R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.  (Read 8714 times)

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« on: September 08, 2010, 01:34:29 pm »

My latest and greatest:

http://www.post-consumer.com/ND/ptmf.mp3

Nicholas



Logged

daniel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 157
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2010, 02:24:30 pm »

great!
Logged

Otitis Media

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 564
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2010, 02:49:26 pm »

I dig. Don't you love the amount of reverb you can get away with in mono? Things live in their own space pretty well here, though I'm missing the bass guitar a bit. I'd also delay the shaker coming in so that it lands on the downbeat of the next bar rather than sort of lazily fading up.

You can push the guitar licks up more for some more contrast, as well. It's a good basic mix, from what I can hear, now the trick is to get it moving so that it's got some life in it. Your BVox can also come up a bit.

I realize I just suggested turning a ton of stuff up, which may or may not totally fark all the balances up...

-D
Logged
Dan Roth
Hired Gun

Blackie Pawless

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2010, 03:30:31 pm »

Like the song and singer and overall vibe.
Like the Led Zep "Boogie With Stu" ending.
I actually like the shaker coming in early before the downbeat like Beatles/Stones often did with percussion. Okay, enough of my dinosaur analogies...
On a subjective production level, got a little worn out with so much pedal steel.
Mono is nice touch for this kinda thing.
Who's the artist?
Logged
Scott Baggett

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2010, 04:45:24 pm »

There is no bass guitar.  Should we put one on there?  Nick felt the piano was sufficient.

Nicholas




Otitis Media wrote on Wed, 08 September 2010 11:49

I dig. Don't you love the amount of reverb you can get away with in mono? Things live in their own space pretty well here, though I'm missing the bass guitar a bit. I'd also delay the shaker coming in so that it lands on the downbeat of the next bar rather than sort of lazily fading up.

You can push the guitar licks up more for some more contrast, as well. It's a good basic mix, from what I can hear, now the trick is to get it moving so that it's got some life in it. Your BVox can also come up a bit.

I realize I just suggested turning a ton of stuff up, which may or may not totally fark all the balances up...

-D

Logged

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2010, 05:07:24 pm »

breathe wrote on Wed, 08 September 2010 16:45

There is no bass guitar.  Should we put one on there?  Nick felt the piano was sufficient.


That is a decision that the "production team" needs to make... in other words, that is between you, and Nick, and who ever else has a voice on the project.  The readers of this forum do not have a voice in your production, and [frankly] you shouldn't be asking them for a voice -- that's what "Gearslutz" is for - people who don't deserve a voice to feel like they're being heard].

Go for what feels right to the production team and you will never be wrong... go with a "consensus" and you will never be right!!

Peace.
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2010, 07:22:15 pm »

That's a really good point Fletcher.

Nicholas




Logged

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2010, 07:52:09 pm »

You know though, that being said, it's still cool to get feedback on a mix from people who are competent.  I can't stand GS and would never go there for help.  But I trust most of the people on your forum and I don't think asking them for advice is wrong.  I think you opinion (however noble) presupposes that I know exactly what I'm doing, which isn't necessarily the case.  THAT being said, I'm not about to credit "Fletcher's PSW Forum" as a co-producer of the record.

Nicholas



Logged

Otitis Media

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 564
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2010, 08:12:42 pm »

Fletcher wrote on Wed, 08 September 2010 17:07

breathe wrote on Wed, 08 September 2010 16:45

There is no bass guitar.  Should we put one on there?  Nick felt the piano was sufficient.


That is a decision that the "production team" needs to make... in other words, that is between you, and Nick, and who ever else has a voice on the project.  The readers of this forum do not have a voice in your production, and [frankly] you shouldn't be asking them for a voice -- that's what "Gearslutz" is for - people who don't deserve a voice to feel like they're being heard].

Go for what feels right to the production team and you will never be wrong... go with a "consensus" and you will never be right!!

Peace.


