From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V17 #247 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Tuesday, September 15 2009 Volume 17 : Number 247 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: Why mono? [Jeremy Osner ] reap [Christopher Gross ] REAP [Tom Clark ] so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ [Bret ] Re: Why mono? [2fs ] Re: Why Mono? ["Nectar At Any Cost!" ] Re: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ [kevin studyvin ] Re: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Seeking "Best of 00's" band list [2fs ] Re: Seeking "Best of 00's" band list [Rex ] reap ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Waimono* [James Dignan ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:42:51 -0400 From: Jeremy Osner Subject: Re: Why mono? I'm amazed so many messages have been exchanged under the subject heading "Why Mono?" without any reference to Gonorrhea and/or Syphilis. J On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:11 PM, 2fs wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn < > Hagedorn@spinfo.uni-koeln.de> wrote: > > > --On 14. September 2009 08:57:40 -0400 Jeremy Osner > > wrote: > > > > But if the music was originally recorded in mono (like e.g. early > Beatles > >> records), the information being lost by abandoning stereo is information > >> that was not present to begin with. I think? > >> > > > > But they never *were* recorded in mono! Even their earliest recordings > were > > at least two-track. Of course each of those tracks was mono, and probably > > never meant to be mixed as stereo > > > Right. "Stereo" isn't just two tracks; it's two tracks mixed specifically > to > be heard simultaneously from two speakers (tpically, two identical > speakers). > > Some of the other posts point out that (a) the mono mixes were much more > carefully done than the stereo mixes, at least on the earlier albums; (b) a > lot of people originally heard the mono mixes and would enjoy hearing them > again. > > I would add that there's an art to mixing in mono that's very different > from > the art of mixing in stereo. In stereo, you have the luxury of using space > to differentiate parts: two parts that are otherwise similar in sound, > texture, and volume can be distinguished by one being panned left & the > other right. You can't do that in a mono mix - in fact, arguably, recording > *for* mono can and should affect the compositional and arranging process, > in > that if you know that you've written two parts that will end up blending > together in listeners' ears and you don't want that effect, you rewrite. > Multiple channels, then, free up certain restraints (for good and for bad). > > Anyway, for myself I'm happy to hear the songs any which way - so long as > we > have the choice. I do not like it when versions of songs disappear entirely > (David Thomas of Pere Ubu is *notoriously* imperious as to maintaining > permanent control over what he wants people to hear on Ubu records...to the > point that every reissue of Ubu albums presents new mixes, sometimes very > different ones, sometimes with new or missing parts). > > Inevitably, in a few years, there'll be another box set...in which the > entire Beatles catalog is remixed (not just remastered) in stereo (as the > Yellow Submarine "songtrack" CD was a few years ago, and that _Love_ thing > two years or so back). What's not entirely clear to me: when you had only 4 > tracks at your disposal, a typical practice (which the Beatles did quite a > lot) was to "bounce down" some of those tracks if yo needed more than 4. > So, > you'd record (say) rhythm guitar on one track, bass on another, and drums > on > the third...but you wanted more than one track for vocals, piano, and a > lead > guitar. So, you'd take those three tracks, mix them carefully, and record > them on a single track of a new 4-track recording - freeing up another 3 > channels for your vocals, piano, and lead guitar. > > Where this gets interesting, in the remix potential, is that if EMI was > careful about preserving its tapes and both the 4-track master used for the > record (bounced-down rhythm section, vocals, piano, lead guitar) *and* the > original 4-track with 3 tracks for the rhythm section were preserved, you > could *now* go back and remix all 7 tracks that were recorded, with no loss > of fidelity from bouncing down. I'm going to assume something like that was > what was done on the YS Songtrack album (which remixed the original sounds, > using more modern notions of spatial placement, i.e., bass frequencies > centered, instruments spread...rather than all the instruments in one > channel & all the vocals in another). > > I could go on - but it'd be nice if someone with actual experience, you > know, mixing a record on old-school equipment could say something rather > than my rampant hypothetical speculations... > > > > -- > > ...Jeff Norman > > The Architectural Dance Society > http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:42:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher Gross Subject: reap Actor Patrick Swayze, 57. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/15/movies/15swayze.html?_r=1&hp ______________________________________________________________________ Christopher Gross On the Internet, nobody knows I'm a dog. chrisg@gwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:08:16 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: REAP Patrick Swayze. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:00:37 -0500 From: Bret Subject: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ Yet 0 for Jody Powell - press sec to Carter. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isKU8ty-18RIkdob3nM59X4T9aBAD9ANEH6O0 you guys are slipping..... - -b ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:27:56 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Why mono? On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 4:41 PM, kevin studyvin wrote: > > Anyway, for myself I'm happy to hear the songs any which way - so long as > we > > have the choice. I do not like it when versions of songs disappear > entirely > > (David Thomas of Pere Ubu is *notoriously* imperious as to maintaining > > permanent control over what he wants people to hear on Ubu records...to > the > > point that every reissue of Ubu albums presents new mixes, sometimes very > > different ones, sometimes with new or missing parts). > > Which sent me back to the notes to St. Arkansas, where DT has this to say: > > "Some of you may remember stereo sound. It had a brief vogue for a > decade between the mid-60s and mid-70s before being edged out of > fashion by Enhanced Mono. A product of that brief window, Pere Ubu > never lost its affection for the format. Most people know that by > moving between the two speakers of your hi fi system a point can be > located at which the sound seems to lock into place. Ordinarily this > is the point that forms an equilateral triangle with the two sound > sources. With Pere Ubu, however, this point has been located directly > in front of the right hand source. There are good reasons for this. > 1. See the Folly Of Youth video. 