monaural vs. stereo
mannybolone
Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
I've never thought about this but I recently picked up a second copy of Wade Marcus' "A New Era". My previous copy was the commercial stereo version but this new one is the "d/j copy monaural." For the audiophiles out there who know better - which is the better sounding version?Or does it not matter?
Comments
i'm not sure what the difference is between monaural and mono...but usually mono copies are preferred over stereophonic or records recorded for mono but then mixed for stereo after the fact.
this almost sounds like the regular release was stereo but then mixed for mono for the dj or something...you know, for those who want to play wade marcus in da club and don't want any heavy panning throwing off the dancers.
I have a mono Junior Mance-With a Lot of Help From My Friends which is pretty dope. I don't like a lot of that Enoch Light stereo swivel panning shit unless they use it creatively (some of those Persuasive Percussion type LPs use it effectively, and so does Enoch L occasionally).
I'm babbling,
PEACE
T.N.
Pretty much up to 1968, when there was an option to release mono and stereo mixes, mono was always done first and foremost. A lot of hard time and effort went into making these mixes, with the limitations of the technology at the time. AM radio was still king, so outside of making records for people with mono phonographs, there was also the thought of getting airplay, which could lead to single sales, and maybe albums for the older crowds. Stereo mixing was always an after thought, and a lot of times you could tell, especially Motown. Jazz and classical, on the other hand, were already mixing as if you were in the concert hall, to "accurately reproduce the soundscape". Meanwhile, rock and pop artists were mixing vocals to the left, music to the right.
When I was young, I used to think that stereo was the best, and mono was crap (if given the option between the two). When Both Sides Now used to sell records in collectors guides, they wanted to sell the idea that you now have the option to hear your favorite mono recordings through "both sides now", as in your ears and through two speakers. But there had always been a curiosity.
When labels started reissuing old music on compact discs, collectors would have issues over the "proper mix", especially with greatest hits packages. Fans wanted to hear the "original hit version", which for music in the 60's was always in mono. There may have been a stereo mix, but the mixes were always terrible. Labels didn't know how to react to that.
In time, labels started getting access to the master and/or multi-track tapes, and instead of using the mono or crappy stereo mixes, started making new, updated stereo mixes. For some, that was like playing the role of God. I remember the big debate over remastering Layla And Other Assorted Love Songs[/b], because you will always have fans that love the original mix, as is, despite the flaws.
But there has always been a small group of people who have said "screw the stereo mixes, we prefer them in mono". When I used to buy records, if I had the option between stereo and mono, I always went for stereo. But with the theory that mono mixes were done first and stereo as toss-offs, I decided to pay more attention. Sometimes the mixes are very drastic, plus with the limitation of having the song come out of one speaker, you have to compensate for that. But engineers and producers spent a lot of time making sure that what did come out of one speaker was the best sounding music ever made.
What makes mono appealing, especially those of us who weren't around when it was an issue, is its limitations.
Plus, when it comes to funk and soul, often times a mix with the best overall sound will usually be in mono. Granted, in stereo it may be possible to isolate the drum track or maybe use the echo on the other channel if you're wanting to sample, but unless you're Dilla, you're not producing 24 hours a day.
Occasionally, elements heard in the mono mix aren't in the stereo mix, and vice versa. It can be a new vocal take, a different guitar solo, or whatever. Plus, in a stereo mix, the sound is spread out more, and sometimes that can create something which sounds totally different. Again, that was due to the limitations of multi-track recording and mixing, and sometimes the pressing of the record itself. How many times have we found a 45, loved it, came across a CD with the song and thought "well, I'll have a clean copy on the side", take it home and the mix on the CD sounds like shit? A lot, I'm sure.
Mono mixes in the 70's were limited to promo 45's for radio stations, where FM would play stereo and AM of course would play mono. Most mono mixes were just stereo reductions, but there are a few exceptions. Mystic Moods' "Cosmic Sea" is a perfect example, where they did a completely different mix for mono, and it's edited slightly different too. I would not be surprised if any other Warner Bros. promo 45's from Mystic Moods were like that too.
Another thing to keep in mind that sometimes, the producer didn't do a stereo mix of a certain song until years after it was originally released. Well known hits from the 50's and 60's may not have had a stereo mix to go with it, so when it came time to release a greatest hits package, maybe they went back to the masters and created an all new mix. A 1970 stereo mix will of course sound very different from a song that was mixed in mono in 1957, or stereo.
My point in all of this is that despite its limitations, mono is appealing merely to hear a different mix that a lot of us, who grew up with stereo only, have never heard. These days if I see a mono pressing of an album I am interested in, I don't hesitate to pick it up.
In terms of collectibility, stereo will always be of more value for albums in the 50's and 60's since mono outsold stereo by what, 6 to 1 (or maybe it was 10 to 1)? Mono is in abundance, so there's no excuse for not being able to find a mono pressing. That is, unless it's Beatles records, where the mono pressings of some albums are known to be higher in value than the stereo mixes.
I just did the A/B thing - I was too lazy before but I got curious.
Stereo version is definitely superior. It just sounds more vibrant. The mono version of "Spinning Wheel" at least sounded really flat compared to the stereo.
