Stereo Image

[Riad]

I'm looking for good tips, or a resource, someone can point me to for created a wide stereo image.

I'm wondering how limited I am mixing ITB with a C|24 and PT HD Accel system... can't seem to get the sound image wide enough.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Rob

[DirkB]

Originally Posted by Riad

I'm looking for good tips, or a resource, someone can point me to for created a wide stereo image.

I'm wondering how limited I am mixing ITB with a C|24 and PT HD Accel system... can't seem to get the sound image wide enough.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Rob

Off all the things gear related, I find stereo image not one of them .
What I mean is: creating a nice stereo image has to do with proper arrangement and mixing technique. Study the cd's you like very carefully on your monitors and try to hear what thechniques are used.

Just one tip: stereo synth/keyboard tracks rarely ever help in creating a wide image. Also: try to create space in the higher frequencies by rolling of from things like digital recorded guitars for example. Those tracks don't need anything above 4-8k generally, but can cloud up the frequency range that helps in creating a wide image.

Good luck,
Dirk

[Riad]

Originally Posted by DirkB

Off all the things gear related, I find stereo image not one of them .
What I mean is: creating a nice stereo image has to do with proper arrangement and mixing technique. Study the cd's you like very carefully on your monitors and try to hear what thechniques are used.

Dirk,

Couldn't there be some outboard gear that can contribute to achieving a better stereo image? Would analog summing devices produce a better stereo image? Would a better mixing console than the C|24 contribute to a better stereo image? I'm not sure, just asking.

Of course mixing techniques are a must no matter what your gear, but I'm under the impression that some devices do a better job, but I'm not sure.

Rob

[Drumsound]

Also be aware of phase while tracking. Anytime you use more than one mic on a source (drum-set is one source) you need to check your phase. Any time there are two or more instruments recorded at the same time in the same room, phase must be checked. When things are 'in-phase' you can put them anywhere you want in the stereo picture.

That said...Wide stereo comes from a combination of many mono events.

[SigmaDeltaAudio]

Originally Posted by Riad

I'm looking for good tips, or a resource, someone can point me to for created a wide stereo image.

I'm wondering how limited I am mixing ITB with a C|24 and PT HD Accel system... can't seem to get the sound image wide enough.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Rob

Move your speakers out to the side a bit more? ehe


Seriously, the wider the stereo image gets the more trouble you get in converting to mono... and the stranger it sounds on headphones and crappy speakers. You sure you really wanna get into crazy megastereo devices? It gets dangerous!

[Shaman]

Originally Posted by Riad

Would analog summing devices produce a better stereo image?

I´m my experience - yes. The api 8200, that I tried several days ago had much better stereo imaging than my ITB PT HD. So has the SPL mixdream.
Check those external summing boxes out and see what they do for you.

Some will disagree here - I don´t care - it´s just what I heard.

Of course the arrangement is most important.

Don´t pan everything hard left/right - there´s nothing left for the stereo image to "breathe". Lay some things 2´o clock , some 3, others 4 ó clock - fill the holes between centre and hard L/R.

then there are stereo enhancing plugins like Waves S2 and DUY wide, or the Behringer Edison on the hardware side which can be helpful.
The SPL mixdream has also a nice stereo enhancement built in.
Generally use those little helpers only in small doses and if possible only on single signals/busses - too much of them can steal your mono compatibility.

Happy testing !

BTW your studio looks great - very cozy place !

[DirkB]

Originally Posted by Drumsound

That said...Wide stereo comes from a combination of many mono events.

So true .

Greetings,
Dirk

[vaesion]

study the haas effect. type that in your browser

[

[vaesion]

stereo enhancment plugs suck wanger

[Riad]

Shaman,

Thanks for the info, and thanks for the compliments on the studio - it's appreciated.


vaesion,

Thanks for the links I will definately check them out.

