Mono / Stereo tags = What is the current thoughts ?

hola, I see a couple really old old forum posts from 3 and 6 years ago re: this subject "Mono / Stereo tags" and need to ask what is the "NOW" common practice of adding "mono" when it's a "mono only" vinyl LP?

1st = If a vinyl LP is "mono only" then adding mono is IMO misleading ...misleading in that someone might expect there is a stereo equivalent when there is none, Another point is that many older mono releases were electronically redone in a "fake stereo" or re-channelized in the new format for stereo like "RCA Living Stereo" etc... so that would make sense to add mono if it was reissued in a different format. But if its MONO all by itself are we suppose to be adding mono to the format? best

2nd = Does the release say "Mono" on it anywhere? If so - then It would be Ok to add the tag, right? But if the "said" LP does not state or mention mono - IMO then you don't add the tag, correct? Then one should provide evidence for it "being Mono" and show there is a stereo counterpart, and SO then adding mono tag is all fine.

need help thanks

BarnyardOrbit
But if its MONO all by itself are we suppose to be adding mono to the format?

As long as it's factually correct, there shouldn't be any reason not to add the tag assuming that the record was released after the "invention" of Stereo.
Adding the tag to anything prior to that is somewhat redundant since all releases were Mono before there was Stereo

BarnyardOrbit
But if the "said" LP does not state or mention mono - IMO then you don't add the tag, correct?

Again, if it's factually correct it should be fine IMO. A lot of Mono-releases don't mention Mono (opting for the catchier tag "High Fidelity") but are easily recognized by their cat#s
Example: The Spencer Davis Group - Gimme Some Lovin'

aasaxell
there shouldn't be any reason not to add the tag assuming that the record was released after the "invention" of Stereo.
Adding the tag to anything prior to that is somewhat redundant since all releases were Mono before there was Stereo

yes thanks ... agreed to that and/or but what im having trouble is an LP from 1958 ...right at the cusp of the dawn of the stereo era. The Girls the LP doesn't say mono or doesn't imply a stereo LP was ever released.

aasaxell
if it's factually correct it should be fine

+1

I have added a mono version which does not state mono, but from the cat no indicates it and there is a stereo counterpart. Probably the most contentious tag I have used. Don't forget early stereo editions (before c. 1955) are rare but do exist in some cases, so there must have been a reason for a release to state 'mono' when new! These rare stero versions may not have found their way onto the db yet :-)

djcarbines
I have added a mono version which does not state mono, but from the cat no indicates it and there is a stereo counterpart.

+1 yes .... id agree with a catalog # if sequencing suggests a stereo like RCA "LPM" "LSP" etc

BUT

BarnyardOrbit
If a vinyl LP is "mono only" then adding mono is IMO "really" misleading ...in that someone might expect there is a stereo equivalent when there is none

aasaxell
As long as it's factually correct, there shouldn't be any reason not to add the tag assuming that the record was released after the "invention" of Stereo.

So in the same way we have 'after 1970' for stereo, it would be useful to have a 'before 19xx' for mono?

Paquitin Lara* / Ramon And His Orchestra - Cha Cha Anyone?)

I'd say that the Mono tag on Polly Bergen, Fran Warren And Lynn Roberts - The Girls is fine.

avalon67
So in the same way we have 'after 1970' for stereo, it would be useful to have a 'before 19xx' for mono?

Yeah, there was a thread on this a while back IINM... can't the outcome

aasaxell
released records in Stereo around that time, using the cat# prefix "SLP" so I assume that "ULP" was for their Mono releases.

ok you have a valid point, thanks

BarnyardOrbit
...in that someone might expect there is a stereo equivalent when there is none

I get what you're saying and it's more likely than not that the record in question never was released in Stereo but I don't think that should be a reason for excluding factual data from a release.

BarnyardOrbit
If a vinyl LP is "mono only" then adding mono is IMO misleading ...misleading in that someone might expect there is a stereo equivalent when there is none

Understood. But if there is no Stereo version in db and we have just a single copy that does not say "also available in stereo" or have the stereo version cat to indicate it exists, it is difficult to know if the stere version is simply rare or literally non-existant!

djcarbines
there must have been a reason for a release to state 'mono' when new!

If it is misleading to to add the tag in this instance, I don't think it is deliberately so, just the best we can do until further sources become available.

avalon67
So in the same way we have 'after 1970' for stereo, it would be useful to have a 'before 19xx' for mono?

here is the old old forum posts...

aasaxell
Yeah, there was a thread on this a while back IINM

interesting reading material

http://discogs.versitio.com/forum/thread/185911
http://discogs.versitio.com/forum/thread/334439

djcarbines
If it is misleading to add the tag in this instance, I don't think it is deliberately so, just the best we can do until further sources become available.

good point ...BUT ....

djcarbines
But if there is no Stereo version in db and we have just a single copy that does not say "also available in stereo" or have the stereo version cat to indicate it exists, it is difficult to know if the stereo version is simply rare or literally non-existant!