There's a lot of cool things about mono and basic begining stereo. Axis Bold as Love is a great instumental LP if you pan to one side cuz you just loose the vocals.
I think it's all relative to the artist/LP. Wade had such a big sound he could actually bennifit from stereo. Where some garage rock like SoncisWailers etc hit pretty hard in original Mono.
Although its usually only ever an issue with artists like Zep and Hendrix (which command $$$) I tend to wonder in the long term if the promo-only mono's will become collectible just because they're rare
Simulated mono or stereo is for shit. And monaural is just fancy talk for mono. In mono recording, typically there is only one microphone, one loudspeaker, or in the case of headphones or multiple loudspeakers they are fed from a common signal path, and in the case of multiple microphones, mixed into a single signal path at some stage.
True mono recordings are beautiful, as are true stereo. The facemelting shit is binaural, though. In binaural, a recording unit that has two high fidelity microphones mounted in a dummy head, inset in ear shaped molds to fully capture all of the audio frequency adjustments (known as Head Related Transfer Functions) that happen naturally as sound wraps around the human head and is "shaped" by the form of the outer and inner ear.
Once recorded, the binaural effect is reproduced using headphones. The result is a listening experience that spatially transcends normally recorded stereo, since it accurately reproduces the effect of hearing a sound in person, given the 360?? nature of how our ears pick up nuance in the sound waves.
If you haven't fucked with some binaural recordings, I'd encourage you to try it. My dude and I built our own dummy with PZM mics, walked around Oakland on New Year's Eve 1999 recording the gunshots and fireworks as Y2K dawned. Listening back on headphones the next day, it was creeeeeeepy. Hearing someone laugh on the recording, I'd turn around quickly, thinking they were actually in the room. It's heavy.
You also look like a huge dork walking around with microphones taped to the side of your head. But who gives a fuck...
I took one of these to bike week in Datoyna a few years back. That shit is INSANE! 360?? of sound. I've been meaning to grab a pair PZM's so I can bulid my own. Wow...I forgot all about this. Thanks!
A perfect example of this is a series of sex CD's done by Lisa Palac called Cyborgasm[/b]. Go get 'em.
I dont know about records, but with my own mixes, I always run all my drums mono, except for shit like handclaps and stuff. Mono is nice because it gives a good flat sound to things you dont want to sound to shiny in your mix.
Definitely. With electronic based music, anything goes. Although if you want to do hip-hop that is more funk based, you want it to sound more human than robotic, a tight loop that is in the center and sounds as if someone is playing it in the studio. But to play with that idea of doing what you're told you're not supposed to do... there are risks but it's interesting to hear the results.
Speaking of huge dork...
I was digging through some old digital archives and I found one of the binaural test recordings. I made a few mp3s for folks who may be interested:
You should listen to these mp3s with headphones. The recording was made in a studio where a few very stoned dudes were playing drums, a Rhodes through a Leslie speaker, turntables through an analog delay, and a drum machine. These snippets are in no way a representation of "music." It was part of a series of placement tests we were doing. M-S, X-Y, Stereo, Bluemlin, Binaural. In the end, it was a digital archive of examples of different microphone placement techniques.
Rhodes, Drums, Echoey Talking Record
(The binaural "head" is in the middle of the room; the Leslie Rhodes is on the left, the drums are on the right, and the PA that's playing the record is left of center)
Drum Machine, Rhodes, Coughing
(This snippet is interesting because someone steps on a delay stompbox twice, and you can hear it click, which creates an interesting spatial dynamic in your headphones. Also, someone coughs, which sounds "trippy" within this microphone configuration. The instrumentation is for shit, but that wasn't the point of the recording.)
Talking, Door Closing, Fan...
(This is after an hour of recording. No break. Dudes were getting sweaty. You can hear the weed dealer say, "You're trippin' dude... Too bad you don't have any girls on ecstacy..." which is kinda funny. Two people are walking around the room. You can hear the Leslie speaker spinning in the left channel, and someone walks over and turns it off. During the talking, the two people are walking around the room, which is kind of interesting binaurally. Then they open the door of the studio, turn a fan on, and close the door.)
Anyway. Let me know what you think. If you can hear the difference in this recording technique as opposed to other types of microphone placement. To me, it seems pretty similar to the way in which the ears process sound.
thanks for sharing these!
yeah.. that second mp3 the one with the coughing, definitely sounded like it was coming from right behind me.
Interesting rundown, Bam. I saw that method listed on Lou Reed's STREET HASSLE when I was in high school and just figured they were using some high-falutin term for stereo. Now I wanna throw it on (luckily STREET HASSLE is a GREAT album*), listen to it on headphones and see if I end up with face residue on the front of my shirt.
*as long as you don't take too much offense to the side 2 opener, "I Wanna Be Black." Google the lyrics and make sure your sense of humor is in full working order.
There's a live version he does on (I think it's called) Live-Take No Prisoners[/b]. It takes him eight minutes to do a three minute songs because in this part of his career, it seemed like he wanted to be like Lenny Bruce or something. Great album, and "I Wanna Be Black"... it has to be heard.
Was the first Sonics org released on Stereo or was it only the reissue that appeared a few years later!?
Anyways, I always thought the Norton reissue had best sound quality.