Hey You Lovely Garagepunkers and Podcasters- Something has been bugging me lately and I just wanted to see if anybody cares about this subject. Most of the podcasts here at Garagepunk.com are in Mono, though most of the music recorded after 1965 is mixed in Stereo. I understand that a Mono MP3 is much smaller in size, uses less internet server space and is much quicker to download; but a lot of the music gets compromised and even instruments and voices lost in the process of changing the Stereo signal into Mono. Does this bother anybody else besides myself? By no means am I upset with what I've heard here at Garagepunk.com, quite the contrary. Since we're all playing fairly rare music, lots of unheard old and new bands, I just figured it should sound it's very best for the listener. Lemme know what you think.... Brother Pantichrist

my vote goes for mono. I started podacasting in mono long ago and, as Kopper says, for the same archive weight you get a better sound in mono ... besides, about 70% of what I play is mono!

I like mono, except for certain songs that really play with the 2 Speakers alot ... i.e. there's little fun to listen "the gift" by the Velvet Underground (from the record "White Light/White Heat") in mono, because actually on one speaker there is basically just the voice narrating a story, while on the other one there's the beautiful bass-line blubbering along ... well it works in mono, but loses a certain "feel". Same thing happens with some early Jimmy Hendrix Experience recordings (third stone from the moon, all that stuff) ... but hey: Lo-Fi kicks ass (as long as the MP3s are above 192 kbps, because if they're less you can't listen to it ALOUD). like here's an example on how NOT to compress music into unhearability: this youtube-thing is recorded just way below the level of cozyness

I've had a few issues converting songs in stereo to mono. I think I did what I could with them and played them shits anyway. I guess I don't really have a preference but at the same time I think it's nice to have the listener hear the song as it was intended to be heard.

Interesting subject this one...
This might sound weird but the podcasts from here sound "warm" as opposed to full blown 256kps or 320kps Mp3's that sound crystal clear but somehow flat and lifeless.

I guess they get close to that dirty tape sound but without the hiss and stretching you get with tape by using using a lower bit rate.

i can't say I've really noticed the mixes getting squashed by the conversion to mono but that might explain why sometimes I think the engineer or band should be shot for screwing up the mix that badly. And like others have said if you want to hear the good stuff go and buy it.

I like doing the show in mono, it always sounds just fine to me.

I asked Brian Wilson about this, but all he said was, "Eh? Talk in my other ear."

Like Kopper said, we aren't looking for our 'casts to sound like the source, Panti. If our listeners dig what they hear hopefully they go out and order that particular Voodoo Rhythm release. I never have had any problems with the quality of 80 kbps mono. In fact I have been pleasantly surprised at how good it sounds. Your eardrums have been psychodelesized by all that good Ganja and DMT.....and thats a good thing my friend.

Okay, nice quick responses.

I too prefer MONO when things are mixed in MONO.

We play a shitload of Voodoo Rhythm releases as well as other productions that the Sonic Nightmare team have produced which are all mixed in Stereo. We spend enormous amounts of time to make these records sound as good as possible, and most productions use stereo effects as well as panning instruments throughout a stereo spectrum. So by the time our show gets squeezed down to a MONO 80 kbps I am 100% sure it sounds inferior to the source, and a 160 stereo kbps would surely be less compromising to a final Stereo mix.

But hey, as long as you other podcasters don't mind, then I guess I can get used to it! Where's my beer?

“Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds” -Walt Whitman

I prefer mono.

I've only experienced problems with converting a stereo MP3 into a mono one with maybe one or two songs, where it ended up with static or one channel drowned out the other. Personally, I think the mono podcasts sound fine. Better than AM radio, even. Stereo MP3s often sound worse, in fact, because you split the channels and each channel has a lower bit rate. For example, an 80 kbps stereo MP3 is actually 40 kbps per channel, which is why you hear the compression artifacts in the music (that swishing sound). We would have to rip our shows at 160 kbps stereo to replicate the sound of our 80 kbps shows, and what would it gain you? Well, for one, it would take you twice as long to download each episode and take up that twice as much room on your hard drive or iPod... and it wouldn't necessarily sound any better! Also, the podcasts aren't intended to include pristeen copies of the music... FREDDI is right. We'd rather folks go out and buy the records, CDs, or downloads from the bands if they want the best quality sound. So think of the podcasts as more of a sampling of what's out there rather than an aurally perfect copy of it.

By the way, ALL of our shows are supposed to be ripped in mono, so that the audio is consistent when listening from one program to the next.

Guessin' my ears ain't as finely tuned as yers, my fellow music fiend...cuz I really can't tell any difference once I'm in full tilt garagepunk podcast party-time position...

...most o' the 'casts are in such shitty mp3 bitrates that mono vs. stereo is of no concern...

Mmm... I think podcasts radio and Garagepunk.com is above all a good chance to knowing new music and bands.
Then if someone heard and discover something interesting, he better search for the CD or LP,and buy it.
Well,maybe most of the stuff played it's not easy to find,but wishing them,visiting records shops or mail order catalogue,
it's still a charming things about music. Anyway I connected my PC audio output in my HI-FI and ain't not that horrible result.