SACD Mono or Multi-channel...why?

Find deals on ebay
Amazon
Advertise with us
QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
GOS

GOS

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2013
Messages
21,729
Location
Central Illinois
Hey all you gray haired QQ'ers. LOL, that includes me...

I posed a question in an unexpecting thread and it really doesn't belong there...so I figured it needed it's own thread.
For those of you who like to listen to MONO layers of SACD and care about the MONO layer. Why? Somehow...does the MONO sound better to you than the 2 channel or multi-channel (Quad or 5.1) layers?

Or...is it really more of a nostalgic road trip...I mean..if it's just that...I can dig it man. I love to spin some old scratchy 45's every once in a while...I mean...I know they sound inferior...but it's sort of fun I guess.

Or...also...can a faithfully reproduced MONO track on the proper system truly sound better than the stereo counterpart??? I personally cannot weigh in on that as I simply don't listen to MONO...ever... (OK, maybe on my damn iPhone I do...LOL...sort of)
 
Here’s an example that applies to a huge chunk of the music that I listen to. From 1957 to 1960, the engineers at Capitol Records would record most sessions in both Mono and Stereo (to three track tape). Both had completely different microphone set-ups and placements and their own dedicated recording consoles. The Mono was essentially done live with all EQ and echo on the spot whilst the three track was still dry and untampered with. It was remixed usually about a week later to make the stereo reduction. So the differences are found on almost every level from mic placement, EQ, the type of echo chamber used and effects like compression applied, to levels between the vocals and the orchestra. This is why you’ll hear different nuances between the Mono and Stereo versions of albums and in some cases instruments are heard more in one than in the other.

Other labels, like Columbia and RCA Victor would record on three track tape and then mix down to both Mono and Stereo.

Here are short examples using Nat “King” Cole superb Analogue Productions SACD which offers all three versions: Mono, Stereo and three track Multichannel. You'll noticed that on the Mono clip, the piano and the harp are present and nicely balanced with the rest of the orchestra and that Nat's vocals have reverb applies to them. On the Stereo clip, the piano and the harp are on one side and far into the mix whilst Nat's vocals are much dryer. Same take, two different snapshots! This is why I like having both version. I have the choice depending on my mood.

Mono [video]https://youtu.be/Q6y38oqv_sQ[/video]

Stereo [video]https://youtu.be/7GNP1Cr5Kcc[/video]

P.S. Clips made available here correlate with the 90-second, freely available iTunes samples.
 
Back in the day, I was one of the few kinds who bought the STEREO LP. In my neighborhood, I think I might have been the only one to buy stereo LP's, because they were $1 upcharge from mono. And I was listening in stereo from '62 on. The only mono records I bought in the day were Chipmunks and the Beatles' Something New. Long ago, I acquired them all in 2ch.

covers40.jpg

Why listen at all in mono? I began to discover mono releases in the 80's, when I bought a UK Beatles Collection LP box in MONO. I already owned the UK stereo Collection box. Many things sounded different. Helter Skelter and Don't Pass Me By have VERY DIFFERENT ENDINGS. I've subsequently bought the Japan Mono CD Beatles Box, EP Box, Singles Collection and US Capitol boxes which include both US stereo and mono mixes.

191234580120.jpg

Unknown-6.jpeg

bsc1_a-2.jpg

Unknown-7.jpeg

I bought mono LP's from used stores, as well as when rereleased on LP and CD. Lots of things have guitars that are missing on stereo mixes. Dylan's Ballad of a Thin Man sounds different on the mono Highway 61. I bought the mono Dylan LP's, and bought them again on a mono CD box.

Bob-Dylan-Mono-Box-450x284.jpg

To me, mono mixes are often like listening to alternate takes and other bonus tracks: they're great and something different. To me, alternate takes are rarely, if ever, better than the originally released versions. IMHO, few will ever be as good, let alone better than 2ch, or better yet SURROUND mixes.

IF you haven't listened to Sly's Greatest in mono, I strongly suggest you do so. I've owned all these tracks on LP, CD and the Sly CD albums box. I've owned Greatest Hits on LP, SQ, Q8 and CD. I've listened most often to Greatest Hits in Quad. Only occasionally have i listened in 2ch. Other than an opened up mix in Quad, most of the performances are the same, or at least very similar in 2ch. BUT, the mono SACD layer on the new 4.0/1.0 disc has some tracks that are VERY DIFFERENT. CHECK IT OUT!

Unknown-1.jpeg
 
Those are logical reasons...since you put it that way. yeah, could be simply like alternate takes. I like listening to alternate takes as well.
 
One more thing: I would much rather listen to a HIGH FIDELITY mono mix, than two channels of low-fi slop, aka, Electronically re-Channeled Stereo (Duophonic.) That's a high filter on one channel and a low filter on the other channel. Fortunately, most re-channeled albums were released ONLY in mono on CD. For once, the record industry did something right!
 
Quad Linda said:
Back in the day, I was one of the few kinds who bought the STEREO LP. In my neighborhood, I think I might have been the only one to buy stereo LP's, because they were $1 uocharge from mono. And I was listening in stereo from '62 on. The only mono records I bought in the day were Chipmunks and the Beatles' Something New. Long ago, I acquired them all in 2ch.

View attachment 22475

Why listen at all in mono? I began to discover mono releases in the 80's, when I bought a UK Beatles Collection LP box in MONO. I already owned the UK stereo Collection box. Many things sounded different. Helter Skelter and Don't Pass Me By have VERY DIFFERENT ENDINGS. I've subsequently bought the Japan Mono CD Beatles Box, EP Box, Singles Collection and US Capitol boxes which include both US stereo and mono mixes.

View attachment 22476

View attachment 22477

View attachment 22478

View attachment 22479

I bought mono LP's from used stores, as well as when rereleased on LP and CD. Lots of things have guitars that are missing on stereo mixes. Dylan's Ballad of a Thin Man sounds different on the mono Highway 61. I bought the mono Dylan LP's, and bought them again on a mono CD box.

View attachment 22480

To me, mono mixes are often like listening to alternate takes and other bonus tracks: they're great and something different. To me, alternate takes are rarely, if ever, better than the originally released versions. IMHO, few will ever be as good, let alone better than 2ch, or better yet SURROUND mixes.

IF you haven't listened to Sly's Greatest in mono, I strongly suggest you do so. I've owned all these tracks on LP, CD and the Sly CD albums box. I've owned Greatest Hits on LP, SQ, Q8 and CD. I've listened most often to Greatest Hits in Quad. Only occasionally have i listened in 2ch. Other than an opened up mix in Quad, most of the performances are the same, or at least very similar in 2ch. BUT, the mono SACD layer on the new 4.0/1.0 disc has some tracks that are VERY DIFFERENT. CHECK IT OUT!

View attachment 22474
Click to expand...

Evidently there is a problem with the mono side on Sly...haven't received my copy yet..
 
Quad Linda said:
To me, mono mixes are often like listening to alternate takes and other bonus tracks: they're great and something different.
Click to expand...

This. If it's a song or an album I like, it's just interesting to hear the different approaches. Unlike a lot of people, I actually don't hear many noteworthy differences on mono vs. stereo Beatles albums, but you know within the first five SECONDS which version of "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" just started. Completely different sound to it.
 
atrocity said:
This. If it's a song or an album I like, it's just interesting to hear the different approaches. Unlike a lot of people, I actually don't hear many noteworthy differences on mono vs. stereo Beatles albums, but you know within the first five SECONDS which version of "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" just started. Completely different sound to it.
Click to expand...



Damn, really?? One of my all time favorite albums...but haven't heard the mono versions.
 
Quad Linda said:
One more thing: I would much rather listen to a HIGH FIDELITY mono mix, than two channels of low-fi slop, aka, Electronically re-Channeled Stereo (Duophonic.) That's a high filter on one channel and a low filter on the other channel. Fortunately, most re-channeled albums were released ONLY in mono on CD. For once, the record industry did something right!
Click to expand...

Did you ever hear EJ's Empty Sky in Mono, Linda?
Apparently its quite different to the common or garden Stereo.. but its a toughy to locate :eek:
 
fredblue said:
As faras I know Clunt yes . Tbh I've nebver analysed any version i've got (there's a few on various formtas as you can imagine...) so maybe more than just vinyl but afaik that is it yes.
Click to expand...

Either you're being rude, you're drunk, or your speeeel cheeeck is boken!
 
GOS said:
[/B]

Damn, really?? One of my all time favorite albums...but haven't heard the mono versions.
Click to expand...

Yep...I can't really describe the difference in words, but "Astronomy Domine" just sounds really different right off the bat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U0en1Y5S-w.

It also turns out that the stereo version of "Interstellar Overdrive" is missing an organ overdub that's prominent right from the beginning of the mono mix...and I think there's an additional guitar overdub as well.

In contrast, the mono version of the second album doesn't sound that different to me...except for "Corporal Clegg", where this time it's the mono version that's missing something really obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wagonmaster_91
SACD Multi-channel via HDMI
Replies
16
Views
2K
Ambientblog
A
trevorspiro
What is the real purpose of four channel sound?
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
7K
Tribby2001
Tribby2001
steelydave
DIGITAL Deep Purple - Machine Head (UK Quad Mix on the 2003 EMI SACD)
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
ssully
S
Dynamic Editor
DIGITAL Looking for help on spotting errors on Bob Dylan 5.1 mixes (Bringing It All Back Home, Blonde on Blonde, Another Side of Bob Dylan)
Replies
2
Views
877
Dynamic Editor
Dynamic Editor
ted_b
Spatial Audio Calibration Toolkit is the real deal
Replies
12
Views
5K
ted_b
ted_b

Latest posts

Back
Top