Gearslutz.com

All Advertisers
Go Back   Gearslutz.com > The Forums > Mastering forum


New Reply New Reply Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 4th April 2009   #1
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,037

Thread Starter
"Stereo Widening" questions for pros.

So I'm demoing the TC MD3 plug and I've come across the Unlinked/MS Decode Mode thingie where you can process the Mono signals & Stereo signals separately? I realize you can get into big trouble with this but I'm kind of liking it alot...in moderation.

The question for you Mastering Pros...what's common software/hardware used to "widen" the mix... & if you even do that? I really only just thought about EQ & Compressionn, etc.


In the past I've tried the Waves Stereo Width plug but I didn't care for what that did.
__________________
Me at
amost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #2
Lives for gear
 
studjo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,399

Send a message via AIM to studjo Send a message via Skype™ to studjo
a typical case for the DrMS plug in from our esteemed GS moderator

Jo
studjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #3
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,037

Thread Starter
Hey cool...downloading the demo. Thanks!
amost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #4
Lives for gear
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 4,709

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by amost View Post

The question for you Mastering Pros...what's common software/hardware used to "widen" the mix... & if you even do that?
Simple M/S widening.

M/S equalizing, ITB or using the Dangerous Sum & Minus hardware and an equalizer.

Adding distortion to the sides.

A lot of analog hardware will add some width automatically.

Lots of choices but I don't think I ever prefer unlinked L/R processing. It can seem nice at first but it causes other problems where the image is less focused. That's different from M/S processing/compression that you're mentioning though.

Width should be obtained in a natural fashion or at least sound very natural, so I rarely go for a "wide" sound as it's lacks the focus and punch of a more balanced image.
__________________


Professional geek


Online Mastering
Lagerfeldt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #5
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,037

Thread Starter
Hey thanks...yeah that all makes sense. I probably shouldn't use the term "widening"...I guess I mean I wasn't totally aware of the idea of processing the Stereo signal separate from the Mono signal all in the same 2 track mix.
amost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #6
Gear maniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: manchester uk
Posts: 256

Widening a mix is not something I take lightly.
Widening on first listen may always sound more impressive but when compared to the original that has more impact which I will prefer. It is very easy to lose the middle information and can cause more problems then any benefits

If the master I do does come back wider then it is normaly a by product of trying to correct a element of the mix such as a to forward vocal etc. I normally will use m/s eq to do this rather than a specific widener tool and also in small amounts of correction.

Just my opinion of course.
__________________
Alex Ivory
http://www.ivorymastering.com
aivoryuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #7
Lives for gear
 
Cellotron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 3,574

Verified Member
Most stereo width processing that happens as noted is via gain changes in the Mid and Side channels. There's a few other processors that do stereo width modification that do "something else" in their processing besides just Mid and Side channel gain changes that have been used as mastering processors as well. These include SPL Vitalizers, Digital Domain K-Stereo (whose algorithm is also included in the Weiss DNA), the Bedini B.A.S.E., and (modded) Behringer Edisons.

Currently the one high quality off the shelf analog M/S matrix I can think of is the Dangerous Music S/M. M/S matrixes are also included in the Dangerous Music Master, Manley Backbone, and Crookwood mastering consoles. Other options you might find on the used market are vintage Telefunken, Neumann and Lawo "Panorama" modules, the discontinued AEA MS38, and the discontinued ADR Propak Audiomate.

As far as M/S plugins some options are:
Voxengo MSED
Brainworx' various plugins
Waves S-1
Sonoris M/S Codec

There's a number of other stereo image modification plugins out there that might have some use such as the Algorithmix K-Stereo and Flux Stereo Tool as well.

I definitely mirror other posters cautions regarding tracks sound "wider" as you very often lose impact by weakening the middle when doing so - although got to say my modded SPL SX2 (original version of the Vitalizer) has really helped once in a blue moon to rescue tracks that were mono-ish to the point of being cluttered.

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Cellotron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2009   #8
Lives for gear
 
wado1942's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,936

I discovered about 10 years ago that a short delay (Haas) between 15-30ms, 1 channel inverted and perhaps a low pass filter can really widen things without destroying the mono compatibility or changing the mix. It just takes a TINY bit of the delay to really liven up things. Aside from that, a simple M-S matrix followed by some envelope manipulation and finally, an L-R matrix is all I use. I'm going to build a passive analogue M-S matrix pretty soon so I can use it on analogue sources without going into the digital world first.
wado1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009   #9
Moderator
 
jayfrigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,352

Verified Member
Widening can happen subjectively with the right EQ and dynamics processing, but specific widening processors are used in high-end mastering far less than anybody might believe, given what you read on the internet and in magazine advertisements.

When it does happen, most often it is M/S (Mid/Side) processing, often EQ, but sometimes dynamics, and sometimes simple M/S level adjustments (bringing up the "S" channel). It also tends to be more often digital than analog, though analog M/S is on the rise with several products offering the feature over the past few years.

The Weiss digital EQ is one common place to do M/S processing in mastering (but by no means only). You can put it into M/S mode and, for example, on a rock project you may simply EQ a couple dB up on the sides in the mids to upper-mids to make the guitars come alive, sounding huge and wide. You don't necessarily need to globally increase the side component.

Of course, you must be careful not to lose the center, or lose the sharp imaging as you start mucking with M/S. Other times, M/S is simply a corrective tool rather than a widening tool, as in M/S de-essing, or EQ on the "M" to fix a vocal.
__________________
Jay Frigoletto
Mastersuite
www.promastering.com
www.studiometronome.com
jayfrigo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009   #10
Lives for gear
 
amost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,037

Thread Starter
Hey thanks guys...some great thoughts & tips on it, appreciate it.

I've been sitting for some hours with the TC MD3 & finally staring to figure out what the parameters are actually doing which is a drag...because now I'm going to have to have it. I'm liking it.
amost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009   #11
Lives for gear
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 778

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by amost View Post
Hey thanks guys...some great thoughts & tips on it, appreciate it.

I've been sitting for some hours with the TC MD3 & finally staring to figure out what the parameters are actually doing which is a drag...because now I'm going to have to have it. I'm liking it.
I don't know how the MD3 compares to the MD4 but I use the MD4 (TC 6000) for my MS work corrective work.

For sweetening, a bit of S raised (+.2 dB on average) at selected frequencies with/without the K-unit is very effective.

As Lagerfeldt pointed out, some analog gear can make the program wider just by running through it. My Manley Mastering Vari-Mu with mods seems to be the box here with the most "magic". It needs no compression to affect the stereo field in a very positive way. I have had two other Vari-Mu units here and they did not sound as nice so I guess I've got a special one!
__________________
Andy,

Silverbirch Productions

www.silverbirchmastering.com
Andy Krehm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009   #12
Lives for gear
 
Greg Reierson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,039

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cellotron View Post
I definitely mirror other posters cautions regarding tracks sound "wider" as you very often lose impact by weakening the middle when doing so...
And for that reason I will sometimes NARROW the image or maybe push the vocal or lead range forward with a mid EQ. It works both ways depending on what is so wrong with the mix that you reach for such a tool.


GR
__________________
Greg Reierson
www.RareFormMastering.com
Greg Reierson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009   #13
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 12,364

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Reierson View Post
And for that reason I will sometimes NARROW the image or maybe push the vocal or lead range forward with a mid EQ. It works both ways depending on what is so wrong with the mix that you reach for such a tool.


GR
Exactly.

I'll have a width template/energy shape in mind per track that has the right balance of center punch and width, and MS is there to make subtle tweaks toward that shape.
__________________
brian lucey
magic garden mastering

The Shins, Dr. John, The Black Keys, OAR, David Lynch, Sami Yusuf, moe., Hacienda, Jessica Lea Mayfield
Spiral Groove Studio One mixing monitors
lucey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009   #14
jdg
Lives for gear
 
jdg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: seattle, WA
Posts: 2,523

Verified Member
this reminds me how much i love good mixes!
when the center is so hard hitting itsounds like there is a person or snare or bass right in your room.. and the ambience and room tones surround you, even go behind you.

any time i do any "width" tricks in mastering.. a chance for this type of soundstage is nearly impossible.
__________________
nothing helps "suck", not even analog

panicStudios - mastering in seattle
jdg is offline   Reply With Quote
New Reply New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread starter Forum Replies Last Post
On the mixing of Seal's "Killer","Prayer for the Dying", "Don't Cry" thethrillfactor So much gear, so little time! 71 2nd April 2009 06:42 PM
When the client asks...."why doesn't my mix sound like the pros"? ryst So much gear, so little time! 53 15th November 2007 05:50 PM
Ribbon Mics - Any general "pros" and "cons" when comparing them to non ribbons? perx High end 15 28th June 2007 09:20 PM
Question on "mult formulas" for the GS pros here ?? sage691 High end 4 14th March 2007 05:35 AM
Learning what the pros do to get "that sound". Big 3rd Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production 10 4th September 2006 08:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:44 AM.

 
 
Powered by vBulletin®
Gearslutz.com Limited - UK Company Number 7597610.
Registered Office: 35 Ballards Lane, London, N3 1XW.

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.