Fletcher is right - reading my comments, I basically started barking commands about how *I* would mix it without any idea what the band and the people involved thought was right. I guess if I were one of the Lord Alges, I could do that kind of shit and get away with it.

Personally, I wonder what a bass guitar would sound like on the track, but if everyone THERE feels it doesn't need it, then it doesn't.

It's a good sounding mix, and I guess the things I pointed out may amount to personal preferences within a vacuum at this point.
Logged
Dan Roth
Hired Gun

Otitis Media

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 564
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2010, 08:18:04 pm »

breathe wrote on Wed, 08 September 2010 19:52

 I think you opinion (however noble) presupposes that I know exactly what I'm doing, which isn't necessarily the case.


I can't speak for anyone else, but I have never, ever felt like I know what the hell I'm doing. Many here might likely say that's an accurate feeling.
Logged
Dan Roth
Hired Gun

trock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2018
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #10 on: September 08, 2010, 08:56:49 pm »

Go for what feels right to the production team and you will never be wrong... go with a "consensus" and you will never be right!!

Classic

i am beginning to think a book on fletcherism's would do the whole industry a world of good
Logged

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2010, 09:08:38 am »

Quote:

Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.


Very seldom a 'way to go' for me here. I mix an average of 48 tracks per mix sometimes over 60, and I need to use the frequency bands' real state to the fullest. Working with a mono mix is alright for speech, guitar/vocal performances and things that aren't too complex in both production and arrangement, but regardless of the miracles the older engineers achieved in the 50's, why would anybody want not to record in stereo or regress to ancient mixing methods?

Regards,

Edward

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2010, 09:36:39 am »

Dan Roth had a couple good ideas for improving the mix, which I employed to good effect.  This, I now consider to be the final mix.

http://www.post-consumer.com/ND/ptmmf2.mp3


Nicholas




Logged

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2010, 09:56:29 am »

Also, why would anyone want to create a song that used 60 tracks?  I'm not saying that's a recipe for disaster, I'm just saying it seems weird.

Nicholas



Logged

Ryan Slowey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 591
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2010, 10:06:37 am »

Edward Vinatea wrote on Thu, 09 September 2010 09:08

why would anybody want not to record in stereo or regress to ancient mixing methods?

Regards,

Edward


Because when it works, as it does here, it sounds good. What other reason do you need?

Logged
Ryan Slowey
Albany, NY

My music: http://maggotbrainny.bandcamp.com

breathe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1104
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2010, 10:08:33 am »

BTW, my mix was put together on a Speck X.Sum, which is what I'm using until my MCI gets repaired.  I think this mix will sound considerably better if my artist can wait for me to remix it on my repaired MCI.

Nicholas

p.s. This record was the one I had to seriously debuzz with the Cube-Tec software.



Logged

MagnetoSound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2589
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2010, 03:54:33 am »

Edward Vinatea wrote on Thu, 09 September 2010 14:08

Quote:

Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.


Very seldom a 'way to go' for me here. I mix an average of 48 tracks per mix sometimes over 60, and I need to use the frequency bands' real state to the fullest.




To me, stereo is an effect, nothing more nothing less, and completely optional depending on source. Panning, likewise.

If you find that you need to be panning tracks apart to make them fit in the 'frequency band', I would suggest you look for the overlapping parts in your arrangement and fix them, or perhaps deal with the mush with a tad of EQ. IMHO, stereo panning should not be seen as a mandatory workaround for a cluttered mix. A good mix will work in mono at least as well as it does in stereo.


And sometimes mono really does just sound better.  Smile


Logged

Music can make me get right up out of my chair and start dancing or it can get me so pumped up I have to walk around the block.
It can also knock me back and make me sit there and cry like a little baby. This shit is as powerful as any drug!!!
- Larry DeVivo

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2011, 11:26:27 am »

I realize this is now an old thread. However, it has to be said that when one extracts only one sentence from a paragraph, it's easier to be read in the wrong context and this should also be considered a form of 'trolling'.  

