Merging cabs?

[lfm]

Perhaps, I wrote "it's at least a tad stereo when you use different cabs, isn't it?" though, and the definition of mono is the sound mixed in to a single channel, so it's not mono

How meaningful it is in the sense of being stereo is subjective, I would say. You can take a mono track, add stereo effects and call that stereo, so why not two different sounding tracks without effects? When does it become meaningful? Some people just copy and paste the same guitar track, EQ and pan them and call that stereo

I think you are absolutely right.

You did say "tad stereo" which is fine. If you add a 100% wet delay to one speaker you will also feel it's much more depth and everything that goes with "stereo" as well. Even eq a bit different or that speakers have different response is enough IMO.
- "tad stereo" enhancing depth and width of material

Even surround stuff use a lot of this fake processing with delays and stuff.

My surround phones has different settings delays if Sport or Game mode etc that fit source material if one an arena or something else. All fake really.
- what matters is how it is perceived

[Uncle E]

Mid-side is a nice way to do it. Definitely better for audiences, but I also prefer it at home or in the studio. Basically 100% amp in the middle and 100% ambient effects coming out of the sides.

[YnJ]

eq a bit different or that speakers have different response is enough IMO

I don't have two identical cabs, all different cabs with different speakers. I was playing last night at home with my stereo cab, as I call it, a Framus Dragon 4x12 I have mounted Celestion K100 speakers on the right side and Rockdriver Vintage speakers on the left side in. They blend very well together, they also sound very different from eachother

Of course, the stereo effect isn't that noticable when the speakers are placed that close together in the same cab, you tend to hear the blend as a single sound, I would still say it's stereo though

[BertKoor]

I would still call that double-mono