zako wrote:

Romy,,Romy,, romy,,,,,Some times you can be so thick headed...in the logic of mono and its correct use,,nothing faulty...All music performed is live,,,and at times localzation is not percieved,,,How is mono haveing practical advantage over propertly implemented  stereo????  This argument came up in recording Myron Salvador at the organ and chorus ,,At the St louis Cathedral...a friend of mine invited me to record the concert in stereo while he recorded his feed in mono,,,Both of us used the same type of microphones,,,Sennheiser MKH condenser units,,,I set up my mics in the " Londen Tee bar Blumine configureation,,,George strapped his ONE mono sennheiser mike centered between mine on the same bar all elevated up 15 feet,,, i used my stereo Nagra... ane he used a Nagra mono version (borrowed),,, The result???? stereo gave No advantage over his mono version,,,No forced fold down between our systems...He didnt use a feed from my cables but used his own...He had a good solid impactful recording and was just as involving as mine,,  This was a surprise to me,,, I thought the spacial effect (stereo) would be better,,but it was,nt,,,,,,,Dont expect stereo recording to be the answere,,,I have hundreds of photos of recordind venues,,London Phil.  Berlin Symphony,,Vienna Phil,,Etc Etc showing mic placement for stereo....All mics positioned in the orchestra on stands looking down on bald heads of the musictions,,,HOW IS THAT STEREO<<< BULLSHIT !!!! It is your logic that is wrong,,,I have been at this recording longer than you.... I,m right and your wrong and that ends the discussion....    Maron

zako wrote:

All music performed is live,,,and at times localzation is not percieved,,,How is mono haveing practical advantage over propertly implemented  stereo????  This argument came up in recording Myron Salvador at the organ and chorus ,,At the St louis Cathedral...a friend of mine invited me to record the concert in stereo while he recorded his feed in mono,,,Both of us used the same type of microphones,,,Sennheiser MKH condenser units,,,I set up my mics in the " Londen Tee bar Blumine configureation,,,George strapped his ONE mono sennheiser mike centered between mine on the same bar all elevated up 15 feet,,, i used my stereo Nagra... ane he used a Nagra mono version (borrowed),,, The result???? stereo gave No advantage over his mono version,,,No forced fold down between our systems...He didnt use a feed from my cables but used his own...He had a good solid impactful recording and was just as involving as mine,,  This was a surprise to me,,, I thought the spacial effect (stereo) would be better,,but it was,nt,,,,,,,Dont expect stereo recording to be the answere,,, .

Zako, it is hard to debug what coursed stereo failure in your given example. You know well that it might be zillion reasons and I do not think that your example is illustratable. BTW, stereo is NO ONLY the localization of subjects but much more…

zako wrote:

I have hundreds of photos of recordind venues,,London Phil.  Berlin Symphony,,Vienna Phil,,Etc Etc showing mic placement for stereo....All mics positioned in the orchestra on stands looking down on bald heads of the musictions,,,HOW IS THAT STEREO<<< BULLSHIT !!!!

Yes and no. Most of what you complain is not the subject of stereo but rather the barbaric use of poly-microphone techniques. The proper stereo is done with just two microphones in dummy hear and so on. The positioning of microphone is super complex subject – I would not even go there…If you feel that by hiding behind the big names of the big concert halls and famous labels will give you some assurance of proper recording techniques then you are mistaken. BTW, the hi-fi recording companies are the worse. The more they accent their hi-endless then more idiotic results they as usually produce.  The typical stereo from hi-fi recording companies is a different instruments coming from different channels and different feed are in opposite absolute phase. Ironic is that the more idiotic recording is the more moronic audiophile adore it. My favorite in this the Patricia Barber that all Morons-audio-fools keep under pillow and that has double-bass and voice in opposite polarity to each other…

zako wrote:

It is your logic that is wrong,,,I have been at this recording longer than you.... I,m right and your wrong and that ends the discussion....

I still maintain my view: mono recording are not a cure from bad stereo recording. I do not compare my recording experience to yours – I do not record at all. However, I do my listening and I do not feel that mono recording need to be a direction to pressure. BTW, my observation of the people who pitch mono always made me to divide then in 3 categories:

1)    Inability to get Stereo due to the real-estate reasons. The Japanese Sakuma is perfect example who bravura that he listen ONLY mono but who admit privately that he would rather to do stereo if he had room for second loudspeaker.

2)    The Sinister reasons. Any asshole who suddenly need to sell Klangfilm or WE mono system or who need to release a premastered mono recording “suddenly” begin to sing songs that  mono is unbeatable…

3)    Inability to get proper Stereo due to the audio reasons. This is majority. The guy from the Anstendig institute above is a good example (I still did not read his article). What I spoke with him years back he absolutely discarded my audio results because I do not use equalization. According to him if a person do not use 64 band equalization then I have shity sound. So, do you want ME to argue with HIM about stereo. After the 64 band equalization you have a defecation of phases and he fell that it call “stereo”

unicon wrote:

….we barely see any well planned stereo .

Romy the Cat wrote:

unicon wrote: ….we barely see any well planned stereo . Absolutely right.  Normally people hardly ever familiar with properly implemented stereo. I did properly implemented stereo a few months back in 2001-2002. I did not hear SO MUCH properly implemented stereo ever anywhere else. The Cat

ghpicard wrote:

So Romy, we know you haven't yet prepared your new room, but weren't your Macondo / Milq in your old apartment a properly implemented stereo setup ?Why ?Gaston

Stereo is only as good as the width of your head,,,Both visual and audio...Of course locolazion diminish,s as you sit back further,, Hall ambiences will eventually take over...If you are the conductor you get a different perspective,,,And PERSPECTIVE can come from logic of interpretive views..Impactful perspective can come from many sources without stereo...I do not under stand your logic of the case that MONO WAS FORCED (not chosen) you bought your seat (in the hall) and the enviroment will deal you your perspective..  A decest friend of mine ,,(may he rest in hell) only believed in mono,,Making mono records,,most of his life,,would audition his version(mono) than mine (stereo) at the same concert and location..He would point at playback and complain about the swimming sloshy sound,,,He then would disconnect one side and play his mono tape...Showing full localazation and front to back hall balance..  Our mics were on one tall poll mic stand,,In the DECCA tree mic position,,His was the center mic,,,All mics were the same type Sennheiser MKH 105s  Mics were about 3rd row back from edge of stage,,,I now have his MONO tapes,,And play them for doughting morons,,showing that good recordings can be made in mono,,,I then place a record RCA stereo,,with 27 mics like the 32 mike version stereo by phifer,,,,(what a piece of shit) A BARTOK piece,,I wrote the producer a scathing letter,,and told him to shoot the fucking engineer...

AOK_Farmer wrote:

We might well have settled with Mono. If we lived in octagonal rooms we might have settled on 3 channels. Maybe it is about the rectangular rooms we live in that we choose stereo? What if we lived in round rooms?  Something to think about

AOK_Farmer wrote:

Do you think you would lose the ability to hear stereo properly and that for the Van Gogh type person Mono is as sufficient as stereo?

AOK_Farmer wrote:

It's a stereo world and listening to stereo recordings in mono seems moronic, even if you only have one ear.

OK, who has not recently tried a good mono recording played from just one BIG speaker?  It has been quite I while since I have done this.  It may take a while to get to it, but at some point I will play the 1943 Furtwangler/BPO Beethoven 9 through one DEBZ, and I will get back with impressions.  IMO, this recording has sound field, ambience, everything, up the wazoo in "enhanced mono".  Let's hear how it sounds in "true mono".

Paul S