Mono vs stereo


Although I like stereo, often I find it contrived.  More fun than actually adding to the music realism.

I see the Beatles have a "mono" collection available.

Are there any "mono"  advocates out there? While I realize there is no "left / right" imaging, is there a sense of realism that isn't captured in stereo? 
128x128jimspov
When you listen to mono, you should use a single speaker, in the center, not two speakers playing the same signal, it won't sound the same.

When you listen to stereo, one thing you will notice is instruments at the sides get brighter than those at the center, even when you have ideal imaging. This is caused by your head.  Neo:6 music mode and multi-channel playback gets rid of this.

I personally like the spatial illusions a great deal. I do think there is something about music not captured in mono. If you have ever seen a painting with texture and depth, and try to photograph it, the 2D image never captures the richness you have with the painting in front of you for this reason, in addition to issues of ink color matching. This 2-eyed perspective changes everything.

At the same time, recordings matter a lot. I'm not big on the wall of sound type productions. I rank that right up there with excessive compression and noise to fill time between commercials.

Best,

Erik

Music recorded in a studio on a multi-channel recorder is not really a "Stereo" recording. It is a "multiple-Mono" recording, each individual mono channel having recorded the sound of a single microphone. Each channel’s signal is then "panned" somewhere between the left and right Stereo loudspeakers during the "mixing" of the recording. True Stereo recordings are usually made with a recorder have either two or three channels, fed from a mixer combining the sound received from a microphone array (containing as few as two mics, up to maybe a dozen) placed in a large room (concert hall, church, etc.). The individual channels are NOT panned between left and right during post-recording production as are multi-Mono recordings, the mic positions having been arrived at before recording began to achieve the desired sound stage and instrument images. True Stereo recordings date mostly from the 1950’s and early 60’s.

Prior to the late 60’s, Pop And Rock ’n’ Roll LP’s were offered in both Stereo and Monaural pressings, Stereo retailing for a dollar more. The Beach Boys, The Beatles, and Bob Dylan spend days mixing the Monaural versions of their albums, leaving the Stereo mixes for an Assistant Engineer to crank out in about an hour (time is money, especially in a professional studio, now over $300/hr for the good ones). Bob Dylan’s early albums sound ridiculous in Stereo, his voice coming out of one speaker, his guitar out of the other!

Consumer alert! If buying original pressings, avoid at all costs any and all "simulated Stereo", "reprocessed from Monaural", LP’s. All they are is Monaural recordings that have had the left and right channels equalized in grossly different directions, for instance the left with all the bass removed and the right all the treble. That was done to many of the early Beach Boys albums (though the Surfer Girl album was not, for some reason. The Stereo version of that album is not reprocessed Mono), Capitol Records labeling the fake-Stereo pressings "Duophonic". They sound TERRIBLE! Reprise Records did the same thing to some of the Kinks albums. The early Kinks sound phenomenal in Mono!

In the late 60’s Rock ’n’ Rollers starting using the studio to create intentionally un-lifelike sounds---guitars jumping from left to right, for instance. The very beginning of "Listen My Friends" on the 1st Moby Grape album features that exact effect. When heard on a Monaural pressing, the beginning sounds wrong! But for Rock ’n’ Roll, the sound of all the instruments and voices combined into a single image can be much more powerful and explosive than if they are spread apart in space. The early Who albums, for instance. Live concerts are in Mono, both the left and right P.A. stacks pounding out the same sound. I like "small" music (Bluegrass, Jazz ensembles, Baroque groups, etc.) recorded in an intimate setting without a lot of post-recording electronic "sweetening" (reverb, echo, etc.) in Stereo, as the separation between instruments and voices allows the playing and singing of each to be more clearly heard, each sound inhabiting it’s own space. It fits the music, too. Those musics are often performed in small venues, and the physical positions and separation of the instruments at a live performance is replicated in the Stereo version (even if in reality actually a "simulated" Stereo multiple-Monaural recording) of the album.

The early Beatles releases are very poorly mixed in stereo so mono is better in that particular case.
In most of other cases stereo gives you imaging and mono does not.
Nice post, bdp.  On the early Beach Boys LPs, I recall that Surfin' Safari, Surfin' USA, Surfer Girl, Shut Down Vol. 2, Little Deuce Coupe, the Christmas album, In Concert and All Summer Long were all stereo.  The Duophonic crap started with Beach Boys Today and Summer Days (at least, I think so).
czarivey, I may be in the minority but I prefer the early Beatles in stereo.  Of course I wish they'd done a better job with the panning of the tracks but given the method they used (bouncing between two four tracks, etc.) I'll live with it.  If I"m not mistaken the early mono mixes were done from the stereo mix, so the stereo would be one generation fresher on top of everything else.  I know that later they did separate mixes.