Records all the way!!!! I am 60, and have a 45 rpm collection of doo-wop, rock-a-billy, and Top 40 ranging from approx 1954 to 1967, all original pressings. I have around a thousand or so. The only cd player I have is in my car, so I cant listen to any of my 45s right now when driving. I could in my previous car because it had a cassette player, and I have a lot of my 45s on cassettes, as I have a cassette recorder. May have to invest in a cd recorder just to hear my records in the car, as I put around 300 miles a week on it back and forth to work. Radio here in the central Florida area stinks for oldies...we have one FM station, Sunny 105.9, that plays some 60's and 70's, but only the mega hits. There is an AM station in the Villages, AM 640 WVLG, that does play a fair amount of 50s and early 60s, especially on the weekends, but they are hard to hear at night where I live.

I gotta pop in here and add my 2 cents......

Speaking of......... Tammy...

The reason they sometimes eliminated tracks from stereo re presses was because of lack of popularity.
I have both mono, and, stereo pressings issued at the same time, and, no difference, except for one being stereo.

I don't know what you mean by artificial stereo.
The earlier stereo issues were deliberately seperated to show the difference. The only true fake stereo records included an echo chanber to make them sound like stereo.

On the 4, and, 8 track tapes. Not likely to see a return.
Both had their failings, and, the machines needed alot of servicing. Most players were installed in cars. In house machines were offered, in fact, alot of the cheap stereos of the 70's had them, but, they just weren't that great. The tapes tended to be noisy, were expensive to produce, and, were just plain troublesome.
I have one 8 track tape which is an exact copy of the lp I also have, including the hit "Ramblin' Rose".
But, the sound on the lp is superior to the hissy, not as good sounding tape.

Alot of people today don't even understand that except for the very last ones, 78's were never "Vynal".
In fact, they were plastic in the end, except for the re issues made in the last 35 years.
I don't like the vynal 45's, as they tend to be recorded not so loudly.
The worst ones, admittedly, were the styrene.
Prone to nearly instant wear out.
A later machine played the cheap styrene records fine, but, older machines wore them out quickly.
It was done that way to sell more records.
Alot of the popular 45's were issued on styrene, and, vynyl at the same time.
Bill Cahill

You ain't agonna out-Tammy me, lol. I've also got two of her CD's.

Bleh on them hissy 8tracks!


Nothin' beats pristine vinyl!
LOL!

The 8 tracks played pretty well on the Motorola mounted in the front of my console, driving to work. Couldn't do that with records...

You're just jealous 'cause I've got more pictures of her, bwaaahhhh!

I have an 8 track player in my Zenith console, i also got a big stack of 8 track tapes with my RCA console, it does play pretty well but it will never be better than records, definately a hissy cheap medium.
Im glad i have a working player, my wife is in her late 30s and didnt know what one was ?
BTW what is the quality of new records like ?

I don't know, but, I have a new re release fake stereo of "Oh, my love" a popular tune. It was used on the movie "Ghost". The new record is dissappointingly weak in volume. I have to turn volume control up alot.
You can barely see the undulations in the recording, It's mostly straight grooves, it's so weak...
Bill Cahill

That doesnt sound good, my wife is a rock music fan has a taste for "PearlJam" thier latest album is to be released on record, i told her i would buy her it, i hope it sounds ok and not flat and horrible.
we will see.

There were quite a few types of "phony" stereo records made from mono recordings. Some used echo like you said, some had the bass & treble in one channel and the midrange in the other, and of course the notorious Capitol Duophonic in which they delayed one channel. Sometimes they even played with the phasing, in which case the recording cannot be proplerly played in mono. A good example of that is this 1970s reissue of 1940s Cab Calloway recordings. If you push the mono button, Cab's voice all but disappears:

Bill,
Do you mean Unchained Melody by the Righteous Brothers? That was recorded in 1965 and should be in stereo, what ever that may have been in '65.

This is a re release, and, it wasn't called that. I can't help that.
It was not called that. This was pressed off original two years ago.
Maybe an illegal record?

I have that 45!
Yepperz!

I have the original by Les Baxter from 10 years earlier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKzpjeoZduk

Less Baxter was hot stuff in the '50s. I have several of his records.

It's amazing how many records from the '50s were hits again in the '60s.
You Belong to Me by Joe Stafford was a monster hit in '52 then again in '62 by the Duprees.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=berL-80E ... GJzeg630Vg

I have the original by Les Baxter from 10 years earlier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKzpjeoZduk[/quote]

Well snot on you, fities!

I also have the Baxter version - very nice version.

For my money, the most beautiful version of Unchained Melody is by Harry Belofonte:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz0ze0lcaF8

Ken D.

I have Righteous Melody by the Unchained Brothers. It's rare. They chained them back after the session.

I believe the Original version of Unchained Melody is the 78 rpm by Al Hibbler.

Listen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch9PYYHrGFQ

Don't quit your day job of fixing record players to become a record historian just yet, RT, lol!

Referenced from Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles, 1955-1993.

Unchained Melody
Les Baxter, debut, 4/9/55, peak position #1
Al Hibbler, debut, 4/9/55, peak position #3
Roy Hamilton, debut, 4/23/55, peak position, #6
June Valli, debut, 5/14/55, peak position, #29