Re: [ARSCLIST] stereo or double mono

[Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This practice appeared to be very common in the early CD era. I'm guessing most folks felt that "the 
listener won't know" and didn't want to spring for full-track heads and the hassle of changing 
headblocks and electronics adjustments. Unfortunately, unless they aligned azimuth to tones on the 
tape, and the tape was slit well so the azimuth was constant throughout the reel (sometimes not so 
if a master is made from several live-to-fulltrack session tapes), there are audible problems that 
give the shortcut away.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lennick" <dlennick@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] stereo or double mono


> For starters, just listening in mono and stereo should tell you if there's any
> notable difference.
>
> Some labels used to reissue old recordings by playing mono tapes in stereo
> (Atco on LP, London on CD) and those sometimes had a bit of stereo spread (or
> the result of dirty playback heads or unbalanced channels) and sounded pretty
> slushy in mono.
>
> dl
>
> Dave Rice wrote:
>
> > Hi Arsc-L,
> >         Does anyone know any software or process where I could quickly
> > analyze a stereo audio file and find out if it has two different
> > tracks (stereo) or if it is just double mono. I have a number of
> > audio files that were recorded digitally which I suspect are double
> > mono but is there a way to make sure. It seems like a piece of
> > software could just subtract left from right and if the difference is
> > 0, then double mono.
> > Thanks,
> >
> > David Rice
> > Archivist
> > Democracy Now!
> > 87 Lafayette St.
> > New York, NY 10013
> > Phone: (212) 431-9090 x811
> > Fax: (212) 431-8858
> > Email: dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx