CAPITOL/EMI TO RELEASE "GOOD VIBRATIONS"/"HEROES AND VILLAINS" 78 RPM

[GeorgeFellInHisHorn]

gotta look for those Buy-It-Now's on ebay, snagged one for $30!!
almost didn't get one, 'till someone started raving about the quality..


i hope i'm not disappointed!

[juggler]

The writting under the Capitol logo is the serial no. 509990 98341 18

The serial no. of the 78rpm is the same: 509990 98341 18

Ah, thanks.

[Roger Ryan]

...I'm so glad I kept my dad's old record player (circa 1970), which plays 33, 45, 78...and 16!  Has anyone ever seen a 16 RPM record?

16 RPM records were used primarily for transcription purposes or spoken word - significantly increased recording time per side, but terrible fidelity.


On an unrelated note, I can't make out who did the art direction of the new vinyl release in the posted link image; what does it say?

[guitarfool2002]

Went to two independent record stores in Southern California.  One had 3 copies, the other 8.  Both charged USD $11.99.  But, when I put Good Vibes on my Wurlitzer 1015 78 rpm jukebox, I was really disappointed to discover that these new records were cut with standard LP microgrooves, and not the wider grooves traditionally found on 78 rpm records.  The result, when attempting to play the record on my jukebox, was that the wider stylus (about four times as wide as a normal stylus) would alternately skim across the top of the grooves, then settle into a groove and play the music for awhile, then pop out and skim, then pop back in, repeating the process.  And, when the stylus did settle into the grooves, it would dig into the top portion of the vinyl grooves, leaving a black powdery residue on top of the playing surface.

Put it this way: If I were the proud owner of an old Wurlitzer jukebox, a bubble-top or any other model, that would be my main reason to buy this 78rpm release as something other than a collectible item not to be played. Hearing records on any of those machines is such a cool experience!

To hear that this particular 78rpm record cannot be played on one of the most common 78rpm players seems a bit absurd to me, and I'm sorry to hear your record for all intents and purposes got carved up by what should have been the "correct" needle.

So what can you play this record with if not on an old 78 jukebox?

[Shady]

gotta look for those Buy-It-Now's on ebay, snagged one for $30!!
almost didn't get one, 'till someone started raving about the quality..


i hope i'm not disappointed!

Yes!! I'm not the only guy who paid 30 bucks to get one. 

[bgas]

Went to two independent record stores in Southern California.  One had 3 copies, the other 8.  Both charged USD $11.99.  But, when I put Good Vibes on my Wurlitzer 1015 78 rpm jukebox, I was really disappointed to discover that these new records were cut with standard LP microgrooves, and not the wider grooves traditionally found on 78 rpm records.  The result, when attempting to play the record on my jukebox, was that the wider stylus (about four times as wide as a normal stylus) would alternately skim across the top of the grooves, then settle into a groove and play the music for awhile, then pop out and skim, then pop back in, repeating the process.  And, when the stylus did settle into the grooves, it would dig into the top portion of the vinyl grooves, leaving a black powdery residue on top of the playing surface.

Put it this way: If I were the proud owner of an old Wurlitzer jukebox, a bubble-top or any other model, that would be my main reason to buy this 78rpm release as something other than a collectible item not to be played. Hearing records on any of those machines is such a cool experience!

To hear that this particular 78rpm record cannot be played on one of the most common 78rpm players seems a bit absurd to me, and I'm sorry to hear your record for all intents and purposes got carved up by what should have been the "correct" needle.

So what can you play this record with if not on an old 78 jukebox?

One of the new phonographs they're selling ywhich plays at 33-45-78. that or a laserdisc player?

[Runaways]

my player had a 78 setting.

[guitarfool2002]

Went to two independent record stores in Southern California.  One had 3 copies, the other 8.  Both charged USD $11.99.  But, when I put Good Vibes on my Wurlitzer 1015 78 rpm jukebox, I was really disappointed to discover that these new records were cut with standard LP microgrooves, and not the wider grooves traditionally found on 78 rpm records.  The result, when attempting to play the record on my jukebox, was that the wider stylus (about four times as wide as a normal stylus) would alternately skim across the top of the grooves, then settle into a groove and play the music for awhile, then pop out and skim, then pop back in, repeating the process.  And, when the stylus did settle into the grooves, it would dig into the top portion of the vinyl grooves, leaving a black powdery residue on top of the playing surface.