Rob-

[sordeli]

Hi, did you try the M/S mode?, Thats the only way to have control with the mono & stereo image, and you can have an independent process. I use this technique in mastering too

[PRobb]

I totally agree that this is much more a question of technique than gear. The key is to create discrete places for things. Maybe don't pan the drums full stereo to leave space on the outside for other things. Or pan the drums full and make everything else work inside them. Also be aware of things that have similar frequency ranges and/or rhythmic patterns. Panning them together will unify them, panning them apart will separate them.
Also, I find headphones are useful for identifying panning problems. And sometimes just reversing the pan on the drums can open up a mix. The hat might have been on a side where it was fighting other high freq stuff.
Is the high side of the piano on the same side as a bright accoustic guitar? Does the piano really need to be stereo? Is that stereo synth pad washing out the space? Becoming aware of stuff like that will open up a mix more than any gear choices.

[Riad]

Originally Posted by PRobb

I totally agree that this is much more a question of technique than gear. The key is to create discrete places for things. Maybe don't pan the drums full stereo to leave space on the outside for other things. Or pan the drums full and make everything else work inside them. Also be aware of things that have similar frequency ranges and/or rhythmic patterns. Panning them together will unify them, panning them apart will separate them.
Also, I find headphones are useful for identifying panning problems. And sometimes just reversing the pan on the drums can open up a mix. The hat might have been on a side where it was fighting other high freq stuff.
Is the high side of the piano on the same side as a bright accoustic guitar? Does the piano really need to be stereo? Is that stereo synth pad washing out the space? Becoming aware of stuff like that will open up a mix more than any gear choices.

Everything you said was certainly very true, and I've done all that while mixing ITB and yet stereo image still sounds weak.

Since this thread was started in March I've since purchased a Dangerous 2 Bus, and it makes all the difference.

So yes, you need to get your technique down, however, there are some pieces of gear that can help produce more depth and image... the D2B was the difference for me.

ymmv,
Rob

[cgarges]

Originally Posted by SigmaDeltaAudio

Move your speakers out to the side a bit more? ehe

You know, it's funny--I was actually going to suggest doing the opposite. I used to work in a studio where the monitors were spaced pretty far apart and my mixes always seemed really wide and deep in the control room and very two-dimensional when I took them home. After a while, I started moving the monitors in closer together and I had to work harder to get the imaging on my mixes where I wanted, but because of that, it translated better. Give it a shot. It may seem weird to you at first if you're used to hearing your monitors wider, but once you get used to it, you may dig the results.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[tapeslut]

great tip!

[cgarges]

Thanks!

CG

[themaidsroom]

i'd hit the otb as much as possible!

i'd say get an analog 2 track of some sort.........
get a plate or find a room
where you can have an actual mic and speaker
event that's going to the
two track



be well

- jack

[Billster]

If you have a good sounding room, I´d suggest to record every instrument in stereo. Even those that you usually would think about recording in stereo (Guitars etc.).

But before you do that, think about where you want to put those instruments later in the mix and record them accordingly. That´ll give you lots more depth and a very good stereo imaging (better than any panpot).

For a perfect demonstration of depth and stereo imaging listen to the recordings of George Massenburg - a very good example would be the "warm your heart" album by Aaron Neville.

Cheers,
Bill

[raal]

Originally Posted by Billster

If you have a good sounding room, I´d suggest to record every instrument in stereo. Even those that you usually would think about recording in stereo (Guitars etc.).

But before you do that, think about where you want to put those instruments later in the mix and record them accordingly. That´ll give you lots more depth and a very good stereo imaging (better than any panpot).

For a perfect demonstration of depth and stereo imaging listen to the recordings of George Massenburg - a very good example would be the "warm your heart" album by Aaron Neville.

Cheers,
Bill

was thinking of getting IR-1 and sampling my room at different spots with different mics. C-24, ribbons, etc. -- then sending dry signals to to left/right of that sample while mixing. synths, direct bass or sampled drums could benefit.

i've actually sent dry signals out through speakers and recorded the room in the past, and this worked nicely.

sure would save alot of time...

