Mono Musings

[JonL]

Let me preface this by saying that I'm one of those who prefers vinyl over digital, although I do plenty of listening to CDs, my iPod, streaming music from my Macbook over a wireless Airport, and streaming radio. There's a place in my life for all of this.

Yesterday I was listening to an inexpensive European import CD: Howlin' Wolf In Concert. In concert where or when, I do not know. No liner notes at all except a song list. The CD doesn't say so but it is obviously a mono mix, probably because that's what the original tape was.

The CD sounds great. One of the best ones I have. I'm wondering if it is because it is mono. It occurs to me that the thing I dislike about CDs is that to my ears they have an exaggerated presentation of reality. Too much contrast, to use a photo analogy. Perhaps too much stereo effect. It occurs to me also that in "real life," we rarely hear live music with tremendous stereo separation. We're back a bunch of rows in the audience. With acoustic music, it becomes a virtual point source, except for room ambience. With amplified music, I doubt that they put much difference right to left in the PA, because they want the mix to sound good throughout the hall. Our stereos are capable of much more stereo effect than we're likely to hear in a normal live performance. CDs (or any digital source) can really put a musician "hard left," or "hard right." And our stereos make it sound just like that. Unnaturally so. An LP doesn't have the same level of stereo separation, so even though it may not be as technically capable, this imperfection actually forces the mix to sound more natural.

Anybody care to throw some stones at this?

 

[onepixel]

Try some mono vinyl, especially some older jazz. It will blow you away.

 

[audiozaz]

Interesting remark!

At a live performance, unless you're listening to a non-amplified ensemble taking up big surface area (big orchestras mostly), I guess you're not likely to get huge bi-lateral separation. In the case of say, a rock show where the singer or guitarist is roaming all over the place, it still wont make a difference where the sound comes from, so that's all a process added at studio recording indeed.

We should come up with a "variable mono/stereo" pre-amp circuit in order to compensate for recording l/r separation to see just how much of it sounds the best. Once again, this probably is something that would be very subjective to the individual.

az

 

[fairchild]

Old tube units in the 60s sometimes had a "Stereo blend" control that allowed you to blend any degree from full stereo to mono... useful.

 

[KeninDC]

Many great live bootlegs are mono. Stones at Leeds ("Leed Guitars") for example.

Ditto on the jazz LPs.

 

[Art K.]

Try some mono vinyl, especially some older jazz. It will blow you away.

Same with some of the old mono classical recordings.

 

[Old1625]

Most of the stereo recordings dating back to the early 1960s were mumbo-jumbo crap generated by slamming pan-pots to extreme left or right on a control console. It seems that the reconstruction of the placement of performers was not as important as the exaggeration of separation, such creating a recording that would be a hot purchase for the early stereo owner to showcase their equipment.

With such technique phasing is not part of the picture, and a true stereo image would be impossible to reconstruct.

With today's microphone technology it is possible to completely and faithfully reproduce the image of the placement of a performing group, but I haven't heard much of this...

Stereo "imaging" even to this day is up to the whimsy of the recording engineer, such as may or may not be in concert with the ultimate listener.

Monaural recordings do have their virtues--not the least being that perhaps you can leave it to your own imagination as to the image, and not have it sullied by the distracting tintinnabulations of those with oddball ideas about what constitutes sport in creating the stereo effect.

 

[Dark Knight]

I would whole-heartedly agree. I used to think "mono" was a dirty word until I got into older jazz (i.e., bebop). As long as the the fedelity is there, it can be beautiful. I have really taken to RVG series which on some recordings state the orginial session was in mono. The mono version is what is presented on CD. I can really appreciate it now.

DK

 

[shimniok]

Cool topic. I may have to try out more mono music. My only mono record that I've listened to a few times is a Chet Atkins LP and the SQ is fantastic and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that the instruments are all coming from the same direction... altho I think *maybe* there is a sense that they aren't all coming from a point source but maybe layered front to back, I dunno.

I do find it a bit distracting on some stereo recordings (usually jazz) where *some* instruments are sitting on top of each other (some weird star trek transporter malfunction) or where there are other anomalies, like a drum set that is 15 feet wide (drummer with really long arms).

... maybe in mono less distracting because ALL instruments are originating from one area.

I do like some stereo separation in classical-- not too much though because I sit far enough away from the orchestra that I can't pinpoint where, say, the flute is relative to the oboe or clarinet.

I don't know that my cd's make the soundstage wider or more pinpoint than the LPs. Maybe depends on the particular recording. I do know what you mean about cd's having a hyper real sense of presence like bright pinpoint lights twinkling out of inky blackness... whereas LP (maybe due to phase distortions?) is more like you hear the players in the room instead of floating in the blackness in space.

Michael