There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

MermaidsGarden ,
@MermaidsGarden@lemmy.world avatar

This would be more early 60’s, mostly because those engineers were working with 2 track stereo which really limits your options. Most artists were recording on at least 8 track stereo by the 70’s.

someguy3 ,

This might explain why old players had a mono/stereo setting.

unreachable ,
@unreachable@lemmy.world avatar

karaoke moment

Num10ck ,

has anyone tried out apple’s ‘spatial audio’ and how it compares to 5.1?

minticecream ,

Turns out early audio consoles with stereo didn’t have a pan knob. They had a pan switch. So choices were limited to left, right, or center (mono).

Wasn’t til later that the pan pot was invented allowing incremental panning and true stereo mixing.

Hammocks4All OP ,

That’s wild. But theoretically they could make two separate mono tracks, right? For example, a left mono track with 75% of what would have been an isolated left channel + 25% of the right channel and, similarly, a right mono track with 25% of what would have been an isolated left + 75% of the right. Then, sure, pan switch it fully to left and right.

SpaceNoodle ,

That’s even more complicated.

bizarroland ,

Exactly. Plus the common use of mastering at the time was to optimize the recorded audio for printing on a vinyl disc, and if the grooves were too deep or the transitions to Sharp it could cause the needle to skip out of the track.

If your average listener is going to be listening on a mono device then a smart thing to do would be to pan one thing consistently to one side and the other to the other as the mono needle isn't going to care where it's getting its vibrations from. That would give you more resolution and more depth for the cut, as long as the final disc was only played in mono.

I'm not saying that's the case for every recording but I'm pretty sure it has happened quite a few times back then while they were still figuring everything out.

banazir ,
@banazir@lemmy.ml avatar

I’d be perfectly fine if everything was just mixed mono. I see little value in stereo. I’m weird like that.

zaphod ,

In electronic music you often slightly detune the left and right of a synthesizer to make it sound “wide”, you can’t do that in mono and if you mix the stereo down to mono it sounds boring.

strawberry ,

like @zaphod said, its mostly to make it sound wider. in mono, everything sounds like its in the center of your skull. in stereo, some stuff it a few inches from my ear (wherever the drivers are), some stuff can be in my head, some can even be in my throat if that makes sense

astrsk ,
@astrsk@fedia.io avatar

It’s fun and interesting all the experimentation that went on back then. As someone deaf in one ear… it’s hard to truly appreciate, but I get it.

mbgid ,

You know, I love those albums where they fucked around did things like hard-pan all the drums to the right channel. I’m here for the experimentation.

the_dopamine_fiend ,
@the_dopamine_fiend@lemmy.world avatar

The jump from mono to stereo made a lot of engineers’ heads spin. Then again, how many 100% perfect 5.1 albums have you heard?

Actually, I’ve listened to only three 5.1 remixes, all of them phenomenal albums to begin with, and their 5.1 jobs were pretty meh. Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots came out pretty good, but mainly because they just fucked around and tried stuff.

Iamsqueegee ,

Have you ever listened to Zaireeka appropriately? I haven’t, but that must be a headache to line up correctly.

LucasWaffyWaf ,

It was a pain in the ass but me and a buddy got it working once. I was a young teen and this was long before weed helped me see more beauty in music, so I didn’t get much out of it, but as an adult it’d probably be different.

SnotFlickerman ,
@SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

I thought part of the point of Zaireeka is that it is impossible to get it exact every time, so every time you play it it is a unique soundscape.

li10 ,

I hate the “spatial” mixes.

Sometimes they’re done really well, but most of the time it’s just putting different parts of the song in different areas and makes it sound “diluted”.

Like, the guitar is in front of you, then the bass is behind and to the left… why??

Hammocks4All OP ,

It makes sense. I bet it’s super hard, especially at first.

It’s largely a headphone problem, at least for me. I can’t listen to a song where certain tracks are completely isolated to one ear. The audio doesn’t need to be mixed perfectly, but I need at least a little bit of each sound in each ear. Otherwise it’s too distracting. My brain hates it.

Skullgrid ,
@Skullgrid@lemmy.world avatar

They \just got stereo bakk then igth

SzethFriendOfNimi ,
@SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world avatar

Does make it easier to isolate vocals I guess

eightpix ,
@eightpix@lemmy.world avatar

And instrumentals.

Midnitte ,

Think this is more an artifact of the way vinyl records worked - since audio can be encoded in two channels via the way the needle moves in certain orientations

hydroptic ,

Urr, I don’t think that’s it. I’m not sure stereo sound for vinyls has ever worked so that something like this would be necessary, and it wouldn’t really make sense – why would they have to put vocals on one channel and instruments on the other?

A stereo vinyl player just has the needle moving up and down in addition to left and right, so that the left-right axis is the sum of the waveforms of both channels and the up-down axis is the difference – which means that a regular mono player can play stereo vinyls

Midnitte ,

Hm, not sure why they’d do it then - maybe just easier to keep organized with the workflow of the time?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •