[jagorev]

Ok, this might be a really stupid question...but:

I have a bunch of CD remasterings of old recordings from the pre-stereo era. These are in mono sound. Since mono only has one channel, shouldn't there be half as much data in mono as in stereo?

If so, why aren't mono CD releases twice as long? I would expect them to be able to fit 150-160 minutes in the same number of megabytes as it takes to fit 75-80 minutes of stereo.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev Ok, this might be a really stupid question...but: I have a bunch of CD remasterings of old recordings from the pre-stereo era. These are in mono sound. Since mono only has one channel, shouldn't there be half as much data in mono as in stereo? If so, why aren't mono CD releases twice as long? I would expect them to be able to fit 150-160 minutes in the same number of megabytes as it takes to fit 75-80 minutes of stereo.

All Mono recordings have 2 channels on remasters. The same channel plays through both speakers, hence, mono sound (mono stereo). Stereo is comprised of two discrete channels, R & L. So, in effect, they both take up the same space since if it was truly mono, it would only play out of one speaker.

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFF All Mono recordings have 2 channels on remasters. The same channel plays through both speakers, hence, mono sound. Stereo is comprised to two discrete channels, R & L. So, in effect, they both take up the same space since if it was truly mono, it would only play out of one speaker.

But....that's such a complete waste of space!

My ancient cassette deck had a mono/stereo switch, so that mono music would come out of both speakers. This would seem relatively easy to implement with our vastly advanced equipment.

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev But....that's such a complete waste of space! My ancient cassette deck had a mono/stereo switch, so that mono music would come out of both speakers. This would seem relatively easy to implement with our vastly advanced equipment.

Yep, it would be. But the Redbook spec didn't allow for a "send the same signal to both channels" code... I guess they weren't thinking about mono. You could implement it further up the line but without standardization it would be kind of pointless. And, again, most manufacturers just didn't care about mono.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blip Yep, it would be. But the Redbook spec didn't allow for a "send the same signal to both channels" code... I guess they weren't thinking about mono. You could implement it further up the line but without standardization it would be kind of pointless. And, again, most manufacturers just didn't care about mono.

You just took the words out of my mouth.

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFF You just took the words out of my mouth.

Great minds think alike eh?

 

[Stephen_Ri]

I believe Sony got it right with ATRAC minidisc mono implementation. I'm not sure about SACD or DVD-A. Anyone know about these high res formats?

 

[ameyer17]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blip Yep, it would be. But the Redbook spec didn't allow for a "send the same signal to both channels" code... I guess they weren't thinking about mono. You could implement it further up the line but without standardization it would be kind of pointless. And, again, most manufacturers just didn't care about mono.

Even if this could be done, I don't know if it would be done much, IME very few recordings can take advantage of something like this.