Just listening to you talk makes me happy. I love your videos. You are honest and insightful. it never feels like you are pushing your products. Keep em coming !

Late twenties Paul. I have some recordings from 1930's ,jazz, that were cut in 2 channel. Beatles weren't really concerned about stereo til the white album. Audio fidelity,living stereo , vanguard and others were excellent sounding recordings, back then they really cared what it sounded like unlike today when most listen to earbuds and mobile devices.

"Electronically reprocessed for stereo" . That was the phrase. That is how you take a mono recording and magically transform it to "stereo" from a two track master tape, meant to be mixed into mono. The effect was atrocious and even the Beatles hated it. In the early 1960's, very few people had stereo systems. Popular music was all recorded in mono, to be played over AM radio, and mono systems at home. EMI studios went to four track recording in 1964, and 8 track in 1968. With the 8 track they could finally do a reasonable stereo mix. On the classical side however, RCA and Mercury, at least in the US, started releasing true stereo records in 1953-1954. I have a copy of one of the 1954 releases. They used a three microphone technique, the center mike for the mono release, and they mixed all three for the stereo releases. This technique made for some of the best sounding, most natural recordings ever made. Of course they were all tube analog. They were released with the labels, Living Stereo for RCA and Living Presence for Mercury. The RCA era ended with the advent of Dynagroove in 1963, and the Mercury recordings were phased out in 1968. The simple three mike arrangement kept the ambience of the hall and the positioning of the instruments at a natural balance. Once they started to use multi-miking, it was all over. A bunch of the RCA and Mercury recordings are available on Tidal, I don't know about the other streaming services. Search for Fritz Reiner, Charles Munch or Howard Hanson.

Thank you so much for this video. I was looking for one that addressed exactly this!

I played Lenny Kravitz with "Are You Gonna Go My Way" to my dad and took out one channel so just the guitar and drums were audible. He looked at me like I was a wizard. Had no idea what was going on. Good fun.

Stereo albums, as we know them, are by Audio Fidelity in November 1957. RCA was the first to license it, December 1957. I have a 10 LP set recorded by RCA in January-March of 1958. This set of recordings completely disproves everything Paul just said in answering the question of panning and exclusive L channel/R channel recording. These recordings have every bit of depth and imaging we expect from modern digital stereo recordings. So, the engineers knew exactly how to mic, and how to mix. Cheap recordings are what Paul is talking about from the early 1960s. Hardly the bar that really existed, just poor recordings.

Hello Paul, The motion picture technique you are recalling was used in Todd-AO. There were 5 (five) full range channels behind the screen and it was possible to place the sound in any of the 5 or combinations thereof. This is referred to as the "five across" system. There was also a mono surround channel in that system. Like the surround channel today, folks want it to be cranked and something loud coming from there always. Not so in a real mix where it was for effects on an occasional scene. Like the wolves in the surrounds in Dr. Zhivago.

Yesterday I put on a mono copy, purchased when it first came out, of Belafonte at Carnegie Hall. Still sounds really good.

I actually heard one on the radio when traveling with my dad. The vocals came from the left speaker and the trumpets were all from the right rear speaker. Sounded different

The answer is: Beatles, most recordings were made on a 4-track machine. Once full, it was bounced to another 4-track machine. Perhaps 4-tracks onto one, which opens up 3 more tracks for adding on to. And so on until the all tracks were recorded. The Stereo mix you hear was intended for a final mono mix, keeping the vocals on one side and music on the other was the result of a final 4-track master needed to be be mixed on to a mono final master. So they had this final 4-track master to mix stereo to, they mixed 4-tracks down to 2-tracks for the Stereo mix. This is what you are hearing.

Another good explanation, Paul. There is a big difference between a real stereo recording and panned mono. A real stereo recording not only picks up loudness differences between the two channels, but also the sounds arriving at the microphones at different times. ORTF recording is a good example of that.

I like the way many of the older stereo recordings sound. The newer centerstage recording can "sometimes", not always, but sometimes sound boring!

I have a Hollies LP album and I noticed that they do that on the song “Sorry Suzanne” it definitely gives it a different sound.

