With an expansion of their acoustic live album Stripped, a gallery exhibition and a South American documentary all bowing this year, The Rolling Stones aren't letting up in 2016. Now, it looks like we can add one more to their busy year: a box set of the band's ABKCO-controlled discography, all released in mono.
The Rolling Stones in Mono captures, on 15 CDs or 16 LPs, the original mono albums released on both sides of the Atlantic between 1964 and 1969. While The Beatles waited for some time before differentiating the international variations on their albums, this box will go all-in, offering the band's U.K. debut from 1964; their second American album, 12 X 5, from the same year; and their second and third LPs from England (No. 2) and America (The Rolling Stones, Now!) in 1965.
From there, the box features both U.K. and U.S. versions of Out of Our Heads (1965) and Aftermath (1966), the 1966 U.S. album December's Children (and Everybody's); British (Between the Buttons) and American (Flowers) albums from 1967; and finally, their first three internationally uniform albums, Their Satanic Majesties Request (1967), Beggars Banquet (1968) and Let It Bleed (1969)--the mono versions of which remain exceptionally rare.
Exclusive to the box is Stray Cats, a single-CD/double-LP collection of mono single-only material and odds and ends, including the first legitimate CD release of "Con Le Mie Lacrime," an Italian-language version of "As Tears Go By." The cheeky sleeve design to Stray Cats recalls the art to Beggars Banquet, which will be presented with its original "bathroom wall" cover now present on most CD reissues.
Everything in The Rolling Stones in Mono has been newly remastered from the original tapes by Bob Ludwig, and the 180-gram vinyl has been cut from new lacquers at Abbey Road Studios. All LP artwork has been meticulously recreated, with a 48-page booklet featuring rare photos and a new, 5,000-word essay from David Fricke.
The Rolling Stones in Mono will be available September 30!
The Rolling Stones in Mono (ABKCO, 2016)
CD: Amazon U.S. / Amazon U.K.
LP: Amazon U.S. / Amazon U.K.
Disc 1: The Rolling Stones (Decca LK 4065, 1964)
Disc 2: 12 X 5 (London Records LL 3402 (U.S.), 1964)
Disc 3: No. 2 (Decca LK 4661, 1965)
Disc 4: The Rolling Stones, Now! (London Records LL 3420 (U.S.), 1965)
Disc 5: Out of Our Heads (Decca LK 4733, 1965)
Disc 6: Out of Our Heads (London Records LL 3429 (U.S.), 1965)
Disc 7: December's Children (and Everybody's) (London Records LL 3451 (U.S.), 1966)
Disc 8: Aftermath (Decca LK 4786, 1966)
Disc 9: Aftermath (London Records LL 3476 (U.S.), 1966)
Disc 10: Between the Buttons (Decca LK 4852, 1967)
Disc 11: Flowers (London Records LL 3509 (U.S.), 1967)
Disc 12: Their Satanic Majesties Request (Decca TXL-103 (U.K.)/London Records NP-2 (U.S.), 1967)
Disc 13: Beggars Banquet (Decca LK 4955, 1968)
Disc 14: Let It Bleed (Decca LK 5025, 1969)
Disc 15: Stray Cats
- Come On (single A-side - Decca F.11675, 1963)
- I Want to Be Loved (single B-side - Decca F.11675, 1963)
- I Wanna Be Your Man (single A-side - Decca F.11674, 1963)
- Stoned (single B-side - Decca F.11674, 1963)
- Fortune Teller (from Saturday Club - Decca LK 4583, 1964)
- Poison Ivy (from Saturday Club - Decca LK 4583, 1964)
- Bye Bye Johnny (from The Rolling Stones EP - Decca DFE 8560, 1964)
- Money (from The Rolling Stones EP - Decca DFE 8560, 1964)
- Poison Ivy (Version 2) (from The Rolling Stones EP - Decca DFE 8560, 1964)
- Not Fade Away (single A-side - Decca F.11845, 1964)
- I've Been Loving You Too Long (from Got Live If You Want It! - London Records LL 3493 (U.S.), 1966)
- The Under Assistant West Coast Promotion Man (Single Version) (single B-side - Decca F.12220, 1965)
- 19th Nervous Breakdown (single A-side - London Records 45LON 9823 (U.S.), 1966)
- Sad Day (single B-side - London Records 45LON 9823 (U.S.), 1966)
- Con Le Mie Lacrime (single A-side - Decca F.22270 (IT), 1965)
- Long, Long While (single B-side - Decca F.12395, 1966)
- Who's Driving Your Plane? (single B-side - Decca F.12497, 1966)
- We Love You (Single Version) (single A-side - Decca F.12654, 1967)
- Dandelion (single B-side - Decca F.12654, 1967)
- Child of the Moon (single B-side - Decca F.12782, 1968)
- Jumpin' Jack Flash (single A-side - Decca F.12782, 1968)
- Street Fighting Man (Single Version) (single A-side - London Records 45LON 909 (U.S.), 1968)
- Honky Tonk Women (single A-side - Decca F.12952, 1969)
- You Can't Always Get What You Want (Single Version) (single B-side - Decca F.12952, 1969)
Nothing about individual releases, would be all for everything from Aftermath on.
