Mixing in mono.

CMolena

Active member
Hey guys.

Probably thats a subject that someone has already brought up...but anyways...

I'm currently using a kind of old single speaker to mix some songs. I've been doing 50% of the mix in this speaker and 50% in my earbudds. It turned out that, making most of the moves in mono made the mix sounding so much better for me when I listened to it in stereo (my earbudds and my car and some other sources I try to listen to just to check out if its allright).

Have anyone else had the same experience here? Would it be unprofessional of my part to mix a band's record like this? I always check the final results at my friend's studio aswell, in good proper studio speakers.
 
It's always suggested to check your mix in mono, mostly to see if there are any phase issues. But how can you know how it will sound in stereo until you listen that way?
 
Are you putting any stereo information in at all - panning and such - or is it really just mono straight up the middle? I suppose the earbuds would give you the panning information...

It's pretty common to do a significant amount of the mixing in mono, and I do it fairly regularly myself. I might have set the pans a bit during tracking and the rough mixing that happens in that process, but then I hit the master Mono button while I work out dynamics and EQ and levels, and then go back to stereo to double check and find tune the image, then back to mono to make sure it didn't get too fucked up by what I just did.

Outside of headphones or earbuds it's very rare that your listeners are even going to hear the full intended stereo age. Whether they're closer to one speaker than another, or too far from both, or turned sideways from them, most of the time people listen to music they end up hearing something much closer to the mono version of your mix. If we want our mixes to translate to sound good in as many situations as possible, then we really have to check that mono compatibility.

It's not just about phase, either. Stereo spread can hide frequency overlaps or build-ups, and even obscure our perception of relative levels. IDK how many times I've been close-but-not-quite on a mix where there was something just bugging me about it, then I hit mono button and go "Oh, that [instrument] is just too loud!"
 
It turned out that, making most of the moves in mono made the mix sounding so much better for me when I listened to it in stereo (my earbudds and my car and some other sources I try to listen to just to check out if its allright).

If you mean individual EQ and some types of per track processing...it may help...but you can't really do any "moves" that involve panning or how you want to treat the stereo sound stage, when you work in mono.
If you setup up everything in mono...and you make no changes to it when you listen in stereo...it's going to be mono.
Of course, if you are applying stereo processing while listening to it in mono...mmmm, that's kinda wonky...but that could explain it sounding differently/better when in stereo.

What "moves" are you referring to?
 
Are you putting any stereo information in at all - panning and such - or is it really just mono straight up the middle? I suppose the earbuds would give you the panning information...

It's pretty common to do a significant amount of the mixing in mono, and I do it fairly regularly myself. I might have set the pans a bit during tracking and the rough mixing that happens in that process, but then I hit the master Mono button while I work out dynamics and EQ and levels, and then go back to stereo to double check and find tune the image, then back to mono to make sure it didn't get too fucked up by what I just did.

Outside of headphones or earbuds it's very rare that your listeners are even going to hear the full intended stereo age. Whether they're closer to one speaker than another, or too far from both, or turned sideways from them, most of the time people listen to music they end up hearing something much closer to the mono version of your mix. If we want our mixes to translate to sound good in as many situations as possible, then we really have to check that mono compatibility.

It's not just about phase, either. Stereo spread can hide frequency overlaps or build-ups, and even obscure our perception of relative levels. IDK how many times I've been close-but-not-quite on a mix where there was something just bugging me about it, then I hit mono button and go "Oh, that [instrument] is just too loud!"

Yes, I do make panning decision even in mono. The guitar parts especially are the part of where I hear a huge difference. In stereo they sound okay, but then again, I put in mono and it sounds waaay loud. Then I just pull down the faders and I realize that the guitars where too loud all along.

And like you've said...other then headphones, its pretty hard for someone to have a perfect stereo image, right?
 
If you mean individual EQ and some types of per track processing...it may help...but you can't really do any "moves" that involve panning or how you want to treat the stereo sound stage, when you work in mono.
If you setup up everything in mono...and you make no changes to it when you listen in stereo...it's going to be mono.
Of course, if you are applying stereo processing while listening to it in mono...mmmm, that's kinda wonky...but that could explain it sounding differently/better when in stereo.

What "moves" are you referring to?

The moves are just moving the faders up or down and rarely a little bit of compression on something.

But I do hit the mono button with somethings in the mixed panned. Especially with guitars this can be really helpful, to me, at least.
 
Yes, I do make panning decision even in mono. The guitar parts especially are the part of where I hear a huge difference. In stereo they sound okay, but then again, I put in mono and it sounds waaay loud. Then I just pull down the faders and I realize that the guitars where too loud all along.

And like you've said...other then headphones, its pretty hard for someone to have a perfect stereo image, right?

