*) (CPYC*)(MÅW*)

2 kommentarer:

  1. It seems that a simple fold down of the stereo mix was used at least on some of the digital mono versions you can find out there, the most striking clue being that the lead vocal comes across as too low in the "mix". After searching for more than 30 years I recently managed to find an original vinyl mono copy of this album, and it is simply breathtaking, with everything perfectly balanced and the music virtually jumping out of the grooves. The original stereo mix of this record was particularly unfocused and disintegrated, although a narrowing of the stereo image can improve on it somewhat. In such cases I use a small home studio mixer, setting the balance controls for the two channels roughly to nine and three o'clock, respectively, to create a soundscape more akin to the average stereo systems of the Sixties which, to be fair, is what these mixes were made for, i.e. Radiograms and suchlike, as opposed to more modern Hi-Fi system set-ups with three metres between the speakers etc.
    Claes Johansen

    SvaraRadera
    Svar
    1. I agree the original mono is better listening, but not all in what you say about the stereo. My copy (012 1Y/012 2Y)sounds pretty good for a sixties stereo, at least on my equipment, played with round stylus (Shure M-44) and two meters between the speakers. Btw. Do you also have the second stereo "standard" version (1Y-2/2Y-2)and know how they differ? I'm also curious if the second mono version (pink label)is a fold from the second stereo, or if they kept the original mono tapes.

      Radera