From: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Multi-track recording
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:52:14 GMT
Reply-To: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <weP20hi00awAI5_HdU@andrew.cmu.edu> "Benjamin D. Lukoff"
<bl2m+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>. . . Two-track is stereo as far as record players are concerned
>if the recording is mixed that way, with one channel far left, and one
>far right.

I think the issue here is whether you want to call it "stereo" when
the two tracks contain totally different sound.  That's what's on the
two-track master tapes the Beatles made up to late 1963.  George
Martin consistently refers to the masters as "twin-track" and will not
call them stereo.  There's no center at all, and the effect is
somewhat unsatisfying to many listeners.

Note, a twin-track recorder could be used to make a stereo recording.
What you would do is mix the input during recording to get some sound
in the middle (by mixing it into both tracks).  The disadvantage is
that the mix is set during recording and cannot be changed later; the
advantage is that you get what any of us would call stereo.  

GM decided instead to use the twin-track recorder to separate parts of
the recording, typically the lead vocal and guitar solo vs the rest.
The advantage is being able to mix afterwards, so he could concentrate
on just getting a good recording.  The fact that a good stereo mix was
impossible didn't carry much weight because pop records were normally
issued in mono anyway, so the main thing was to choose a method that
yielded the best possible mono mix.

I must contradict GM's repeated assertion that the first albums were
originally issued in mono only and that he doesn't know who prepared
the stereo versions.  Lewisohn's "Beatles Recording Sessions", based
on studio documentation, shows GM as producer of record for the stereo
mixing sessions.  Contemporary advertisements mention the stereo
versions.  Don't forget that GM was head of the Parlophone label too.

Please note as well that the first two albums are "stereo mixes" and
not just the session tapes.  Listen to one channel at a time and you
can hear echo of the other channel; this was done more heavily on the
second album "With the Beatles" and the Capitol versions were
processed even more.  However, like Bruce Dumes, I cringe at calling
this "stereo", since the source is what GM has called "twin-track
mono" and can't be made into a real stereo.  Many of us like the
"stereo" albums because you can hear details, but we'd probably like
to listen to the later recordings one or two tracks at a time for the
same reason.  For general listening pleasure, though, I think I would
go along with GM's idea that the mono sounds better.

Now, starting with "I want to hold your hand" in October 1963, they
used 4-track recorders, and from here on out fairly decent stereo
mixes can be produced.  CD-only fans may refer to "Past Masters"
volume 1 for examples, starting with IWTHYH itself.  I fail to see why
GM hates the mixes for the "Hard Day's Night" and "For Sale" albums as
much as he seems to; they sound fine to me.  Sure, sometimes the
balance is a bit odd (see "She's a Woman" on PM for instance), but
most of them aren't odd at all.  The song "A Hard Day's Night" sounds
great in stereo.  

--Joe Brennan


PS-- For those keeping score, Mr Lukoff loses a point for implying
"Love me do" was made on a one-track recorder (""Love Me Do" was
recorded in mono." to give the exact quote).  Mr Dumes loses one for
saying 4-track started with "Rubber Soul"-- would be two points but he
qualified it with "I think".  And I'm throwing away my scorecard now--
let's take this outside...
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles