stereo remixes/remasters of oldies

[aramism]

i mean honestly, why does ever stereo remix/master of 60s pop and rock have to be like exaggerated stereo??? like the drums all the way on one side, the vocals all the way on the other.


it pisses me off so much. thats fine they wanna remix the beach boys and the beatles and all that but why can't they make a normal stereo mix???

 

[pikachu69]

Because they were not recorded in true stereo...

It was not until late in the beatles carrer (Sargent pepper) that true stereo recording was even availible and even then the Beatles did not concern themselves with it. They hung in the studio while the mono mixes were being made but never had any input on the stereo mixes as they did not feel it was important.

 

[aramism]

i know i understand why it happens. they were original mono and then they took the multitracks and created stereo mixes. but my point is why do they have to exaggerate the stereo effect. they can just create normal stereo mixes.

 

[pikachu69]

No,they can't. If they could they would...
Panning a whole instrument to one side and another to the other side is not true stereo, I believe they labeled it stereophonic back in the day. When stereo playback first became available little thought was given to the art of recording in true stereo due to lack of multi tracking capability (using two tracks to record one instrument was not a good use of limited tracks) so it was an after thought used in mixdown for some time throughout the late 60's, some instruments left, some right, just to fill the space.
nowdays, you can't just take a drum kit, for example, that was printed in mono and extract it from tape and make it true stereo as we now know it. Stereophonic and true stereo are two different things altogether and I think you are confusing the two.
How do turn mono into true stereo?

 

[aramism]

i dont think anyone gets my point here. all these original albumns were released originally as mono, then like 20, 30, 40 years later they re-release them in boxed sets or re-issue them remixed and remastered.

but they take the original multi tracks and just pan them out and touch them up and then remaster them. ie: the beatles, motown, otis redding, the rolling stones, the beach boys, etc.

 

[pikachu69]

I understand your point.
There was no such thing as multi tracking back then is my point.
Drums were recorded with 3 - 4 tracks then bounced to 1 (mono) leaving 3 tracks then next instrument recorded and bounced down untill all tracks are full.
The tapes they have to remix/master from, more than likely, would have consisted of mono drums (all on one track with no access to individual mics), vox, guitars etc leaving no chance of doing a full stereo mix.
You can't expect them to then create stereo out of nothing. If they left every thing panned center then it is essentially still mono (you know what I mean, I don't want an arguement over that point) So the only way to fill the stereo field to release on CD (which can only be in stereo) is to pan full instruments left and right.

 

[Sloan]

mono drums sound fucking great

 

[Drummerrrrr?]

No,they can't. If they could they would...
Panning a whole instrument to one side and another to the other side is not true stereo, I believe they labeled it stereophonic back in the day. When stereo playback first became available little thought was given to the art of recording in true stereo due to lack of multi tracking capability (using two tracks to record one instrument was not a good use of limited tracks) so it was an after thought used in mixdown for some time throughout the late 60's, some instruments left, some right, just to fill the space.
nowdays, you can't just take a drum kit, for example, that was printed in mono and extract it from tape and make it true stereo as we now know it. Stereophonic and true stereo are two different things altogether and I think you are confusing the two.
How do turn mono into true stereo?

I think he understands it was all in mono originally, it's just that now, 40 or 50 years later when they are remixed/remastered, they randomly place the instruments all over the stereo field which doesn't make sense. Why have a drum kit all the way in the left ear and a vocal track in our right?

 

[bryan_kilco]

I think he understands it was all in mono originally, it's just that now, 40 or 50 years later when they are remixed/remastered, they randomly place the instruments all over the stereo field which doesn't make sense. Why have a drum kit all the way in the left ear and a vocal track in our right?

Yeah, you'd think they would keep everything centered. Drums on one side/vox on the other just seems retarded to me, everything would sound lopsided.

 

[Scott Horner]

I remember listening to my Dad's old 8-tracks and noticing the drums were panned hard left and vocals were in the right. Maybe they're just trying to stay true to the original sound. I don't think they are taking the original tracks and just throwing random things around in the pan field. Unless i'm misunderstanding the point here as well.

 

[Virgil.]

I understand your point.
There was no such thing as multi tracking back then is my point.
Drums were recorded with 3 - 4 tracks then bounced to 1 (mono) leaving 3 tracks then next instrument recorded and bounced down untill all tracks are full.
The tapes they have to remix/master from, more than likely, would have consisted of mono drums (all on one track with no access to individual mics), vox, guitars etc leaving no chance of doing a full stereo mix.
You can't expect them to then create stereo out of nothing. If they left every thing panned center then it is essentially still mono (you know what I mean, I don't want an arguement over that point) So the only way to fill the stereo field to release on CD (which can only be in stereo) is to pan full instruments left and right.

I think the OP understands that. I believe what he is trying to get at is if they were recorded in mono, why are they going back and trying to make them stereo? We understand they didn't have the means to record in stereo, but the point is why ruin the way a classic album sounds by altering it by trying to make it stereo -- panning instruments, etc. I would much rather them clean up the recordings and leave it mono. If that makes sense.

 

[pikachu69]

Because these days 99.9% of all playback medium is in stereo, not mono.

You simply can't make a mono CD. 16bit 44.1Khz stereo. Whats not to get?
The only way to keep it mono would be to re release on record but even then most if not all modern turntables are stereo now.
If everything was left center to 'sound mono' it would sound much worse being played through a stereo system (possible phase cancelation) and less like the original, IMHO, also alot of the originals that are being re mastered were already panned this way too.
Unless I am missing something I don't see what the issue is here.

 

[aramism]

Drummerrrrr? hit it on the head and some others seem to understand what i'm saying.

it's annoying to listen to the newer versions where everything is panned. i'd rather hear it in mono since they had to multi track everything and bounce entire instrument groups as one track. i get that part. i know they didnt have like snare top, bottom, kick in/out, tom1, 2, etc. etc.

the drums were essentially cut to one track, vox, etc. etc.


but hearing drums all the way on the right and vocals all the way on the left is super annoying for every single song on headphones. and unless you find original cds or issues, a lot of the updated stuff on cds and itunes are all remasters. and it just so happens i like motown and oldies and i have a lot of it on vinyl and some on cd but some stuff i lost or want from itunes or modern cds they have the remasters and reissues only.

i've heard some stereo remixes/masters where they don't extremely pan things, or they will leave drums and vox center at least and pan out shakers and tambourines and keys and guitars. seems a little more practical than this...