|
|
Post by wreck on Aug 2, 2013 9:34:48 GMT -6
So I have been an amateur engineer for probably 25 years. The first 20 I just worked on my own music. But I just did my own thing until a few years ago when I realized these communities existed. New worlds opened up - side chain comp, compressor induced dynamics, etc. Somehow it's really easy to ignore things you don't understand until someone says it just right. I have been interested in m/s processing, but I didn't know I had the tools to do it, then yesterday, I saw a video using IK Multimedia plugs doing m/s processing. Those were some of the first dang plugs I ever bought. Last night I opened them up, started sweeping the lows out of the sides and comping the the low end down the middle and I couldn't believe it. Such a powerful tool. But what are the benefits and pitfalls of M/S processing? How do you guys use it beyond what I tried last night? And what are some of the things I might think sound cool but ultimately dont? Thanks in advance!
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 2, 2013 10:02:04 GMT -6
this is pretty new to me also, I'm interested in hearing applications and approaches also? but what i've messed with i'm really liking, the idea that i can control the width of the stereo image after the fact is just cool as shit! M=C12 clone/S=ribbon on acoustic, sounds sweet, and it never hurts to be afforded the ability to collapse to mono problem free as a no brainer 8)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2013 13:53:42 GMT -6
So I have been an amateur engineer for probably 25 years. The first 20 I just worked on my own music. But I just did my own thing until a few years ago when I realized these communities existed. New worlds opened up - side chain comp, compressor induced dynamics, etc. Somehow it's really easy to ignore things you don't understand until someone says it just right. I have been interested in m/s processing, but I didn't know I had the tools to do it, then yesterday, I saw a video using IK Multimedia plugs doing m/s processing. Those were some of the first dang plugs I ever bought. Last night I opened them up, started sweeping the lows out of the sides and comping the the low end down the middle and I couldn't believe it. Such a powerful tool. But what are the benefits and pitfalls of M/S processing? How do you guys use it beyond what I tried last night? And what are some of the things I might think sound cool but ultimately dont? Thanks in advance! would love to watch the video. Can you post the link ?  |
|
|
|
Post by wreck on Aug 2, 2013 14:16:07 GMT -6
So I have been an amateur engineer for probably 25 years. The first 20 I just worked on my own music. But I just did my own thing until a few years ago when I realized these communities existed. New worlds opened up - side chain comp, compressor induced dynamics, etc. Somehow it's really easy to ignore things you don't understand until someone says it just right. I have been interested in m/s processing, but I didn't know I had the tools to do it, then yesterday, I saw a video using IK Multimedia plugs doing m/s processing. Those were some of the first dang plugs I ever bought. Last night I opened them up, started sweeping the lows out of the sides and comping the the low end down the middle and I couldn't believe it. Such a powerful tool. But what are the benefits and pitfalls of M/S processing? How do you guys use it beyond what I tried last night? And what are some of the things I might think sound cool but ultimately dont? Thanks in advance! would love to watch the video. Can you post the link ? Gladly: - hope it helps. What i never really understood when I originally obtained these plugs is that when you engage the ms or lr, you basically have two different eqs going even though they look exactly the same. When you hit ms, then select m, the eq is impacting the mids, then when you select s, even though the eq doesn't appear to change, it is a different eq and you are not impacting what you did to the mids any longer. It probably said that all in the manual, but .... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2013 14:28:52 GMT -6
very cool. thanks wreck.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 2, 2013 14:34:13 GMT -6
Here's the long and short of it... agree if you want, I'm only speaking from 3 decades of experience. Every time I write something I look at it and say "What the heck does that guy know anyhow?" And I'm always learning too!
Ok. Here goes. Are you ready? Am I ready? Prolly not, and that's never stopped me before.
MS is bollocks (bull testicles which is the English way of saying BS).
It is an artificial stereo effect. It is a psycho-acoustic effect at best. It can sound interesting but remember, it's effect is lost the minute you go to mono or you anywhere but exactly in the center of the stereo field. Why? Well, the "sides" is in phase on one side and out of phase on the other. They cancel each other out in mono or within a certain distance from the sweet spot.
That being said, There is an easy way to achieve it if you wish to know if it's right for you... besides the plug-in route mentioned which can manipulate the effect.
Record a mono cardioid center microphone aimed at the sound source. Record a figure of 8 microphone that is 90º to the center capsule (sideways, not up and down) in exact proximity to the center mic. This is easier in a DAW than tape. You know have 2 tracks recorded. Duplicate the figure of 8 track. Flip the phase on the duplicate. Pan the original 8 to the right, pan the duplicate to the left. Keep the cardioid in the center. Make sure all 3 are at the same level for your starting point. Adjust levels from there.
Now, ask yourself, WHY BOTHER? When coincident AB, XY and ORTF stereo sound better and Blumlein is even better.
-Grumpy old man shutting up now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2013 14:38:20 GMT -6
I suppose the beauty is that you know you will have zero phase issues in mono. Also, in stereo it lets you have a solidly panned mono source to which you can fade in a stereo image. I like m/s!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2013 15:12:31 GMT -6
Well, ok, but that is not the whole story really.
One can convert a stereo signal to M/S anytime easily, analog or digital, affect mid and side signals differently with, let's say EQ and compression, than convert back to regular stereo. This opens up completely new possibilities that you do not have in standard L/R stereo. You can e.g. balance the stereo width of the signal by just manipulating volumes, you can focus manipulations on center signals, e.g. bass or vocals, in a way you can not in L/R stereo.
It's just a bunch of possibilities you have, not so obvious options. And you don't need any special gear for it.
I guess one can not have enough tools for sound manipulation, right? So it is useful to know about stuff like this, even if you use it rarely - sometimes it might just fit the bill...
Best regards,
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by grummy on Aug 2, 2013 15:51:26 GMT -6
I've noticed so far in this thread folks using the term M/S to refer to completely different things. The thread starter began the thread talking about Mid/Side processing and some of the responders are talking about the mid/side as a mic configuration/technique.
Mid/Side processing is something you can do to any stereo signal. It's the process of effecting (commonly EQ or compression) the centre audio differently than the sides. Technically you could record using a blumlein configuration and then use M/S processing to that recording after the fact. A common rout is EQing more sparkle and cutting the bottom in the sides and boosting sub bass in the centre.
Mid/Side as a mic technique is (as mentioned above) using a cardioid pattern on axis and a fig 8 pattern off axis (facing the sides) with each mic diaphragm as close to each other as possible. Then (as mentioned above) duplicating the side mic, inverting the phase of duplicated track and then panning them hard L/R. More often than not I find I can get a more exciting 3D rich stereo picture from XY, blumlein, or spaced pair than M/S, but there are benefits to MS. As me mentioned earlier it collapses to mono with absolutely no phase issues. You can adjust your stereo width after the fact. You can also use the signals as an LCR.
I like usin M/S mic technique when grabbing sound effects in the field. If I'm in a forest I don't always know what's going to fly by. With MS I'm essentially grabbing a mono spot and a stereo recording simultaneously. I can choose after the fact when editing weather any given grab is better use to me as a mono spot effect or an interesting stereo sample.
My all time fave in the field is recording using a double mid side configuration. This way with a small footprint and only three mics I'm capturing in surround. Tracking three channels after the fact I can choose to use the recording in 5.0, quad, LCR, stereo, or mono. Great results from using Shoeps's free double mid side decoder plugin. It's pretty powerful and impressive. To understand double mid side better check out Shoeps's website.
|
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Aug 2, 2013 16:14:55 GMT -6
To be fair, MS is often used with a Cardiod Mid mic but an Omni Mid supposedly provides a much better mono translation as it's not a case of some ambiance or none. I say supposedly because I've yet to do it. I like my Blumleins or ORTF.
MS or MS processing isn't something I use alot. If you need a brighter snare and you don't want the cymbals getting razor-sharp, sometimes a little shelf on the Mid channel can help. I low cut the Sides a little more than the Mid, too. Nothing crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 2, 2013 20:16:05 GMT -6
Here's the long and short of it... agree if you want, I'm only speaking from 3 decades of experience. Every time I write something I look at it and say "What the heck does that guy know anyhow?" And I'm always learning too!
Ok. Here goes. Are you ready? Am I ready? Prolly not, and that's never stopped me before.
MS is bollocks (bull testicles which is the English way of saying BS).
It is an artificial stereo effect. It is a psycho-acoustic effect at best. It can sound interesting but remember, it's effect is lost the minute you go to mono or you anywhere but exactly in the center of the stereo field. Why? Well, the "sides" is in phase on one side and out of phase on the other. They cancel each other out in mono or within a certain distance from the sweet spot.
That being said, There is an easy way to achieve it if you wish to know if it's right for you... besides the plug-in route mentioned which can manipulate the effect.
Record a mono cardioid center microphone aimed at the sound source. Record a figure of 8 microphone that is 90º to the center capsule (sideways, not up and down) in exact proximity to the center mic. This is easier in a DAW than tape. You know have 2 tracks recorded. Duplicate the figure of 8 track. Flip the phase on the duplicate. Pan the original 8 to the right, pan the duplicate to the left. Keep the cardioid in the center. Make sure all 3 are at the same level for your starting point. Adjust levels from there.
Now, ask yourself, WHY BOTHER? When coincident AB, XY and ORTF stereo sound better and Blumlein is even better.
-Grumpy old man shutting up now. My take on it has been that it's more shit to screw up. I tend to leave it alone. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2013 23:06:17 GMT -6
I have enough to futz with as it is without ms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 2, 2013 23:19:50 GMT -6
I have enough to futz with as it is without ms. Precisely. |
|
|
|
Post by cenafria on Aug 3, 2013 1:43:20 GMT -6
I've had great results with the MS micing technique for piano, overheads, room ambience as well as for recording an entire band.
I've done very little with MS processing. It does seem to open many new options for mastering versus strict AB processing.
|
|
|
|
Post by lolo on Aug 3, 2013 2:32:15 GMT -6
If it aint broken dont fix it. My take on it. Otherwise i'll prob screw it up  |
|
|
|
Post by Hudsonic on Aug 3, 2013 17:05:32 GMT -6
Don't be scared of MS mic technique. It has two main benefits and you have to decide if these benefits matter to you and your work.
1. Mid signal is always on axis with the source.
2. Stereo width can be manipulated on the spot or in post at your mixer or at your computer.
So, for example, recording room or drum ambience with a m/s set-up means that you can widen or narrow the sound pickup. Widening has the effect of opening up your stereo picture a la the Spector "wall of sound." Narrowing ups intensity.
Same thing with vocals when you have a m/s set-up placed behind the main vocal mic. Open up those vocals in to a panorama.
If you don't have need or interest to vary the stereo picture acoustically with a mic, then bypass this.
The main users of m/s used to be broadcasters who required mono compatibility. FM broadcasters have pretty much abandoned strict mono compatibility rules these days.
I use m/s in a concert hall situation to widen the stereo picture when using a m/s stereo mic (Sanken CMS-2) as a main pair.
|
|
|
|
Post by grummy on Aug 4, 2013 15:28:08 GMT -6
If it aint broken dont fix it. My take on it. Otherwise i'll prob screw it up Sometimes it ain't broke but it can be better. That's usually why I do any kind of processing. It's also the reason I will at times make choices to deliberately give my self options later on. When tracking an instrument or part I can't actually place it in a mix until actually at the mixing stage. I might want to wait until mixing stage to figure out exactly how wide a stereo spread I would like an instrument to have. If I'm out getting random sound effects grabs I'm usually doing it because I've come across an interesting or useful sound. At that point I have no idea if I'll actually use the sound let alone what for. I might get hired to do sound design on a show where the post mixer prefers a mono cue that she/he can pan wherever they like. They also might want the effect in full surround. If I set up the mics in DMS in an interesting place for an hour I might pick up some useful mono centre stuff that the post house can pan wherever they like. At the same time have plenty of useful surround ambiance in between that can be used. To me MS is a tool like anything else in my arsenal. Has nothing more to do with broke or fixed. And like the other tools I have if something is broke (or could just use improvement) and I can fix it with a tool, weather straight mono processing, stereo processing, or MS processing, that's what I'll use. I don't use MS processing all that often but when I deem it useful I'll go there. Without a worry of screwing it up any more than non MS processing. EQ, compression, or otherwise. I just use the same things I do to judge any processing, my ears & my brain. Sure there's a tiny bit of science, (like the rest of what we do), but it's still pretty far from rocket science. I can mess up a track just as easy with non MS processing. If I were that worried I'd just not try anything. I'll end with saying that screwing up has been one of the best tools for my personal development. Screwing up has possibly taught me more as a composer & sound designer than any teacher has (mind you, I never went to school for this career though). If I had I'm sure screwing up would still prove to be a good teacher on top. I can be pretty good at screwing up, M/S or not. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Aug 4, 2013 16:19:18 GMT -6
