LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  February 2016

ARSCLIST February 2016

Subject:

Re: A couple of Mercury questions for Tom Fine

From:

Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:58:59 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (126 lines)

Some further information, for LP collectors. The key to knowing Mercury pressings is the deadwax, 
not necessarily the label color.

1. in the MONO era, 1951-57, the first edition MG series will almost always have a "MF" and number. 
This indicates Miller cutterhead, Fine Sound Studios. On many of them, maybe all of them, there is 
an "I" indicating pressed at RCA Indianapolis. The number after MF indicates the specific 
cutterhead.

2. in the EARLY STEREO era, 1958 to about 1962, there will be a "FR" for Fine Recording, usually a 
"P" followed by two numbers, indicating a George Piros cut and the lathe number and cutterhead 
number. Anything pressed by RCA will have an "I" and the stamper numbers such as "A1."

3. in the PHILIPS era, from about 1963 onward (might be earlier), there will be "RFR", which 
indicates Fine Recording cut, Richmond pressing. The "P" numbers will be there, but no RCA markings. 
Some of these are better than others. The Richmond plant, even when the Mercury Living Presence 
staff was riding herd on quality control, was incapable of consistently high quality output in the 
league of RCA.

4. most MONO cuts from the STEREO era, circa 1958-1965, will carry the "JJ" mark, meaning they were 
mastered by John Johnson.  Keep in mind that mono LPs outsold stereo until retailers stopped 
carrying double inventory (see John Eargle's article in the JAES about stereo-mono compatibility, 
which includes RIAA sales figures from the start of the stereo era through the mid-60's).

In today's collector market, the most coveted Mercury Living Presence LPs are the original early 
stereo records, those pressed at RCA. The first editions usually have a glossy laminate on a true 
lithographed cover, and include a strip of color graphics on the back. Later versions, manufactured 
at Richmond, don't have the glossy laminate, sometimes don't have color on the back, and are made of 
lighter cardboard. I always tell LP nuts, avoid any later pressings, definitely avoid any Wing 
reissues of any MLP content, and consider carefully if you want any vinyl version of something 
released on CD. My mother always said, and I very much agree, that the digital releases are closer 
in sound to the master tapes than the original LPs. This is due to the fact that LP cutting 
inherently imposes limits on frequency response and dynamics, the LP release medium has a very 
audible noise floor, which reduces net s/n quite a bit, and early stereo cutting was an imperfect 
craft. I do agree with some of the LP diehards that the artifact of the early LPs is much more 
beautiful presentation than the CDs, despite the carefully prepared and edited booklet notes in the 
original 1990s CD issues. So I tell people, if you can get your favorite material in original LP 
format at a bargain price, frame the cover.

But listen to the CD if you want to hear all the splendor of the performance and recording. There 
are a few exceptions to this statement, cases where the source tape for the original LP was superior 
(because the first-generation tape was lost or known destroyed by the time the CDs were made). And, 
to my ears, Bernie Grundman's LP cuts, directly from my mother's original playback gear and 
first-generation 3-track sources, released by Classic Records in the mid-90's, are the best Mercury 
LPs. Cutting technology had advanced quite a bit in 35 years, and Bernie is a real ace. He turned 
off all the dynamics-limiting automation and cut it old-school, with my mother reading ahead in the 
scores and signalling dynamics changes just like she had done with George Piros for the original 
LPs. Combine Bernie's great cuts with RTI's superior pressing and really great LPs resulted.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2016 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] A couple of Mercury questions for Tom Fine


> Hi Eric:
>
> I don't have answers to all your questions, but some info. See below.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Eric Nagamine" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2016 3:21 AM
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] A couple of Mercury questions for Tom Fine
>
>
>> Hopefully Tom can answer a couple of questions..
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.       I've been sorting through a deceased friend's collection and I
>> noticed there were many different colored labels in addition to the normal
>> Dark Plum or later Red labels. There's the common white label promo, but
>> I've also found Pink, Green, Yellow and Gold labels in place of the normal
>> plum or red labels on stereo SR series discs. Some say promo and some don't.
>> Any significance in this? I know some of the early mono Mercuries have the
>> Gold Label and I think so does the Civil War sets, but these are not those.
>>
> First of all see this, from the late Ron Pendorf
> http://ronpenndorf.com/labelography3.html
> Ron got his information directly from Harold Lawrence, so I assume it's correct. Ron doesn't 
> address the green, pink and yellow labels I have seen from time to time. I assume they have to do 
> with promotional or other uses. Ping me off-list with some deadwax info on those records and maybe 
> we can figure out some things. One thing I can tell you  is that the non-glossy sleeves of early 
> issues, even if they have color printing on the back, indicate an inferior pressing from Mercury's 
> own Richmond IN plant. The best pressings, 1951 through about 1962, were done at RCA Indianapolis 
> and have an "I" somewhere in the deadwax. What has surprised me is how bad the Richmond "for 
> broadcast only" white-label pressings are! Those were supposed to be the best vinyl, for 
> broadcast. The examples I have did not shine a nice light on the quality of Mercury's plant.
>
>> 2.       Do you know if the Dorati/Minneapolis Copland 3rd in the most
>> recent Mercury box has the uncut version of the finale? From what I
>> understand, every recording from the late 50's on use Leonard Bernstein's
>> cuts from the late 40's, even the 2 Copland led recordings.
>>
> I am not familiar enough with the work to know the answer. Here is a video said to be of that 
> movement:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZruGxBJwwg
> BY THE WAY -- I can tell you that all the wow and flutter and distortion you hear in this lousy 
> transfer DON't EXIST in the new CD reissue, thanks to Plangent Process. The work is available in 
> Box Set 3 and as a 96/24 download from HDTracks. We also got a much more full sonic spectrum, 
> thanks to Andy Walter at Abbey Road Studios. If there were enough potential sales, and thus 
> interest from the corporate parent, I'd remaster all the mono recordings the way we did Copland 
> 3rd.
>
>>
>> Thanks for any light you can shed on this.
>>
> You're welcome!
>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------
>>
>> Eric Nagamine
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> 

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

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
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