Doing Mid-Side at the recording stage rather than ITB

[Corran]

So I just had one of those "why did I do that?" moments.

I've been using M-S on a lot of things, and doing it during the performance so I can hear what it's going to sound like. However I've been using a cheap hard-wired mic splitter, and I've wondered why it's noisy and such . Well duh so I am wondering, other than a dedicated M-S decoder, what is a good way to split a mic signal to get it to two different tracks?

I don't think I want a splitter with a transformer and all that, because the signals are supposed to be identical. However I could use it to get a "rough idea" and then double the straight track and phase reverse, etc.

Sorry if this is a dumb question, what I record usually doesn't have a FOH system so I've never needed a pro mic splitter before.

Also I'd like decent quality but money's tight right now so keep that in mind...

[gurubuzz]

Ms requires 2 microphones.

one Figure of 8 and another Omni

the figure of 8 has the side of the capsule pointing at the source
and the omni sits right on top with the face of the capsule pointing to the
source.

the MS decoder puts the figure of 8 to the left , flips the polarity of the 8 in the right. or vice versa and then has the omni paned dead centre.

The Idea is that when you go mono it cancels the figure of eight and you have a solid mono signal left behind...

sorry if you already know this but the way you described it made me think you are only using one mic...

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by gurubuzz

Ms requires 2 microphones.

one Figure of 8 and another Omni

the figure of 8 has the side of the capsule pointing at the source
and the omni sits right on top with the face of the capsule pointing to the
source.

the MS decoder puts the figure of 8 to the left , flips the polarity of the 8 in the right. or vice versa and then has the omni paned dead centre.

The Idea is that when you go mono it cancels the figure of eight and you have a solid mono signal left behind...

Yes - but it's more normal to use a Cardioid for the mid mic.

Using an omni as the mid gives you two cardioid mics back to back pointing away from each other when matrixed to stereo.


To split the fig-8.

One way is to plug it into a channel of the mixer - take a direct out and plug it into the next channel polarity-reversed. This can either be done with a polarity-reverse switch on the mixer or by polarity reversing in the cable. (polarity-reverse is sometimes called phase-reverse, but the latter is not really technically correct).

The two levels have to be exactly the same.

The best way to do this is to set up the first channel panned centre. Then set the main fader of the second channel to exactly the same level (also panned centre) and then adjust the gain control until you hear nothing at all - the two channels are then exactly the same.

Once you have done this, pan the first full left and the polarity-reversed one full right.

The mid mic., of course, is in another channel panned centre.

I hope this is clear.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by John Willett

To split the fig-8.

One way is to plug it into a channel of the mixer - take a direct out and plug it into the next channel polarity-reversed. This can either be done with a polarity-reverse switch on the mixer or by polarity reversing in the cable. (polarity-reverse is sometimes called phase-reverse, but the latter is not really technically correct).

The two levels have to be exactly the same.

Just to add 2 or 3 to the zillion variants-

1. You might take the "side" direct out and go to a stereo channel in-you'll then have one pot or fader for the side level, with side EQ if you want it.

2. "Side" direct out to a stereo return-then you'll have again one pot for the side level w/o EQ, nice when you can't bypass the EQ otherwise. (You'll notice that the non-defeatable EQ in lower end mixers will keep the side from nulling perfectly.)

3. If desired you can route the "mid" to a mono "normaled" return as well.

[Corran]

Hey guys, thanks! After I had posted I thought about the direct-out idea, but I didn't know if that was a good option.

To the first poster, sorry to be vague. I use M-S often and know about the specifics. If anyone is interested, my normal setup is an Earthworks QTC-1 as the mid mic (I liked the omni rather than a cardioid personally) with a vintage B&O BM-3 ribbon mic as the mid. Gives a great result, but as I said the side mic is a little too noisy, partially because I don't have the best preamp selection (yet!!) but I think also because I'm dividing the signal.

Thanks!

[tINY]

You still haven't let on about your pre-amps and or any Cue mix in your box.

That's where I'd tap the signals for the live MS decoder.




-tINY

[djs]

I use m-s a lot for live recording and ALWAYS track each mic to its own channel. I then matrix it ITB (box or board). This gives you a ton of control over the image - width can be wide or narrow. You can also dial in more or less of the room, and by the same token more or less of the source. The word is flexibility!

[Corran]

My preamp right now is the DMP3. Yes I know it needs to be better...I'm getting some nice ADM pres soon. It doesn't have dual outputs so I can't use that.

I'm recording using a Korg D888, I don't think I can record to two tracks at once or anything in it.

djs: I'm multitracking so I have plenty of flexibility. The point is I want to hear how it sounds immediately, not later. I'm not using any computers though.

[tINY]

Use wired splits on the output of the pre-amp. That shouldn't be a noise problem.



-tINY