From: bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Mono/Stereo query
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:20:36 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: pismo.sw.stratus.com

In article <92318.182958U09236@uicvm.uic.edu> U09236@uicvm.uic.edu writes:
>     MY QUERY: I've always understood that all the Beatle's albums were
>mixed for mono-listening, because stereo just wasn't a big deal when the
>tracks were recorded. Have I been mislead?  For example, I know that
>the Magical Mystery Tour album sounds like h_ll in stereo if you're wearing
>headphones, because you just hear some instruments in one ear and some in
>the other - If you haven't tried it, don't - it's too annoying (Well, it's
>fun to turn down one channel to hear certain instrumentations better, but
>that's just playing around).
>     Again, tell me if I've been mislead in believing that you should hit
>your stereo's "mono" button before listening to the Beatles, because that's
>the way it was meant to be listened to.  Are there recordings that are
>seriously mixed for stereo (and not just technically stereo, in that there
>are different sounds on the different channels)?  I've never really tried
>to listen for that (I don't use headphones often and I have a little boom
>box).
>     So, if I'm right about the mono thing, why are lots of people getting
>all uptight about some mono recordings?  Please do post some replies,
>I'm durned curious now.
>                                Anne u09236@uicvm.uic.edu


Well, Anne, this is bound to be a can of worms!  But here goes:

It has been documented that the Beatles spent much more time on the mono
mixes, especially prior to the White Album.  They *did* spend a lot of 
time on the WA mono mix , but stereo was becoming a bigger thing.  As you 
know, there wasn't even a US version of the mono White Album.  On the Yellow 
Submarine, the UK mono album was a combination of the stereo mix, not a 
separate mono mix.  Let It Be and Abbey Road were released only in stereo,
of course.  

As to whether mono was better than the stereo, well that's a matter
of taste, and therefore, inarguable.  My *personal* feeling is that the
mono versions are generally much more enjoyable.

The "mono" button on your stereo won't really do you any good here. 

On some stereos, the "mono" switch simply takes one channel, and puts 
the same thing thru both speakers, totally eliminating one channel.  
Even if your stereo does mix both channels in the "mono" switch, it's still
not the same as the mono mix.

The reason for the mono button's existence is to be able to listen to 
a mono album and eliminate some effects of listening to a mono record with 
a stereo cartridge.  An orthodox audiophile would only want to hear a mono
record with a mono cartridge (and yes, there really is a difference).
Of course, an orthodox audiophile would most likely frown on "little boom
box" listening. :-)

Also, the mono button doesn't give you all the wonderful mixing differences
that exist between the mono and stereo versions.  

Whatever your preference, mono or stereo, it is a lot of fun to pick up all
the little (and sometimes big) differences between the two versions.

Bruce


-- 
Bruce Dumes			| "Bruce is too obsessed with the Beatles"   |
Stratus Computer, Inc.		|   --comment on report card from Spring '64 |
bad@sw.stratus.com              
508-460-2816                    
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles