Sound in FRONT of the speakers?

[da goose]

Originally Posted by Nonlinear

I don't know if this is a mixing or mastering question - could be both.

We use reverb to make a sound distant, i.e., push it back into the speakers.

A very dry sound appears to be AT the speakers.

Now, how does one bring the sound forward - so it appears to be IN FRONT OF the speakers? Almost like a "inverse reverb" if you will.

I have heard some recordings that sound like this - almost like the sound is next to your head. How is that accomplished?

Phase shift.

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by da goose

Phase shift.

+1.

Nonlinear, there are a few really cool plugins that do this fairly easily if you're thinking of adding 3D elements to your mix. My favourite, at the moment, is Wave Arts Panorma. It's well worth checking out.

Panorama uses crosstalk cancellation (a fancy way of saying that it uses an interference pattern to help partially "isolate" each of the stereo speakers within your field of hearing, which allows 3D spatialization possible over standard loudspeakers) to make this happen. You set the speaker configuration (Eg 40-degrees) and the plugin handles the rest. You can even add reverb and other treatments, right within the plugin.

The quality of the end result is somewhat dependent on the playback system, the environment the listener is in, the position they are in etc. Also, post processing such as min phase EQ, limiting/compression, mid/side processing can degrade the effect to varying degrees, so think of the 3D effect as something that would be applied after all other EQ/processing on the track, and then be careful at the mix bus/mastering stage not to apply processes that end up undoing the effect...

3D is a lot of fun. It's easy to overdo it, but used sparingly on certain elements, it is really cool.

Cheers !
Rob

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by Nonlinear

I have heard some recordings that sound like this - almost like the sound is next to your head. How is that accomplished?

Contrast against background and middleground sounds.

Contrasts in terms of tonality, timbre, direction, dry/wet, envelope, and in how the sounds were captured in the first place. It's so much more of a recording/mixing thing than merely a plug-in thing. Or you might also want to look into holophonics.

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by Adam Dempsey

It's so much more of a recording/mixing thing than merely a plug-in thing. Or you might also want to look into holophonics.

I absolutely agree. I should have prefaced my post by saying that Panorama is one option available that can be used at the mix stage if overt/obvious 3D effects on certain tracks are what is desired.

All the best,
Rob

[Nonlinear]

Hey guys, thanks for all the great info - I will look into all of this.

[kosmokrator]

think of it. What makes a sound, that's actually emitted very close to your ears, different in the real world?

For a vocal, for example mixing it very dry, mixed quite loud, compressed a fair bit, but sung/spoken very softly (the last point being the most importnat one) will make the brain think it's coming from a very close distance.

[AlexK]

Timing and SPL difference between direct sound and early reflections. This paper suggests there is very little transfer function involved.

This has to do with the way a piece has been captured more than anything else, but also the arrangement.

For listening, off-axis response of loudspeakers also becomes very important as this will determine the room reflections which come back to your ears.

[jeff_free69]

Try something like the free Voxengo MSED processor after your reverb. Turn down the Mid and you may start looking over your shoulder for phantom images swirling around the room.

[Nonlinear]

This is something I've noticed more and more as I "critically listen" to some of the best recordings. Most of them have "3-D" qualities - and it's not just reverb doing it.

Then there are a great number of mixes (especially some current pop stuff) that sound completely flat with no dimension at all.

Interesting to note - many of the recordings that have the dimension I'm speaking of where recorded and mixed - or at least processed - with ANALOG gear, tape, etc.

Very interesting ...

[dcollins]

It's from the arrangement and mix.

Not phase-shift, M/S, or other shenanigans, as this effect is certainly heard even in mono productions.


DC

[Nonlinear]

Originally Posted by dcollins

It's from the arrangement and mix.

Not phase-shift, M/S, or other shenanigans, as this effect is certainly heard even in mono productions.


DC

I'm sure arrangement and mix plays a big part but there is more to it than that (I'm searching for mastering secrets here!).

Just to check it out, I put a correlation meter on one of my favorite "spacious" hit records made back the '80s.

The correlation meter showed significant L/R negative phase in ambient parts of the song. I also noticed the spaciousness dropped significantly when summed to mono. It's still "mono compatible" but just loses much of it's depth.

So, it seems they did use some phasing tricks to bring out the 3-D quality. However, it was probably applied in mixing because only certain parts of the stereo image change when summed to mono.

In this case I'm sure it was a deliberate effect. In other cases maybe it's recording techniques and maybe even phase shifts from those "imperfect" analog EQs, etc., that creates this depth and space.

Cool.

[dcollins]

Originally Posted by Nonlinear

The correlation meter showed significant L/R negative phase in ambient parts of the song. I also noticed the spaciousness dropped significantly when summed to mono. It's still "mono compatible" but just loses much of it's depth.

So, it seems they did use some phasing tricks to bring out the 3-D quality. However, it was probably applied in mixing because only certain parts of the stereo image change when summed to mono.

It doesn't have to be a phasing "trick" to show up in the correlation meter, just that it's not common to the two channels.

Like a echo chamber, plate, or other source.

Loosing space in mono is ok.

If it disappears in mono, that counts as trickery.


DC

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by Nonlinear

I'm sure arrangement and mix plays a big part but there is more to it than that (I'm searching for mastering secrets here!).

Just to check it out, I put a correlation meter on one of my favorite "spacious" hit records made back the '80s.

Hi,

I'm interested in learning more. I have to say, I'm a long time fan of all things stereo/3D/binaural (tricks and all, including QSound, SRS etc). I think it's important to understand what people are doing at the recording and mix stages, and to understand how it all works. I used to do live recording and most often recorded using NOS or ORTF arrays, specifically because of the additional depth you can achieve with those techniques vs an M-S array (which is very flexible, very stereo, but lacks the depth).

Can you share an example of one of the songs/records you're hearing the effect on, please? I'd like to study it.

... as I think of it, I have a few 70s era 33rpm records for example "John Denver's greatest hits", which is a stereo LP, and for whatever reason, they chose to flip the polarity of one of the channels (??). I suspect that was done at pressing, and not part of the original mix but I haven't had a chance to fully investigate it yet. In any case, it sure makes John Denver's voice larger than life! I suspect the CD/iTunes version has been fixed and likely sounds much flatter.

Cheers
Rob

[Nonlinear]

Originally Posted by dcollins

It doesn't have to be a phasing "trick" to show up in the correlation meter, just that it's not common to the two channels.
DC

Dipping towards zero, yes. Sounds completely uncommon to both channels will show up as "0" ("no correlation") on a correlation meter. But if the correlation meter goes negative that means left and right channels are out of phase. L/R channels showing "-1" correlation will completely null when summed to mono (so don't mix there).

However, it seems that stereo sounds with negative correlation have that "out in front of the speaker" sound. So maybe this is the key. Just keep it under control.

BTW - I love trickery.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by dcollins

It's from the arrangement and mix.

Not phase-shift, M/S, or other shenanigans, as this effect is certainly heard even in mono productions.

You can lead a horse to water but...

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by dcollins

It's from the arrangement and mix.

Not phase-shift, M/S, or other shenanigans, as this effect is certainly heard even in mono productions.

DC

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

You can lead a horse to water but...

Hey guys, thanks so much for your input on this. I don't disagree that a mono production can contain a lot of depth, and can have even have an almost three-dimensional quality to it, but I think we can agree that Mono recordings only give us a few pieces of the "depth-perception puzzle", such as intensity, timbre and early reflections. It's really amazing how our brains are capable of constructing the illusion of depth from a mono recording, when you think of it.

I also agree with what DCollins and others have said.. that depth comes from the recording itself, the arrangement, and the mix. Busy stereo mixes with no dynamics tend to sound fairly two-dimensional (and a busy mono mix is usually a complete mess!). If you apply what works to achieve depth in mono to a stereo mix, you end up with even more depth.

In my humble opinion, when it's done "tastefully", phase shift, M/S and other tricks have their place in mixing (i.e. not a mastering trick), because they can be used to further complete the depth illusion on a specific track. Too much of it sounds overdone, and makes the music fatiquing/irritating to listen to, but just the right amount makes you go "wow!" when you hear it.

Cheers,
Rob

[Bob Olhsson]

My experience has been that MS tricks have this way of only sounding right in the particular mastering room and not the rest of the world. Mono compatibility also remains important in the real world.

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

My experience has been that MS tricks have this way of only sounding right in the particular mastering room and not the rest of the world. Mono compatibility also remains important in the real world.

Absolutely, Bob. Since most of the tricks depend on the listener being in a certain listening position, (and usually with a room that has a certain amount of deadness to it, too), I don't think the tricks should be the main focus of the mix. It's more of a creative "frill".

I really enjoy listening to some of the early examples of QSound (Madonna's Immaculate Collection" CD, for example). I believe "Like a Prayer" is a fairly standard stereo mix for the most part, but then when the Timbales kick in towards the end, they have clearly been processed with QSound. It's a very deliberate effect. The congas in "Holiday" are another great example.

Sadly, the only people who generally hear it are those who enjoy sitting in front of the stereo and listening from the centre. Walk away from the centre, or listen in the car (or over headphones), and the 3D effect dissappears, but for those that sit and enjoy from a central location (sadly, less and less are doing that these days), there's a reward .