Paul those Beatles songs were artificial mono stereo mixes. 2 Channel is still inherently flawed, it requires one to sit right in that sweetspot which is often very small for proper effect, even still I find that the phantom center image is in adequate. The movies got this right shortly by the 60s they added a physical center channel for a 3 channel LCR array. Some people back in music also enjoyed this 3 channel configuration and there was a 3 channel stereo movement before 2ch became the defacto standard I'm guessing for ease of setup etc. The center would play the phantom center image through an actual speaker, at less volume than the L/R so the image doesn't collapse but loud enough that it perfectly blends in so that when you move Left or Right the sweetspot and LCR image remains intact. This also allowed people at theaters to not have to be perfectly sitting in the middle. Why music 2ch didn't follow this working principle I'll never know. I personally think in music it actually images even better when listened to in 3 channel and makes fake stereo like the Beatles sound even better and more tolerable and real stereo seem to have an added depth and realism. And even better is that in true 2 mic stereo recordings mid/side ambient information is picked up out of phase in the recording. Adding a rear mono or dual mono side speakers also on low volume with a L-R difference circuit to play the out of phase information embedded in the recording reproduces the original ambiance of the recording and blends in with the LCR perfectly giving an amazing stereo image with your ears picking up some of the original background details and ambiance as well, sounds amazing. I use a Carver H9 in passive non-DSP mode (all buttons off) which has L+R (C) and (L-R) S outputs decoded and extracted in the analog domain with no processing. It's so enjoyable with music and also works wonders with extracting the additional channels from original Dolby Stereo analog surround sound in movies from the 70s-90s that were 2ch Lt/Rt (LCRS) mixes. The H9 makes it so that no Dolby Surround/Prologic I capable processor or receiver is required to hear those films as originally intended in the theater. Great stuff.

Paul like I said your Encyclopedia of knowledge when are you going to right your book so I can buy it it'll be a great reference and a very good read to have in our home

I remember listening to the remastering of the Beatle's White album through headphones recently and the only left or only right thing was driving me nuts. It sounds ok on the big system, but with headphones...

In the early 70's the 4 channel "discreet" became popular with tracks isolated to one of the four channels.

Simply because when stereo was first around, recording studios went over the top with the new technology, in fact over-doing stereo hurts your ears when wearing headphones, some old recordings were horrible for this. vocals sound much better in mono. (right in the middle of the image) HOWEVER, binaural recordings are mindblowing with good headphones.

Listen to vintage RCA Living Color or Cameo label 4 on 35mm film stereo recordings, and you will CRY tears of joy! To my critical ears, this older usage of 4-channel 35mm film instead of conventional magnetic tape, really widened the soundstage and increased dynamic range. Even my best attempts at reel to reel or SACD, HDCD, etc. pale in comparison to the old Westrex consoles that were used 'back in the day'! Are you a fan of these Paul? Just curious.

There is a lot of stereo panning in lots of recordings where the sound moves around according to where things would be on the stage

Paul is living the dream. And in Colorado 🍀

The Beatles were the first to come to my mind as well! Burlington VT, could you be thinking of Ben & Jerry’s Ice cream!

I took the question to be related to the days of turntable cartridges and tape recording heads having ratings on how well the separated the left and right channel information. I agree that the late 1960s stereo imaging was experimental, and rarely did justice to the material.

I remember old fellow TV engineers telling me stories of stereo growing pains, one being at first, just a cheat of a stereo pilot tone (20k??)in the aural, just to light the “stereo” light on TV’s. Wonder how many other broadcasters were like that. What a time it must have been!

I have an Ella and Basie album where different sources come out of different speakers.. It was a new toy back then. I have a Peggy Lee album described as "duophonic", plays in both stereo and mono! A big deal back then. Still hear placement of various sources when the sound field calls for it.

Paul, you must have been thinking of Burlington Coat Factory. Not from Vermont, but Burlington, New Jersey.

The original idea of stereo was actually for an image of the band or orchestra created by the use of two tracks. Each instrument would be perceived as being in a different spot across the "stage". However when Madison Avenue got a hold on the idea it became ALL ABOUT separation of the two channels. People would buy cheap portable "stereos" and place the speakers as far apart as the wires would allow and listen for different sounds coming from each speaker. People did not even know what the purpose of stereo sound was at all. There were also a few novelty recordings such as "Seventy-Six Trombones" that did show that this medium could create an image of a marching band passing you on the street. The idea of an image did finally catch on, but it is not always followed.

Yep. I have a few of those hard panned recordings in my collection.

Ok so I've heard they started doing vocals in mono because back when two speakers in stereo was a new thing a lot of people did not place speakers in ideal positions so say one of the speakers tweeter was being blocked by an object like say a plant pot or couch cushion the vocal would still come through.

It was always fun when they panned the drums. I've been helping my neighbor out in his recording studio. Each drum is individually mic'd and has its own channel. The Studer is capable of doing that. I'd be surprised if they use a blumlein setup unless it's for old-timey sake.

