[jaywillin]

the evolution of audio processing maybe

 

[BobG55]

 

 
Hi, I've been trying to find out information about the L + R mode (see attached photo above) on my Supreme 600.  I've tried AudioKarma, all sorts of different words/ terms, associations on Google, all without success.  I downloaded the Owner's Manual and here's what it says about the L + R mode :
 
"L + R ……….  The left and right channels are mixed together and are heard from both speakers"
 
My questions is : is this a "Mono" mode or something else ? I always thought Mono was centered and not mixed together at the extremes (L + R).    As some of you who will read this might perceive, I'm not tech savvy but I do love this amp.  

 
Thank you in advance to anyone who might be able and willing to help me out. 

 

My Pioneer SC 100 (Pre Amp from 1968) for "Mode" has the following:
 
Stereo - Rev & Norm
Mono - L , R and L + R
 
By 1970 the listing for "Mode" dropped the Mono Labeling, leaving just the Rev, Stereo, L, R,  &  L + R.
 
My understanding has always been that L + R is a combining of the Stereo signals to create a Mono output to both of the speakers.
 
This could be used in various ways for level setting/matching as well as in situations where speaker placement prevented a proper stereo set up, such as Large area "parties" or multiple office spaces background "music/noise" etc.
 
JMTC,
r2

That makes sense.  Thank you very much r2muchstuff.  Very much appreciated. 

 

[r2muchstuff]

The SC 100 also has, in addition to Phono Pre Amp settings, a Tape Head setting for 7 1/2 an 3 3/4 ips.  Just like turntables did not include pre amps, older tape decks did not always include the tape head pre amp.
 
Audio and processing evolved, not always for the best
 
r2

 

[r2muchstuff]

So the labeling is a mixed bag into the 1970's.
 
The 1973 SA 9100 has the "Stereo - Rev, Norm" and "Mono L + R, L, R" labeling yet the 1970 SA 900 only has the "Rev, Stereo,  L, R, L + R" labeling.  By 1974/5 the SA 9900 settled on the "Rev, Stereo,  L, R, L + R" while the Spec 1 maintained the "Stereo - Rev, Norm" and "Mono L + R, L, R"
 
Receivers for the 1970s appear to only include a "Stereo" / "Mono" toggle switch instead of the fancy switches of the Pre Amps and Intergrated Amps.
 
r2

 

[jaywillin]

my 2216 has bass and treble, a loudness button and high pass filter, with my modified jvc speakers, just an occasional bass boost, with the minimus 7's, i'll hit the loudness button, headphones, flat

 

[BobG55]

  So the labeling is a mixed bag into the 1970's.
 
The 1973 SA 9100 has the "Stereo - Rev, Norm" and "Mono L + R, L, R" labeling yet the 1970 SA 900 only has the "Rev, Stereo,  L, R, L + R" labeling.  By 1974/5 the SA 9900 settled on the "Rev, Stereo,  L, R, L + R" while the Spec 1 maintained the "Stereo - Rev, Norm" and "Mono L + R, L, R"
 
Receivers for the 1970s appear to only include a "Stereo" / "Mono" toggle switch instead of the fancy switches of the Pre Amps and Intergrated Amps.
 
r2

 

  The SC 100 also has, in addition to Phono Pre Amp settings, a Tape Head setting for 7 1/2 an 3 3/4 ips.  Just like turntables did not include pre amps, older tape decks did not always include the tape head pre amp.
 
Audio and processing evolved, not always for the best
 
r2

Thanks again r2.  Everything I needed to know along with a very interesting and valuable historical background.  What I'm now asking myself is why can't the ones writing the "owner's manual" indicate that L + R means "mono".

 

[jaywillin]

   

Thanks again r2.  Everything I needed to know along with a very interesting and valuable historical background.  What I'm now asking myself is why can't the ones writing the "owner's manual" indicate that L + R means "mono".

doesn't sound flashy

 

[BobG55]

 

   

Thanks again r2.  Everything I needed to know along with a very interesting and valuable historical background.  What I'm now asking myself is why can't the ones writing the "owner's manual" indicate that L + R means "mono".

doesn't sound flashy

As good an answer as any.  Makes sense.

