A stereo record has almost twice the amount of information packed into the groove as compared to a mono recording. Something must have been lost to gain the L+R information. Tracking has to be easier for a mono recording. It's kinda of like a high quality B&W photo; the rich textures, the sharpness and detail are so good that it is hard to imagine it in color, or if there is a color version it seems to take away from the picture. I heard some old mono recordings once on a buddy's Quad ESLs with Quicksilver amps. I could imagine a top notch mono system consisting of a Quad ESL with a mono tube amp and using one side of a dual mono type preamp. The Quad ESL being a good choice in my mind because it is a single point source- and it is fast.
Am I totally nuts or just a bit off?
A few weeks ago I came across about a hundred old mono pop jazz albums from the fifties in storage I had forgotten about.
Had some extended(3am extended) listening sessions using a Shure M78 S(sperical) tracking a little over 2 gms on my trusty Sony PS-X7 .
Sure seemed to me that mono was way cool especially in the LOW listening fatigue factor. Going on a Goodwill road trip next week-LOL,
Tell me again, why was stereo invented?
Had some extended(3am extended) listening sessions using a Shure M78 S(sperical) tracking a little over 2 gms on my trusty Sony PS-X7 .
Sure seemed to me that mono was way cool especially in the LOW listening fatigue factor. Going on a Goodwill road trip next week-LOL,
Tell me again, why was stereo invented?
- ...
- 46 posts total
- 46 posts total