Christopher Ward is right. Early Beatles we're recorded for mono only. Abby Road Studios didn't even want to go stereo for awhile. A great huge book is called "recording the Beatles". Around 150.00 USD. I got one through inter library loan. The staff is always amazed when hauling it to the checkout.

Ken Cohagen, in the 70's quad craze, WGBH and Commercial classical station WCRB broadcasted some live BSO or pops concerts. WCRB had more compression, plus subcarrier bleed. When the music got loud the soundstage moved front to back. Victor Campos might allso have turned off all processing. He used to do this for the Tuesday night Adventures in Sound. Before CDs, it was the best fidelity unless you did your own recording at a concert. I believe he got a couple FCC pink tickets for over modulation.

It was called "Ping Pong Stereo." Back before the Beatles, in the REAL caveman era, 1956 - 60, they would place one instrument, sound effect, instrument, etc. in one channel and something else in the other channel. They used it as an advertising point in order to educate and tantalize the public into buying stereos. "Oh look Harry. You can hear different things in each speaker." You'd go into a record store and there'd be a whole bin of sound effects records, all hanging their hat on the left to right moving sounds: race cars, trains, jet planes, and of course ping pong matches. The musical counterparts of these sound effects were usually big band pseudo-jazz/swing corn pone recordings with arrangements that would throw a 'surprise' instrument into one channel or the other. Enoch Light and the Light Brigade on Command Records comes to mind. These recordings, in exaggerating left/right, were never able to generate a whole, coherent sound stage. We're well rid of the era.

This was actually good.

Panning is not stereo but mono with two speakers. It does not recreate position of an instrument on stage. Though panned mono-channels are mixed together with AB/XY/ORTF type stereo tracks resulting in a mix that sounds interesting. Check Enoch Light recordings on Command records.

LCR on the mixer , left center right , " O " Yes

Alan D. Blumlein DID devise a method of recording stereo audio into a single gramophone record groove and it was in the cutting head where the "magic" laid. A signal applied to a left channel element pushed the cutting stylus into the inner wall of the groove(toward the label) and another signal applied to a right channel element pushed the cutting stylus to the outer wall of the groove(toward the edge). The walls of the groove were at 45 degrees from vertical, hence the term 45/45. The cutting head would move in a sort-of 3-dimentional manner, up-and-down plus side-to-side, and the stylus that would eventually "read" the information in the groove would move likewise. That was the theory behind Blumlein's invention in 1938 when he worked for the then-newly-merged company called EMI(Electric & Musical Industries Ltd.). The problem was, though it could be done, the material used for the records, shellac, was too brittle and too noisy so the results were poor. Fast-forward 19 years to 1957, British record companies were pressing 45rpm(initially with large American-style centres) and LP records in lightweight, comparatively noise-free vinyl, the perfect material on which to apply Alan Blumlein's original method of cutting stereo into a single groove and.......Viola! WE HAVE STEREO!!!

The real problem with such recording is when you listen with headphones the sound becomes very unnatural to our brain as what we normally hear never gets such extreme channel separation due to both ears always getting some of the signal. Try to listen on some old Beatles recordings on headphones...

Always liked the Hollies Bus Stop

Early Grand Funk Railroad albums had this separation down pat.

AC/DC has been using that since the begining, and still do. Get a copy of "Back in Black" or "Highway to Hell". "Beatin' Around the Bush" sounds pretty cool with the panned guitar.

One of the most blatantly artificial stereo mixes I ever heard was of John Coltrane's classic album "A Love Supreme." In the stereo version, Coltrane's tenor sax was off to one side of the mix. That's why for years I treasured my original mono pressing, because that version spotted Coltrane front and center, where he belonged. I've read that The Beatles and their producer, George Martin, complained for years that the mono mixes of The Beatles' records were the ones the band and Martin worked on together and approved. The stereo versions were thrown together at the last minute by people who hadn't been at the recording or mixing sessions and had no idea what the band or their producer wanted the records to sound like.