Put it this way: If I were the proud owner of an old Wurlitzer jukebox, a bubble-top or any other model, that would be my main reason to buy this 78rpm release as something other than a collectible item not to be played. Hearing records on any of those machines is such a cool experience!

To hear that this particular 78rpm record cannot be played on one of the most common 78rpm players seems a bit absurd to me, and I'm sorry to hear your record for all intents and purposes got carved up by what should have been the "correct" needle.

So what can you play this record with if not on an old 78 jukebox?

One of the new phonographs they're selling ywhich plays at 33-45-78. that or a laserdisc player?

You mean those little "Crosley" models that are made to look old? Do they have a stylus which can be changed to play 78's? I'm asking seriously - the last turntable I had which played 78's, you had to change the stylus to avoid damage if you wanted to play 78's.

I just found it odd that what I'd consider one of the most enjoyable ways to hear a 78rpm record - on a vintage jukebox - seems to have destroyed the record. I never would have guessed that until hearing how that happened.

I might be able to give one of these a spin too  :

[OBLiO]

Put it this way: If I were the proud owner of an old Wurlitzer jukebox, a bubble-top or any other model, that would be my main reason to buy this 78rpm release as something other than a collectible item not to be played. Hearing records on any of those machines is such a cool experience!

To hear that this particular 78rpm record cannot be played on one of the most common 78rpm players seems a bit absurd to me, and I'm sorry to hear your record for all intents and purposes got carved up by what should have been the "correct" needle.

So what can you play this record with if not on an old 78 jukebox?

I would say if you really to play the record, find a local antique dealer/collector and discuss needle vs. groove before attempting to play it. The presentation is "kitsch" to me, overall and not necessarily practical in the real world. It's what has become of the record industry as a whole. I don't even ask the question anymore whether the record industry is concerned with satisfying the sonic pallette... I can only "hope" whatever is presented is listenable and engaging.

For Instance: this is a nice little note accompanying the Band on The Run re-issue addressing how 24 bit technology
will solve this issue... (NOT! IMHO)-

The audio industry has seen many technical innovations since Band
on the Run was first released on vinyl in 1973, the most notable
being digital recording. However, with the introduction of CD came
two advances, “de-noising” and “peak limiting” which have become
increasingly unpopular within certain areas of the music industry and
amongst audiophiles.
De-noising was introduced to remove the inherent sound, or hiss,
associated with analogue tape. The amount of processing used to
remove tape noise can be varied, but when used excessively, many
believe that it also has a detrimental effect on elements of the musical
sound.
Peak limiting is a process that increases the loudness of music. It is
achieved by holding the loudest peaks down and raising the overall
level of the music. Much depends on the amount of limiting applied,
but at its most extreme the result can be a serious reduction in the
dynamic range and often audible distortion.
The release of The Beatles’ remasters in 2009 saw a marked change
in attitudes towards these issues, where both noise reduction and
limiting were used sparingly with the aim of representing the master
tapes more accurately.
Such is the case with the newly remastered CD of Band on the Run:
tape noise reduction has scarcely been used and the degree of limiting
is subtle. In addition digital technology has advanced with the
ability now to offer recordings in 24 bit/96kHz. The high resolution
version is being made available via download and is being offered in
two formats: limited, which is comparable in volume to the remastered
CD, and un-limited, which in comparison with the limited version
will sound quieter, but retain the dynamic range of the original
master recording.
Allan Rouse
Abbey Road Studios

Why is this even included? Why does any of this have to be justified?
Why would retaining the dynamic range even be questioned?!

I ask myself sometimes "what is the point?" There is no point!
oh well...

[guitarfool2002]

That's interesting stuff about Band On The Run - Geoff Emerick won a Grammy for engineering that album (and doing parts of it under some extremely bad conditions in Africa...). The most ridiculous part of that whole thing is offering the "high resolution" version as a digital download...invariably so you can hear all the sonic improvements through earbuds on an iPod?

It's more expensive, and more fun too, but the best way to hear these things as they were intended is to buy an original pressing of the vinyl and play it through some decent equipment, whether it be nice speakers, a quality turntable, or a nice pair of higher-end studio grade headphones. If the sound can be "improved" through all kinds of digital dither-dather and bitrate/resolution fantasies, so be it, but I'll take those first pressings which the mixing and mastering was originally done to maximize the quality of the listening experience, which was of course 100% analog. Great example - the original mono single mix of Paperback Writer with the pumping bass, which 95% of Beatles fans never hear on a regular basis.