[SynthaxUS]

http://www.synthax.com/emesowl.html

http://www.embracingsound.com/templa...Page=Endorsers

http://www.barryrudolph.com/mix/emesowlspeaker.html

http://www.embracingsound.com/index.con

You owe it to yourself to check this out...this is not spam either...OK : ))))

Tom Sailor

[SynthaxUS]

http://www.embracingsound.com/inform...echSummary.pdf

One more thing....: )))

Tom

[max cooper]

While we're on the topic, I have a question about correlation meters. I know how to read one, and I'd never base anything just on what the meter says, but I'd like to know exatly what a phase correlation meter reads.

Also, anyone using the Spectrafoo deal for this? Looks like their Lissajous phase correlation meter is nice.



Hey, SynthaxUS, I assume you've read all this stuff over at

http://www.ambisonic.net/

right? Pretty interesting stuff, too.

[SynthaxUS]

Hey Max-

I am very into M/S...

Hearing a M/S mic through a M/S speaker is really something you have to experience to believe. You really have a 1:1 portal effect...you really feel like you are looking through the control room window and it also allows you to really fine tune your mic placement because the variables of the L/R speaker placement are gone...


The imaging is just amazing...

Tom Sailor

[cdog]

Originally Posted by Riad

Dirk,

Couldn't there be some outboard gear that can contribute to achieving a better stereo image?
Rob

It isn't cheap, but once you hear it, you may get hooked. Its like like a hybrid of pixie and angel dust specially produced for sprinkling on 2 track masters. You'll think you're tripping, but you're not.

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule...der_page_id=48

Pricey Pixie Dust aside, I find I get my stereo width largely from the X/Y drum overheads, M/S drum room mics, and double tracked guitars - on a rock mix. Getting placement of the close mic'd toms in line with the room and overhead mics makes a huge difference for me - they just sound bigger and more real.

Moving background or secondary vocals off a few degrees can also work, but I always keep my lead vocal dead center.

Its funny, "dual mono", like the old jazz records where you had hard panned instruments, like lead horn on one side and drums on the other, always sounded huge to me. People are too afraid to mix like that nowadays. "You won't be able to hear the lead kazoo on a clock radio" or some complaint of that nature.

[Riad]

Originally Posted by cdog

It isn't cheap, but once you hear it, you may get hooked. Its like like a hybrid of pixie and angel dust specially produced for sprinkling on 2 track masters. You'll think you're tripping, but you're not.

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule...der_page_id=48

Pricey Pixie Dust aside, I find I get my stereo width largely from the X/Y drum overheads, M/S drum room mics, and double tracked guitars - on a rock mix. Getting placement of the close mic'd toms in line with the room and overhead mics makes a huge difference for me - they just sound bigger and more real.

Moving background or secondary vocals off a few degrees can also work, but I always keep my lead vocal dead center.

Its funny, "dual mono", like the old jazz records where you had hard panned instruments, like lead horn on one side and drums on the other, always sounded huge to me. People are too afraid to mix like that nowadays. "You won't be able to hear the lead kazoo on a clock radio" or some complaint of that nature.

Thanks for the tips and the link. $3500 is a bit steep but that seems to be the cost of any piece of gear i'm looking at today.

It is odd how much improved the stereo image sounds now that I have the DB2.

[theblue1]

A good, well defined 'stereoscape' really opens up a mix. It can mean the difference between a somehat dull documentary recording of a great performance and something that you can just about crawl around inside of... almost a living recreation of the space (real or virtual) the music was made in.

But keep in mind 'stereo' means:

Solid; solid body: stereotropism.
Three-dimensional: stereoscope.

So, as others have happily pointed out increasingly in the last few years, 'stereophonic' doesn't just mean a bi-channel storage format -- it means an attempt to create a 'solid, three-dimensional sound.'

And that means, not just a one dimensional L-R linear soundspace -- but one that suggests front to back depth -- and height, as well.


