Quote:
Ferrograph

The Tape Machines were brenell, Ampex, Scully, and Telefunken. no ferrograph.

the REDD.51 console did not handle stereo mixing too well.

While mixing, the 4 track return channels were 1, 2, 7, and 8. These were grouped as two stereo pairs(1_2 and 7_8). Tape tracks 1 and 2 came into channels 1 and 2. Tape tracks 3 and 4 came into the desk on channels 7 and 8...what this meant was that when listening/monitoring in stereo, tracks 1 and 3 were ALWAYS panned hard left and tracks 3 and 4 were hard panned to the right.

i will never buy any beatles in stereo... as Lowry says, the Mono Mixes were given the most consideration, the most effort. Stereo as a format was in its infancy..hell, Norman Smith and the other "main" engineers were on holiday during the stereo mix sessions!

..hell, Norman Smith and the other "main" engineers were on holiday during the stereo mix sessions!

...and the Beatles left the building after the original mono mixes were done back then when recording the originals.

I realize that sometimes we need "progress" as much as we need a hole in the head

Quote:
I realize that sometimes we need "progress" as much as we need a hole in the head

Isn't that a slightly short-sighted view? Without progress we wouldn't have...well, anything!

I dislike the early 'panned' stereo recordings, and bemoan the whole generation of great recordings 'lost' to the first generation of digital masters as much as the next man. Thank goodness some (e.g. the engineers at Columbia/CBS Masterworks, who ran analog tape machines as backups to the new digital recorders on Gould's 1981 Goldberg's - despite Gould's infatuation with the new technology), like the guys ay Abbey Road, had the wisdom to hedge their bets!

Of course progress is what lies in the word: A good thing. Even though I was speaking in a (much too) general way, I think you know what I mean.

Quote:
I think you know what I mean.