Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [RedHotJazz] How to play in true mono?

Expand Messages
  • Howard Rye
    ... Yes, indeed. I strongly suspected that you knew a lot more about the technicalities of this than I did! Yes, the noise is still there, you just notice it a
    Message 1 of 13 , May 23 2:23 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      on 23/5/05 8:19, Michael Rader at Rader.Michael@... wrote:

      > Just a couple of points about Howard's answer:
      >
      > - The mono button to be found on some amplifiers, like a 25 year old+
      > amplifier I have in my basement, simply combines both channels, so the noise
      > is still there, but may be less obtrusive.

      Yes, indeed. I strongly suspected that you knew a lot more about the
      technicalities of this than I did! Yes, the noise is still there, you just
      notice it a lot less, at least you do if you are used to playing old
      records. It probably still sounds like listening to music in a hail storm to
      most "normal" people.

      Your next point sounds like an even better commercial for never ever having
      an amplifier without a mono button.


      >Some CDs are characterised by a
      > glorious stereo spread of surface noise because whoever transferred the
      > original discs played them in stereo.
      >
      > - Older amplifiers, like a very cheap Japanese job I had in the 1970s, had
      > additionally the option of playing each channel separately, which can make the
      > world of difference on a mono recording, since you can switch off the surface
      > noise from the noisier channel.
      >
      > - Colin Bray told me about a fairly simple device called the audio signal
      > director, available from KAB electronics in the USA (www.kabusa.com), which
      > costs about $100. With this you can select channels, combine both channels or
      > switch channels, i.e. hear what is on the left channel to you right and vice
      > versa. I use this for playing mono records and I guess you could also use it
      > for CDs. The only problem is that you would probably have to hook it up anew
      > each time you switch between analogue records and CDs: I think there's only
      > one input and there would be a problem with ouput due to the use of
      > preamplification for record players. You could always buy two or make your
      > own. The circuitry is probably quite simple, but beyond my own technical
      > capabilities.
      >
      > There is additionally the option of only recording one channel onto a copy of
      > the CD (see my other mail).


      Howard Rye, 20 Coppermill Lane, London, England, E17 7HB
      howard@...
      Tel/FAX: +44 20 8521 1098
    • Michael Rader
      As Howard suggests, the mono button only just partly disguises the problem. The real solution is to have something that can play channels selectively. Some
      Message 2 of 13 , May 23 2:39 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        As Howard suggests, the mono button only just partly disguises the problem. The real solution is to have something that can play channels selectively. Some home cinema sets have a mono button, but again this just combines. Also, some devices have a mono switch for use with FM radio (weak transmitters), which can't be used for any other functions, such as listening to CDs.

        Having said that, I have to confess that the "noise" on one channel of the Jack Hylton CD was due mainly to a defective earplug. The CD sounded far better on other headphones, even though these are ancient and missing the foam rubber cushion. I'll continue to experiment, maybe with the Cl. Williams this time, and report back.

        Cheers,
        Michael

        __________________________________________________________
        Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
        weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
      • Joel Fritz
        ... The mono button makes each channel the sum of the left and right channels. As far as what constitutes true mono, it s a semantic deal. You can record on
        Message 3 of 13 , May 23 9:33 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Howard Rye wrote:
          > on 23/5/05 7:19, Michael Rader at Rader.Michael@... wrote:
          >
          > > I think both Gerard and Howard mentioned the possibilty of playing CDs in
          > > mono. My question is how do you do it? Combine both channels into
          > mono or play
          > > just the one channel with less noise? Most modern amplifiers no
          > longer have
          > > the option of even combining into mono, let alone playing each channel
          > > separately. There are gadgets for the purpose, such as something
          > called an
          > > audio noise director, which I have for records.
          >
          > The answer is that I have an amplifier which does.
          >
          > I am unhappily aware that replacing it when it dies may prove an expensive
          > business since this requirement is now distinctly a minority one, but how
          > can you play 78s without a mono button? They sound vile with stereo surface
          > noise. It's still there of course, it's just easier for the ear to ignore
          > it, and this evidently applies to badly made CDs as well as 78s.
          >
          > Incidentally I have no idea whether a mono button generates "true mono", but
          > it sure reduces the intrusiveness of surface noise.
          >
          > Howard Rye, 20 Coppermill Lane, London, England, E17 7HB
          > howard@...
          > Tel/FAX: +44 20 8521 1098
          >
          >
          >


          The mono button makes each channel the sum of the left and right
          channels. As far as what constitutes true mono, it's a semantic deal.
          You can record on one channel using multiple inputs.

          Stereo records have one channel in the up and down direction and the
          other in side to side. Since 78s have information only in one plane
          (mostly side to side) scratches or surface imperfections in the other
          can cause problems.

          One solution that may involve more work than it's worth is to record the
          cd to your hard drive, use a sound editor program to combine the two
          channels, and dub it to a new cd. Free to cheap editors can combine the
          two channels by addition. Fancier ones give you pretty much all the
          ways you can add or subtract two channels.

          I can't blame anyone for just wanting to listen to the music without
          having to worry about post processing a cd that cost money.
        • aclassicjazzfan
          While I ve learned an enormous amount from Michael & Howard about the intricacies of stereo equipment and reproducing music files in various formats, I feel
          Message 4 of 13 , May 23 10:34 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            While I've learned an enormous amount from Michael & Howard about
            the intricacies of stereo equipment and reproducing music files in
            various formats, I feel bad that my initial inquiry about the sound
            distortion on several CDs has prompted them both to go through so
            much trouble on my behalf, but I certainly appreciate their efforts.

            Michael notes that two of the CDs in question were produced during
            the same period. True, "Odds & Bits" is Timeless 55 & "Clarence
            Williams & His Orchestra, vol. 1" is Timeless 56. Why, then, does
            disk *one* of the CW set sound fine while disk *two* sounds like it
            was recorded "in a hailstorm"? (wonderful metaphor, Howard) I don't
            yet have vol. 2 in this CW series (Timeless 57). Can anyone report
            on its sound quality? I do have most of the Timeless volumes just
            before 55 and just after 56 and they all sound fine. At least in
            the case of Timeless, the problem seems to be limited to just a
            couple of CDs produced within a narrow time frame.

            What baffles me is why some Timeless & Retrieval CDs would have the
            same problem. I know both companies are based in the Netherlands.
            Do they share plants and personnel? Promise me, though, that you
            won't travel to foreign soil to find out!

            Gerard


            --- In RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Rader"
            <Rader.Michael@w...> wrote:
            > As Howard suggests, the mono button only just partly disguises the
            problem. The real solution is to have something that can play
            channels selectively. Some home cinema sets have a mono button, but
            again this just combines. Also, some devices have a mono switch for
            use with FM radio (weak transmitters), which can't be used for any
            other functions, such as listening to CDs.
            >
            > Having said that, I have to confess that the "noise" on one
            channel of the Jack Hylton CD was due mainly to a defective earplug.
            The CD sounded far better on other headphones, even though these are
            ancient and missing the foam rubber cushion. I'll continue to
            experiment, maybe with the Cl. Williams this time, and report back.
            >
            > Cheers,
            > Michael
            >
            > __________________________________________________________
            > Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
            > weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
          • Howard Rye
            ... Well, I ve got it. I suspect I haven t played it yet and I ll be honest that I m not really very keen on playing it in stereo to find out whether it would
            Message 5 of 13 , May 23 12:05 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              on 23/5/05 18:34, aclassicjazzfan at gfitzpatrick@... wrote:

              > Why, then, does
              > disk *one* of the CW set sound fine while disk *two* sounds like it
              > was recorded "in a hailstorm"? (wonderful metaphor, Howard) I don't
              > yet have vol. 2 in this CW series (Timeless 57). Can anyone report
              > on its sound quality?

              Well, I've got it. I suspect I haven't played it yet and I'll be honest that
              I'm not really very keen on playing it in stereo to find out whether it
              would have been more sensible to stick to the LPs!

              Howard Rye, 20 Coppermill Lane, London, England, E17 7HB
              howard@...
              Tel/FAX: +44 20 8521 1098
            • Michael Rader
              The Retrievals in question bear the legend Made In Germany while the Timeless do not. The Timeless Clarence Williams are from 2001 the Brunswick Odds and
              Message 6 of 13 , May 23 2:01 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                The Retrievals in question bear the legend "Made In Germany" while the Timeless do not. The Timeless Clarence Williams are from 2001 the Brunswick Odds and Bits from 1999, while the Retrievals are from 1999 or 2000. I think that there is some noise on the Clarence Williams Vol. 2, but won't draw any final conclusions before checking my headphones
                ;-).

                Michael

                > While I've learned an enormous amount from Michael & Howard about
                > the intricacies of stereo equipment and reproducing music files in
                > various formats, I feel bad that my initial inquiry about the sound
                > distortion on several CDs has prompted them both to go through so
                > much trouble on my behalf, but I certainly appreciate their efforts.
                >
                > Michael notes that two of the CDs in question were produced during
                > the same period. True, "Odds & Bits" is Timeless 55 & "Clarence
                > Williams & His Orchestra, vol. 1" is Timeless 56. Why, then, does
                > disk *one* of the CW set sound fine while disk *two* sounds like it
                > was recorded "in a hailstorm"? (wonderful metaphor, Howard) I don't
                > yet have vol. 2 in this CW series (Timeless 57). Can anyone report
                > on its sound quality? I do have most of the Timeless volumes just
                > before 55 and just after 56 and they all sound fine. At least in
                > the case of Timeless, the problem seems to be limited to just a
                > couple of CDs produced within a narrow time frame.
                >
                > What baffles me is why some Timeless & Retrieval CDs would have the
                > same problem. I know both companies are based in the Netherlands.
                > Do they share plants and personnel? Promise me, though, that you
                > won't travel to foreign soil to find out!
                >
                > Gerard
                >
                >
                > --- In RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Rader"
                > <Rader.Michael@w...> wrote:
                > > As Howard suggests, the mono button only just partly disguises the
                > problem. The real solution is to have something that can play
                > channels selectively. Some home cinema sets have a mono button, but
                > again this just combines. Also, some devices have a mono switch for
                > use with FM radio (weak transmitters), which can't be used for any
                > other functions, such as listening to CDs.
                > >
                > > Having said that, I have to confess that the "noise" on one
                > channel of the Jack Hylton CD was due mainly to a defective earplug.
                > The CD sounded far better on other headphones, even though these are
                > ancient and missing the foam rubber cushion. I'll continue to
                > experiment, maybe with the Cl. Williams this time, and report back.
                > >
                > > Cheers,
                > > Michael
                > >
                > > __________________________________________________________
                > > Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
                > > weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >


                __________________________________________________________
                Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
                weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
              • Bryan Wright
                ... The easiest (and cheapest) way to hear true mono if your amplifier doesn t have a switch is just to get a couple of Y-cables with standard RCA connectors.
                Message 7 of 13 , May 24 8:06 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  > > My question is how do you do it? Combine both channels into
                  > > mono or play
                  > > > just the one channel with less noise?

                  The easiest (and cheapest) way to hear true mono if your amplifier doesn't have
                  a switch is just to get a couple of Y-cables with standard RCA connectors. Get
                  the first RCA Y-cable that will take two RCA inputs (from your turntable or CD
                  player's outputs) and combine them to one RCA output. Then get a second RCA
                  Y-cable that takes one RCA input and splits it to two RCA outputs. Connect
                  these to the inputs on your amplifier. Voila -- instant mono! Each of the two Y-
                  cables costs about $6 at Radio Shack, so you can do the whole thing for about
                  $12 and the results are well worth it (I notice a tremendous difference when I'm
                  playing 78s). Essentially, you're combining the stereo signal into one mono
                  signel, then splitting it back to two identical mono signals so that you can hear it
                  out of both of your stereo speakers. I have a stereo/mono switch on my mixer,
                  but when I'm transferring records to CD, I bypass the mixer aand use this
                  cabling setup because the mixer sometimes introduces a tiny bit of noise.

                  Hope this helps!
                  Bryan
                • Bryan Wright
                  ... The easiest (and cheapest) way to hear true mono if your amplifier doesn t have a switch is just to get a couple of Y-cables with standard RCA connectors.
                  Message 8 of 13 , May 24 8:06 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > > My question is how do you do it? Combine both channels into
                    > > mono or play
                    > > > just the one channel with less noise?

