@@joshsimpson79 I always thought it was weird how the were issuing mono, stereo and duophonic albums all at once. Their duophonic releases seem to go for more money.

@@user-ov8iz9vz4n I have no clue as gusto loved using sound-alike artists. Their compilations are usually third rate.

I wonder why we weren’t sent a true stereo master?

@@wgrantha4438 EMI had a habit of doing that in the 1960's with their British masters as well as European masters, or in the case of "Sukiyaki", a Japanese label (Toshiba Records.) EMI sent out mono during the 60's probably because prior to 1967, mono was the main go-to source for young listeners, who bought the 45 rpm singles, while stereo was for those who had expensive stereo consoles, and were usually adults. This is why you would see more stereo copies of Andy Williams or Herb Alpert albums in used record shops or thrift shops than say, teen-based albums from the British invasion, since the adults with the expensive sets were willing to shell out the extra $1.00 for a stereo copy above the then-average mono copy. Because EMI realized that teens were buying the Beatles and other British invasion acts, they sent out mono tape masters, thinking that Capitol and other labels were going to concentrate on single releases instead of stereo albums. Capitol used the "Duophonic' process to issue pre-1958 albums that were in mono, and adults with stereo sets scooped up those as well, even if the sound quality was dreadfully uneven compared to mono. A Capitol artist like Brian Wilson recorded and mixed in mono simply because he was deaf in one ear, and left the stereo mixing to Chuck Britz and other engineers. The Beatles themselves always preferred their songs in mono (especially John Lennon and George Harrison), and were always present for their mono mixing sessions until 1968, but left the stereo mixing to Norman "Hurricane" Smith, Glynn Ellis, or any other EMI engineer and mixer who was willing to do the job. In the case of The Seekers, they were an Australian folk group who recorded in England a lot, and they did have stereo mixes for their EMI recordings, but like they did with The Beatles, sometimes the stereo masters weren't always sent out immediately, forcing Dave Dexter, Jr. and Bill Miller to redub the songs in "Duophonic". As irritating as that was to stereo fans, that was the norm, and stereo buyers had to still pay $1.00 more for it than the mono copy. By the 1980's, many of EMI's stereo masters from Abbey Road Studios and other have been located and released on CD's during the CD craze, because stereo was more desirable by then. Today, it seems in reverse. Some serious vinyl collectors would want to buy the old mono versions over the stereo, especially on 45's, because they were boosted up in high fidelity for radio airplay to sound good on transistor radios and AM car radios over 60 years ago. Mono albums from 1967-68 are especially rare and valuable because there were too few printed as mono went out of style by mid 1968, and stereo took over as the leading source. Some record collectors, however will never accept "Duophonic' as valuable simply because they hated the sound today as much as they did back in 1964.

@@wgrantha4438 Labels from England like EMI and Decca sending out mono masters for US release were a common trend in the 1960's, forcing US labels to electronically reprocess them. It wasn't until the 1980's that the true stereo masters were issued in the US. The same goes for some other international hits like Kyu Sakamoto's hit "Sukiyaki" in 1963. When shipped to Capitol records in mono, it was issued in Duophonic stereo in the US. The true stereo master was finally heard by US audiences in the late 1980's.

@@brightonmusic I really don’t give a flying fuck. If you don’t like it don’t watch!

@@brightonmusic this is my channel, I can say whatever I damn well please and if you don’t like it then don’t watch asshole.

Indeed I enjoyed it.

@@saltech3444 I’ll talk to my viewers anyway I please. Fuckface

Sit and rotate on a pine cone.

😂​@@wgrantha4438

That was the plan.

No, those are far better than the Chinese shit made today but still very cheaply made.

1 is mono 2 is stereo and 3 is duophonic. And if you don’t like my videos you don’t have to watch them, you asshole.

​@@wgrantha4438He/she probably only have one ear and 2 braincells. It was crystal clear to me

Millions were made and are relatively easy to find so no huge loss.

Yes

I don’t make any money from these videos so it doesn’t really matter what I use to film these.

I think the older duophonic recordings sound better than the later ones.

@@wgrantha4438 Duophonic was experimented as early as 1961, and premiered the following year in 1962. It was used primarily for all mono recordings of popular Capitol albums. Capitol started recording in stereo only around 1970 (there were exceptions: the singles "Gimmie Dat Ding" and "Neanderthal Man" were issued as mono 45's, but were issued in stereo on the albums. "Neanderthal Man" had a different mix from the mono version.) Capitol continued to use Duophonic stereo for reissued albums throughout the 70's and into the 1980's. The Duophonic phase stopped around 1983, just in time for the CD craze , and mono was the preference for sound choice again, though some CD's still used Duophonic on some of the releases whenever they were available. In the 2000's, Capitol issued the "Beatles On Capitol " 2-box set for those who wanted and remembered the 1960's Capitol Duophonic or reverbed stereo mixings by Dave Dexter Jr. and Bill Miller.

@@robertorick6383 I wonder if any of the tapes are left and I also wonder how they did it on a multitrack machine

@@wgrantha4438 Universal/Calderstone, who now owns the Capitol master tapes may still have a few Duophonic tapes in their vaults, but it seems unlikely they will use them over the mono Capitol recordings, which are now used today on streaming, radio, vinyl, and the few CD's they issue today. Mono is preferred over Duophonic or any kind of 1960's electronic reprocessing, and people on You Tube are coming up with their own DES-Stereo recordings of old mono songs for fun. DES-Stereo is a form of rechanneling mono into stereo, but it's by A-I or digital/computerized means, and the results are much better than the results of 1960's rechanneled stereo, which were prepared by the studio engineers/mixers by two-track tape soundboard systems that are now considered primitive to what A-I and computers can do today by many record collectors and DJ's that do appear on KZfaq wit DES mixed stereo. Yes, I do believe that Capitol and other major labels from the 1960's did their rechanneled stereo mixing on multi-mixed soundboard machines (usually 2-track, later 4 or 8-track soundboards.) "Duophonic" was used only by Capitol Records as a brand name, a gimmick and logo (on the record sleeves) to sell the concept to buy new fake stereo recordings from old mono sources. Though a lot of record collectors hated the sound results, the record companies did make a lot of money from fake stereo. Many serious hi-fi record collectors avoided it, but many casual record buyers who wanted to update their stereo systems if they could afford one bought these fake stereo albums by the millions. Also, fake stereo albums were usually one dollar more than the common mono albums from 1960-1967, until mono was phased out by 1968.

The mono version is slightly slower in pitch. And yet again my turntable could be a tad fast.