Why should I pay over $300 for the MONO remixes of the Beatles’ albums when I can just reach over to my old Harmon Kardon receiver and push the “mono” button? Maybe we should just pan everything over to one “earbud” and put the $300 on paying down our personal deficits? It would leave one ear free to detect Harper and cronies’ BS!
—A Big Big Beatles Fan
This article appears in Sep 3-9, 2009.
If your a so called “Big Big Beatles Fan” you would know that the Mono mix was what the most time was spent on, up until The White Album “stereo” was seen as a novelty. Both John Lennon and George Martin have said you haven’t heard Sgt. Peppers until you’ve heard the Mono. People have been waiting years for the Mono mixes to be released on CD. They are not remixes, they are how the albums were inteneded to be, and you don’t have to buy the Mono set (even if you can find one), there is a stereo set too (which is cheaper, with more discs) and all the stand alone discs are in stereo.
Ahhhh…..mono in surround sound……and in high fidelity! It’s like you were right there…. live……in the sound booth!
And here I thought it was going to be a bitch about the kissing disease.
I’ve got “rips” from vinyl of the mono mixes. If you’re an audio snob like me, you’ll think they’re much better. Many other people however won’t notice the difference. We all appreciate art in our own ways. 🙂
Why are the mono versions supposedly better? Isn’t it just like combining the two stereo tracks into one? I don’t get it, can someone explain.
@ Bastard Fish. It’s not really a question of which is better, Mono or Stereo. It’s more like a two sides of the same coin scenerio. What the op. said about pressing the mono button on his/her reciever would combine the two stereo channels into one, this would result in fake mono or a “fold down”, not exactly a specificaly produced mono mix.
The differences between mono and stereo mixes range from slight to drastic. Some songs may have different instruments/vocals more pronounced or more in the backround, some have different tempos, some are shorter, some are longer, some are more “in your face” sounding, some songs are even a completly differnt take of the song.
Yes, it is the same sounds that would come from both your speakers with mono but it was purposely created this way. In the early to late sixties mono was the norm, people heard new music through A.M. radio which only had enough bandwidth to broadcast in mono, most people that had monophonic turntabes (stereophonic turntables were more high end). So to reach the most people bands and producers spent the most time perfecting the mono mix. For example, George Martin and The Beatles were all involved in mixing Sgt. Pepper to mono over the course of a day, after they were done they left for the second/third engineers for bang out the stereo mix in a couple of hours.
So basically, you know the songs but you would be caught off guard by the differences. Most people these days are fine with the stereo mixes because thats what we are used to. The mono set that was released is basically for people who grew up with the mono versions and for absolute beatleholics that want everything.
Bouncing the two stereo tracks down to one would be the way it’s done these days. However, at the time, since stereo was a novelty, the stereo and mono mixes were done separately – mono first, stereo second. George Martin and the band took their time on the mono mixes, but the stereo mixes were done in as little as fifteen minutes, largely without input from the band.
Have a listen if you can find them – it’s more than just a little more of this and a little less of that. The sound quality is actually better, though this may have something to do with the fact that the mono mixes were only available (until recently) on record. The original CDs released in the 80s were a little lifeless.
Finally a bitch where I learned something…
In addition to what everone else has said, the stereo mixes on alot of Beatles tracks are messed up. Nowadays, for example, the drums are recorded in stereo, which is to say the snare drum and bass drum in the middle, and the cymbals and tom toms are spread across the mix where they are physically located on the drum set. Bands such as AC/DC, have one guitar panned left, and the other guitar panned right. If you close your eyes while listening to this type of recording, the sounds are coming from the same places that they would occupy if the band was playing in front of you. It sounds “right” on alot of The Beatles stereo tracks, the drums are panned hard left while the vocals are panned hard right and the guitars, keyboards, etc are in the middle. On other tracks everything except the vocals is panned hard left while the vocals are panned hard right all by themselves. I love the Beatles, but clearly, early stereo mixes were very bizzare and do not sound natural in any way.
Just saying.
Thanks shadowplay, crunchy and H_d, much appreciated. 😀
Good post shadowplay.
These days a stereo track is produced when you record. That track has to be mixed down to mono so the producer can control where the sound goes (pan) in the overall mix (with other instruments). You can’t pan a stereo track without some element of the sound ALWAYS being on the other side unless you pan 100% to one side or another and that’s not really what pan is for in mixing.