Monitors: Narrow vs Mono

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Caffrey" <mike@monsterisland.com> wrote in message
news:9b30ebb8.0410170141.7b0533bf@posting.google.com...
>I find that monitoring in mono almst always leads me to boosting
> tracks that are hard panned too much. Tongiht I moved my tiny Auratone
> like speakers so that they were about 1/4 inch apart. Does anyone else
> prefer monitoring with a narrow placement over mono? What differnces
> have you expereinced this way? I havent had acahnce to see how the
> mixes translate some place else, but when switching through monitors
> while mixing this semmed to be much more effective than hitting the
> mono button.

I don't really understand the question. Mono is totally different from
"narrow stereo" no matter how close you place the speakers. It's apples and
oranges. And it won't help you test for thing "collapsing" at all I wouldn't
think. I may be wrong but I certainly wouldn't do that for true mono
testing. But by all means, try it and see if you like it. That will tell you
more than all the opinions in the world. I think you're the same guy what
wrote about monitors to your back (another thing I would never do on
purpose) but then again, if you like it and it works for you and the people
who listens to your stuff, go for it.

p.s. I realize after writing this you might be using it as a "3rd system" in
addition to regular stereo and mono and if it helps you in that way fine.
But as a replacement for checking mono, no.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi Mike - when mixing rock records, I'm always hitting the mono
button. It's specifically handy for music with hard left/right guitar
tracks. The mono button really tells you where the hard panned
material sits in the mix.

I also like to crank the music (in stereo) and walk down the hall to
another room - the more objectivity, the better!