Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

In the Forum: Audio For Dummies ™
In the Thread: A new 'chic' foolishness about mono systems
Post Subject: Perhaps the system factors in this, too?Posted by Paul S on: 11/16/2008
Adrian, although I find plenty of "mono" recordings that sound better to me in "mono", I will always take good stereo over good mono, other factors being equal.  Sure, some "stereo" is so poorly done that it just does not work as stereo.  But I have also found, fairly recently, that some recordings I always thought were plain old "mono" have turned out to sound better played in "stereo".  Perhaps in these cases the "mono" recordings are "binaural"; I don't know.  Whatever the reasons, ambience, air, spectral balance , imagining and "weight" from a given LP are all much more natural in the "correct" setting, whatever it turns out to be.

The system I have now has done two new-for-me things with the stereo vs. mono thing: 1)  Some mono recordings have turned out to have space, ambience and overall sound at a level I never dreamed was available.  This has been especially gratifying to me with respect to certain older recordings of great performances of great music.  2)  Good stereo has been a real mind bender!  I find it hard to believe anyone would prefer, for instance,  the EMI Calas/La Scala Tosca in mono!

A real pisser that just came up is reading that Rudy Van Gelder actually recorded many if not most of the golden-era jazz Blue Notes in either binaural or stereo as well as the mixed-down mono.  First Classic sells me a ton of $30 mono LPs that are NOT as good as the originals, then they turn around and hint that, "you ain't heard nothin' yet!" Shades of SACD!


Best regards,
Paul S

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site