Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing? (Read 14015 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

I have the 2009 remaster of Rubber Soul in both the stereo and mono+stereo CDs.  When i listen to the mono track of Nowhere Man, i'd swear that i hear some soundstaging.  Not a lot mind you, it's a much narrower stage, but i think i am hearing some placement and depth.

This is counter to what i have always thought mono was. I always thought that soundstaging came from two or more channels playing different levels of the same sound.  So if you have two speakers playing one channel equally loud, you hear everything ontop of each other.  Am i wrong? I know the Beatles were very innovative in the studio, so is is just something they accomplished that isn't the norm for mono recordings?

I listened to the mono first, then the stereo track on the mono disc, then the stereo track on the stereo disc (i assume they are the same).  I'm not making any claims about quality between the two or the accuracy of my little 5 minute experiment.

That said, i do strongly dislike hard panning and it seems common in early stereo recordings, so my feelings may be affecting the results that i hear.

Why am i hearing soundstaging and depth from mono through 2 speakers?

Thanks
Music lover and recovering high end audiophile

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #1 –
When you listen to two speakers in the same room, the fact that they can't occupy the exact same location in space means that the frequency response delivered to the ears at the seated position will vary due to room acoustics when excited from that location, slight differences in distances to the ears, level, and speaker height/tilt/toe-in etc., so you aren't actually hearing the same signal from your speaker L and R, they are merely similar, plus even state of the art speakers vary some per serial number [some high end brands brag they keep the tolerance to much less than 1dB from 20-20kHz, selling their speakers in matching pairs, but even that can be audible in some circumstances].

If you truly had perfect speakers, in a perfect, symmetrical room,  perfectly balanced in level at all frequencies, at identical distances/angle/toe-in, etc., a mono recording when listening from the perfect, single sweet spot should form a mental image of a phantom speaker placed in the middle. The soundstage would have no "width" to speak of but an illusion of depth might exist for some people, but it is mostly just a mental construct.

People usually have a better bet of experiencing a truly balanced experience without the deleterious alterations changing the L differently from the R, due to asymmetrical rooms, by using headphones. I suspect all the sound will seem from the center for your mono albums that way.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #2 –
There are also certain trick EQs which an audio engineer can use to fool the ear into hearing the sound as "coming from above", or "wider", etc. but I don't know of any such HRTF tricks like that having been applied to Rubber Soul, although it is possible.


BTW, Beatle records in mono vs stereo are known to be different mixes, takes, SFX, EQs, etc. It is not just they took the stereo and squished it to one channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npvsGRonfcM

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #3 –
Btw, Those two stereo mixes are different. 1965 vs 1987. Both are "vocal panned to one side" abominations though. The 1987 version has obviously digital reverb too.

Mono is two identical channels, except where they transfer the mono tape on a stereo machne, and the tape faults come out in stereo. I don't think that's the case here though. Crappy speakers make mono recordings have some spatial elements simply because they don't match. mzil is right about what you will here forn a perfect setup. Or just listen through one speaker.

cheers,
David.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #4 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
I have the 2009 remaster of Rubber Soul in both the stereo and mono+stereo CDs.  When i listen to the mono track of Nowhere Man, i'd swear that i hear some soundstaging.  Not a lot mind you, it's a much narrower stage, but i think i am hearing some placement and depth.

This is counter to what i have always thought mono was. I always thought that soundstaging came from two or more channels playing different levels of the same sound.  So if you have two speakers playing one channel equally loud, you hear everything ontop of each other.  Am i wrong? I know the Beatles were very innovative in the studio, so is is just something they accomplished that isn't the norm for mono recordings?

I listened to the mono first, then the stereo track on the mono disc, then the stereo track on the stereo disc (i assume they are the same).  I'm not making any claims about quality between the two or the accuracy of my little 5 minute experiment.

That said, i do strongly dislike hard panning and it seems common in early stereo recordings, so my feelings may be affecting the results that i hear.

Why am i hearing soundstaging and depth from mono through 2 speakers?


(1) Because you are accustomed to hearing soundstaging and depth when you listen to your stereo.

(2) Because your audio system is not perfectly analytic and applies some spatial distortion to the music if for no other reason due to the intrusion of room acoustics.