Thank you so very much, Paul. That was an extremely well told story of the history of stereo. It was truly fascinating, because I was only aware of very basic outline of it, but you filled in all the blanks. That was truly great. You have made my night, sir. Again, many thanks, Paul - Nick

I suspect that the "Blumlein and his wife" story is a later myth. Technically it was possible: Blumlein started courting Doreen Lane in June 1930, and filed the patent application for stereo in December 1931. So far it fits together, but It just sounds improbable because Blumlein did not have to go to the theatre to hear "the single speaker". He was working hands-on with mono sound - mechanical recorders, microphones, early recording studios - since his arrival at EMI in March 1929. He knew the shortcomings of existing technology all too well.

i dont think stereo could be defined as equal loudness in both channels

Everyone is going to smart phones to listen to their music. There is only one speaker to play through. Stereo is the only way to provide a realistic soundstage. The Beatles really divided things up from right to left. Later bandS had some thins on the right, some on the left, some in the center and some off center on either side. There is no true center channel, but stereo provides a wide sound stage, and when you listen to a good recording, close your eyes and you can hear there the band members would be if they were on stage right in front of you. An interesting note, the first stereo radio broadcasts were made using two separate radio stations, two different frequencies. There were a few double radios made in AM for this purpose, but then FM came along and found a way of combining both channels over one frequency, dividing them in stereo for stereo radios and leaving them in mono for crap radios.

Hard-panned sounds are not normal in real life, and therefore should not be part of our recorded media. That's not to say that some early stereo recordings aren't interesting; they just aren't what they Should be.

Most people listening music on headphones. It's just annoying if sound come from one side....

This is the first time I have heard someone say they actually like that cheesy Sixties stereo, drums in one channel, guitar in the other, so cringeworthy that it detracts from some otherwise good music.

I find the Beatles on headphones kind of irritating. I keep thinking my headphones are broken.

Ping-Pong stereo was an interesting technique.

Sorry I think you are wrong here, there was no planing pot on the old mixing desks. You had to go left or right and that's it. The panning pot was a later invention. I am a musician all my live and I worked in studios for 35 years, that what the old engineers have told me.

Here's another throw into the mix . I Believe engineers knew what they were doing and why when they started to use stereo artificial panning. They panned instruments hard left and right on purpose. Most of the early record players had the speakers built in and the distance of speakers in most of these players were only two feet or so apart from one another. This does not create a wide field for stereo imagining in a room when the listener is a few feet away. It's a narrow throw into the feild. The engineers panned hard left and right to create a better illusion of stereo. With the speakers so close to each other, it would not sound that wide when you standing 5 feet away. Panning hard L and R created better stereo image into a room with speakers close together, making the wow factor of stereo greater.

The technical reason was that only mono recordings of the mix were being made and any recording was made to be mixed down into mono. The levels of the vocals needed to be adjustable relative to the band. The two or four tracks were balanced for level and eq and then the band balanced for level and eq. The mix down was to mono. When the market demanded stereo the two or, four track master tape was split into a left and right channel and diddled around a bit to make the two track master into a two channel mix probably with bass frequencies mono. The effect was, that very odd hard left, hard right split often with nothing in the middle. So early Beatles albums were expertly mixed for mono and a less sophisticated stereo mix was used for the stereo pressing. The Beatles and George Martin pioneered better recordings that were recorded as stereo and created many memorable technical masterpieces considering how few tracks they were working with.The funny ping pong stereo records were an artefact of the origins of the recording as mono multitracks split up and recycled as a left and a right. Lots of old amplifiers had a mono button to remove the distracting lack of a sound field.

I find those old "stereo" recordings to be almost unlistenable. I'll happily fork over the money for mono or a properly remixed edition.

Burlington Vermont is where Bernie Sanders works/is from. So if you even turned on the tv during the 2016 election, you probably heard Burlington Vermont mentioned.

Maybe they just want to impress customers that two speakers are independent by placing some instruments on the left while vocals on the right to sell their stereo.

The first stereo mixing desks did not have pan-pots. They had a simple three position switch for left, middle or right. That is the true reason for early studio recordings sounding like that.

VR sound is what you want, headphones to the rescue

Hopefully you gonna use a physical plate Echo in your studio give you that live sound not digital reproduction shite

Because it sounded like shit, especially on headphones.

Paul, You may be thinking of Burlington Coat Factory. Good place to buy kid's clothing.

why did it stop?....because it sucked! everybody hated it.

Burlington coat factory

So you are old

That's not the answer to the question really, Paul. The thing is that stereo was invented in 1958 but only got popular in 1968. So let's say in 1965 90% of the sales of pop music was in mono. Stereo was more for grownups with money who liked jazz or classical music. If a song was recorded in mono they could not make a proper stereo mix ( to sell the extra 10% records ) but they did it anyway. For stereo it had to be recorded with two microphones but they made mono recordings with one microphone So for the stereo records from 1965 they mixed some mono instruments left and the other mono instruments to the right . Which is fake stereo and therefore not desirable!