 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
63.192.89.214
I decided to play my mono deck today.
Thelonius Monk Brilliant Corners Riverside 1961 Blue Label mono 2nd pressing. EX play grade. Listening to this pressing reinforced my decision to not purchase the Craft UHQR reissue. Sublime mono. Monk's Celeste during Panononica just hangs in space, with an ethereal quality that is hard to describe.
Thelonius Monk Monk's Music Riverside 1960-ish Blue Label, small print, 3rd pressing. EX play grade. Another sublime recording. While in mono, there is audible depth, space, air around everyone.
Donald Byrd The Cat Walk Blue Note NY23 Cover, but NY/NY label with Ear- 2nd pressing. EX almost NM. Wow ! RVG mono, big bold and brassy ! Lots of space and air. Byrd is on fire, and the rest are not far behind.
Blossom Dearie Verve pre mgm Silver Black T label. Everything matches a first pressing, but vinyl feels a bit thin...maybe a reissue ? Wonderfully sumptuous production, with their typical vocalist halo effect spotlight. Simple backing band in a BIG studio- you can hear the space. Recording highlights Bloosom like she is under spotlight. Piano is directly behind her, with guitar and bass just to her sides- yes the ambience allows you to place the musicians even though everything is anchored to the center.
A change of pace....
Buffalo Springfield- Again. 1A first pressing Atco. Cohesive mix, with everything clearly recorded. Vocals and midrange sounds a bit recessed in places. Bass is not that deep. HF is fine. Easy to follow guitar lines, and vocal harmonies.
And you ?
Follow Ups:
I share your enthusiasm. And, mono can of course be:
- an excellent cure for hard R/L stereo mixes.
- an excellent cure for deep groove noise.
- a fine window into ensemble interplay.
- and as Chris points out below, access to history.
My favorite HiFi setup, no comparison, is a mono rig
featuring WE24 A horn / WE 555 driver. Tone and
presence of inner meaning just stunning. Nice article
in the link below.
-Mats
When I was a child in the 1950s Mono was all there was. But by the early 1960's my Dad ditched the old mono phono cabinet and went full Stereophonic sound. Once that happened mono was dead to us. A thing of the 40's not anything to be desired.
I still feel that way. If I buy a reissue make sure it's a stereo because I don't want mono.
I do have a mono Sgt Peppers - purchased 40 years after the LP's release to see what the difference might be. What I discovered is that it sounds much worse without some stereo - even poor stereo - sound.
Back in 2001 I bought a brand new Dylan Blonde on Blonde reissue by Sundazed. I was so disappointed it was mono that even after 22 years I"ve never opened the shrink wrap. Why? It's mono!
I avoid them now, after having listened to a few classical music examples.
Later Gator,
Dave
I never play them.
Just an abysmal, wrong headed, shitty thing to do to sell records.
Tip of the iceberg regarding the mentality at record companies
which, when you think about it, really hasn't improved much over
the decades.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Sometimes though...I have a Kenny Dorham album labeled as "Rechanneled to Simulate Stereo" but it's actually real stereo.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
I won't buy mono rock n roll records. Like you, I bought a couple of mono Beatles albums because supposedly it's THE way to hear the Beatles, but IMO even the hard-panned stereo versions are superior in every way.
However...there are a lot of jazz albums that were only recorded in mono. And they can be very good. Especially played back with a mono cartridge.
Some of the early Duke Ellington long playing albums on Columbia sound amazing and they're in mono.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
As a guy born in 1950 music recorded before stereo just doesn't draw me in at all.By the way, I just learned that my unopened Dylan Blonde on Blonde is worth some money so I just put it up for sale on a large well-known "auction" site. So, mono is good for something it seems.
PS. Don't @ me, I know plenty of folks like mono releases and that pre-stereo music is vital and important. This is just a person preference of mine.
Edits: 11/20/23
I remember when stereo was new-fangled. Even after we got a stereo, my dad bought mono records because they were usually a buck cheaper.
Even when it comes to jazz, I'll go with stereo if there's a stereo version available, and I won't touch a classical album in mono. NO, thank you!
But jazz albums that were only recorded in mono can sound really really good with the right playback gear.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
. . . I prefer listening to Dolby Atmos (5.1.4) - mostly on Apple Music via an Apple TV 4K device (even though the streaming is lossy), but also on blu-ray (lossless, but MUCH less of a catalog/selection).
OTOH, just as you say about jazz, there are some classical performances from the 78rpm era which are totally irreplaceable - for instance, how else are you going to hear Rachmaninoff himself play? Listening to mono does require a different set of expectations of course.
But great performances in mono that also sound great in mono.
I'm sure with solo performances, classical in stereo or mono doesn't matter. But orchestral works in mono just sounds too lifeless and one-dimensional to my ears.
And I don't usually listen to solo works. I like the power of a full orchestra.
BTW, my turntable plays 78s. The mono cartridge I use, AT makes a 78 stylus for it. I wouldn't say no.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
Edits: 11/21/23 11/21/23
But even here, there were interesting approaches to the music during the mono era that were never duplicated once recordings moved to stereo. Therefore, I'll even listen to mono orchestral recordings on occasion - for instance, who approaches an orchestral score like Mengelberg did, with his crazy changes of tempo (e.g., BIG ritard at the end of Beethoven's Ninth!)? As I said, listening to mono for me has to do with setting expectations and, as they sometimes say about literature, enabling the "suspension of disbelief". ;-)
Another thing I'll say about mono is that the remasterings seem to get better and better. Going back to the various incarnations I've had of Rachmaninoff's own performances (including a couple where he just conducts the Philadelphia Orchestra), I've been amazed at the recent improvements in the remasterings of those recordings.
Perhaps, at some point in the future, we'll feel the same way about plain old stereo - here's part of column on the Audiophile Style web site from a couple of days ago:I have first-hand experience with the results of Dolby Atmos streaming on a younger generation. My eleven-year-old daughter, far from an audiophile, wants to hear two things when listening to music: Taylor's Versions and Dolby Atmos versions. Fortunately, Taylor's Versions are all in Dolby Atmos, so all is right in the world when these albums are playing.
When a new album of interest is released on Apple Music, my daughter asks if she can hear the Atmos version in my listening room. She NEVER asks to listen to a stereo album in my listening room, and, in fact, she only comes up to my space for Atmos and the second bathroom in our 1940s house. When one of her friends slept over, she HAD to bring her upstairs to stream Atmos from Apple Music. They both requested multiple songs, showing excitement when there was an Atmos version and disappointment when stereo sound only emanated from the front two channels.
Here's the whole article/editorial, if you're interested:
And any disposable money that would meet WAF, I'd spend it on bicycles.
In fact, I'd sell everything I've got, LPs, the entire system, for enough money to buy a Rivendell.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
Just for curiosity, I looked up Rivendell Bikes. They don't seem that expensive compared to some other brands. Seems like you could buy at least a couple if you sold your collection. But what would you do when it rained or snowed?
...and when it snows, well...I shovel snow. I don't let rain stop me. Thunderstorms are another thing entirely.
A complete Rivendell would probably set me back about 5 grand. That's almost as much as I paid for my car.
My main bike now, the one I was out on today, was $1K. The other bikes I own were either free or about the cost of a night out.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
I know it's off the subject of vinyl but what do you like about the bike? The fact that it's made of steel?
And they're beautiful and I'm 100% with Grant Peterson's philosophy. A bicycle should be simple, elegant, comfortable, versatile, and last forever.
Rim brakes, leather saddles, no electronic shifting, no Internet connectivity, no space-age frame material, etc.
For the record, my Canyon Roadlite is comfortable and relatively simple. It has hydraulic disc brakes which are, admittedly, great, but they're also overkill. I'm 145 pounds, the bike weighs about 22 pounds, and at 14 mph there's just no need for disc brakes. They're a marketing gimmick.
Anyway, aluminum frame and carbon fork. It's a great bike, very comfortable, maneuverable, stable. I can ride hands off the bars for half mile or so (did it today in fact). After 6,000 miles, the wheels are still true. Nothing is loose, it shifts perfectly, etc.
Wanting a Rivendell instead is irrational, but that's human nature.
The blissful counterstroke-a considerable new message.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2023, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]