Muddled Mono mixes on CD

[Evan]

Why is that many (but not all) mono versions of albums from the sixties on CD sound muddled and just plain lousy. In fact, I had gotten to the point of avoiding anything in mono as I assumed that it would suck. The main offender that I can think of is the ABKCO Rolling Stones CDs (sure glad I discovered the London issues) and some of the Beatles CDs, but I am sure there are others. I assume that it has something to do with remastering, or lack thereof, as Steve’s work in mono sounds incredibly, and so do the records that I have that are mono. So what gives?

[Grant]

Bad-sounding mono is the result of the same things bad stereo is the result of, bad mastering. bad tapes, wrong playback machines...at least you already know that mono can sound great. And, yeah, some mono mixes are muddy.

I know the Rolling Stones' ABKO mono sucks, but what else have you listened to?

[Matt]

One usual culprit in bad mono mastering: that slight flanging/swishing sound that's common on the Beatles mono CD's, lots of older Verve jazz CD's, etc. It happens when you play a mono tape back on a stereo head (which in itself is actually okay) and then hitting the mono button to combine channels. The proper way to get a mono mastering is to play it back with a mono head. Otherwise, if you do it on a stereo head, pick a channel or leave it as stereo (though leaving it in stereo risks other minor problems).

Also, another reason for a bad mono sound may just be the way it was mixed. To use the Beatles as an example, on Beatles For Sale, they used lots of compression on the mono mix (the one the Beatles cared about) to get the sound they wanted. Part of what they wanted was to get the music to sound good on a cheap turntable. When it came time to do the stereo mix, which was left to the engineer, it was done quickly with much less compression and other nasty tricks. I think it was pretty much the same with the Beach Boys music. The stereo mixes were done quickly, while the mono mixes were worked on quite a bit, and it shows.

This isn't always a rule, though. Just listen to Sam Cooke's old hits, or some stereo Frank Sinatra on Capitol, or the Tokens on "The Lion Sleeps Tonight." The stereo versions use a lot more EQ and in some cases are drenched in echo; the best way to hear most of that stuff is in the mono mixes, which were done more "gently."

[Steve Hoffman]

You have learned well, Grasshopper! ;)

[Andrew]

I've always liked the first Stax box-set, for that stone heavy mono sound. Beatles "first four" shoulda been more like dat!

[Matt]

I learned from the best, Steve.

[AudioGirl]

That's what I love about this forum... Chalk full of great information that you can't get anywhere else!

I remember some very interesting and informative posts from the DCC forum as well. Steve has a really great way of expaining some pretty complicated stuff and keeping it interesting at the same time.

I have such a better understanding of the technical side of things after having spent untold hours on these discussion boards.

THANKS!! :)

[Holy Zoo]

Somebody called this "Hoffman University" :) I really love that description... now all we need is our own fight song. ;)

[Grant]

I have to agree that the best mono I own is perhaps the first Stax/Volt box. Second is the Temptations box.

The absolute WORST mono I have ever heard is the Diana Ross box set, which is thankfully no longer in print.

[Evan]

Grant, I assume that you mean what was I listening to when I decided that Mono mixes were bad. I think that I got the idea from my parents first(yeah, it’s the old “Blame it on the parents ploy”), but it seems to have been reinforced by the first CDs that I heard in college. The early Rolling Stones were the worst. There were probably others, but I don’t really remember. I do remember being disappointed with the Beatles CDs that came out in mono. I had most of their records in stereo already and the mono mixes just sounded muddled to me. Then there was the Rolling Stones Box set. My sister’ second husband received it as a Christmas gift. After hearing those mixes, I was firmly convinced that mono was totally inferior. About two years ago I brought a copy of Otis Blue, on mono, of course, and although I love the music, I was disappointed by the sound quality.
Then one day I went to the DCC web page to look for some CDs as I had bought a copy of Pet Sounds in 1993, and I was quite pleased with the sound quality. I was hopping fro more of the same. That was when I discovered the bulletin board and this young grasshopper started to learn. My enjoyment of music has increased immensely. I am sure it hasn’t hurt that I upgraded my amplifier and pre-amp to a vacuum tube system. The quality of Steve’s work is amazing. I especially love what he does with mono mixes. I wish that he could have done the mono Highway 61.
I think that I am starting to get the picture. Some people should never be allowed to master music because they just don’t know what the hell they are doing.