 

[Skylab]

It is worth noting that in vintage receivers, the stereo/mono switch when in Tuner mode would turn the stereo circuit off the Tuner and allow one to hear the broadcast in true mono, which in the case of FM could significantly reduce noise, since the stereo signal of FM broadcasts was multiplexed onto the mono. So it was not, in this case, just a summoning of L+R, when in Tuner mode.

 

[r2muchstuff]

Thanks Skylab, I totally forgot about FM when commenting on Receivers.
 
r2

 

[jnorris]

Early stereo amps and receivers gave you the mono options of playing the left channel to both speakers, the right channel to both speakers or the combined left and right to both speakers.  They often also gave you the stereo option of reversing the left and right channels.  Whether they called it Mono or not depended on their willingness to be connected with old technology.
 
Skylab is also correct about the FM tuning in mono mode, but it didn't have to be specific to the tuner.  Since much of the noise on an FM station is out of phase between the left and right channels, mixing them would cancel it out.
 
And if I may digress back to the turntable discussion.  I'm sorry but it makes me laugh when I see people talking about the superiority of vinyl over digital when they are listening to a low end turntable with a junk cartridge.  That's just not superior to digital in any way, shape or form.  I get a real belly laugh when I see them get excited over finding scratched and warped vinyl records at Goodwill, taking them home and pontificating about analog sound.  If you're not going to invest in a good quality turntable and cartridge combination, with a carefully maintained record collection, then spend the money on CDs instead.  They will sound better.

 

[SpeakerBox]

  And if I may digress back to the turntable discussion.  I'm sorry but it makes me laugh when I see people talking about the superiority of vinyl over digital when they are listening to a low end turntable with a junk cartridge.  That's just not superior to digital in any way, shape or form.  I get a real belly laugh when I see them get excited over finding scratched and warped vinyl records at Goodwill, taking them home and pontificating about analog sound.  If you're not going to invest in a good quality turntable and cartridge combination, with a carefully maintained record collection, then spend the money on CDs instead.  They will sound better.

 
Well, we differ a bit here.  I have always hated CDs.  There is an edge to the sound that really bugs me.  Even through my Sony 999ES or Rotel RCD 855 feeding a PASS B1 buffer, a Rowland M1, and LS3/5A clones they suck out loud IMHO.  On the other hand feeding the B1 and Rowland with a cheap Pioneer PL-516 with a Ortofon Red sounds glorious (and yes even with some GW vinyl, albeit in good shape).  CDs are a flawed format with only 16Bit resolution and the sampling rate of 44KHZ. Even oversampling to deal with the 44KHZ causes issues - so much so that one of the most popular mods for the RCD-855 is to disable oversampling.  You are hosed either way oversampling or not.

 

[jnorris]

   
Well, we differ a bit here.  I have always hated CDs.  There is an edge to the sound that really bugs me.  Even through my Sony 999ES or Rotel RCD 855 feeding a PASS B1 buffer and a Rowland M1, and LS3/5A clones they suck out loud IMHO.  On the other hand feeding the B1 and Rowland with a cheap Pioneer PL-516 with a Ortofon Red sounds glorious (and yes even with some GW vinyl, albeit in good shape).  CDs are a flawed format with only 16Bit resolution and the sampling rate of 44KHZ.

I'm not so sure we are disagreeing here.  The Pioneer/Ortofon combo you have is significantly ahead of the crap that some people are buying to "re-discover" vinyl.  I'm talking about the people that are using cheap plastic "vintage" JVC, Aiwa, Sherwood, etc., turntables with $30 cartridges.  Or worse, that Ion USB garbage.
 
I agree that a good turntable, cartridge, preamp combo is far more listenable than CD.

 

[SpeakerBox]

  I'm not so sure we are disagreeing here.  The Pioneer/Ortofon combo you have is significantly ahead of the crap that some people are buying to "re-discover" vinyl.  I'm talking about the people that are using cheap plastic "vintage" JVC, Aiwa, Sherwood, etc., turntables with $30 cartridges.  Or worse, that Ion USB garbage.
 
I agree that a good turntable, cartridge, preamp combo is far more listenable than CD.

 
Ok.  I guess we need a glossary of terms to indicate what we each think of as "crap". 

 

[photonic]

Keep my Luxman L-210 or should I get something more modern like Schiit?  I have a tube amp but I feel it doesn't have the control that I'm looking for... I have HD6xx's btw.