Why Does Mono Sound Bad To Me?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by A Saucerful of Scarlets, Apr 9, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dkmonroe

    dkmonroe A completely self-taught idiot

    Location:
    Atlanta
    If there were people who actually "fetishize" mono, then I would expect those people would be mono-only, not listen to both mono and stereo and prefer mono versions of some albums. I think it would be far more accurate to say that the several people here who claim to actually hate mono are actually those who "fetishize" stereo. So I think it's actually pretty hypocritical to say that "some folks have a hard on for mono recordings" as if that's some big bad personality flaw that normal folks like you don't have.
     
    Grant likes this.
  2. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    I generally prefer stereo, but I don't think I'm particularly wound up about it. I own mono Beatles, Doors, Hendrix, Floyd. I do not dislike early 60s stereo mixes. I usually find them to be a charming relic of the era and more pleasing to my ears than their mono counterparts, in general.

    I don't bemoan the fact that early Elvis is in mono. Seems perfectly natural to me.

    Perhaps the fetishizing I note is more about folks that do seem to get bent out of shape, one way or the other, about the topic. I don't think they're bad people, it just strikes me as odd.

    The idea of folding down Dark Side of the Moon to mono in search of some improvement strikes me as a weird thing. The idea of releasing a brand new album in mono strikes me as weird. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen.

    I like this place and I think most of us are looneys. I maintain that it is a fetish site, not that there's anything wrong with that.
     
  3. The FRiNgE

    The FRiNgE Forum Resident

    As many have responded, mono does not sound right through headphones. The sound seems to emanate from the top of the head (that's me) or inside the head as others have described. Mono does produce front to back imaging through speakers, and also can create a sense of space (though not nearly as convincing as a good stereo setup)

    Mono at its finest can be from a single speaker. The listener can move about the room without degradation, as a single speaker never introduces any time smear in off-axis listening locations. (certain exceptions via narrow dispersion speakers and horizontally arranged multi-way drivers which are axis sensitive)

    Stereo speakers can be a problem for mono. The listener needs to be centered. When off center the sound becomes phasey and "colored". (try this as an experiment, and also valuable for ear training of phase coloration)

    Another way mono sounds great is via room filling sound, with the music loud. Room reflections, and being some distance away from the speakers presents a sense of space and big sound.. for stereo this dilutes stereo separation anyway.

    Mono usually sounds more robust vs stereo. There will be exceptions as stereo mixes differ (some having a strong L+R mono component) and also the amount of compression and reverberation applied by the sound engineers. Some mono recordings just sound like dog crap, but don't judge it by those... as also stereo can be bad too.

    BTW I'm not a mono freak, (but you should see me in stereo) just that sometimes the better recording can be the mono version.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017
    SandAndGlass and Helom like this.
  4. dkmonroe

    dkmonroe A completely self-taught idiot

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Who the hell ever said that Dark Side Of The Moon needs to be folded down into mono? I have heard anti-mono fetishists joke about that, or trying to use that as a debate point ("Do you wanna hear DSOTM in mono? NO? Well, game over."), but I've never heard anyone seriously argue that it would be a good thing.

    The people who seem most bent out of shape on this issue are stereo fetishists. I've heard them say that they hate mono, they ****ing hate mono, mono is garbage, mono gives them a headache, mono isn't "superior and progressive", that mono "limits what you can do in mixing and mastering (it doesn't, unless it was recorded with a single microphone which most music wasn't)," I've never heard any of the "mono fetishists" dismiss the whole phenomenon of stereo the way that the stereo fetishists dismiss mono in principle. A few people prefer the mono mixes of a handful of albums and it's supposedly reasonable to call them "fetishists" with a "hard on", while other people only like stereo and think mono is garbage but that's not a problem. The whole debate seems backwards to me.
     
    Grant likes this.
  5. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    Pink Floyd dark side of the moon fold Down

    P.S. You're right. I'm wrong. Sorry I ever brought it up.
     
    billnunan likes this.
  6. Carl Swanson

    Carl Swanson Senior Member

    I don't like mono, but it sounds MUCH better on my Sennheiser HD-600s than it did on any previous headphones I had. Sounds decent on the HD-380 pros I use for isolated listening, too.
     
  7. Schoolmaster Bones

    Schoolmaster Bones Poe's Lawyer

    Location:
    ‎The Midwest
    Hardcore Audiophile.
     
  8. dkmonroe

    dkmonroe A completely self-taught idiot

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Clearly those mono fanatics are a problem. They're so stubborn and unyielding.
     