Philip Cohen says
Individual releases of all titles (except "Stray Cats") coming in 2017.
Does anyone know of a web site that discusses the differences between the Stones' stereo and mono mixes for each of the songs? I have both the stereo and mono boxes of the Beatles and there are obvious differences between those mixes so its great to have both.
However, I have the Dylan mono box and with that, I just do not notice any difference between the mono and stereo (maybe because most the work is just acoustic guitar and voice?).
Before I drop $200 on the CD box, I would want to know if there are obvious differences with the Stones work, to the point where it brings a whole new listening experience of a familiar catalog.
Mark H. says
The gist is that on "Beggars' Banquet" all but one track are fold-downs from stereo (equivalent to pressing the "mono" switch on your amplifier) and that all of "Let It Bleed" is fold-downs. I don't remember about the earlier albums, but I am fairly sure there are dedicated mono mixes of "Between the Buttons" and "Aftermath". Earlier - of course there were dedicated mono mixes; "Satanic Majesties", no idea.
In general a dedicated mono mix will differ from the corresponding stereo mix.
As to "significant differences", I'll leave that for others to answer.
After doing some research on the history of the Stones 60's mixes in other forums and with some of the comments on this site, I think I am going to pass on buying this. The completist in me wants this box set but I probably would not end up listening to it that much, especially if there are not many differences.
The first US album I have on SACD is already in mono and a few of these songs on this new box are already in mono on the excellent Singles Collection box set from 1989.
And I am not interested in getting just fold downs for two of their biggest works, Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed. If those two albums had dedicated mono mixes, then that would change my mind.
Will "Majesties request" have the original plastic 3 dimensional picture on front of the cover?
Philip Cohen says
No Lenticular (3-D) cover for "Their Satanic Majesties Request", not even in the vinyl box. The album cover(as presented in these new CD & vinyl boxes) is not even an accurate representation of the 1970's (non-3D) album cover. The fabrication of the album covers for the vinyl box don't match with the original UK or U.S.A. album covers. The vinyl is mastered from digital files.
By the way, for those 1960's Rolling Stones songs which have both stereo & mono mixes, there are no musical differences between the stereo & mono mixes.
The whole reason why a dedicated mono mix was created for "Sympathy For the Devil" is because, when the engineer tried folding down the stereo mix to mono, the piano disappeared, hence a dedicated mono mix had to be created.
Phil, the Chess stereo tracks are fold downs in mono, as are all of Beggars and Bleed sans Sympathy, but just about everything else has unique mono and stereo mixes. The (previously unreleased) mono mix of Please Go Home is fairly different, for example.
Joe Mac Pherson says
Honestly, this box set frustrates me. Living in the United States, it didn't take me long to realize, by the time I was 17 in 1971, that the UK albums were truly the official albums, and the US additional releases were either almost exactly the same, or simply doing what happened with The Beatles UK albums: Taking the original UK versions with 14 tracks, cutting the music down to 10-12 tracks on the US versions, plus padding the "new" albums with 45 RPM single tracks. The Beatles In Mono box set got it right: ALL the original UK albums in their correct order, and additional US material or 45 RPM singles, issued on the 2 bonus discs- in chronological order.
Here, with The Rolling Stones set, far too often you're going to hear songs you already heard before, on the UK releases. They should have taken all the US recordings as well as the singles, adding them in chronological order to the bonus discs.
It was an irritating experience in the early 1970's, when I could afford the original UK albums, and still have to have the almost duplicate US versions, just for those extra tracks!
I noticed nothing from the Metamorphosis album is included, even though there's some fascinating material there. I'm sure almost all of it was done in Mono. DAMN. You can't always get what you want, and this is solid proof.
.But Yes, I'll buy this!
Magnus Hägermyr says
Just my thought too. Who needs all the duplicates? I maybe wait for the individual releases in 2017 then.
I have been in personal touch with Andrew Oldham regarding the UK/UK versions, and he confirmed to me that both the UK/US tracklists were done by him and the band as a result of different marketing strategies. Besides this, The Rolling Stones recorded transatlantic until 1966 and albums like "No. 2" and the UK version of "Out Of Our Heads" are just as much a hodge-podge of different sessions as the U.S. albums were.
Philip Cohen says
ABKCO has always regarded the U.S.A. "12 x 5" album as the group's actual second album, since it was released before the Uk "The Rolling Stones No.2" album.
Philip Cohen says
"Metamorphosis" was released only in stereo; fake stereo for the 1963-65 songs, true stereo for the 1968-69 songs.
The early songs are mono recordings with after the fact stereo overdubs.
I feel just like Joe: it seems like the Stones can't get to the idea that they should disregard their US discography, just like the Beatles did, and use the missing tracks on supplemental albums.
After all "12x5" for exemple is not much more than a compilation of singles and EP...
And anyway, most of us are going to rip the UK albums, then the remaining tracks for the US albums, am I right?
I mean, come on: ALL the tracks from "Out of Our Heads" (UK) will be duplicates, same goes for "Aftermath" (US)... And "Aftermath" (UK) has 12 doublons out of 14 tracks!
AND JANE IS THREE TIMES A LADY!!! COMMODORES' STYLE!!!
("Aftermath" UK & US and "Flowers")
* Why no "Metamorphosis" (UK)?
* Why no "got LIVE if you want it!" (US album)?
* Why the missing tracks from "got LIVE if you want it!" (UK EP) are missing?
* Is "Paint It Black" the 3:45 or the 3:22 version?
* And I suppose the version of "I've Been Loving You Too Long" is from "More Hot Rocks", not from "got LIVE", isn't it?
Thank you to anyone who can answer these.
As I stated in an earlier reply, the UK albums were no more official than the US releases. All album tracklists were done by the band themselves.
As to why there is no Metamorphosis: It was and is an all-stereo release.
Regarding the missing live-stuff: It will be released later on.
As to Paint It Black: the original mono mix are the 3:45 version, which were correctly used on the 2002 edition of Singles Collection. There is nothing to suggest that they will not use that same version this time.
Philip Cohen says
As for the U.S.A. "Got Live If You Want It" album(no relation to the UK E.P. of the same name), all ABKCO CD or SACD releases of the album are in mono anyhow (though some people claim that those discs are a later mono remix, not the original 1960's mono mix). There was a true stereo vinyl release, which was available until the late 1980's. In the UK, Decca did once offer a stereo CD, but they had only individual dubs of the songs, so on that stereo CD, each song fades up with applause, then fades out with applause. In short, there is no fully satisfactory CD of the album. Ironically, considering its exclusion from the new boxed set, this is the one Rolling Stones album where there are audible musical differences between the stereo and mono mixes.
Thank you very much guys, it all makes sense.
I think it would be a smart move to issue a "complete masters" collection instead then...
"As for the U.S.A. “Got Live If You Want It” album(no relation to the UK E.P. of the same name)"
There's one relation: I'm Alright uses the same backing track on both releases, but the vocals on the LP are different from the EP.
"all ABKCO CD or SACD releases of the album are in mono anyhow (though some people claim that those discs are a later mono remix, not the original 1960’s mono mix)"
Not simply a claim, the mono LP was a completely different animal from the CD and SACD, which were apparently newly remixed. And there are even some mix differences between the CD and SACD. Also, if memory serves, there's some *slight* stereo ambience present on the ABKCO remix, so it isn't 100% mono.
"There was a true stereo vinyl release, which was available until the late 1980’s. In the UK, Decca did once offer a stereo CD, but they had only individual dubs of the songs, so on that stereo CD, each song fades up with applause, then fades out with applause."
Decca did not have individual dubs of the songs, they had the stereo LP master. Fades and extra applause were added between songs for some reason for the CD.
"In short, there is no fully satisfactory CD of the album."
That is true.
Dale Haskell says
Wow! Even The Beatles weren't given the opportunity to choose what went on with their US releases. Not according to their interviews,at least.
Philip Cohen says
To me, this release is nothing really earth shattering. Unlike The Beatles, there were no musical differences between Rolling Stones stereo & mono mixes (in instances where there WERE both stereo & mono mixes).
To me, a more troubling thing (which has received no media attention) is that for the unreleased (but already bootlegged) 1963-1965 Rolling Stones studio tracks and radio broadcasts, Jagger and Richards had only two options: let ABKCO release the recordings, or let the recordings become "Public Domain"(legally bootlegable) material in the UK & Europe. As we know, Jagger & Richards let the recordings become public domain material. Yes, I know that Jagger and Richards remain embittered towards ABKCO. Jagger & Richards' view is that ABKCO founder (the late) Allan Klein misled them to think that they owned their (1960's) song publishing, when in fact ABKCO owned it...and still does.
But ABKCO has the last laugh. The labels releasing public domain CD's of 1963-1965 Stones outtakes and broadcasts still have to pay song publishing money(for Jagger-Richards compositions) to ABKCO. The fans would have gotten a (very slightly) better sounding product if ABKCO had been permitted to release the recordings officially. And even if Jagger & Richards have a change of heart, it is now too late to change the Uk/Europe public domain status of the recordings....which will (starting in December) include 1966 outtakes.
The Beatles, The Who, The Hollies,Led Zeppelin, The Kinks, Small Faces, The Beach Boys, Them, Cream, Deep Purple, Genesis & Jimi Hendrix have all had some or all of their BBC recordings released officially. The Pink Floyd BBC material will be released in November, but still The Rolling Stones hold out against the release of their BBC recordings. There's two and a half hours of Stones BBC material, though only 50 minutes of it circulates with full fidelity.
Rick McNulty says
Does this mean they've located old or made actual new mono mixes of Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed? Both of those albums (save "Sympathy") were fold-downs and not dedicated mixes.
In complete agreement about the unencessity of the US versions and all the attendant duplicates.
Joe Mac Pherson says
Another song, or actually 3, that I was certain would show up in the box set: Shades Of Orange, fully realized and intended for the album, Their Satanic Majesty's Request but dropped, probably due to 33 RPM space limitations, and the infamous, legendary Schoolboy Blues, aka Cocksucker Blues, along with the B-side, Andrew's Blues or something like that, which is a major slam, loaded with arsenic fueled sarcasm. about their original manager/producer. The record was intended to be the final, "kiss off/fuck off" affront to Decca Records, as they were about to leave their long time label and began recording on their own, newly established label. The song name checks Andrew Loog Oldham, Gene Pitney, The Hollies, Phil Spector and more.
The Decca executives were NOT amused or enthusiastic to give this record a chance to go anywhere. I've heard both songs, long ago, after buying a well recorded bootleg (And making the major error of letting my 2 older sisters hear it, as they were quite curious about the recording, and their shocked reactions were priceless. It was all I could do to not break into laughter as they became more and more appalled. Yes, Schoolboy Blues is still scandalous, by today's standards! Ditto for the B-side!
Philip Cohen says
While "Shades of Orange" & "Loving Sacred Loving" were co-written by Bill Wyman, the recordings are by a Wyman-produced group "The End". Bootleggers frequently try to pass them off as Rolling Stones outtakes.
Philip Cohen says
The whole reason for recording "Schoolboy Blues" was because the group owed Decca/London two more "Sides"(one more single), and the group submitted "Brown Sugar"(the alternate version now included the expanded "Sticky Fingers") with an obscene, unreleasable B-side, so that Decca/London would reject it, and the Stones could launch their new label with "Brown Sugar"(albeit in a more polished take).
"Schoolboy Blues" was musically a joke, and it was a contractual manoeuver. That's why Jagger almost breaks up laughing when he sings about a young boy having sex with a policeman, as he sings the lines "He f#*ked me with his truncheon and his helmet was way too tight".
The contractual issue was resolved by The Rolling Stones giving Decca/London non-exclusive use of "Wild Horses" and the released version of "Brown Sugar".
I honestly can't believe The Rolling Stones will have a mono box before The Beach Boys. Capitol needs to get on the ball.
Philip Cohen says
Capitol has offered all of the Beach Boys mono mixes on CD. Analog Productions has offered all of them (except "Wild Honey") on vinyl.
Sort of. When they did the mono CDs a couple of years back they didn't include the bonus tracks from the 1990 2-for-1 reissues. I just think The Beach Boys deserve a box that rounds up their entire mono output on Capitol including those bonus tracks.
Philip Cohen says
Some bonus tracks in the Beach Boys 1990 "twofer" series were mixed down for the first time in the CD era. There ARE no original 1960's mixes (mono or stereo) of those songs or versions.
Thanks Philip, I didn't know that! I still would love have a box done by Capitol, but I doubt it will happen.
Steve Talia says
Until I get word that there will be dedicated mono mixes on these discs, I am going to hold off until the individual album releases come out. I will be monitoring the obvious music forums and Phil's comments to see if any of the individual albums will have something on them that I actually need. I would also make an exception if a fold-down reveals a new perspective on any of the albums. But my big emphasis is on wanting dedicated mono that has never been released before (which hasn't already been put on the old DSD remasters). BTW. Hey Phil, thanks for chiming in on things here at The Second Disc.
Dale Haskell says
It's my understanding that Beggars and Bleed were fold downs,except for Sympathy For The Devil. However,fantastic bootlegs have been around for some time of these mono versions. I own them and they rock. Not only do the fold downs kick,the bonus tracks on everything from Aftermath to Let It Bleed are worth it alone and a classic example of how often the criminal bootleggers better the legal criminals at record labels. Shit,I may not even need this box.
Dale Haskell says
I can't imagine anyone would make new mono mixes of anything. It seems a bit daft.
According to the http://www.highfidelityreview.com/guide-to-the-rolling-stones-remastered-sacds.html – the ABKCO – releases from 2002 are:
Mono Tracks Only
England’s Newest Hitmakers
Out of Our Heads
Out of Our Heads – UK Version
Mono and Stereo Tracks
The Rolling Stones Now
Big Hits (High Tide and Green Grass)
Through the Past, Darkly (Big Hits Vol. 2)
More Hot Rocks
The Rolling Stones Singles Collection – The London Years
Stereo Tracks Only
Aftermath – UK Version
Got Live If You Want It!
Between the Buttons
Between the Buttons – UK Version
Their Satanic Majesties Request
Let It Bleed
Get Yer Ya-Ya’s Out
The question: will the mono-albums and mono-tracks be identical in the new mono box?
Is the box a "must have box"? If yes, why??
Can't believe no one's commented on the fact these mono releases were cut from "digital transfers" - which was glossed over in Mike's article where he states the LPs are "newly remastered from the original tapes by Bob Ludwig."
This misrepresents the source that was actually used: even if "RL" did cut them it won't be as hot as if he'd had access to those 1/4 inch analog masters.
Joe Marchese says
The mastering of this set, including the role of the original tapes, is discussed at length in this Billboard piece:
What that article doesn't mention is that many of the analog to digital transfers were done for the 2002 reissue series. A fairly small chunk was either done new or wasn't used then. At least some of the transfers were made with a stereo head as well, despite what the Billboard article claims.
Found it! At least some clarification about Original Stones releases, not the "new" box set monos: http://stonesondecca.com/3A1_Matrix.html
Now we can scan the matrix numbers on our collection & hope it doesn't have "T2."
Ludwig didn't cut them. He was given digital transfers from ABKCO (often the same ones that were used in 2002), he did his mastering, and that was sent to Sean Magee for cutting.
Thanks, Joe & Luke. So who will tell us which are new, which are folds & which are '02 monos? This makes one wonder why there are "Let it Bleed" original '69 monos on eBay going for hundreds of $
Why are Let It Bleed mono copies going for so much money? Collectors like such things, I guess.
I haven't compared every single track to the 2002 versions, but briefly:
- The first album appears to be a new digital transfer. Of course, all digital versions have been mono, so in that sense, it's nothing new. I haven't done a close comparison to see what I prefer yet, although previously I preferred the original London CD with the unfaded Tell Me.
- Most of the material from 12 X 5 to December's Children uses the same digital transfers as the 2002 issues, although there are some exceptions (Confessin' The Blues comes to mind, probably because the 2002 stereo transfer has tape drag at the start of the song). The stereo Chess tracks have been folded down to mono.