Look...it's *normal* for a signal to sound louder in mono than stereo (when it's panned in L/Rstereo and not dead center)...so making all those decisions in mono, but then listening in stereo...well, if you think that works best, go for it, but to me, mono is just to do a quick check for phase issues and anything odd, otherwise all my mixing decisions are done in stereo (unless of course I actually want a mono mix).

Also...there is no such thing as a perfect stereo image.
IOW...this notion that stereo only has value when you are in the singular sweet spot (or with headphones) is not accurate.

When you are in a room, listening with your two ears to everyday life sounds...there is NEVER a *perfect" stereo sweet spot, yet we hear in stereo all the time.

Again...use mono if it works for you, but IMO, if the final mix is going to be a stereo mix, than mixing decisions and processing should be done while listening in stereo, not mono.
The fact that it sounds so different when you switch should tell you why I say the above. :)
 
I just got set up to doing it.. put one of a forgotten JBL 2105 into service, and I really like it.
Not so much the collapsed to mono phase thing, although I guess that's a good benni', but simply the 'lows out of the way, mids forward'. New to it, but seems very effective.
 
Have anyone else had the same experience here?
I don't even start panning anything until everything sounds great in mono. If it sounds good in mono, it will sound good once you start panning things out. The opposite is not necessarily the case.
 
I don't even start panning anything until everything sounds great in mono. If it sounds good in mono, it will sound good once you start panning things out. The opposite is not necessarily the case.

That's one way to start things....but then once you do pan out in stereo, usually the levels that were set in mono end up needing to be adjusted anyway to fit the stereo image.

I'm usually tracking already with a stereo mix in mind, and/or often I will also record stereo tracks...so to use mono for setting up the mix just doesn't work for me. I only use it to check how the stereo collapses...but not more than that.
 
I don't even start panning anything until everything sounds great in mono. If it sounds good in mono, it will sound good once you start panning things out. The opposite is not necessarily the case.

+1

If the perceived levels dip when I pan things out in stereo, I quite often find another place for that part or pan less severely. I find there is usually a way to make things work in both stereo and mono without making major changes to the mono mix. It seems odd to me to be having panning take precedence over compatability/mix translation in my mixes...

I find Mono is super-useful for levelling the low mids and bass in a mix, you can hear any buildups or lumpiness straight away, as has already been mentioned.
 
It seems odd to me to be having panning take precedence over compatability/mix translation in my mixes...

I find it odd that people think they need to be compatible for mono delivery systems and listening. :D ;)
Of course, using mono as a tool for checking things during mixing...is valid. A lot of folks do that, and it can certainly help identify any problems, as you build your...stereo mix.

These days, more than ever...stereo is what everyone is listening to.
From home systems, to car systems, to the millions of people walking around with earbuds or headphones.
All the streaming services use stereo...YouTube is in stereo...computers have two speakers usually.

I mean...besides AM talk radio...who listens to music in mono on any large scale, so that compatibility for mono is really needed...???
If anything...people are more concerned about digital format compatibility...MP3, WAV or some HD formats...etc.

Mono was considered a handicap back in the day...because our ears hear in stereo. Guys like Phil Spector would slather on the ambiance to try and get some depth/width.
When you listen to a mono mix, your ears are still trying to hear it in stereo.
Stereo panning is IMO a major creative tool for mixing, allowing you to build a more 3D image...and I certainly wouldn't trade that off for fear that some guy with a single car speaker won't hear the intended mix. :)

Of course...YMMV.
If you like mono...that's cool. I'm not trying to persuade anyone to not mix for mono.


.
 
Last edited:
I do all of my EQing, compression and mono effects in mono out of one speaker or the other. I probably spend the first 90% of a mix working in mono. For the last 10%, I switch to stereo, do my panning, do my final levels and do level automation. At this point, I rarely touch my EQ or compression again, except maybe at the bus level. Of course, if I want to change something, I do. No rules. That would be silly. This is just my general approach.

I mix this way because I am able to get separation and clarity in mono that I am happier with when I compare to my mixes that I did predominantly in stereo in the past. I really enjoy switching to stereo after doing all that work in mono to get everything working together. I found in the past that working in stereo from the start would give me a false sense of separation of instruments because of their panned position. I want that sort of separation when collapsed to mono. It has nothing to do with targeting mono systems. It just has to do with knowing that my mixes turn out far better this way.

There are different approaches to mixing and none are really "the one true and correct way". There is just what works for each individual.
 
It has nothing to do with targeting mono systems.

Right.

Setting things up in mono...even doing things with tracks "un-panned" as another approach rather than actual mono...can help you set up the stereo mix. Another thing may be soloing tracks...etc...etc.
Lots of techniques to trim off the fat and get things settled in...but at the end, you still pan out and finish mixing in stereo for stereo delivery..

