<<Modern technology may allow more sophisticated "fake stereo" mixes than the ones created in the 60's, but true stereo is still a different thing.>>

True stereo is fake reality.

Quote
stonehearted
<<Modern technology may allow more sophisticated "fake stereo" mixes than the ones created in the 60's, but true stereo is still a different thing.>>

True stereo is fake reality.

That's a philosophical statement, not really a technical aspect.

Quote
alimente

Quote
stonehearted
<<Modern technology may allow more sophisticated "fake stereo" mixes than the ones created in the 60's, but true stereo is still a different thing.>>

True stereo is fake reality.

That's a philosophical statement, not really a technical aspect.

That's not philosiphical.

From a mono mix You can work on frequencies, as exemple you can add 8dB to 4000 Htz frequency on left channel, lower 8 dB the same frenquecy on right channel, things like that, it will give a slight stereo effect (re-processed stereo) but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
The only way to get a stereo mix is from a multitrack tape/recording.
During the early 60's, once the final mix was done, the original multitrack tapes were erased, for economical reasons, and used again for other recordings. Tapes were expensive. The 1st LP was recorded on a three-tracks tape recorder if I'm not mistaken. The mixing done and aproved, the multitrack tape was erased.
This was definitively destrictuve, and in now way you can go back.
By chance, some songs released in mono only were also mixed in stereo (Chess 64).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-03-28 11:43 by LiveAtHidepark.

Quote
LiveAtHidepark
[...] but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
[...]

Wrong, I just did it six days ago. [www.iorr.org]

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
LiveAtHidepark
[...] but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
[...]

Wrong, I just did it six days ago. [www.iorr.org]

Talk is cheap. Show us some proof.

Quote
LiveAtHidepark

Quote
alimente

Quote
stonehearted
<<Modern technology may allow more sophisticated "fake stereo" mixes than the ones created in the 60's, but true stereo is still a different thing.>>

True stereo is fake reality.

That's a philosophical statement, not really a technical aspect.

That's not philosiphical.

From a mono mix You can work on frequencies, as exemple you can add 8dB to 4000 Htz frequency on left channel, lower 8 dB the same frenquecy on right channel, things like that, it will give a slight stereo effect (re-processed stereo) but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
The only way to get a stereo mix is from a multitrack tape/recording.
During the early 60's, once the final mix was done, the original multitrack tapes were erased, for economical reasons, and used again for other recordings. Tapes were expensive. The 1st LP was recorded on a three-tracks tape recorder if I'm not mistaken. The mixing done and aproved, the multitrack tape was erased.
This was definitively destrictuve, and in now way you can go back.
By chance, some songs released in mono only were also mixed in stereo (Chess 64).

I was referring to the statement "true stereo is fake reality".

Apart from that, what you say is more or less exactly what I said in my earlier post.

Quote
alimente

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
LiveAtHidepark
[...] but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
[...]

Wrong, I just did it six days ago. [www.iorr.org]

Talk is cheap. Show us some proof.

The Last Time - Mono SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]
The Last Time - Stereo SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
alimente

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
LiveAtHidepark
[...] but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
[...]

Wrong, I just did it six days ago. [www.iorr.org]

Talk is cheap. Show us some proof.

The Last Time - Mono SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]
The Last Time - Stereo SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]

A true stereo version of The Last Time exists and is out there on various boots. Your mix,however, at least the 10 seconds or so you are willing to share with us, sounds like "fake stereo" = wide mono as described in my earlier post with an added tambourine in the left channel to make it sound more like "real stero".

Quote
alimente

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
alimente

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
LiveAtHidepark
[...] but you will never separate an individual instrument from a mono mix and send it on the right or left channel.
[...]

Wrong, I just did it six days ago. [www.iorr.org]

Talk is cheap. Show us some proof.

The Last Time - Mono SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]
The Last Time - Stereo SAMPLE: [soundcloud.com]

Quote
alimente
A true stereo version of The Last Time exists and is out there on various boots [...]

I know.

Quote
alimente
[...]
Your mix [...] sounds like "fake stereo" = wide mono [...] with an added tambourine in the left channel [..]

It's not a mix, it's an edit. "Wide mono" - nonsens, use your preferable wave editor and you will agree. Nothing is added at all. It's a clean separation job, the percussion is separated from the rest and edited to hard left. Take a listen to this, it will support what I say: [soundcloud.com]

It still sounds like "wide mono" = "electronically reprocessed stereo" to me - with an added tambourine in the left channel. The tambourine may be "extracted" from the original mono track, but so what?

Regardless, this short sample leads to the question who these kind of production are aimed at. It may be a nice demonstration for studio buffs, but for the consumer a "stereo" edit/mix with just a tambourine in a separate channel does not make sense when all other instruments and voices are not separated at all and still sound more or less monophonic. It's nice for a 10 second sample, but for a whole track it sounds rather dull, not to speak of several tracks in a row! In the end, music is for listening.

Quote
alimente
[...] but so what?
[...]

You've missed the whole point in this thread.

the tambourine in the soundcloud example sounds terrible, very fake and artificial, even distorted, and that's what you get with these kinds of sound editing: it is just nothing. worthless.

March 2021: there are - I found out later on - some people who really are quite good in extracting stereo from mono. Here is an example of a well done DES version of "Surprise Surprise": Surprise, Surprise



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-21 14:00 by dingq.

Quote
Hurristone

Quote
alimente
[...] but so what?
[...]

You've missed the whole point in this thread.

And the "whole point" according to Hurristone is.....?

Quote
dingq
the tambourine in the soundcloud example sounds terrible, very fake and artificial, even distorted, and that's what you get with these kinds of sound editing: it is just nothing. worthless.

And that is exactly what I meant: Who wants to listen to this trash?

a YouTube friend of mine who I know for many years finally found out that extracting stereo from mono INDEED is possible. Here is one of his many DES Rolling Stones songs: a very well done "Blue Turns To Grey":

"Blue Turns To Grey" on YouTube

Quote
dingq
a YouTube friend of mine who I know for many years finally found out that extracting stereo from mono INDEED is possible. Here is one of his many DES Rolling Stones songs: a very well done "Blue Turns To Grey":

"Blue Turns To Grey" on YouTube

...it’s a specialty of ”Eric records”....not for the Stones yet in this time...