|
|
Post by Diabet on Jul 13, 2012 16:56:28 GMT -5
Discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zilla2112 on Jul 13, 2012 17:53:24 GMT -5
nope.jpg
|
|
|
|
Post by Diabet on Jul 13, 2012 17:54:31 GMT -5
Listen to the beatles. On stereo. |
|
|
|
Post by Zilla2112 on Jul 13, 2012 18:01:35 GMT -5
Personally, I think a lot of older music (particularly The Beatles) sounds way better in stereo. Other than some occasions where drums and vocals are hard-panned, having the instruments panned between two speakers is far more interesting to my ears than just a big, mono, wall of sound. It especially made a difference when I listened to Pet Sounds: hearing it mono the first time was alright, but the stereo mix made everything sound a lot clearer to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Diabet on Jul 13, 2012 18:06:58 GMT -5
Eh I just don't like how its all separated.
|
|
jamzftw
El Goodo
Kick out the jamz
Poop.%\0\%
Posts: 103
|
Post by jamzftw on Jul 19, 2012 17:37:17 GMT -5
If there was any chance that Giles and George Martin mixed the whole Beatles discography like how it sounds on LOVE, that would be super awesome. It's kinda weird having vocals on one side and the rest of the track in the other, but I still like that better than mono.
|
|
|
|
Post by straf on Jul 22, 2012 2:41:09 GMT -5
Depends, really. 13th Floor Elevators sounded great in mono. Pink Floyd's debut sounded great in mono. At least two of Bob Dylan's albums were surperior in mono (BIABH and H61R [the early folk album are really a given with the mono. They're only guitar and vocal, and one in each ear sounds funky]). BlondeOB is definitely better in stereo, but I'm on the fence with JWH. The Velvet Underground's debut sounds mostly great in mono, but when the songs get too different... well, I suppose that there's no making the feedback and shit sound good, stereo or not. The Phil Spector stuff is just obvious. You can only listen to those in mono. But as far as that goes, mono vs stereo doesn't even fucking matter anymore since 90% of the artists you care to listen to probably don't have mono recordings anyway. And of the hundreds of artists that have recorded in mono, there will a good portion that will either: a) have recordings with no stereo equivalent or b) not be something that you will neither try to listen to or want to. There's probably an even greater amount that fall into category c) not only do they not have equivalent recordings in stereo, but you don't want to listen to them either.
So as for the whole discussion, it's rather pointless isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Diabet on Jul 23, 2012 1:57:36 GMT -5
I made this thread for no reason
hence the reason why its in spam
|
|