- With the exception of the tracks that were released on The Singles Collection, the mixes on Aftermath, Buttons, Satanic, and Flowers are unique and haven't been issued digitally before. The same is true for the mono mix of Sympathy.
- Beggars (except Sympathy) and Let It Bleed are folded down from stereo.
- Under Assistant is the unedited original mix, which makes its digital debut. Unfortunately, it runs 2% slow.
- 19th Nervous Breakdown is an alternate, inferior, mix, with lots of hiss present between vocal lines.
- Back Street Girl and Please Go Home are unique, apparently unreleased mono mixes. The Buttons and Flowers mono LPs had fold-downs of the stereo mixes.
- A few transfers are arguably upgraded, like Street Fighting Man.
Sound is awesome on this compared - aftermath is superb
Someone named "BrownFingersDibbity" posted a lengthy review on Amazon of the Mono Box which raises more questions; I'll quote a bit of it before adding my own "enquiring minds want to know" questions:
"Let's start with the early albums. The Rolling Stones, Rolling Stones No. 2, and Out of Our Heads - both US and UK versions - are already out there completely in mono, so there is absolutely nothing unusual about those four discs (except possibly the shorter fadeout for Tell Me). 12x5 and December's Children CD's have 7 songs total in stereo with the rest in mono, but the mono versions of those 7 (6 on 12x5 and 1 on December's Children) songs on the box set are fold-downs of the stereo mixes; in other words if you already have those two CDs and also have the freeware app Audacity, you could create the mono mixes yourself and they would be just like what you get here. This is also true of 2 of the 3 songs in stereo on the Rolling Stones Now cd; the only song in stereo from that cd that is in a true mono mix on the new box is Heart of Stone, and that mono mix was already available on the Out of Our Heads UK disc....Then there is Let It Bleed, which the entire disc in the box is a fold-down. So is Beggars Banquet except for Sympathy for the Devil. And almost everything on the Stray Cats disc can be found on the 2002 remasters - mainly on the Singles Collection - with the exceptions of I've Been Loving You Too Long (which may be a fold-down)."
So if LIB & BB are fold-downs would this be definitive proof that there are NO MONO MIXES of either of those 2 albums?
Also, would this confirm that ALl London label US releases were fold-downs - not authentic mono mixes like their counterpart UK releases?
It's already known that outside of Sympathy, Beggars and Bleed are fold downs. One of the (stereo) Beggars tapes even has instructions to substitute the mono mix of Sympathy at the end of the reel when cutting in mono.
As far as London vs. Decca goes, in most cases both used the same mixes. In the case of Satanic, all London mono copies use the mono mix, while one Decca pressing uses the mono mix and the rest use a fold-down of the stereo. What the Amazon review was talking about was not the US albums specifically, but the fact that dedicated mono mixes don't exist for any of the material recorded at Chess in 1964. Any mono versions - on 12 X 5, No. 2, Now!, and December's Children - are folded down from the stereo mixes. Many of the transfers of those songs on the mono box are actually the stereo transfers from 2002 that have been folded down to mono digitally. Because any mono analog tapes are copies of the stereo masters anyway.
Thanks for your patience & generosity, Luke. I'm a new fan of this site but an early fan of the Stones, for 50 years now.
Like most music lovers I succumbed to CD Fever, having long ago sold or given away the abundant LPs of my youth - effects of moving apt-to-apt & co-ownership w my brother. I'm newly seduced by vinyl so I bought a turntable & am now collecting what Stones monos I can find (1964-1969) because I grew up w single-speaker players like most 60s teens & want "That Sound" again.
Before I get too far into it I seek advice - so far I've got:
Rolling Stones Now! (London LL3420)
Out Of Our Heads (London LL3429)
Aftermath (London LL3476)
Mainly, would these London US releases be authentic monos? Or just fold-downs? (I avoid folds the same as I do "electronically re-processed" stereo.)
Moving forward, should I focus on UK releases so I know they're "real mono?"
Again, thanks for your valuable info.
I don't personally own any of those LPs, but:
- Now! would be dedicated mono, except What A Shame and Down The Road Apiece, which only exist as fold-downs. Everything else only exists as mono except Heart of Stone.
- Out Of Our Heads only exists as mono.
- My understanding is the US Aftermath is a fold-down.