SO yes ....OK i've looked all thru my goldmine books and also the www and find NOT a single Stereo to exist for this LP .... thus ...as far as im concerned ... I know this is "mono only" AT least "currently" have found no stereo ....but hear is the trouble im facing ...SAY someone is attempting or wanting to buy this "LP"... they might think to themselves ..."hey this is marked AS a mono LP ...so there must be a stereo "...and they might also say to themselves ..."SO I don't think I will by the mono until I find the stereo", that is the misleading part.

BarnyardOrbit
I know this is "mono only"

If this is a verified fact, you could add this to the Release Notes I guess, thus prohibiting the assumption of a Stereo release.

Found this :)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FRAN-WARREN-POLLY-BERGEN-LYNN-ROBERTS-The-Girls-LP-/111255469325
Stereo cover with "SLP" prefix but the record is Mono though with "ULP" and yellow labels.
BarnyardOrbit, your sub states "Blue Labels", you sure it isn't Stereo?

aasaxell
your sub states "Blue Labels", you sure it isn't Stereo?

hola ....pretty sure its not stereo.. BUT I will DEF play it tomorrow and find out, thanks

aasaxell
Found this :)

Thanks kindly !!!

aasaxell
Adding the tag to anything prior to that is somewhat redundant since all releases were Mono before there was Stereo

nope. you add the Mono tag to all releases that are Mono, except to formats that were only available in Mono (ie; Wax Cylinders).

avalon67
So in the same way we have 'after 1970' for stereo, it would be useful to have a 'before 19xx' for mono?

nope. add the Mono tag, no matter what year or era the release came out in.

PabloPlato
Mono, except to formats that were only available in Mono (ie; Wax Cylinders).

Well that seems redundant and somewhat ridiculous for things like Victor 78rpm discs and recordings pre 1950. For example we have not seen a stereo 78rpm shellac disc ?

here is a Peruvian stereofonic 10" 78 RPM shellac
Luis Abanto Morales Con Ticona Y Pastor - Tragedia / Mambo De Machahuay

PabloPlato
here is a Peruvian stereofonic 10" 78 RPM shellac
Luis Abanto Morales Con Ticona Y Pastor - Tragedia / Mambo De Machahuay

That's dubious to say the least... yes I can see that is says Stereo on the labels so the format tag is valid but I find it unlikely that this is a true stereophonic shellac record.

I just played the b-side and it's in stereo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JOYr2jaDt8

and here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTHpE8-wdLo

You can tell the second 1 is a LP as you can hear the static

PabloPlato
here is a Peruvian stereofonic 10" 78 RPM shellac

chuckles... yes ok another country .... let me quote thyself

BarnyardOrbit
we have not seen a stereo 78rpm shellac disc ?

made in the Americas ;)

none the less, when you see a mono release you tag it as such. end of.

PabloPlato
when you see a mono release you tag it

So for example ??? Seattle Concert

yes, if it is a mono release then the tag inclusion is correct.
what's the issue? as far as i know the appearance of the Remastered tag does not cancel out the addition of the Mono tag.

I don't think there's any specific rules against mono for any specific date ranges, however, I personally don't add the mono tag before stereo took off in the mid-to-late 50's.

Diognes_The_Fox
I don't think there's any specific rules against mono for any specific date ranges, however, I personally don't add the mono tag before stereo took off in the mid-to-late 50's.

I'd like Mono to have a similar guideline to Stereo - there is absolutely no need to tag a record pre-1950s with Mono as all releases would have been in Mono.

disneyfacts
there is absolutely no need to tag a record pre-1950s with Mono as all releases would have been in Mono.

where would you draw the line? 1950?

marcelrecords
where would you draw the line? 1950?

Although stereo came around in 1958, there were experiments a bit before that - 1950 would be a good date.

disneyfacts
1950 would be a good date.

How about the dawn of the LP ...1949 ?

disneyfacts
I'd like Mono to have a similar guideline to Stereo

I would not want this. We have enough problems with the stereo tag restrictions.

BarnyardOrbit
How about the dawn of the LP ...1949 ?

Which is actually June 1948... I wouldn't mind, it's just kind of annoying to see a 78 tagged as mono when there was no other type of sound at that point.

DarkSoda
I would not want this. We have enough problems with the stereo tag restrictions.

Such as?

disneyfacts
kind of annoying to see a 78 tagged as mono

agreed