The best way to sample a stereo record into mono

What's your thoughts on this? I heard that it's better to sample either left or right channel only because it avoids phasing effects, but what if i want to sample the whole full sound of the recording?

you can use a sound editor software (like wavelab or soundforge or audacity... there's a lot) to record the two channels (L+R) in mono and then send the result to the sampler (or sample the sound directly in the sampler/mpc via usb or via midi dump)
or you can use use a mixer (a mixing board, not a dj mixer): set the pan level to "center" to catch the sound of the two channels in mono, and send the sound of the record into your sampler. if you're sampling a turntable you have to use a preamp or a dj mixer to amplificate the signal, if you're using a cd palyer you can plug it directly on the mixing board (line in) without a preamp/dj mixer
or you can use a mono record (but you have to use a mono cardridge on your turntable to obtain a "correct" mono sound)

IMO you need a third option in this poll

3. Depends on the source material.

Thats what I would vote for.
Some instruments sounds better on just 1 side others need a mix of both sides to sound full. I got some records were the Kick is different on both sides (left side more bassfrequencies, right side more kick(high) frequencies) so you can choose: 1both for a full sound or left for bass or right for just a kick. Or another example are Hihats or snares. some records got the dry sound more on the left and a reverbish sound more on the right. you can choose by yourself.

The flexible way is to record the sample to a DAW on two mono tracks (each side has its own track. pan centered) . Now you can play it and get the best sound by mixing these channels till you like it.
This can also be done with a hardwaremixer like thx said but its easier in a DAW cause you can set a loop around the sample and complete concentrate on the sound. If you do it just with a turntable and a hardware mixer you'll need to cue back while mixing the sound (not comfotable).

peace

^
that's right
thanks Peter

Pete, i understand what you are saying, but i heard from some people that summing (mixing) two channels (stereo) into one mono channels makes a flat, dull sounding sample due to the phasing effects, so it's always better to sample just left or right channel... I tested it on a few recordings and it seems to be true...

zork wrote:Pete, i understand what you are saying, but i heard from some people that summing (mixing) two channels (stereo) into one mono channels makes a flat, dull sounding sample due to the phasing effects, so it's always better to sample just left or right channel... I tested it on a few recordings and it seems to be true...

There shouldn't be any phase issues if the record has been mixed properly. Mix engineers worth their salt will make sure recordings translate in mono. Too many TVs, for example, are still in mono. It would be folly to limit the distribution to stereo playback only.

Another thing to consider is early stereo recordings had unorthodox panning. The Beatles, for example, had their LPs in mono in some countries and stereo in others. "In my Life" by the Beatles, has a wonderful harpsichord solo by George Martin. Get a stereo recording of that and isolate the right channel only. Its Bass Guitar and Drums. No bleed from the baroque take (which, incidentally, was recorded slow as he couldn't play at that tempo!). But by no means are the mono copies (sold in the US I think) any worse in terms of dynamics and phase coherence.

As Peter rightly points out, it depends on the source material. My link to the Alice Monopak was in reply to your thread title. This device is "better" than the computer solution as you are keeping everything analogue up until your sampling.

zork wrote:
Pete, i understand what you are saying, but i heard from some people that summing (mixing) two channels (stereo) into one mono channels makes a flat, dull sounding sample due to the phasing effects, so it's always better to sample just left or right channel... I tested it on a few recordings and it seems to be true...
-----
not necessarily true...
but yes it could provoke some phase problems
but if you want to sample the sound of the two channels...
i don't know very well
i have used a boss rc-20 pedal in some cases, it has a stereo in and a mono out, but is better to sample the source directly in the mpc because every device in the chain alters the original sound
but the samples i made with the rc-20 are sounding good
no phase problems

zork wrote:Pete, i understand what you are saying, but i heard from some people that summing (mixing) two channels (stereo) into one mono channels makes a flat, dull sounding sample due to the phasing effects, so it's always better to sample just left or right channel... I tested it on a few recordings and it seems to be true...

Like I said. It depends on the signal itself. Yes you are right, it CAN sound dull or sound strange because of phase issues. But on the other hand:

1. There is a standard in recording/mixing that every record should be able to be played mono (kitchen radio test so to say) without extreme phasing issues. Thats what the correlation meter is for.

2. If there is some strange sound nonetheless you will hear it and thats the way to go. It doesnt matter if you mix the channels or do other things to the signal path. If it sounds dope you will hear it and if it sounds dull or strange change the setting till it sounds dope.


If you using the method I mentioned above (recording 2 indipendent channels to DAW first) you can also shift the right or left channel a few samples or ms and get rid of some phasing issues (by getting phasing issues in other frequencies )


peace

Shostakovich wrote:the mono copies (sold in the US I think)

in the 60s there are many records pressed in mono, in all countries
stereo hi-fi systems were not so popular at the time
many peoples got a mono turntable in the 60s

Shostakovich wrote:This device is "better" than the computer solution as you are keeping everything analogue up until your sampling.

Yeah you are probably right. Right now if I need a sum i'm using Wavelab, but i guess it's better for the warmth of the sound to do it analog than in the digital realm.

thx wrote:

Shostakovich wrote:the mono copies (sold in the US I think)

in the 60s there are many records pressed in mono, in all countries
stereo hi-fi systems were not so popular at the time
many peoples got a mono turntable in the 60s

Agreed, but there weren't many releases which were MONO ONLY in one country and STEREO ONLY in another.

It was STEREO ONLY in the US and most fans agree the UK MONO versions sounded much better. That is why they fetch more on the s/h market than the American pressings.

zork wrote:

Shostakovich wrote:This device is "better" than the computer solution as you are keeping everything analogue up until your sampling.

Yeah you are probably right. Right now if I need a sum i'm using Wavelab, but i guess it's better for the warmth of the sound to do it analog than in the digital realm.

Its just more practical to have it out of the box. It means you can bypass the PC and the unnecessary AD/DA processes.

thx wrote:you can use a mono record (but you have to use a mono cardridge on your turntable to obtain a "correct" mono sound)

Nonsense.

If you need ALL the characteristics then both chans.