Spatial Imaging

[davidwilson]

Ok I would like the opinion of the experts on this one. (That's You)

listening to many CD lately like Nickelback and Green Day for example I notice that the mixes seem unnaturally wide and spacious. I'm gathering it's due to not only great Engineering but some artificial enhancement of the stereo image in maybe the mix or mastering stage.

So for this type of music what is the recommended method?

There are many products out there that seem to do the wide thing and the one I have liked the best was DUY Wide. The only thing is when I tried it I sent a mono signal to the left and noticed that it was also sending a signal to the right (I guess opposite phase) which adjusted in level as I increased the effect controls. So is this effect just the same as setting up an AUX bus and switching the L/R channels putting them out of phase and blending to taste. Would save me a few hundred bucks and could probably do this more selectively in the mixing stage.

I also like the effect of sending the centre image forward or backwards like the Behringer Edison although not really liking the general sound of the unit.

Any opinions??

[Adam Dempsey]

Hey David,

In my experience the strongest sounding mixes which feature great separation are quite tight and centered, but with contrasts (which help make separation possible) in the arrangement in both stereo elements and front/back depth. It's all in the mix.. meaning a strong mono image to carry the focal point, often balanced with more incidental elements for emphasis (and hey, if you want a mix element loud, make it come out of both speakers rather than just one). This is also why double tracking, if done well, can kind of give you the best of both worlds. Whatever works to create balance and contrasts, but it's far less of a mastering thing.

I've not needed to add width to a mix at all in years, other than to help match one track's imaging with others for continuity in a project. I have had projects come in whereby the drum overheads, for example, were recorded in M-S, and their width was varied in mixing with the verses/chorus - worked really well, but it's always along the grain of the music, in this case for "size" and spatial dynamic, not purely "width".

Of course headphones (without crosstalk) will easily tend "widen" the image. And commercial radio often does, too. So leave it to those processes. However, yes: a width enhancement process, if properly implemented, should not affect mono compatibility.

[davidwilson]

As far as the tracking side if thinks go I typicaly for heavy guitars for example record 3 or more takes panning each L,R and in some cases centre. With different amps or guitars where possible to give a difference.

This make things quite big but listening to the types of bands mentioned before the guitars seem a little wider still. I have only ever been able to match (Now that my demo plugs have expired) by reversing the phase and L,R then blending.

I guess if i don't effect the centre guitar the mono mix wont be as bad (but who listens to mono anyway right). I have not committed this to a mix yet though as I am worried that the effects may cause more harm than good later down the track and seems a little radical even for me.

I guess i'm really asking If I wish to widen a track artificially is there any difference in say the DUW wide type and just reversing phase on an Aux channel and switching L and R??

[Sunim Koria]

The appropriate use of delays can often help in effectively shaping and enhancing the spatial image to a degree - do a search on the forum for Haas delays.

Learn to get the issue of mono-compatibility to work for you - you can do all sorts of wacky spatial effects using a combination of phase-reversal, delay, EQ, pitch-shifting, and even MS processing and STILL have the whole thing fold down to mono very neatly indeed. It just requires a slightly mathematical approach and a lot of creative experimentation!

Also, bass frequencies tend to "cloud up" and can affect the spatial localisation of certain elements in a mix. You may need to be more drastic in shaping the lower frequencies for hard-panned elements that you really want pushing out to the sides.

SK

[davidwilson]

Originally Posted by Sunim Koria

The appropriate use of delays can often help in effectively shaping and enhancing the spatial image to a degree - do a search on the forum for Haas delays.


SK

Thanks Sunim

I have used the Hass effect and these type of delays but there not as big as what I able to get now with the above mentiond technique.

What I am guessing after listening to some stuff I have recorded in the past is that using Buss compressors like the SSL or Avalon 747 even lightly will narrow the image so maybe I am wanting to makeup for that loss.

Some compressors on the otherhand tend to enhance the stereo image also like dare I say it the Ozone Multiband or my Homemade GSSL and a touch if Lavry soft clipping.

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by davidwilson

As far as the tracking side if thinks go I typicaly for heavy guitars for example record 3 or more takes panning each L,R and in some cases centre. With different amps or guitars where possible to give a difference.

thumbsup

You can also try this slight variation:

two different heads (or combos) with different cabs ( best if 1 x 12) fed by the same guitar and played at the same time instead of double tracked. Stick one bi-directional ribbon in front of each cab (inexpensive mics are fine too) . Possibly same make and model.

Cabs or combos need to to be off the floor (obviously and at least a good 80 cm.) and aligned. Put a gobo in between to separate them.

If you have chorus or a delay pedal (analogue would be nice) you could use that as a splitter as well an an extra widener.

You can then try different panning during mixing.

Space is mostly achieved during tracking (artificially like above or ina spacious room with careful positioning of sources and mics) as well as in mixing more than in post production.

[soundroid]

Originally Posted by davidwilson

What I am guessing after listening to some stuff I have recorded in the past is that using Buss compressors like the SSL or Avalon 747 even lightly will narrow the image so maybe I am wanting to makeup for that loss.
.

Dave, I find if you use an SSL buss compressor with both channels 'unlinked', the stereo
image will remain exactly the same.
When used in 'stereo link' mode, the image can shrink slightly.

Joe

[studioland]

Yes, tried that before. You can have your stereo buss fx in dual mono you'll have a wider image. Did that for a while but now I'm back to stereo mode because my mixes tended to be too wide, spread. As Boomshanka says above I guess it's more about contrast. If you put bass, kick, snare, voice in the middle and guitars 100 Left and right that's basically what the bands you're talking about usually use. If you can, layer 4 guitar tracks sometimes it goes to 8 (2 acoustics ...), I don't think you need to flip phases that much.

With a focused mix Duy wide will work better, I often use it and it's a really nice plugin. It's not just widening it adds color too and I don't think you can get the exact same result manually.

David

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by davidwilson

I guess if i don't effect the centre guitar the mono mix wont be as bad (but who listens to mono anyway right).

More people hear mono reproduction than even they themselves would be aware of. FM radio, for one, broadcasts in M-S (mono being significantly stronger). Poor reception = mono signal.

[Mr.HOLMES]

I would say to get contrast clever use of reverbs delay and paning is the thing to go during mxing.

I am still learning on that too with every mix I am improving it.
Listen to some old Beatles stuff to hear unusual paning.... try to do it like this you will see what happens. Have a lissajous meter aside when mixing...see what happens to it when using reverb or mixing hard L M R ...my 2 cents

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by davidwilson

So for this type of music what is the recommended method?

Some naturally hear in a wide and spacious landscape and mix that way. Others a real strong center image and others more upfront, tall and dry. These things naturally reflect in their sonic signature. That is how you can listen to someone's work and tell who did what.

The records you are asking about were mixed by CLA, Mike Shipley & Randy Staub. Each has his own unique sound.

They were also mastered by Ted Jensen. I can't see Ted J using a spatializer to expand these guys mixes. Ted J has always had a certain spin he puts on the work he masters and that's why guys go to him so much. It could be a Jazz or hiphop project and it will sound like Ted J.

Is there a point in this?

Enhance and focus on your sonic strengths whatever that is and the wide thing usually works itself out somehow without having to use any special processing on everything.

Originally Posted by davidwilson

I also like the effect of sending the centre image forward or backwards like the Behringer Edison although not really liking the general sound of the unit.

Any opinions??

I use this box sometimes when i want to move certain tracks out of the way. It has a natural bright sound to it. Either use it with this in mind or what i do sometimes is "dumb it down" by running it through something else to smooth out its bite.

[James Meeker]

Originally Posted by davidwilson

I'm gathering it's due to not only great Engineering but some artificial enhancement of the stereo image in maybe the mix or mastering stage.

Eventually, it's *ALL* about great engineering. There are many, many ways to get a spacious mix but only the skilled guys get it there without screwing the mix up.

[Adam Dempsey]

There could be effective use of varying M-S on only certain stereo elements (eg room mics) in the mix which can remain very natural sounding.

There's also the difference between a good "spacious" mix, and pure "width" - the latter which doesn't tend to come without the expense of reduced "depth". I mentioned this in a previous similar thread, but as far as tweaking the overall finished mix goes...

If, on an otherwise good mix, there's some spectral balancing required in the upper mids/highs (where most spacial cues are naturally) then getting that sorted first via careful attention to EQ can make a mix appear wider, no extra width processing required - especially if stereo ambience also is raised via compression. The KISS principle applies again.

[Empire Prod]

Originally Posted by soundroid

I find if you use an SSL buss compressor with both channels 'unlinked', the stereo
image will remain exactly the same.
When used in 'stereo link' mode, the image can shrink slightly.

SSL Quad G384 buss comps don't unlink. They are always in stereo mode.

[Chaellus]

spatial widening can be good but i noticed that if you over use it lets take for example the S-1 plug from ways , if you take it to max widenning the stereo sound suddleny becomes or waht seems to become mono, lesss depth etc.... its a matter of how much you use it.. it shouldny take away what is present in the material and should only magnify what is there in a pleasent way