The thing I didn't connect with earlier was this notion it made more sense give up on panning for the sake of having a mono-compatible mix...???
I'm just not seeing who that mono mix is for, based on how most people listen to music

You don't need to have some exceptional stereo system or to always be in that singular stereo sweet spot to appreciate the wider bigger image of a stereo mix.
I'm just saying that for me...mixing is about creativity and getting a rich/full sound stage from the mix...and not about worrying over any mono compatibility.
 
Just adding - And hoping that *I* didn't cause any misunderstanding in there (though I admit to not going over the whole thread in detail).

Getting a bunch of instruments to sound great together in mono - pre-panning if you will - yeah, it just makes a better mix. Even once a mix is "stereo" all those frequencies that would be potentially "stomping on each other" are still present in the room (another reason why "everything sounds fine" with headphones). If you can get spectral separation in mono, you're going to have spectral and more effective spatial separation in stereo.

Great sounding mixes tend to still sound quite good in mono. Frequently, it's because they were sounding quite good in mono first.

I know a lot of engineers that chase the mix that's in their head instead of letting the mix be what it wants to be (sorry... it's late).

Going for gigantic guitar tones and what not -- Solo'd, those tones might sound fantabulous. In the mix, maybe "too big" -- In mono, nothing but a squishy mess. Get those guitars to sit well with everything else in mono and although they might not sound "gigantic" in the finished mix, they don't sound distracting - and "gigantic" is only some early reflections away.

Blah, blah, blah - Working in mono allows you to better zero in on what serves the mixture, rather than working on "two different mixes with a common center" (sorry - it's late and it's been a long day).
 
I know a lot of engineers that chase the mix that's in their head instead of letting the mix be what it wants to be (sorry... it's late).

Naaa...that's a valid comment.
I think each mix has a natural path it wants to follow. The best you can do is figure out what it is, and then let it go that way.
 
I don't know about a daw, but mixing with an analog console starts in the tracking stage.

Dealing with musicians, real instruments, and headphone mixes starts determining the mix direction early on.

I do check in mono, but the majority of mixing is in stereo. ....for me anyway.
 
The thing I didn't connect with earlier was this notion it made more sense give up on panning for the sake of having a mono-compatible mix...???

I didn't say that though ;) I'm definitely not an advocate of 'giving up' on panning, that's absurd. Perhaps I didn't make it clear what I meant there. Using the word 'compatability' was perhaps a mistake.

What I was trying to get at is that a good mono mix will work when you pan it out, but a stereo mix won't always work well in mono, even if it sounds great in stereo.
It's not for anyone (because it's rare for people to listen in mono, with a single speaker), but I have found it really useful. It highlights buildups/cancellations that stereo will hide, so it's a little tricky to balance things sometimes, but thats the point for me because it makes me work a little harder on my mixes.
So...it makes sense to me to do the majority of processing and levelling in mono.

The buildups/cancellations I notice mixing mainly in mono are mostly the kind of things that bothered me when I listened to my mixes on other systems when I mixed in stereo all the way, so it's helped me improve my mixing loads.
 
Last edited:
IDK about "...makes me work harder..." For me, everything seems to go easier.

The tracking process is mostly mono. Sometimes I'll pan the instrument I'm playing for a tiny bit of "more me" effect, but it'll go back to center when I move to the next instrument. I'm forced to find space for everything via arrangement first, then "source choices" like mic choice and placement. By the time tracking is done, the mix is all pretty much right there. Control some dynamics, adjust the frequency spectrum here and there, and it sounds like something.

Then I pan it out and add some effects and then hit the Master mono button to make sure I haven't fucked anything up, and make some adjustments if necessary. Un-monoize and it's done. It sounds great in the studio, good in the car, decent on the crappy PA at the bar, pretty damn good on my friend's "stereo" that's 4 times further from us than the speakers are from each other and is kind of over to my left, and fucking wild in good headphones.

I guess maybe it comes from so much live mixing experience where everything is pretty much mono by default, and fancy panning tricks can't help much, but for a long time I was panning things out and around right at the start of a mix, and it didn't always work out.

A large part of it is just another perspective on the mix. I like to walk away and go wash dishes, or stand outside the screen door, too. It helps. If you've never tried it, it might be worth a shot. Maybe it won't work for you, but it does for many.

Course, there are perfectly valid reasons to ignore mono comparability altogether. If you're the only one ever gonna hear it ( ;) ) or want to make a real hardcore audiophile statement. I swing that way at times myself, but frankly I do want to be able to pull up some of my shit on any system available and not cringe too much, or feel like I have to make excuses.
 
Back
Top