A better compromise would have been to do what they did on a limited edition Robert Johnson box set I mentioned elsewhere: make the records look like 78's and feel like 78's but have them playable on 45rpm. If you can't play the new 78 release on a vintage 78 jukebox, why make it a 78 at all?

[OBLiO]

That's interesting stuff about Band On The Run - Geoff Emerick won a Grammy for engineering that album (and doing parts of it under some extremely bad conditions in Africa...). The most ridiculous part of that whole thing is offering the "high resolution" version as a digital download...invariably so you can hear all the sonic improvements through earbuds on an iPod?

It's more expensive, and more fun too, but the best way to hear these things as they were intended is to buy an original pressing of the vinyl and play it through some decent equipment, whether it be nice speakers, a quality turntable, or a nice pair of higher-end studio grade headphones. If the sound can be "improved" through all kinds of digital dither-dather and bitrate/resolution fantasies, so be it, but I'll take those first pressings which the mixing and mastering was originally done to maximize the quality of the listening experience, which was of course 100% analog. Great example - the original mono single mix of Paperback Writer with the pumping bass, which 95% of Beatles fans never hear on a regular basis.

A better compromise would have been to do what they did on a limited edition Robert Johnson box set I mentioned elsewhere: make the records look like 78's and feel like 78's but have them playable on 45rpm. If you can't play the new 78 release on a vintage 78 jukebox, why make it a 78 at all?

Excellent points.... I heard or read... I have to find this again or maybe someone already has this... but Brian Wilson understood the blending of sounds to achieve another sound. He stated it himself. If I can find it again I will post it.

One difference I hear between analog and digital is that digital sounds glassy to me. Analog has a better grip. It's not to say that digital is bad and digital is great for capturing almost all the aspects, but is still lacking in that earthy quality. One thing I hear much of is a lack of center in the sound stage... where the sides are separated and you can be forced into listening to just one speaker at a time. I have seen the word "clean" used in reference to mixes. I don't want clean or separation if it wasn't meant to be. I want "well-blended" and dynamic. Plus, I have heard music at 16/44 that sounds better than the 24 bit stuff. 24 bit is used for headroom. So when I see that comment about limiting, it makes no sense to me. How about this? For 16-bit masterings, lower the volume. I have a volume control on my player and I will make the adjustment in volume on my own.

I think it was in the early 90's, Capitol released a past masters series of Beach Boys cd's. The sound was like night and day in comparison. I really do not understand why those masterings are not used for all pressings. And those would have to be 16/44 and they even blew the vinyl away. Just seems odd to me.

Anyway don't want to rant too much about it... but you'd think an industry built around presenting blended and dynamic sound collages would consider that people will actually be listening.
 

[picassosson]

Did nobody post pictures of the artwork (or the disc, but none of you guys have opened them yet  ) or did I just miss the post?

I wanted to drive the hour to Berkeley to pick one of these up but I had to spend all my money on books for school.

[Jonas]

What are the last two words inscribed? Something off?

[Runaways]

What are the last two words inscribed? Something off?

...next time i'll take my shoes off..

C'MON MAAAN. 

each side had a different barnyard lyric.

[Jonas]

I have no idea how I didn't put that together...long day I guess.

[stack-o-tracks]

Nice, thanks for the pictures. Disappointed I didn't get a chance to pick one up.

[?]

Yeah, I like the pics!  The packaging is really cool.

[bgas]

A better compromise would have been to do what they did on a limited edition Robert Johnson box set I mentioned elsewhere: make the records look like 78's and feel like 78's but have them playable on 45rpm. If you can't play the new 78 release on a vintage 78 jukebox, why make it a 78 at all?

But why in the world would anyone think these were made to play on a vintage jukebox??  Just looking at the image I see from the very recent post tells me the grooves are much too fine to be played on something OLD.
It's been trumpeted on here many times that it has to be a gimmick, and yet the first thjought is "let's try this on my old 78 jukebox".  
wank.  
Sad that the record may be ruined, but come on....
It's a gimmick. It's also obvious that they didn't think it thru to someone trying to play it that way; maybe they figured people would get it enough to try it on a more recent model, IF AT ALL.  

