LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  April 2012

ARSCLIST April 2012

Subject:

Re: Record Store Day and - "ARSCers"

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 06:42:51 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (147 lines)

Hi Mike:

That's a haul! Good for you two. Another LaserDisc diehard, eh?

Regarding the Fennell record, I find a number of those Mercury fd35 and fds "Command wannabe"
records in mono format in dollars bins, plus more mono Command records than I would have thought
would have been made. The record companies pressed mono versions to cover their bases, but in the
case of "stereo spectacular" productions, it seems like a mindless following of "tradition" in
retrospect.

The Fred Fennell Cole Porter record was made at Fine Recording Bayside (the former Everest studio).
I can almost guarantee there wasn't a separate mono mix. Remember that those three Fennell albums
(Victor Herbert, George Gershwin and Cole Porter) were among the few Mercury Living Presence albums
made with a many-mic technique (Fennell did a couple more "pops" albums in the later 60's, and one
or more of the later Romeros albums were recorded as "productions" with active mixing and separate
mics on everyone). They were essentially pop albums commissioned by Mercury HQ to augment the David
Carroll and Xavier Cugat and other pop artists in the "Command Wannabe" series. So since they
weren't standard 3-mic MLP productions, the mono would have been a fold-down of the three master
channels. For regular MLP mono albums, up through 1964, the mono channel was the same single-mic
pickup as always, which was the center mic for the stereo pickup. A separate pair of full-track tape
decks were on the truck for the mono recording because there was too much crosstalk to use the
center channel of the 3-track. So, in practice, the mono LPs come from separate edits of the session
tapes but the edits were pretty much identical. I've never listened to all the mono vs. stereo but
here and there I bet there are slight differences, just due to human imperfections or imperfect edit
notes (in the 60's, in most cases, the mono tapes were edited by a different person from the stereo
tapes, using the stereo tape edit notes).

The Fennell Gershwin and Porter albums were reissued on CD. The 35mm master for the Porter was lost
(and never found), but there was a 3-track tape "B reel" set run at the sessions, which was used to
master the CD. The Gershwin tape was a 2-track which was thought at the time to have been made when
the LP was mastered, "live" from the 3-2 mix. But, my reading of the old Mercury tape logs indicates
that session was recorded live to 2-track. At the time of the Gershwin session, that's how pop album
were done at Fine Recording Manhattan, there weren't even three channels on the Studio A mixing
console, so if they really were recording to 3-channel they'd have needed to patch into Studio B.
Also comparing the original LP to the CD, I don't hear the telltale extra generation of tape hiss
and "washout" of dynamics. That CD sold relatively well when it came out, but it's been out of print
now for a long time. Fennell made a couple more "Pops" records during his time with Mercury, and one
could consider the three Leroy Anderson records to be pop albums.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Biel" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record Store Day and - "ARSCers"


Leah and I got to Princeton Record Exchange near the end of the day and
was able to get the 10-inch-2- disc Janis Joplin Pearl outtakes and the
10-inch Pete Townsend Quadrophenia demos. She put back The Wall 7-inch
box. She got an Ozzy 12-inch and 7-inch pic disc, and another 7-inch
left over from last year. (That's Osborne, not Nelson.) I got the Muddy
Waters 12-inch. Then today we got to the Brooklyn Annex of Academy and
thanks to Steve Ramm's heads up about the Tompkins Square 78s I was able
to get TWO copies of the Luther Dickinson one that is going for more
money on ebay than the one by Ralph Stanley. They said they sold out of
the Stanley yesterday. I wonder how many copies they had?? They were
$18 each. They had them on a rack on the wall behind the register, and
I spotted them since I had seen that they were just in plain yellow
sleeves. I agree with Steve that this was not a well thought out
promotional effort. Too few copies and no effort to have a printed
sleeve.