                    The easiest (and cheapest) way to hear true mono if your amplifier doesn't have
                    a switch is just to get a couple of Y-cables with standard RCA connectors. Get
                    the first RCA Y-cable that will take two RCA inputs (from your turntable or CD
                    player's outputs) and combine them to one RCA output. Then get a second RCA
                    Y-cable that takes one RCA input and splits it to two RCA outputs. Connect
                    these to the inputs on your amplifier. Voila -- instant mono! Each of the two Y-
                    cables costs about $6 at Radio Shack, so you can do the whole thing for about
                    $12 and the results are well worth it (I notice a tremendous difference when I'm
                    playing 78s). Essentially, you're combining the stereo signal into one mono
                    signel, then splitting it back to two identical mono signals so that you can hear it
                    out of both of your stereo speakers. I have a stereo/mono switch on my mixer,
                    but when I'm transferring records to CD, I bypass the mixer aand use this
                    cabling setup because the mixer sometimes introduces a tiny bit of noise.

                    Hope this helps!
                    Bryan
                  • Michael Rader
                    For one thing, we don t have Radio Shack in continental Europe - I don t know for certain about the UK, but anyway there are equivalents and you can easily get
                    Message 9 of 13 , May 25 2:18 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      For one thing, we don't have Radio Shack in continental Europe - I don't know for certain about the UK, but anyway there are equivalents and you can easily get Y-cables in most chains tores like MediaMarkt, Saturn, Dixons and whatever else there is ;-).

                      However, when using this solution for mono recordings which have a stereo spread for extraneous noise, I would suggest hooking one output channel on the CD or record player - the one with less noise - with a y-chord to give two identical mono outputs. This is OK if your gear is located so that you can plug and unplug inputs and outputs easily. If it's sitting close to a wall in some shelves, as mine is, this is probably not the easiest solution, since depending on where more noise is, you might have to hook up anew for every record you want to play. Combining both channels into one retains the noise, even if it might be less obvious.
                      Cheers,

                      Michael

                      Karlsruhe, Germany



                      RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com schrieb am 24.05.05 17:09:48:
                      >
                      > > > My question is how do you do it? Combine both channels into
                      > > > mono or play
                      > > > > just the one channel with less noise?
                      >
                      > The easiest (and cheapest) way to hear true mono if your amplifier doesn't have
                      > a switch is just to get a couple of Y-cables with standard RCA connectors. Get
                      > the first RCA Y-cable that will take two RCA inputs (from your turntable or CD
                      > player's outputs) and combine them to one RCA output. Then get a second RCA
                      > Y-cable that takes one RCA input and splits it to two RCA outputs. Connect
                      > these to the inputs on your amplifier. Voila -- instant mono! Each of the two Y-
                      > cables costs about $6 at Radio Shack, so you can do the whole thing for about
                      > $12 and the results are well worth it (I notice a tremendous difference when I'm
                      > playing 78s). Essentially, you're combining the stereo signal into one mono
                      > signel, then splitting it back to two identical mono signals so that you can hear it
                      > out of both of your stereo speakers. I have a stereo/mono switch on my mixer,
                      > but when I'm transferring records to CD, I bypass the mixer aand use this
                      > cabling setup because the mixer sometimes introduces a tiny bit of noise.
                      >
                      > Hope this helps!
                      > Bryan
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >


                      __________________________________________________________
                      Mit WEB.DE FreePhone mit hoechster Qualitaet ab 0 Ct./Min.
                      weltweit telefonieren! http://freephone.web.de/?mc=021201
                    • aclassicjazzfan
                      ... 57). Can anyone report on its sound quality? I do have most of the Timeless volumes just before 55 and just after 56 and they all sound fine. At least
                      Message 10 of 13 , May 28 6:32 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In RedHotJazz@yahoogroups.com, "aclassicjazzfan"
                        <gfitzpatrick@u...> wrote:

                        > I don't yet have vol. 2 in the Clarence William series (Timeless
                        57). Can anyone report on its sound quality? I do have most of the
                        Timeless volumes just before 55 and just after 56 and they all sound
                        fine. At least in the case of Timeless, the problem seems to be
                        limited to just a couple of CDs produced within a narrow time frame.
                        >
                        > Gerard


                        I've just acquired "Clarence Williams & His Orchestra, vol. 2: 1933-
                        1937" (Timeless 57). I regret to report that all cuts on both disks
                        in this set have the same sort of sound distortions (short "buzzes"
                        or static) as does disk two in volume 1 (disk one sounds fine). This
                        seems to confirm Michael's theory that the Timeless CDs from 2001 had
                        a production problem. Fortunately, the noise is less intrusive on
                        vol. 2 than on vol. 1. In any case, the music is wonderful.

                        Gerard
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.