And, with that in mind, I come back to your quest for a technological solution to creating a 'wide' stereo image.

When I hear someone asking for something like that, I immediately fear they will fall prey to that sucker-punch to the uninitiated, the recording technology equivalent of those street hustlers who work the train and bus stations, looking for fresh young marks coming in from the country with their wheeled suitcases -- "stereo enhancers."

Stereo enhancers -- those plugs and devices that "expand the stereo soundstage" (often beyond the physical layout of the speakers) or "create a stunning 3D environment" all too often work by playing cheezy tricks with stereo phase, tricks that will sabotage the victim's --er, engineer's -- project in such a way that it may be unplayabe on mono systems like club soundsystems, not to mention radio,TV, and mono internet streams.

Not only does the "stereo enhancer" user run the risk of ending up with disappearing instruments in mono environments -- if he's lucky enough to get a chance to press his mix to vinyl, it may very well screw with the cutter, which, after all, can't be in 'two places at once' which is, in a sense, what out of phase stereo material would require. (That's a bit of a gliss over actual science, but, hey, you get the drift.)


Create your wide and detailed stereoscape the old fashioned way, with careful use of stereo recording (when possible and desirable), careful and sensitive placement and enhancement (reverb, EQ) of mono-recorded tracks, and a sense that stereo sound is a lot more than just having two speakers.

[A quick and dirty test for phase problems in mixes is to simply 'mono' the mix. If things start disappearing in the mono version, it strongly suggests that the left channel of that sound is, to some extent, out of phase wiht the right. And that causes problems for all the reasons detailed above.]

[SynthaxUS]

"Move your speakers out to the side a bit more? ehe


Seriously, the wider the stereo image gets the more trouble you get in converting to mono... and the stranger it sounds on headphones and crappy speakers. You sure you really wanna get into crazy megastereo devices? It gets dangerous!"




That's what is so appealing about the EMES Owl...You are often fooled by the localization of sound by the physical placement of your L/R speakers...if you move them around, ie further apart or closer, you make compensations and changes to your mix based on what what you are percieving due to their placement.

The Owl eliminates those variables by taking the lowest common denominator approach. It works as a vector scope in air...so when you pan something hard left or right it appears in the same perspective in the stereo image that the vector scope is displaying, giving you a one to one correlation between your eyes and and ears.


It also eliminates the dual redundant mono info that L/R speakers require to recreate the phantom image. The result is a much clearer, phase coherent stereo image that is balanced and in proportion...not smeared, altered or enhanced by the L/R speakers and their placement.


You really owe it to yourself to check this thing out...It is truely a revolutionary device...It's all I ever listen to anymore...

Tom

[soundeslutz]

Originally Posted by DirkB

Off all the things gear related, I find stereo image not one of them .
What I mean is: creating a nice stereo image has to do with proper arrangement and mixing technique. Study the cd's you like very carefully on your monitors and try to hear what thechniques are used.

Just one tip: stereo synth/keyboard tracks rarely ever help in creating a wide image. Also: try to create space in the higher frequencies by rolling of from things like digital recorded guitars for example. Those tracks don't need anything above 4-8k generally, but can cloud up the frequency range that helps in creating a wide image.

Good luck,
Dirk

agreed

[theom]

just a thing that works for me... sometimes.

Try putting a mono track in a 3/4 pan to one side, send the track to a verb that sounds natural, now sum the verb rtn, or only use one side and pan that rtn the same as the track.

Or if you have some extra verbs put one on an insert of a mono track, so the return in panned with the track (watch the wet dry knob).

a couple panned dedicated verbs can really give you a natural wide sound and increase depth a lot.

[cfjis]

Originally Posted by cdog

It isn't cheap, but once you hear it, you may get hooked. Its like like a hybrid of pixie and angel dust specially produced for sprinkling on 2 track masters. You'll think you're tripping, but you're not.

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule...der_page_id=48

Has anyone tried out that K-Stereo DD-2?
I'd love to hear any feedback on it...

regards,
CJ