If it aint broken dont fix it. My take on it. Otherwise i'll prob screw it up Sometimes it ain't broke but it can be better. That's usually why I do any kind of processing. It's also the reason I will at times make choices to deliberately give my self options later on. When tracking an instrument or part I can't actually place it in a mix until actually at the mixing stage. I might want to wait until mixing stage to figure out exactly how wide a stereo spread I would like an instrument to have. i could not agree with grummys post any more! for me, I do a lot of my creating during the tracking process, i am not an up front commitment guy, not even on compression, i capture as true as i possibly can, and start coloring after the fact. I do see why the producers and bang it out guys commit up front though. I record for me, with no hurry or pressure what so ever. I'm liking what i'm hearing from MS mic'ing, and i'm loving the flexibility, seems especially powerful when dealing with a dense mix. |
|
|
|
Post by btreim on Aug 5, 2013 11:29:56 GMT -6
MS is my favorite way to record someone playing guitar and singing at the same time. It allows you to get a centered vocal, but keeps a little stereo information from the guitar. I've pretty much every other stereo micing technique and this by far has been the best. I honestly don't do much MS processing, but when I do, I tend to like it a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by wreck on Aug 7, 2013 8:51:20 GMT -6
MS is my favorite way to record someone playing guitar and singing at the same time. It allows you to get a centered vocal, but keeps a little stereo information from the guitar. I've pretty much every other stereo micing technique and this by far has been the best. I honestly don't do much MS processing, but when I do, I tend to like it a lot. I really have never done ms micing. I guess I haven't done much singer with an acoustic type recording. I definitely need to experiment with it though. |
|
|
|
Post by btreim on Aug 7, 2013 8:57:03 GMT -6
MS is my favorite way to record someone playing guitar and singing at the same time. It allows you to get a centered vocal, but keeps a little stereo information from the guitar. I've pretty much every other stereo micing technique and this by far has been the best. I honestly don't do much MS processing, but when I do, I tend to like it a lot. I really have never done ms micing. I guess I haven't done much singer with an acoustic type recording. I definitely need to experiment with it though. You should! Even if it's just to decide that you don't like it. It's always good to have a bunch of different techniques down, so that when you're presented with certain issues in tracking you have ways to deal with them. |
|
|
|
Post by wreck on Aug 8, 2013 8:17:46 GMT -6
So I have been messing with the processing aspect of m/s on a few different songs. The one thing that I notice that makes a bid difference is putting a m/s eq on the drum buss and sweeping the low end out of the sides so it's focused down the middle. I really really like this move. Then I generally try a slight bump in the highs on the sides only and typically really like that as well. Conceptually I understand that this may all be some kind of mind trick, but it certainly works for me. I do need to collapse it all down to mono and check it. I don't really understand how you can take a bass drum that is panned center and make it more centered by sweeping it out of the sides when all you have are sides, but somehow my brain seems to hear it that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Aug 9, 2013 3:34:51 GMT -6
I use the Brainworx m/s EQ thing a lot. When in mixing stuff that I didn't record or produce. Sometimes "stereo" synths or pads are just barely stereo...like a lot of the information is actually mono or in the middle. You can use the m/s EQ to treat just the center channel and get some muck out of the way of the vocal or snare or whatever is there but the sides of the signal stay true to the original sound. Used judiciously it can be quite effective.
Sometimes it's pretty cool to really tweak a sound and let it get phasey...mono be damned. Make em twist their heads around!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Aug 9, 2013 6:34:31 GMT -6
I use the Brainworx m/s EQ thing a lot. When in mixing stuff that I didn't record or produce. Sometimes "stereo" synths or pads are just barely stereo...like a lot of the information is actually mono or in the middle. You can use the m/s EQ to treat just the center channel and get some muck out of the way of the vocal or snare or whatever is there but the sides of the signal stay true to the original sound. Used judiciously it can be quite effective. Sometimes it's pretty cool to really tweak a sound and let it get phasey...mono be damned. Make em twist their heads around!!! I find myself using m/s processing more like this ^. Cleaning out and focusing the middle. The sides tend to really spread out nicely after the mid has been cleaned up. From reading posts on the subject it seems mose people are using an m/s eq to give the sides more presence but I rarely have a need to boost the highs. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 9, 2013 7:12:46 GMT -6
Mid/side miking is really cool with acoustic demos...Where you record with one cardioid mic and and figure of 8 right above facing to the sides...then duplicate the figure of 8 track and flip the phase and mix those two in o bring in width. Really cool.
|
|