Rob

[falgorian]

I read the term bineural might be it...maybe I'm wrong

Sent from my SPH-M820-BST using Tapatalk

[johnynotknow]

What you're hearing is a perception thing or rather "psycho acoustics"

If we are talking about SHM and the like. the reason their leads etc sound so upfront is because of the rather liberal use of sidechain. selected not just triggered by the kick but off certain other elements aswell i.e the main lead may push the arp or strings down everytime it hits giving the impression that the lead is taking up a rather large sonic area "****off arp it's my time to shine"

This is then further enhanced (the dynamic created with the sidechain)with small ratio compression with almost levelling amp settings to bring up the nuances of the duckin.use short attack times and you're biting your self in the ass

This isn't about squashing peaks or any of that other topsy turvy approach people have to dance music,it's about creating them (and then squashing them,well that's optional i suppose)think of it like dynamically triggered fader riding.if everything follows the 4/4 that's gonna make for some flat none interesting dynamic...suppose it worked for daftpunk and the early french dudes but in this day and age, sidechain is used more liberally but the sources as trigger are chosen more err conservatively


Some listening suggestions of blatant examples of this.anything by mr oizo,feedme,pryda/cirez-d and clark,maybe not your cup of typhoo (it's a brand of tea in england) but these show this effect off quite well vs the everything triggered to the kick posse

i will finally add that you need to realise alot of these tracks are arranged with sidechain in mind.things are intentionally where they're in the time domain due to the effect they'd have off other elements when used as a key trigger which then imparts some subtle groove or dynamic into the tracks. (which is then obscured by certain folk for going a little ott with the dynamic rapage)

am gonna stop editing this now or i'll go on all day......


Johnynotknow



Sent from my HTC ChaCha A810e using Tapatalk

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by falgorian

I read the term bineural might be it...maybe I'm wrong

Sent from my SPH-M820-BST using Tapatalk

Binaural only works whilst listening in headphones...so yes, you can get depth (google "virtual haircut" for a very interesting demonstration) but not from speakers.

[JustMastering]

Originally Posted by johnynotknow

What you're hearing is a perception thing or rather "psycho acoustics"

Hi,

Precisely ! I agree that this is all dealing with psychoacoustics. Sidechaining and various compression techniques will only contribute/detract from the "loudness" and "timbre" parts of the puzzle, though.

Compression can contribute to the impression of size in particular. Heavy compression has the same "flattening of perspective" effect that a long lense on a camera has, and so if you severely compress something it tends to sound very big. Therefore, sounds that you want a sound to appear distant in your mix, shouldn't be compressed much, if at all if you are looking to achieve a natural sense of depth.

Sidechaining adds creative dynamic changes that can add some energy/interest/urgency, but it won't provide the solution to Nonlinear's question regarding achieving a result that is "almost like the sound is next to your head".

All the best !
Rob

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by JustMastering

Hi,

Precisely ! I agree that this is all dealing with psychoacoustics. Sidechaining and various compression techniques will only contribute/detract from the "loudness" and "timbre" parts of the puzzle, though.

Compression can contribute to the impression of size in particular. Heavy compression has the same "flattening of perspective" effect that a long lense on a camera has, and so if you severely compress something it tends to sound very big. Therefore, sounds that you want a sound to appear distant in your mix, shouldn't be compressed much, if at all if you are looking to achieve a natural sense of depth.

Sidechaining adds creative dynamic changes that can add some energy/interest/urgency, but it won't provide the solution to Nonlinear's question regarding achieving a result that is "almost like the sound is next to your head".

All the best !
Rob

Aah,ok.i kind of scanned through the posts

If we are talking about comm house of today am not really hearing this close to your ear sound you speak of.granted, it can be wide but nothing that would be perceived as "close to your ear" to get those types of effects you want to be looking about putting the left and right channels out of phase(which further reinforces my doubts to about the extent of out of phase elements due to most of these tracks needing to be largely mono compatible).to take this to the extreme you want to be looking at remicing stuff and putting that out of phase.which am positive no one making comm house goes to that extent

This phenomenom is pretty unique to you dude


The only other thing that comes to mind with mids sounding really upfront (not in the stereo image am talking about centred mids) is perhaps the tweeters on your speakers are a little to forward.certain tweeter designs suffer from this.can't be assed scanning back to see if you referenced against different speakers

Maybe the acoustics in your room portray the mids a little unaccurately.


Johnynotknow

Sent from my HTC ChaCha A810e using Tapatalk

[Nonlinear]

Originally Posted by johnynotknow

This phenomenom is pretty unique to you dude

Yeah, the more I think about the more I say, "Why bother?" Really.

A lot of music these days isn't even STEREO - it's all panned center with a little touch of ambience on the sides. It's "wide mono".

That's how you make it louder. And louder is better...