(3) Errors in the production cycle, some which might even be intentional - e.g. reverb or channels with different spectral response or timing. (others have already pointed out several)

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #5 –
I've never encountered mono content on a CD where both channels were digitally identical. I just assume there are slight differences because even when the original was recorded to one channel, when prepping for CD they always stereo-ize it first, running the mono signal through analog stereo equipment during the transfer. I don't think the old Sony gear for digitizing audio and authoring CDs was capable of mono input, was it?

Even when a modern DAW is used for CD authoring, they can still end up with not-quite-perfect mono if they duplicate the hi-res mono to create identical L & R channels before doing the conversion to 16/44.1...because the dither added to each channel during the conversion will be different.

Whether this has happened with the mono Beatles remasters, and whether it accounts for anything audible, I don't know. But in my experience, mono-tape sourced material on CD has always had a bit more "presence" than when I convert it to true mono (identical channels), which is something I used to do in a desperate bid to save disk space.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #6 –
I'm pretty sure of the 2002 releases of the Rolling Stones material that were in mono they were exactly that, digitally speaking.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: mjb2006 on
I've never encountered mono content on a CD where both channels were digitally identical. I just assume there are slight differences because even when the original was recorded to one channel, when prepping for CD they always stereo-ize it first, running the mono signal through analog stereo equipment during the transfer. I don't think the old Sony gear for digitizing audio and authoring CDs was capable of mono input, was it?

Even when a modern DAW is used for CD authoring, they can still end up with not-quite-perfect mono if they duplicate the hi-res mono to create identical L & R channels before doing the conversion to 16/44.1...because the dither added to each channel during the conversion will be different.

Whether this has happened with the mono Beatles remasters, and whether it accounts for anything audible, I don't know. But in my experience, mono-tape sourced material on CD has always had a bit more "presence" than when I convert it to true mono (identical channels), which is something I used to do in a desperate bid to save disk space.

When I do a vinyl rip of a mono LP, I save just one channel so I get true mono, instead of the two channels that my stereo cartridge/ADC/etc. will generate in Audacity. It just makes sense to eliminate as many variables as is (easily) possible. I look at and listen to the file in Audacity to see which channel has the least noise between tracks and save that one, although there's not usually a huge difference.
 

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #8 –
Rather than recording only one channel from a stereo pickup of a mono record, it is generally best to sum the two channels to mono and to record that, for the least possible noise.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #9 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
Why am i hearing soundstaging and depth from mono through 2 speakers?


You don't hear it, you are imagining it. The difference of the two channels on the 2009 mono Nowhere Man looks like this:

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #10 –
Thanks for the responces and reasoning. It's great to have this place to come to when i want confirmation of my delusions :").

So, if the stereo mixes are new, are the mono ones new as well? I've been trying to ascertain that via Google.
Music lover and recovering high end audiophile

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #11 –
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes about the mono mixes.

Regarding the delusions, I think a good case was made about asymmetries in the speakers and/or listening environment.  I don't think you're being delusional.

Have you tried listening with headphones?

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #12 –
Quote from: 2Bdecided on
Crappy speakers make mono recordings have some spatial elements simply because they don't match. mzil is right about what you will here forn a perfect setup. Or just listen through one speaker.  cheers, David.


Mono buttons are rare in preamps or receivers made in the past several decades however one can effectively achieve this, from a mono [OR stereo*] source, and without having to disconnect any speakers, by using the Dolby Pro Logic II surround mode, which is quite common. All the sound will properly come out of the center speaker alone (plus the optional subwoofer). The sound should have no horizontal soundstage at all this way.

*"Speakers A" will need to be turned off [or disconnected] for stereo sources and the surround speakers ideally should be disconnected as well, leaving only the center (plus sub).

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #13 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
So, if the stereo mixes are new, are the mono ones new as well? I've been trying to ascertain that via Google.
None of the mixes are "new". The Rubber Soul and Help albums were remixed for the original CD issues in 1987; almost nothing else was. The mono mixes are all the originals. There are some stereo mixes that are a little later than the originals, but I can't remember if any are on the 2009 CDs.

Every single mix of every single Beatles track is listed here, along with which release it appears on...
http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/beatles/

Cheers,
David.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #14 –
Quote from: greynol on
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes about the mono mixes.

Regarding the delusions, I think a good case was made about asymmetries in the speakers and/or listening environment.  I don't think you're being delusional.

Have you tried listening with headphones?

I just tried it again with headphones.  I think maybe i am "delusional". The instruments and voices still have apparent placement. Things are in the center of my head, but voices are slightly left center, bass is slightly right center.  If fact if i swap the headphones on my head so that the right cup is on the left ear, it reverses. But it's not nearly as extreme as the stereo version, which is hardpanned, so it's not a mislabled track. It's not a wide soundstage at all. It's all cruched together and a very slight effect, but it's there.  I'm sure it's just me as sometimes when i listen the bass is on the left and sometimes it's on the right. 

Goratrix's graph proves it.  Now, where did i put that straigh jacket?

I'm listening through my computer via mpv.  I wonder if, at 42 my hearing may be uneven at some frequencies in each ear.
Music lover and recovering high end audiophile

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #15 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
I'm listening through my computer via mpv.  I wonder if, at 42 my hearing may be uneven at some frequencies in each ear.


That was my first thought when you mentioned the bass on one side and the vocals on the other... but then you said it reverses when you swap orientation of the headphones...
Creature of habit.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #16 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
I wonder if, at 42 my hearing may be uneven at some frequencies in each ear.
Typical high frequency loss due to age is fairly symmetrical, addressing both ears evenly, UNLESS it is partly due to a specific trauma which attacked one ear more aggressively: NIHL [noise induced hearing loss]. The classic example is right-handed rifle shooters who don't use adequate ear protection every single time they shoot. Their right ear typically suffers greater loss than the left due to the closer proximity to the blasts. In fact gun fire is THE most common cause of recreational NIHL.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #17 –
Are you using the same receiver to drive your headphones as your speakers or some other common device? 

What if you try a phone or personal media player?

What if you change up the headphones for an alternate pair?

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #18 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
if i swap the headphones on my head so that the right cup is on the left ear, it reverses.
So the two halves of your headphones aren't matched. Hence you're not hearing the same in both ears, even when the same signal is sent to each driver. Hence you're not hearing mono as mono.

Cheers,
David.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #19 –
Quote from: BearcatSandor on
I'm listening through my computer via mpv.  I wonder if, at 42 my hearing may be uneven at some frequencies in each ear.


Its not necessarily about your age, it is about the provenance of your ears.

One nearby really loud sound off to one side of your head and...

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #20 –
Quote from: mzil on
Rather than recording only one channel from a stereo pickup of a mono record, it is generally best to sum the two channels to mono and to record that, for the least possible noise.


Wouldn't it be better to use a MS-encoder and delete the side signal?

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #21 –
Quote from: markanini on
Quote from: mzil on
Rather than recording only one channel from a stereo pickup of a mono record, it is generally best to sum the two channels to mono and to record that, for the least possible noise.
  Wouldn't it be better to use a MS-encoder and delete the side signal?
I can't say I've ever tried [in fact I don't think I've ever owned a mono record] but in theory it makes sense:

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php...st&p=876559

My only reservation would be that due to the weird, variable distortions of LP playback per radius being played, a simpler mono technique might be more forgiving to the unwanted variable distortions, phase, and level irregularities of playing the first cut vs the last ones on the LP due to inner groove distortion, pinched groove, and the constantly varying skating force distortion [which constantly varies despite almost everyone's Band-Aid approach of applying a fixed, constant value of "anti-skating compensation", ignorant of the variable groove modulation level induced drag and the current groove radius, which both continually affect the actual skating force and its distortion].

It might be best to compare results, using the different methods, track to track. It's not uncommon, in some instances, for one channel of an LP to have more damage and groove wear than the other, in which case recording only the better channel and ignoring the other (more damaged) one entirely might result in the least overall noise and distortion.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #22 –
Let's get back on topic, please. This discussion has nothing to do with vinyl. If you wish to discuss these tangential items further, send me a PM and I will split the topic.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #23 –
I've tried it and your guess is right: it's sometimes better, but can be distractingly inconsistent.

Btw, on most m/s encoders, m is just the two channels summed to mono. One other exception is Dolby prologic, but the steering it introduces will make things worse for this I think.

Cheers,
David.

stereo and mono beatles -- what am i hearing?

Reply #24 –
Sorry.