[Curtis Leon]

I caved in and bought one after seeing a copy at my local record store for 11.99. Ah, well. I've always wanted Good Vibrations on vinyl.

[bgas]

I caved in and bought one after seeing a copy at my local record store for 11.99. Ah, well. I've always wanted Good Vibrations on vinyl.

And that's all it took.  Somebody else I talked to said the store they went in had 50 copies in the racks!  my store had 5 total. another I went to had 4, and some didn't get any!!

[Shady]

Perfect video for us who were not able to get one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvUOrjK7qRc

edit:

H&V clip uploaded too by another user

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

[guitarfool2002]

A better compromise would have been to do what they did on a limited edition Robert Johnson box set I mentioned elsewhere: make the records look like 78's and feel like 78's but have them playable on 45rpm. If you can't play the new 78 release on a vintage 78 jukebox, why make it a 78 at all?

But why in the world would anyone think these were made to play on a vintage jukebox??  Just looking at the image I see from the very recent post tells me the grooves are much too fine to be played on something OLD.
It's been trumpeted on here many times that it has to be a gimmick, and yet the first thjought is "let's try this on my old 78 jukebox".  
wank.  
Sad that the record may be ruined, but come on....
It's a gimmick. It's also obvious that they didn't think it thru to someone trying to play it that way; maybe they figured people would get it enough to try it on a more recent model, IF AT ALL.  

I do have to laugh at some of this, but with the footnote stating I did not buy a copy of this gimmick record nor do I see the far-reaching value of it beyond sentimental attachment for those fans who are excited about collecting this record, and I understand that impulse *completely* as a collector of odd items and such wanting to own this. That's more than cool, but this one didn't strike me as a must-have so I passed.

It also seems like the dealers and resellers had a field day buying than inflating the price of this record almost immediately on Ebay and other outlets. Reminds me of baseball card dealers selling worthless bobblehead stadium giveaway figurines on Ebay for huge profits the night they're given away for free at the ballpark. The swine...

But to question why someone who collects and owns a vintage 78 player would *dare* attempt to play it on that player is going beyond the pale, just a bit. What would you normally do with a 78 besides play it on a record player which plays 78's? And if it were designed for the modern players, do those 100 dollar turntables that play 33-45-78 have a sound quality which would justify the sonic improvements if there are any on this 78 release, or is the ol' Crosley replica turntable going right into an mp3 converter so it can be listened to on the commute into work this week? Or posted on a blog or YouTube somewhere (give that one 24 hours to be pulled down... )?

I tag this whole reply carefully with a  because I'm enjoying these reports and the conversations quite a bit. In other words, I'm smiling the whole time which may have been the point of Capitol issuing a 78 which can't be played on a 78 jukebox all along.

[Jim V.]

I'm just gonna throw out a guess and say maybe they found the lead vocal for "Barnyard". I mean why would they put the lyrics on this vinyl and then put out SMiLE featuring "Barnyard" with no lead vocal. I mean, its possible they might fly the Humble Harv "Heroes And Villains" demo vocal onto it, but I think maybe this was a subtle hint that we are getting something cool.

[OBLiO]

A better compromise would have been to do what they did on a limited edition Robert Johnson box set I mentioned elsewhere: make the records look like 78's and feel like 78's but have them playable on 45rpm. If you can't play the new 78 release on a vintage 78 jukebox, why make it a 78 at all?

But why in the world would anyone think these were made to play on a vintage jukebox??  Just looking at the image I see from the very recent post tells me the grooves are much too fine to be played on something OLD.
It's been trumpeted on here many times that it has to be a gimmick, and yet the first thjought is "let's try this on my old 78 jukebox".  
wank.  
Sad that the record may be ruined, but come on....
It's a gimmick. It's also obvious that they didn't think it thru to someone trying to play it that way; maybe they figured people would get it enough to try it on a more recent model, IF AT ALL.  

Not sure if it was really all that clear what it was other than it was a 78. Was it ever clear?
I humbly retract "kitsch".
The packaging looks beautiful...
It's in mono and I checked out the youtube vid and it sounds good...
78 RPM=better sound, but you need a turntable that has the 78 rpm
Thanks to the posters who posted the photo and video.

[hypehat]

Dude on the above video says it takes a normal stylus, btw