2. Sound is heard from left to > right. Facing and equidistant to the sound source the left ear will > 'hear' before the right. Situating the focal point in front of the > right source alters depth of field. 3. The scale created by a Mid/Side > approach is sometimes preferable to a standard Left/Right separation. > You are, of course, free to do as you choose." > > For somebody who originated the term "avant-garage," sometimes I > suspect he overthinks. > Really? Anyway, he also has a sense of humor - it's just subtle enough that, uh, sometimes it's not clear when he's joking and when he's utterly serious about some semi-crackpot idea. Like "sound is heard from left to right." What now? On the general subject though: was it here that someone pointed to an article pointing out the problem with headphone-listening in stereo is that, due to the presence of one's own thick skull, the experience is quite different from listening to stereo in the open air...since in open air, your right ear hears the left channel...but with a slight delay, and altered by having passed through that thick skull - but in headphones, you don't hear the channel with the opposite ear at all. (Technically, that was a question - - but it seemed silly after such a long phrase to pop a Q on the end there.) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:06:06 -0700 From: "Nectar At Any Cost!" Subject: Re: Why Mono? i like it! reminds me of . ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:10:50 -0700 From: kevin studyvin Subject: Re: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Bret wrote: > Yet 0 for Jody Powell - press sec to Carter. > > > > http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isKU8ty-18RIkdob3nM59X4T9aBAD9ANEH6O0 > And let's not forget that the Carter White House staff played a viatl role in making a star, of sorts, of the monumental Root Boy Slim & the Sex Cange Band... http://www.rootboyslim.com/BioPage.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:58:43 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ On Sep 14, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Bret wrote: > Yet 0 for Jody Powell - press sec to Carter. > > http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5isKU8ty-18RIkdob3nM59X4T9aBAD9ANEH6O0 > > you guys are slipping..... > Did he ever jump out of an airplane with Keanu Reeves? Or dance with Jennifer Grey? yeah, I didn't think so. - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:34:37 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: susan boyle covers Stones classic http://susanboylefanclub-usa.blogspot.com/2009/09/susan-boyle-new-song-from- her-upcoming.html My Bob Dylan Examiner Column http://www.examiner.com/x-21829-Bob-Dylan-Examiner my blog is "Yer Blog" http://fab4yerblog.blogspot.com/ http://robotsarestealingmyluggage.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:09:16 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: Recommended! - --On 5. September 2009 11:43:22 +1200 James Dignan wrote: > The new Yo La Tengo gets the thumbs up from me. From me as well! I've listened to it twice now, and the only track that doesn't do much for me is the second to last one (The Fireside). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:10:12 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: so, i saw 2 reaps for an actor............ Bret wrote: > Yet 0 for Jody Powell - press sec to Carter. When I was 8, I wanted to be called Jody Powell. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:59:24 -0400 From: lep Subject: in math and zombie news to-day... courtesy bruce schneier''s 2009-09-15 CRYPTO-GRAM newsletter. heads up that the link is to a pdf file. << Modeling zombie outbreaks: the math doesn't look good. "When Zombies Attack!: Mathematical Modelling of an Outbreak of Zombie Infection." http://www.mathstat.uottawa.ca/~rsmith/Zombies.pdf >> xo p.s. yeah, i know, it's *applied* mathematics, but i'll let it slide in this case. - -- "people with opinions just go around bothering one another." -- the buddha ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:39:26 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: Seeking "Best of 00's" band list On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Miles Goosens wrote: > > > Goldfrapp > > On!Air!Library!, and its successors School of Seven Bells and > Daylight's For the Birds > > Ladytron > Given these, I might suggest Deastro and A Sunny Day in Glasgow. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:10:20 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: Seeking "Best of 00's" band list On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Tom Clark wrote: > > > And who knew Miles was into Peaches? Oh, I did! - -Rex, big on The Go! Team ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:01:46 -0400 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: reap Keith "a little slosh for the pan, and a big slosh for me" Floyd, TV chef, 65. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:38:44 +1200 From: James Dignan Subject: Re: Waimono* >\I don't think that people have a preference for mono as opposed to >stereo, in principle, it's that for many classic recordings from the >'60s, when stereo was still new, the mono versions reflect the artists' >visions. This is certainly the case with The Beatles releases, and from >what you say I suspect so with Floyd's Piper. > >More specifically: In the day, stereo was thought of us a fad, that >might or might not even catch on. (Brian Wilson famously disliked the >idea of stereo because it meant people would hear his mixes differently >based on speaker placement etc., although his hearing loss in one ear >may have also been a factor.) This also means that when stereo recordings were recorded/released, they weren't always taken that seriously by the artists - which sometimes led to oddities in the sound. On which subjct, can anyone who has the new Beatles releases tell me whether the stereo "Please Please Me" has John stuffing up the lyricws art one point, like the vionyl stereo release had, or whether they've 'tidied it up"? James *A perfectly acceptable, though non-existant, name for a New Zealand river - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V17 #247 ********************************