Originally posted by Holy Zoo
Somebody called this "Hoffman University" :) I really love that description... now all we need is our own fight song. ;)

That was me on the Board Etiquette thread. Distance Education is cool and the tuition is just right! :cool:

[Grant]

Evan, I was just hoping you were smart enough to bash particular mono CDs for the inferior sound quality you heard, and NOT just because it's mono. like a lot of people do.:)

[AudioGirl]

Steve, aren't there some mono mixes on the Elvis 24K Gold Hits album as well? I love that album! Almost every cut, stereo and mono.

Truth be known, I wasn't much of an Elvis fan until DCC released the 24K Gold Hits. I have them both on LP and gold CD, with NO buyer's remorse whatsoever!

If you haven't heard these, run don't walk to the nearest place (Better Records probably has them or try "ye ol' e-bay) you can find them and buy up!! :D

[Dave]

Audiogirl,

Funny I don't recall a 24kt Hits vol.2. I do recall Elvis Is Back though.;)

[AudioGirl]

Dave,

You are correct! :( Elvis is Back is the correct name of the second album... We are indeed thinking of the same album... I lump them both together because I got them at the same time. I assume you own this one? Isn't it GREAT?!!?



Thanks for the title correction. :)

[Dave]

AudioGirl,

(sigh) Unfortanately I've been unable to obtain "Elvis Is Back" on gold cd for a somewhat respectable price but do, happily I might add, own 24kt Hits and it sounds fantastic.;)

[AudioGirl]

Dave...

I say, pay whatever you think might think today is an indecent price.

If you don't, some day you'll be kickin' yourself in the @$$, wishin' you had bought it when it was a bargain (what you think is indecent today). :(

Trust me on this. I bet everyone on this board can relate a similar experience. I know I have kicked myself more than once. Now, I buy it if I want it. Especially when I it's a DCC and I already know it's gonna be good.

If it costs you $50 bucks and you play it 50 times... Do the math. It only cost you a buck each time. That's nothing!!

[Dave]

AudioGirl,

I totally see your point of view especially if you're a professional and don't have the time but, if you've got the time the deals are to be had on ebay ie. just got Ray Charles: Recipe For Soul Soup for $11.50 inc. everthing. Used but perfect.:D

[AudioGirl]

Dave!! A true e-bay SCORE !!

Good for you! Great album! ENJOY. :D :D

[Dave]

AudioGirl,

Thanks I plan to.

The Vulture sits patiently watching his meal........until.

Yeah that's not the first one either as I've done quite well about 80% of the time in my 11 months on ebay, the deals are there.;)

[Paul L.]

I got the gold CD of "Elvis Is Back" in Mint but played condition on eBay for $13.

You don't have to pay a lot of money for stuff, unless you are impatient. Take your time. It's fun to hunt for stuff.

[Evan]

Originally posted by Grant
Evan, I was just hoping you were smart enough to bash particular mono CDs for the inferior sound quality you heard, and NOT just because it's mono. like a lot of people do.:)

Grant,
I would never bash a mix simply because it was mono or stereo. If possible, I like to have both versions, if available. I find that I might want to listen to one or the other, depending on my mood (Same thing with vinyl or CD). Also, if I find that I do prefer one mix over the other, it is usually because it was a bad mix as the case of the “Surrealistic Pillow” mono vs. the stereo (way to much echo) or it is a poor mastering. The best example of poor mastering that I can think of is “Otis Blue”. The Rhino disc is muddled and his voice sounds compressed or altered in some unnatural way. It’s hard for me to describe. It just doesn’t sound right. The Japanese pressing is only available in stereo (as far as I can tell and the mono is available only as a import from the US), and sounds great IMHO. It is much clearer with much more emotional impact. Some parts sound like he is right there. It is a bit more tape hiss than a normal CD (no NoNoise there!), so I assume that a safety was used for the stereo pressing, but I love it. Just goes to show what good quality control can accomplish. I must purchase the Sundazed version of “Otis Blue” to compare. I have heard nothing but good things about their pressing of the mono mix.