Sgt Pepper in Mono or Stereo? Your preference...
Jan 25, 2009 at 10:59 PM Post #16 of 32
I stand by what I said, and have even talked Geoff Emerick one on one about it. The drums are louder in the mono mixes, especially the kick drum, but that doesn't make the mixes less detailed. The mono mixes were personally mixed by Martin, Emerick and the 4 Beatles over the course of several days. The stereo mixes were mixed by a secondary engineer (forget his name) and was considered far less substantial......stereo was not considered the more marketable forum yet, and for the first 3 years that Pepper was out on Vinyl the Mono outsold the stereo considerably. It is a shame that the Mono has never been officially released on CD. All the Beatles albums were hand-mixed by the Beatles in Mono until The White Album. The White Album was mixed in stereo and mono but only released in mono in the UK.
 
Mar 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM Post #17 of 32
If God had wanted us to listen to mono, he would have given us one ear.
 
Mar 6, 2009 at 4:54 PM Post #18 of 32
I read somewhere that Bing Crosby wanted living stereo (3 channel ) to make it because
the singers voice was more pronounced than the mono he dealt with for years then the
decission to go stereo nixed the 3ch but some can still be had on sacd.
 
Mar 6, 2009 at 11:46 PM Post #19 of 32
Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbang /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If God had wanted us to listen to mono, he would have given us one ear.



...and why don't we have wings?
smile.gif
 
Mar 20, 2009 at 4:52 PM Post #21 of 32
For some people the 2nd ear is a backup
smily_headphones1.gif


Just listened to Pepper the other day on LP thru spkrs(ATC's) for the 1st time in yrs. I need to give it another listen w/ hdphs as I like the atmospherics but often w/ Beatles stereo stuff they did hard pans which I find annoying, there's a big musical hole in the center. It's like having 2 mono tracks running separately in each ear yet simultaneously sounding in sync. It's neither TRUE STEREO or MONO. Much of the mono releases from the 60's, particularly jazz did sound bigger more full.

There are both technical(recording process) and psychacoustic explainations for hearing differences between stereo and mono, perhaps Bill Nye The Science Guy will make a visit to this forum and articulate in laymans terms for those not in the know.
 
Mar 21, 2009 at 1:40 AM Post #22 of 32
"there's a big musical hole in the center. It's like having 2 mono tracks running separately in each ear yet simultaneously sounding in sync."

That's absolutely how I feel about Sgt. Pepper in stereo. The mono mix is by far my fav.
 
Sep 16, 2012 at 1:49 PM Post #23 of 32
Just found this thread while doing some googling.  Hopefully all the debate over the mono mixes being the ones that George Martin and the fab four created vs. the stereo being secondary have been laid to rest, now that the remasters came out in 2009 and that was confirmed as fact in the surrounding commentary.
 
I have the mono and stereo remaster sets.  I believe they did a better job of doing the stereo remasters than the mono.  The stereo sounds brilliant - sparkly, clean, deep, detailed, punchy.  Spectacular job of remastering.  These sound really good.  The mono box set is more of a historical archive, a filling of a gap that had been missing for all these years on cd.  Now the mono mixes are available on cd, but they didn't do too much towards making them sound "great".
 
Having listened to both, I prefer bits of one and the other.  I love the mono mixes, but like I said I think the stereo remasters have better sound quality and are more enjoyable.  I agree, though, I don't like the hard-panning left and right of the mix.
 
However.....  I have recently gotten back into vinyl.  Through the wonder that is eBay, I laid hands on an original 1967 UK first pressing of Sgt. Pepper in mono.  Wow.  Let me say it again.  Wow.  The mono vinyl blows away the mono cd from the 2009 remasters.  I don't have an exotic turntable, either, just a simple Thorens TD166 MKII with a Shure MX97E cartridge (cartridge is sold on Amazon for $79).  And I have a $1000 cd/sacd player, which sounds unbelievable.  The mono remaster to me sounds sterile and laid back, whereas the vinyl has so much power, kick, detail, and clarity.  It's everything you want Sgt. Pepper to be.  John Lennon once said that you haven't heard Sgt. Pepper until you've heard it in mono.  But he died before the cd age.  I think if John were alive today, he'd be saying that you haven't heard Sgt. Pepper until you've heard it in mono on the original vinyl!
 
Sep 16, 2012 at 8:22 PM Post #24 of 32
I bet you're listening on headphones. On speakers, the mono box set sounds much more focused and clearer than the stereo.
 
Apr 10, 2015 at 2:42 AM Post #30 of 32
nspindel said:
Just found this thread while doing some googling.  Hopefully all the debate over the mono mixes being the ones that George Martin and the fab four created vs. the stereo being secondary have been laid to rest, now that the remasters came out in 2009 and that was confirmed as fact in the surrounding commentary.

I have the mono and stereo remaster sets.  I believe they did a better job of doing the stereo remasters than the mono.  The stereo sounds brilliant - sparkly, clean, deep, detailed, punchy.  Spectacular job of remastering.  These sound really good.  The mono box set is more of a historical archive, a filling of a gap that had been missing for all these years on cd.  Now the mono mixes are available on cd, but they didn't do too much towards making them sound "great".

Having listened to both, I prefer bits of one and the other.  I love the mono mixes, but like I said I think the stereo remasters have better sound quality and are more enjoyable.  I agree, though, I don't like the hard-panning left and right of the mix.

However.....  I have recently gotten back into vinyl.  Through the wonder that is eBay, I laid hands on an original 1967 UK first pressing of Sgt. Pepper in mono.  Wow.  Let me say it again.  Wow.  The mono vinyl blows away the mono cd from the 2009 remasters.  I don't have an exotic turntable, either, just a simple Thorens TD166 MKII with a Shure MX97E cartridge (cartridge is sold on Amazon for $79).  And I have a $1000 cd/sacd player, which sounds unbelievable.  The mono remaster to me sounds sterile and laid back, whereas the vinyl has so much power, kick, detail, and clarity.  It's everything you want Sgt. Pepper to be.  John Lennon once said that you haven't heard Sgt. Pepper until you've heard it in mono.  But he died before the cd age.  I think if John were alive today, he'd be saying that you haven't heard Sgt. Pepper until you've heard it in mono on the original vinyl!
Click to expand...


Sorry to revive an old thread, but I'm really surprised that despite the many threads created to analyze the 2009 boxsets, no one bothered to even mention the 2014 mono vinyl boxset, which, unlike the 2009 remasters, this time was remastered right from the original analog tapes.

With that in mind, and given that you are one of the few lucky ones who actually have a first pressing of the 1967 vinyl, how does it sound in comparison to the 2014 release? Do they sound the exact same as we were promised?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top