We also bought oodles of other stuff and I have no idea if I will have
money in my account when the credit card bill is due!! At Princeton we
got a lot of laser discs. I got Vol 1-3 of Twilight Zone for 3.99 a
box, and she got four box sets of Twin Peaks for same price. At Academy
I got the Pearl reissue of Florodora cast recordings from 1900. Two
volumes on JEMF of "Work's Many Voices". Some interesting early Gene
Autry reissues, one on Anthology of Country Music "sounds like Jimmie
Rodgers" with thing from the early 30s with a lot of alternate takes,
and a 4-disc box by Columbia Special Products on Murray Hill (of all
labels!) of Autry from 1929 thru 1942 with no dupes on the ACM disc. A
Clark Galehouse special on Golden Crest by Jon and Sondra Steele which I
never knew existed. They are most important for a 1948 recording "They
All Recorded To Beat the Ban" about the musicians union strike. And one
record that would be interesting for Tom Fine for the info on the
gatefold album -- a mono copy of Freddy Fennell conducts Cole Porter on
the f:35d series. If only it was stereo. But if it were stereo not only
would it have been much more than $1.00, it would have been gone long
ago.

Mike Biel [log in to unmask]

On Apr 22, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> There were some retro items in the RSD selections, reissues of old Vanguard albums plus old
> Stax/Atlantic singles, and a vinyl issue of Dr. John's new album, not to mention a red vinyl
> limited edition RSD exclusive of Little Richard's first LP, newly reissued. For early-middle-aged
> among us, Uncle Tupelo was likely on the radar in college times and now their first 3 albums are
> back out in vinyl. For the younger among us, punk and speed-metal fans, Refused is back together
> and touring, and their superb album, "The Shape of Punk To Come" (which had totally escaped my
> worldview back in 1998) was an RSD exclusive as a 2LP red vinyl reissue. Remember, that was 14
> years ago it was issued, so when it was current, the likely fan base from that time is now in
> their late 20's to mid 30's. An old 40-something like me wasn't following Swedish speed metal in
> the late 90's, although apparently I should have been! Funny thing, what caught my attention was
> the
 retro-appreciating album cover and title (the title is an adaption of
an Ornette Coleman album and the graphics are lifted from the style of
old Columbia jazz albums including the "stereo 360" logo). Liking the
music was a bonus, making the $30 well spent.
>
> By the way, one could easily count the Metallica RSD vinyl album as "retro" since they were in
> their heyday when I was in college back in the mid-80's. That's a generation ago now, hence retro
> for sure.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ramm" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 3:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Record Store Day and - "ARSCers"
>
>
>> Cary wrote:"I have seen nothing in the way of new compilations of material
>> on vinyl or reissues of classic jazz,
>> Broadway, country, or even generic pop. The Record Store Day releases,
>> aside from the occasional
>> "novelty" issue of something on 78 (the Beach Boys' 78 of "Good
>> Vibrations" last year comes to
>> mind), are still of little interest to ARSCers - at least from a West
>> Coast perspective."
>>
>> While I'm sure I know where you are coming from in your comment Cary, I
>> think that if the term "ARSCers" will always be defined as those who collect
>> recordings (including CDs) pressed before 1980 or so (or even before 2000)
>> then ARSC needs to broden its exposure to new collectors. We have folks like
>> Uncle Dave Lewis who give a classical music AND a punk rock paper at an
>> ARSC Conference (great jobs on both!) but not everyone is UDL. Are the folks
>> who really flock RSD ARSC member (and hence ARSCLIst member) possibilities?
>> I understand the 78-L listserve members (many who are here) but it seems
>> to me that we should be as diverse as the MLA listsefe - and, actually, more
>> sore since many of the MLA folks work with sound recordings as part of the
>> JOB and not hobby (and probably could care less about RSD).
>>
>> What I thought was the dumbest RSD move was for Tompkins Square records to
>> press 500 78s and send to the stores. They probably could have produced
>> 2,000 or more and sold them. They'd make a nice profit and collectors would
>> thank them. Instead those "resellers" who grabbed the 500 will put on eBay
>> and Tompkins Square won't see a penny. We only had one (out of of 6
>> independent record stores within blocks of my house) participate in RSD and they had
>> basically no "special product).
>>
>> Steve Ramm

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager