FOT Forum
The Best Show on WFMU => Show Discussion => Topic started by: ian on October 25, 2007, 08:06:45 AM
-
This might be a stupid question, one that shows my youth... but what is the appeal of mono versions of older albums, is it romaticizing or is something really lost in the remastering to stereo?
I'm not talking about the regular complaints about remastering, about how they compress the shit out of records to make them sound like they're on modern fm radio, I mean specifically stereo vs mono of old albums that were originally mono.
Is it just preference to the original version, purism, etc? Sell me on it!
-
If you are referring to Tom's mention of Pink Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn, the real selling point is the clearer mix of the album. I've had the mono version of Piper for a while and have never gone back to the stereo version. The music is fuller and lacks the cheap channel panning effects on "Interstellar Overdrive".
As far as mono for 60's era albums. Stereo was rather new in the 60's and very few people had the equipment to properly reproduce it. I think it was initially considered a bit of a gimmick. Bands had little interest in the stereo versions of their album mixes. I read that the Beatles never attended any of the their stereo mixes and that the mono versions were their preferred ones.
An album like "Pet Sounds" which is sometimes called Brian Wilson's first solo album, is probably preferred in the mono version because Brian Wilson is deaf in one ear and was physically unable to hear stereo. I guess the theory is that Wilson could never approve the stereo mix, therefore it is inferior.
I hope that helps. There is a lot of conjecture on my part and I am by no means an expert. There are dozens of books that explore the subject in more depth, but I thought I would take a stab.
Really though, that mono "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" is great, check it out.
-
I was definitely aware of Wilson's deafness and this was my deciding factor in leaning towards the mono mix of Pet Sounds myself. I didn't know quite the extent that bands of the era leaned toward mono mixes, though.
I have Piper with a mono mix on it, I'll have to not ignore it anymore. Thanks for your answer.
-
Bah. Stereo sounds better almost every time. If stereo as we know it today was around in the 60's they would have used it. I've heard stereo remasters compared to technicolor but I think it's more like a DVD reissue. They're not adding anything to the music they are just making it sound better using the pieces that were already there. I guess if you want to hear how it sounded when it came out, the mono version is nice to have, but to hear people say that the mono versions sound better seems crazy to me.
-
Bah.
Bah? What are you, Doctor Doom?
The whole point that people are making on this thread is that stereo WASN'T around to the degree that it is now back in 1967, when these records came out. So the artists were recording and mixing their records for mono. So if you have no interest in hearing how the artists thought the music should sound, that's your choice. I'd choose to hear how the band envisioned the album, not some engineer barfing out a stereo mix without any of the principal artists around to supervise.
As for 'using the pieces that were already there', plenty of stuff that is on the mono version of PIPER AT THE GATES OF DAWN got lost in the stereo mix. So you hear elements that fell out of the recording during the transition. The same goes for the mono mix of THE KINKS ARE THE VILLAGE GREEN PRESERVATION SOCIETY - the mono version seems so much livelier than the stereo version.
There's not much separation on contemporary recordings these days anyway - they often end up a thick, compressed wad of mid-range goo. So if you want that, it's all yours.
Tom.
-
Along with the previous albums mentioned all that I proudly own in mono. Lets not forget a certain Dylan record called Highway 61 Revisited. Now only if there was a mono version of Blood On The Tracks.
-
You guys remember Mid-Range Goo, right? They opened for Puddle of Mudd in '96.
Love,
Jimmy Pardo
-
Some people also find that mono has more of a raw punch to it. At least that is why everything Dead Moon does is recorded in mono.
-
And in case nobody knows, The Best Show podcast is intentionally in monaural. The show isn't as funny in stereo, trust me.
-
Bah.
The whole point that people are making on this thread is that stereo WASN'T around to the degree that it is now back in 1967, when these records came out. So the artists were recording and mixing their records for mono. So if you have no interest in hearing how the artists thought the music should sound, that's your choice. I'd choose to hear how the band envisioned the album, not some engineer barfing out a stereo mix without any of the principal artists around to supervise.
I can concur that the original recording is very important. How many bands really had that much input in the production process though? Plus, it's not like some two bit record labels put out the stereo re-releases.
I don't know, I've only heard mono/stereo releases of a few bands. As bad as the CD's are (not the music but the mastering), I still think the stereo versions sound better for the Beatles. I think that's due to growing up with the CD's and listening to them so much. Listening to Sgt. Peppers in mono is a drastic change when you've heard the stereo version a thousand times. Pet Sounds sounds 100 times better in stereo to me. That album was made for stereo even though Brian Wilson couldn't hear it. The Kinks stuff sounds better to me in stereo as well. Phil Spector too....just kidding. Although, has his stuff ever been released in stereo? It would at least be interesting to hear what it would sound like.
By livelier do you mean that when listening you feel like you are in the studio or at a show? I think the importance of that aspect might be the fundamental difference between mono enthusiasts and stereo enthusiasts.
-
My friend gave me a double disc of the complete Beatles A- and B-sides in mono. They are really, really incredible sounding mixes. The greatest improvements are heard in Ringo's drums and the lead vocals. Typically, they would hard pan those instruments in the stereo mixes, which made them lose some of their overall impact. Plus, I hear a lot of new harmonies and instrumental parts in these mixes.
They really need to do nice double disc reissues of these albums, one version in mono and one in stereo. The Capitol Albums box sets apparently have really nice mixes, but they need to just do the right thing already.
-
Those Monkee reissues are released in mono and stereo discs. I know the 'drummer' is in the hate pit. But you cant hate upon Pisces, Aquarius, Capricorn & Jones Ltd. that's a great one in mono.
-
Pet Sounds sounds 100 times better in stereo to me. That album was made for stereo even though Brian Wilson couldn't hear it.
We are not going to agree on this. All the best to you and your stereophonic recordings.
Tom.
-
Oddessey and Oracle eats it in stereo. Mono all the way for that one. Revolver is unlistenable if you have it in stereo and one of your speakers isn't working. "Tax man" is like bum...............bum..........bum............TAXMAN! "Got To Get You Into My Life" actually sounds depressing if you can only hear one speaker.
-
Same goes for Sgt. Peppers.... I had a pair of headphones go out on one side when I was a kid and I was wondering what was going since all the rest of my music played find out of one ear. Actually, both of those albums really don't sound good at all with headphones if you are listening to the stereo version.
That leads me to another question... Does mono still sound good to you all if you are listening with headphones? That's how I listen to my music 98 percent of the time so maybe I've been turned off because of that? I should give this mono thing another shot.
-
I thought the mono version of PIPER AT THE GATES OF DAWN was absolutely riveting through headphones. Instead of watching the usual tennis game that takes place on a lot of 60's stereo albums, watching the tracks get knocked back and forth between channels, it feels like you're right in the middle of the music. I loved it.
Tom.
-
Is that the recently released version?
-
I'm guessing yes Gilly and it is fantastic.
-
I don't know if they're on CD, but I do prefer the mono versions of the London Records-era Stones LPs. I have yet to hear Satanic Majesties in mono (the vinyl is pretty rare since that was getting towards the end of the era where mono was common), but I'd love to.
I also prefer the mono version of the first Love LP to the stereo mix. I'm pretty sure the CD has both versions.
-
I don't know if they're on CD, but I do prefer the mono versions of the London Records-era Stones LPs. I have yet to hear Satanic Majesties in mono (the vinyl is pretty rare since that was getting towards the end of the era where mono was common), but I'd love to.
I also prefer the mono version of the first Love LP to the stereo mix. I'm pretty sure the CD has both versions.
The Love LP does have both versions and the Stones albums are floating around in mono form. I've got a few in my collection.
-
the Stones albums are floating around in mono form. I've got a few in my collection.
I have the Stones stuff on vinyl but I've never seen them on CD. I don't think they did mono versions when they remastered everything a few years ago. Are the copies you have official releases?
Oh, and SF Sorrow by the Pretty Things is another album where I prefer the mono mix. I also second Tom's mention of TKATVGPS by the Kinks.
-
The Stones cd are of the gray area. I got them from a certain site still in existent the one with the demon.
-
Oddessey and Oracle eats it in stereo. Mono all the way for that one. Revolver is unlistenable if you have it in stereo and one of your speakers isn't working. "Tax man" is like bum...............bum..........bum............TAXMAN! "Got To Get You Into My Life" actually sounds depressing if you can only hear one speaker.
Thank God my stereo came with TWO working speakers!
PS: My pacemaker is useless if the battery runs out
-
So what mono albums should I check out? Stuff that is readily available on CD. I did some searching and I don't see much other than jazz, Beach Boys and The Who. Also, has pretty much everything from the 60's been remastered to stereo or has a lot of it been untouched?
-
Mono is a waste of time. So is stereo, at this point.
I met an audiophile at the record store, and he has been re-mastering all of my music into 5.1 using Logic Pro. He then presses it onto Vinyl and gives it to me to play on a modified Thorens TD-124 in my special music room.
It might sound silly, but stepping into my music room is like taking a time machine 20 years into audio's future.
...If you insist upon listening to mono though, get that Back to Mono Phil Spector comp.
-
Mono is a waste of time. So is stereo, at this point.
I met an audiophile at the record store, and he has been re-mastering all of my music into 5.1 using Logic Pro. He then presses it onto Vinyl and gives it to me to play on a modified Thorens TD-124 in my special music room.
It might sound silly, but stepping into my music room is like taking a time machine 20 years into audio's future.
...If you insist upon listening to mono though, get that Back to Mono Phil Spector comp.
Is his name Heinrich?
-
Thank God my stereo came with TWO working speakers!
PS: My pacemaker is useless if the battery runs out
Haha! Nicely done.
-
I had a lot of the "great albums" (digitally) that were special editions with mono and stereo versions. I finally ended up deleting all the mono versions for the sake of saving space and satisfying my OCD for having my digital music collection be orderly.
Like Gilly asked: Is there one great example of mono v. stereo that I can find and listen to the two back to back for comparison?
-
PS: My pacemaker is useless if the battery runs out
Or if I punch it.
-
PS: My pacemaker is useless if the battery runs out
Or if I punch it.
or if I heat up my lunch with a microwave around it.
-
I had a lot of the "great albums" (digitally) that were special editions with mono and stereo versions. I finally ended up deleting all the mono versions for the sake of saving space and satisfying my OCD for having my digital music collection be orderly.
Like Gilly asked: Is there one great example of mono v. stereo that I can find and listen to the two back to back for comparison?
I've been looking through Rhapsody for some albums and the only one I can find is Pet Sounds and Velvet Underground and Nico (Deluxe Edition). I'll tell you what, I must have heard a junk rip of the Pet Sounds mono because that is much better. Sorry Tom. The Velvet Underground one is really interesting. I haven't decided if I like it better or not.
-
ok, I just listened to Journey's album Escape back to back, mono then stereo.
My verdict: you mono guys are crazy. stereo is better.
-
Monaural kills stereophonic every time.
Also, Tom couldn't have been more right in regards to the importance of the The in The Pink Floyd. Syd Barrett's The Pink Floyd: one of the greatest bands ever. Pink Floyd: bland prog for aging acidheads and overweight "rockers" in suits. Everything after Piper at the Gates of Dawn is junk, except for Jugband Blues, which was a Barrett composition of course.
I love Jugband Blues:
[youtube=425,350]RTtXVrANEhU[/youtube]
-
Alright, I stand corrected. Mono is definitely better than stereo when it come to albums originally released that way. My entire argument was based on what must have been a terrible rip of Pet Sounds. I've heard 6-7 albums now back to back with the stereo version and the mono wins every time. I am humbled.
-
Also, Tom couldn't have been more right in regards to the importance of the The in The Pink Floyd. Syd Barrett's The Pink Floyd: one of the greatest bands ever. Pink Floyd: bland prog for aging acidheads and overweight "rockers" in suits. Everything after Piper at the Gates of Dawn is junk, except for Jugband Blues, which was a Barrett composition of course.
I can't say I'm surprised to read this, as it's kind of the prevailing opinion among fellow rock geeks, and it is the view I myself once held. However, I don't think it's entirely fair or accurate to say that everything after Piper is junk. Granted, I have very little use for Dark Side of the Moon or anything after, but the stuff in between Piper & Dark Side is actually very good, especially if your favorite stuff from Piper is the harder, spacier stuff like Interstellar Overdrive, Lucifer Sam, or Astronomy Domine. A viewing of Live at Pompeii might give you pause, as might a listen to "The Nile Song." Or maybe not.
On the other hand, if you like Piper for the whimsical, Tolkien-inspired fairy & gnome-land stuff like Bike and The Gnome, I can see why you hate everything else.
Edit: Sorry if this comes across as smug - it wasn't supposed to be.
-
ok, so I'm comparing Odessey and Oracle by the Zombies. I listen to This Will be our Year (one of my all time favorites.) The mono version has horns that got dropped on the stereo version. I'm not that into the horn parts, but it is alarming that they would drop a major piece of the song like that. I guess that's pretty common?
-
I'm not ashamed to admit it - I like much of the bloated, bland prog-rock post-Barrett output of Pink Floyd. Up to and including several tracks on "Momentary Lapse of Reason," which is really more a David Gilmour-Bob Ezrin collaboration than a Pink Floyd record anyway.
Sure, only about 3 minutes of the 23 minutes of "Echoes" is interesting in any way, but there's nothing wrong, in my opinion, with being able to appreciate "Sheep" and "March of the Chrome Police" in the same sitting. Vive le Ipod and Vive les late 70s.
-
People really get all into being condescendingly cool way too much. "Dogs" is an exceptional cut. Parts of The Wall are ridiculous, but other parts are satisfyingly lush and beautiful.
Listen to everything, and every once in a while something will stick. Drop your guard and be open to something you're already convinced you'll hate. You've made mistakes before, who's to say you're not in the middle of one?
Like what you like, and don't apologize for it.
-
Friend of the show, Vincent Gallo, and his love for Monaural. (http://www.drowninginbrown.com/dib_sp.htm)
-
I've been hunting down a ton of mono since we started talking about this. Well, not a ton. It's hard to find and I don't own a working record player so it's even harder to find. But, I am changing my stance 180 degrees on this. Mono is always better. I've listened to Smokey Robinson and the Miracles, The Beatles, Beach Boys, Cream, Pink Floyd, The Supremes, The Who and the Velvet Underground and it all sounds so much better. I need to find myself a record player now so it will be easier to get stuff.
-
Things might be going off the deep end when it's iconoclastic to defend Pink Floyd's "The Wall" album.
-
Things might be going off the deep end when it's iconoclastic to defend Pink Floyd's "The Wall" album.
Wait, Whuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut?
-
Also, Tom couldn't have been more right in regards to the importance of the The in The Pink Floyd. Syd Barrett's The Pink Floyd: one of the greatest bands ever. Pink Floyd: bland prog for aging acidheads and overweight "rockers" in suits. Everything after Piper at the Gates of Dawn is junk, except for Jugband Blues, which was a Barrett composition of course.
I can't say I'm surprised to read this, as it's kind of the prevailing opinion among fellow rock geeks, and it is the view I myself once held. However, I don't think it's entirely fair or accurate to say that everything after Piper is junk. Granted, I have very little use for Dark Side of the Moon or anything after, but the stuff in between Piper & Dark Side is actually very good, especially if your favorite stuff from Piper is the harder, spacier stuff like Interstellar Overdrive, Lucifer Sam, or Astronomy Domine. A viewing of Live at Pompeii might give you pause, as might a listen to "The Nile Song." Or maybe not.
On the other hand, if you like Piper for the whimsical, Tolkien-inspired fairy & gnome-land stuff like Bike and The Gnome, I can see why you hate everything else.
Edit: Sorry if this comes across as smug - it wasn't supposed to be.
No need to apologize; my opinion on Pink Floyd could be seen as equably, if not more, smug. I have ventured past Barrett era Pink Floyd many times. I'll admit there is some stuff worth listening to, but it just doesn't have the same impact on me as the Barrett songs.
I apologize if I came off as condescending.
-
Hearing the mono Pipers after listening to the stereo a zillion times is quite ear-opening and really makes me smile. I imagine Syd was involved with this mix much more than the other one, as Tom mentioned earlier on this thread. I do wonder though, if people who loved the original mono lp when it was released were just as stoked when a new "stereo mix" came along (assuming this happened somewhat later on I guess; 70s perhaps). I'd very much wish to have this mono re-master on the lp format, so make it happen EMI or whoever! uh, please...
-
This is late, but continuing with Pink Floyd--
One of my favorite Best Shows ever is the one where Tom plays Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety while taking calls from obviously stoned listeners and eating a Twix bar during "On the Run." It captures perfectly everything I love and hate about that album.
"There can't be any fighting when you're listening to this--the only thing you could fight about is who could fall asleep first in a little sleep race."