Why Does Mono Sound Bad To Me?

Not to offend, but I can't imagine anything sounding good on that setup.

 

Unfortunately the Parlophone 45's were only originally released in mono in the UK, there was no choice in the matter.

My UK record collection is all mono (other than Let It Be & Abbey Road of course), but I much prefer my 2009 Stereo CD set (now in iTunes) over anything. Like you I only play my mono for nostalgia reasons only.

 

I listen to mono LPs all the time with headphones. Love it. SL1200MKII w/AT70 cart w/stock conical stylus>Lafayette LR9090 w/mono switch engaged>Monoprice DJ8323 direct from headphone jack. No issues at all. Sounds great through the JBL L19's also.

 

No offense taken. That's why I added that info, just in case it was something wrong with what I've got. Sounds good to me Don't want to go any higher (plus don't have the money) just in case I get used to it.

I always liked the weird panning in that, especially in Interstellar Overdrive

 

Good. Not trying to be a snob, as we all start somewhere.
Just wondering if you can get true mono playback through the iPad?

I know nothing about using a computer for audio purposes.
But, I do know that Mono LPs played through a system without a true Mono output are certainly lackluster in comparison to one with.

I ascend to having a second deck setup for Mono playback at sometime in my near future.

 

Yeah in the settings you can enable real mono playback, or so I believe it is anyway. Probably not any good though.

 

Why wouldn't you?

Ah, this is because a stereo cartridge will inevitably see different crackles/rumble/groove noise in its two channels, plus some phase error, all of which will create some sort of fake stereo impression. This is a non-issue with digital. A "mono" CD is really the two stereo channels having identical content, crackles and phase errors do not occur. An MP3 created from such a CD will be the same, or it will be the two identical channels summed together to a single one, i.e. true mono.

 

Honestly I do not understand this fascination with Mono that many on this forum have. I'd rather not listen at all than listen to music in mono. To me the sense of space in a recording is a crucial to making a recording sound good.

 

EXACTLY!

Actually the truth is there's a whole lotta people who have a fascination with stereo, and yet people who can't handle anything other than stereo accuse people who like mono and stereo of having a "fascination with mono."

 

I take you're point on mixes, but I disagree that there aren't folks here who fetishize mono. You did know your site was a fetish site didn't you?

 

Name one person who listens to mono only and NEVER listens to stereo.

 

"Theres someone in my head, but its not me...."

 

Just so were all clear here, there is a common misconception amongst non audiophiles, but still music lovers, that mono is superior *because its mono*. In the case of the Beatles at least, most prefer the mono mix because it is what was originally intended, and also contains more details in some cases, that were burried or lost when they did the stereo mixes. Hopefully this new 2017 Giles Martin stereo remix for Sgt. Pepper corrects this

For me, Ive always hated vocal hard-panning, so if I cant find a mix with centered vocals, Ill try and get mono.

 

I hear exactly the opposite - that stereo is superior because it is stereo. That sentiment gets aired here in every discussion about the subject. It goes along with the ubiquitous "I have two ears" remark.

 

I agree with this as well. I think that theres just too many variables when it comes to deciding mono or stereo.

 

I don't think it's all that complicated. Listen to both without prejudice and decide what you like. It's the attitude that mono is automatically inferior because it's old fashioned and we all have two ears that starts the controversy. People act like they're being baited just because people prefer the mono mix of something. Or they just think that mono is so "old" that it needs to go away. Exact same dynamic as in LP vs CD arguments - we have the CD, therefore no one needs LP's. We have stereo, therefore no one needs mono. And when someone expresses a preference for one of these "old-fashioned" things, people get all combative.

 

I listen in mono only, with one speaker. I prefer mono and wholeheartedly believe it possesses some objectively superior qualities over stereo playback, though these are not the reasons I listen to mono exclusively.

Come at me with what you've got, I've made peace with my maker.

 

Having listened as a kid to music on headphones in both mono and stereo taking in ambiphonics I don't find hearing sound come from the centre bad or distracting from the performance as it is enveloping. Do I love stereo? Yes not least for classical music and stereophonic recording certainly has its advantages but there times where older mono popular recordings just sound that more 'together' than a rushed stereo mix and that mix and presentation is the better one.

 

We had a big long thread about this very mindset a year or two ago. People will settle for less and convince themselves that it is "good enough". They don't quest for anything better because they may find out how wrong they are. Many times people convince themselves because they don't have the money, which is really the reason.

As for mono, the reason people like it is because those mono mixes were done differently than the stereo ones. In the 60s and early 70s, it was the mono mixes/versions that were deemed important by the producers, engineers, and the artists. The stereo mixes were usually the afterthought. So, when you listen to, say, The Beatles or Motown in mono, that's what they wanted. That's what the hit singles sounded like and made the money. They were often called "the money mix".

I don't know exactly what you are listening to in mono compared to the stereo mixes, but mono can be just as ambient as any stereo mix. I think the problem is that people who greatly prefer stereo get addicted to the "ooh cool" aspect of it, rather than how good they actually sound.

Are you trying to suggest that audiophiles always prefer stereo? If that's the case, you couldn't be more wrong about that.

 

The Who Quadrophenia should answer that, the way the gents in the studio did some tweeking to the sound to make the album wild. Mono is good for old school jams and vibes, but from the late 60's on up stereo is the way to go.....

 

Yeah, when they stopped actually issuing mono mixes, that did kinda put the kibosh on the whole mono thing.

 

You said very nekkid, Uh, hu, huuu, huuu.

 

Gotta' love stereo, Stereo its a Texas thing. Yehaw!!!

 

Oh, is that what I said? Or did I just say some folks around have a hard on for mono recordings?