    Grant likes this.
  9. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Seattle area
    Guilty as charged, and have been for the last 36 years.

    Sorry guys, I really didn't mean to thread-crap here, or to be disrespectful to those of you who don't share my views. I just don't happen to like the sound of Mono, and have always been surprised by how many people on this forum seem to regularly ask for Mono mixes.

    But if you guys like it, the more power to you! I just wont be joining you in either purchasing, or listening-to, those particular releases.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017
    dalem5467 likes this.
  10. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Mono has a sound??
     
  11. Helom

    Helom Forum member

    Location:
    U.S.
    As The FRiNGE sated above, mono recordings sound best through a single speaker. Mono recordings were not made for headphones or 2 channel, they were created for the single speaker record players that were common in the 60s. Why should playing mono recordings through 2 speakers sound any better than playing a stereo recording through one speaker?
     
    SandAndGlass and The FRiNgE like this.
  12. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Seattle area
    Of course it does. A dead-flat image which is always centered right between the speakers on a good stereo, or in the middle of your head on a set of headphones.
     
  13. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    I don't get you. You're saying that the lead vocal in every stereo record that comes out of the center right between the speakers on a good stereo is unacceptable because it's technically mono? I don't get it.
     
    progrocker likes this.
  14. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Seattle area
    I just really enjoy a sense of "space" around my music when I listen. And I especially love it when that sense of space envelopes me entirely in my listening chair. I simply don't get that experience at all with Mono.

    You are correct to surmise that many so-called "stereo" mixes which simply consist of panned mono I don't care-for very much either. A centered mono vocal track alone doesn't usually bother me. But the more instruments which get recorded in mono on a given recording, the less that I will generally like that recording because the less of a sense of "space" and "depth" I will experience on that recording.

    I realize that you may never agree with my point of view on this issue. But do you at least understand where I am coming from at bit more now?
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017
  15. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Well, I get it in one sense, but to eliminate 6o years of recorded music history because it doesn't swirl around you enough is not a "sound" reason. To go the rest of my life without hearing Elvis or Buddy Holly or Benny Goodman, etc. would make me cry. Soundstage positioning would be the last thing on my mind when listening to my favorite classic recordings..
     
  16. POE_UK

    POE_UK Forum Resident

    Location:
    Somerset
    This is the same for me, i absolutely hate the Kinks vinyl in mono, but love the digital stereo versions of "you really got me"
     
  17. notesofachord

    notesofachord Riding down the river in an old canoe

    Location:
    Mojave Desert
    I've got monomania, and you know baby, there ain't no cure...

    [​IMG]
     
    Licorice pizza likes this.
  18. Bill Larson

    Bill Larson Forum Resident

  19. A Saucerful of Scarlets

    A Saucerful of Scarlets Commenter Turned Viewer Thread Starter

    Well for me it's certainly the money aspect. I'd love to get some ultra expensive equipment but honestly I'm happy with what I've got anyway so it doesn't bother me.
    Yeah I'm listening to early 60's recordings. I often hear mono Sgt. Peppers especially is ideal so I was trying it out but couldn't ever like it, wondering whether it's just my equipment, my ears or whatever. Also some Kinks and other stuff were missing stereo versions of songs on iTunes.
    Mono vs Stereo is subjective, really. I don't think there's anything else to it. I was just wondering why I thought the actual quality of the sound in mono was worse in my ears, whether it was just me, what I'm listening through or whatever.
     
  20. The FRiNgE

    The FRiNgE Forum Resident

    Hey Mr Mojo,
    Personal preference definitely is a major factor. I remember when stereo was new, was about 1962 for me. People were complaining about it, a lack of fullness, and shrill by comparison to mono. Another reason was the early hardware, general consumer grade record players which did not have as much power as the mono sets. The reason for this was economics, most likely, as the cost of the new stereo sets had to compete with mono, and stereo was heavily promoted (but slow to be accepted) The price points were critical to entice people to buy a new Stereo record player. (but were disappointed by their sound and lack of power)

    Just a point of view and perspective:
    Early stereo was not good, most of it wasn't. Most of the early stereo records featured "ping pong stereo", one set of instruments on the left, other instruments on the right. (also note 60's Beatles "wide stereo" which I happen to like) Exceptions were very well engineered stereo recordings. (RCA Living Stereo classical recordings among the exceptional of the era)

    When comparing mono to stereo, the early mono recordings tend to sound more robust, better by default. They tracks were laid down for mono, and do not translate well to the production of stereo. If one studio track has all the vocals and bass and drums, the other guitars and tambourine... where does one place these tracks in the stereo field? You have one stereo channel for just a guitar and tambourine.. therefore a lack of fullness at home on a portable record player. In fact many mono records were recorded on a three track Apex 300 (such as Sinatra) the Beatles on 4 track, and sound engineers "bounced" tracks, a multi-tracking technique. But this was not for the purpose of producing a stereo record. Most consumers were still purchasing mono records at that time. Stereo was so slow to catch on, finally gained a lot of traction around 1966, about the time the Beatles ended their touring and started on Sgt Pepper.

    Later mono pressings, such as Sgt Pepper were recorded and mixed for stereo, so the mono mix sounds very lackluster, IMO
    I mention Sgt Pepper, as you did, because the stereo mix blows away the mono mix.

    So, early mono, and later mono are apples and oranges.
    Early recordings were tracked and mastered to favor mono, later recordings for stereo.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017
  21. A Saucerful of Scarlets

    A Saucerful of Scarlets Commenter Turned Viewer Thread Starter

    That makes a lot of sense.
    I too like the Beatles wide stereo, but my dad hates it. Never took into mind why it was like that though. Good to know!
    Wasn't it only until Abbey Road that they decided to focus on stereo? Or was it at Sgt. Peppers, but at Abbey Road they decided to neglect mono completely?
     
  22. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Hate to burst your bubble, but there is. It's not a matter of just picking stereo or mono. They are mixed differently. In some cases, especially with early Atlantic recordings, they are totally different recordings. Like many here, I grew up listening to the mono 45s and radio. When stereo became dominant in the 70s, and especially when especially CDs came out, I always felt that something was wrong, and when companies started putting out mono CDs, I realized why. The stereo mixes/versions weren't the same as the hit mono singles. That's why we have a trend of mono on CD today. People are realizing that they don't sound like the hits they knew and loved, because they aren't! Once in a while, there will be stereo mixes that are the same as the mono, or where the stereo mix was the hit, but that didn't become common until the early 70s. The labels continued to issue mono mixes to radio to eliminate potential phase issues on the air.


    You say you know nothing about audio, but I encourage you to stick around this place and learn stuff. Do some digging on your own. Read books. read what the pros say. And, keep listening.

    But, don't kid yourself thinking that it's just a subjective preference. That goes for all the other stereo at all costs people, too.

    But, if I can get good stereo mix that matches the mono hit mix in all aspects, i'll take it! That's why I like the new Eric Records "Hard To Find 45s on CD Volume 17" CD.
     
    The FRiNgE likes this.
  23. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    No it wasn't. At the risk of turning this into a Beatles thread: The Beatles didn't deliberately mix for stereo until the "Let It Be" sessions in 1969. before then, they went for mono.

    The mono "Sgt. Pepper" blows away the stereo.
     
    SandAndGlass and Spirit Crusher like this.
  24. A Saucerful of Scarlets

    A Saucerful of Scarlets Commenter Turned Viewer Thread Starter

    I don't really have a bubble to burst as I'm pretty open to any interpretation. I'm talking generally. I know that there are many differences throughout The Beatles discography due to different mixes, I'm saying whether you prefer the sound of it being central or not is subjective. Not in the case of different mixes.

    Yeah I hear that a lot and I get why, LSD especially has some fantastic effect on Johns vocals, plus the other differences like how everything is way rockier and She's Leaving Home is slower and whatnot.
    George did the mono while The Beatles were there and stereo was just an afterthought when they weren't, right? Or do I have my story wrong?
     
  25. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    But, that's what mono vs. stereo is all about: different mixes. It isn't just a matter of choosing one over the other. Take "Help", for instance: The mono mix/recording does not have a tambourine, and features a different vocal. The stereo re-recording adds the tamborine. But, the mono version was the hit.

    If you want something that involves the same recording, look at "Baby, You're A Rich Man". The tape effects in the mono mix do not exist in the stereo mix because they were added exclusively to the mono. George Martin and Geoff Emerick could not replicate it when they mixed it to stereo.

    "Hey Jude". The mono mix sounds unique with the right amount of compression added. It sounds like a full recording and jams. The stereo mix sounds disjointed and loose. The mono mix even runs longer than the stereo mix.

    I could sit here all night and give you examples of all kinds of songs from the 60s and 70s.

    Just keep listening.
     
    stereoptic and Spirit Crusher like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine