Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › The Beatles - Mono vs Stereo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Beatles - Mono vs Stereo

post #1 of 42
5/3/09 at 10:24am
Thread Starter 
I have some of the Beatles albums both in Stereo and in Mono, and come to notice some different in the sound, like different mixing or voices and so on

Can you please make a list or comment what different are they between the different versions of the Beatles albums in Mono Vs Stereo ?!
Reply
post #2 of 42
5/3/09 at 2:23pm
I'm not going to make a list, but I will say that everything sounds better to me in Mono until Magical Mystery Tour........

I hate drums panned left and vocals right and vice versa, that's not a good way of listening to music and can cause a headache.........the difference between mono and stereo can be felt on any set up but especially in a headphone set up. The Beatles music sounds particularly well suited for mono because all the instruments were recorded as a mono image. What I mean by this is that the guitars, the drums, the bass were all granted one channel. The original stereo mixes were done at a time where it was very time consuming to create a mix where an instrument was NOT either dead center, hard right or hard right.....it wasn't impossible, but generally in the Beatles early stereo mixes you will find a pool of mono images either panned to the extreme left, extreme right or dead center. It's not really what stereo mixes would later become known for and actually this style would later become known as fake or "artificial" stereo because all you are really hearing is a mono recording picking apart in a very extreme way.

During the White Album sessions the mixing console was upgraded and you can hear that there is some definite effort to create a truer stereo sound. It is really in Abbey Road though that we begin to hear The Beatles mixed in a way that is far more in agreement with the way music would later be mixed. And I always assume the unparalleled love Abbey Road gets on head-fi has as much to do with its sonic character as it does its musical character. Abbey Road is the only STEREO beatles album which can appeal to an audiophile I feel. BUT Sgt Pepper as heard in Mono, or Revolver as heard in mono are pretty much a sonic masterpiece to me...........

P.S. The White Album is my favorite of all:-)

I don't know if this really helps you, but my advice is when the Beatles Mono Discs come out in september, it is definitely worth picking up........for anyone interested in hearing the Beatles mixed in a way that they were recorded (MONO).
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #3 of 42
5/4/09 at 5:52am
Thread Starter 
Thanks!
Anyone else ?
Reply
post #4 of 42
5/4/09 at 8:19am
Stereo music = High end Senn/AKG/Grado/ATH/Whatever

Mono music = Skullcandies

IMHO, Stereo panning issues is very annoying, but not as annoying as how much mono music sucks. The gap between mono and stereo is just too big. Mono music has no soundstage, no sparkle, no life. There's a good reason why mono music has become an endangered species.
Reply
post #5 of 42
5/4/09 at 1:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by scytheavatar View Post
Stereo music = High end Senn/AKG/Grado/ATH/Whatever

Mono music = Skullcandies

IMHO, Stereo panning issues is very annoying, but not as annoying as how much mono music sucks. The gap between mono and stereo is just too big. Mono music has no soundstage, no sparkle, no life. There's a good reason why mono music has become an endangered species.
Mono music does in fact have a soundstage, it does not image though. Fake stereo such as early Beatles stereo mixes have neither a soundstage nor are capable of imaging.

All recordings prior to 1954 (and still most recordings of the 50s) were done in mono..............there are TONS of great mono jazz recordings which I still think could be considered close to reference quality. Yes they're in mono, but they DO sound alive, they do sparkle and they do have soundstage............

Mono recordings became a thing of the past because 1. FM radio was capable of stereo (as opposed to AM radio)

But more importantly.........When stereo is done properly stereo has a considerable advantage over mono..........The keyword there is "properly"......that word is open to interpretation, but my ears tell me the Beatles early stereo releases were not done properly.
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #6 of 42
5/4/09 at 3:47pm
I don't have a problem with mono. If done well, it can sound superb.

As for the Beatles... I'm not a huge fan of the studio trickery and other stereo effects - they're dated and have none of the "gee whiz" factor they used to. If you poke around old record shops, you'll find stereo demonstration discs and similar. I've picked up a few for historical interest and because they're cheesy fun. They'll make a BIG DEAL out of the sound of a train going from left to right and similar recordings. The Beatles' stereo mixes are about the same. I love their music, but studio tricks from 40-50 years back fail to impress - they just irritate. Put another way, if the Beatles were recording today, the music would be the same and the stereo effects would be toned way down.

That's why I'll take mono.
Reply
post #7 of 42
5/4/09 at 4:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post
I don't have a problem with mono. If done well, it can sound superb.

As for the Beatles... I'm not a huge fan of the studio trickery and other stereo effects - they're dated and have none of the "gee whiz" factor they used to. If you poke around old record shops, you'll find stereo demonstration discs and similar. I've picked up a few for historical interest and because they're cheesy fun. They'll make a BIG DEAL out of the sound of a train going from left to right and similar recordings. The Beatles' stereo mixes are about the same. I love their music, but studio tricks from 40-50 years back fail to impress - they just irritate. Put another way, if the Beatles were recording today, the music would be the same and the stereo effects would be toned way down.

That's why I'll take mono.
I am now going to concur with the Beatles' mono having their charms. I recently discovered by old Beatles albums and the stereo panning and trickery is pretty annoying. I didn't used to notice it when I was spinning them when I was young, but now that I'm a full-blown audiophile, yes, it is annoying to hear everyone flipping back and forth between channels like it's a cheap speaker set-up record.
Reply
post #8 of 42
5/4/09 at 5:05pm
I agree with DaviMahler and UncleEric; the beatles earlier records on stereo are not enjoyable as far as the soundstage is concerned; especially not on headphones.
They sound like they were recorded with a multitrackrecorder, one instrument/voice each track, the voice got both L+R, the other tracks each got either L or R.
The essence of a stereo-soundstage is using the continuum between left and right, not one or the other.
So if the remasters feature the original stereo, I think I might go for the mono box.
Reply
post #9 of 42
5/4/09 at 8:07pm
Definitely mono for stuff like the beatles. Hard stereo panning and the such is just annoying.
Reply
post #10 of 42
5/4/09 at 9:08pm
Those guys would hang out while the mono mixes were done, and then leave the studio or work on other songs. As a result, any stereo mixes prior to Abbey Road were intended to be subordinate to the mono mixes (from an artistic stance). To be honest, the stereo versions are still worth many listens, and they are by far the dominant versions, but they sound wrong in places. One of the biggest problems is that the bass track is often only in one ear, which gives the illusion of congestion when compared to the other channel. Furthermore, some embellishments end up getting overexposed, perhaps sounding out of place. When you convert the track to mono (or if you have the real thing), every sound falls into place like a puzzle. As for Sgt. Pepper, I don't think the album's concept makes sense in stereo, because in mono it really is like sitting in the crowd with the band in front. That's my opinion.

As far as I know, lots of audiophiles on a certain other forum tend be split on whether the "White Album" is better on mono or stereo. I like both.

And as for the box sets, I can wait patiently, since the albums were previously remastered by MFSL (but no CDs were produced). Good luck trying to beat that across the board.
Reply
post #11 of 42
5/4/09 at 9:15pm
I must admit, the only albums I have really listened to the full way through a lot are Sgt Pepper, Abbey Road, and White Album, and I have heard them all in both mono and stereo. I highly prefer mono, as the hard panning is just horrible in stereo. On top of that, at the time of The Beatles, stereo was almost a gimmick. Wasn't nearly as developed as it is now.
Reply
post #12 of 42
5/5/09 at 11:53am
I suppose that I would consider the mono versions if I had any interest in the early stuff. As it happens, however, my interest in The Beatles begins with the psychedelic era, and by then the stereo mixes were starting to be much better.
Reply
post #13 of 42
5/5/09 at 5:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by intoart View Post
I suppose that I would consider the mono versions if I had any interest in the early stuff. As it happens, however, my interest in The Beatles begins with the psychedelic era, and by then the stereo mixes were starting to be much better.
Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Sgt. Pepper all sound best in mono. But you don't have to purchase new CDs, because you can just use foobar to output mono from the stereo tracks.
Reply
post #14 of 42
5/5/09 at 11:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron313 View Post
Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Sgt. Pepper all sound best in mono. But you don't have to purchase new CDs, because you can just use foobar to output mono from the stereo tracks.
Don't mean to contradict you, but that is definitely not true. The genuine mono mixes are demonstrably different than a collapse of the strereo mixes.

Different question though: I'm very interested in this topic, because I'm thinking about which box set I will buy--mono or stereo--when these Beatles remasters come out in September. The real question seems to me to be: Will they reconstruct the stereo mixes? I assume they will. And assuming that, we have no way to know how they will compare to the mono mixes and will have to wait for reviews, yes?
Reply
post #15 of 42
7/4/09 at 4:24pm
RESURRECTING AN OLD THREAD!!!

I've heard needledrops of pretty much all the Beatles albums in both mono and stereo. For everything pre-Sgt. Pepper, here are my preferences:

Mono
Please Please Me
With the Beatles
Help!
Rubber Soul
Revolver

Stereo
A Hard Day's Night
Beatles for Sale

The stereo LPs of AHDN and BFS really are something to behold. The tube cut BFS is absolutely gorgeous. It's very warm and real sounding, much moreso than its mono counterpart. The stereo AHDN just sounds plain better than the mono version.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › The Beatles - Mono vs Stereo
<img src="/p/Vn1cI1BzV2sGPgU2BicFaFdiAmdRYQI9V2ZTOFdpWGBbMlMwUSoMdFo6CXYAbVFfVSJTcwdtAjBSIQcSUj9VJwBsU34ELQEjXSUFJ1doXHRWY1xgUGNXVAY6BTYGcgVwV38CdlFnAjdXZ1M8V2lYYVsjUylRNwwLWnc,.gif" />