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
fiogf49gjkf0d
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!
Feh!
Best regards,
Paul SRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site