* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Andrew Haley wrote:
Rockinghorse Winner wrote:
* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Arny Krueger wrote:
I still remember the first time I ran into someone who had
assidiously avoided the conversion from mono to stereo.
I know someone who maintains that mono is the better sounding mode.
It certainly can be, depending on the release. It's quite well-known
that the mono versions of the earlier Beatles records are the genuine
article, with the stereo versions something of an afterthought. (The
"Revolution" single is a revelation in its original mono form.) I
suppose the goal is the artist's and the producer's intention: what is
the best way to reveal what they wanted to record? We all know stereo
records that are so clumsily done they sound better in mono. On the
other hand, stereo recordings in a natural acoustic space can sound
far better than mono ever could.
Andrew.
Doesn't mono also convey space? I've always thought it has ambience, it has
'air.' True, it doesn't have directional info, but live performances, what
with the echoes and such, renders directional info far more dispersed than
stereo recordings impart.
*R* *H*
--
Powered by Linux |/ 2.6.32.26-175 Fedora 12
"No spyware. No viruses. No nags." |/ 2.6.31.12-0.2 OpenSUSE 11.2
http://www.jamendo.com |/
"Preach the gospel always; when necessary use words." St. Francis