Ryan Slowey wrote on Thu, 09 September 2010 10:06

Edward Vinatea wrote on Thu, 09 September 2010 09:08

why would anybody want not to record in stereo or regress to ancient mixing methods?

Regards,

Edward


Because when it works, as it does here, it sounds good. What other reason do you need?




My initial statement was meant for very complex mixes.

Having said so, in response to Ryan's question and assuming his good faith, I can only answer it with another question: how do you know a stereo version of the same tune wouldn't sound just as good if not better?

If you like to hear things monoish, you can always pan parts or elements only a few degrees from the center and still appear to sound mono. Naturally this wouldn't make a lot of sense for some applications, but you get my point.

If one finds people to hire you to mix mono mixes, great. Any work should be welcome, but I haven't been asked that in 20 years or so.

Maybe other engineers on this board would like to share some of their work doing mono mixes? That would be interesting to hear, I think.

FWIW.

Regards,

Edward




Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2011, 12:21:57 pm »

MagnetoSound wrote on Fri, 10 September 2010 03:54

Edward Vinatea wrote on Thu, 09 September 2010 14:08

Quote:

Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.


Very seldom a 'way to go' for me here. I mix an average of 48 tracks per mix sometimes over 60, and I need to use the frequency bands' real state to the fullest.




To me, stereo is an effect, nothing more nothing less, and completely optional depending on source. Panning, likewise.


To me it's not an effect but a necessity. One that my clients demand it.

Quote:

If you find that you need to be panning tracks apart to make them fit in the 'frequency band', I would suggest you look for the overlapping parts in your arrangement and fix them, or perhaps deal with the mush with a tad of EQ. IMHO, stereo panning should not be seen as a mandatory workaround for a cluttered mix. A good mix will work in mono at least as well as it does in stereo.


Agreed. But, in case you missed my point: think of "frequency bands' real state" as the spectrum you have to deal with and can fill up; the right and the left channels are both spanning for our practical purposes from 1 Hz to 20kHz.

Now, you can have same or similar elements filtered differently on both left/right channels, but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels.

In a convoluted arrangement, this can mean the option of having a part, i.e., another voice or element, more clearly separated and defined than any mono version can.

Quote:


And sometimes mono really does just sound better.  Smile


You would need to test that against its stereo version and still, those results would be mainly 'subjective'.

Hope this clarifies.

Edward

mgod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4020
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2011, 12:25:42 pm »

Mono is often more compatible with how people actually use music. You make a nice stereo mix, one speaker or earbud is out, a car's left door panel is blown or rotted, someone's stuck their speakers behind a couch and out of phase. Things are getting better this way, but there's still no way to control for it. Mono, everybody hears everything.
Logged
"There IS no Coolometer." - Larry Janus

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #20 on: January 02, 2011, 12:34:26 pm »

mgod wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 12:25

You make a nice stereo mix, one speaker or earbud is out, a car's left door panel is blown or rotted, someone's stuck their speakers behind a couch and out of phase. Things are getting better this way, but there's still no way to control for it. Mono, everybody hears everything.


In my opinion, that shouldn't be the defining reason as to why mono is better. You can still drive a car with a flat tire, but nobody likes to do that.

Regards,

Edward

MagnetoSound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2589
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #21 on: January 02, 2011, 01:58:30 pm »



Wow Ed, you are really on it today. I can hardly stumble across a thread where you are not engaged in combat.

The premise of this thread is, Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go. Can you not comprehend this idea at all? Does your mindset allow no room for this concept?



Edward Vinatea wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 17:21

Quote:

If you find that you need to be panning tracks apart to make them fit in the 'frequency band', I would suggest you look for the overlapping parts in your arrangement and fix them, or perhaps deal with the mush with a tad of EQ. IMHO, stereo panning should not be seen as a mandatory workaround for a cluttered mix. A good mix will work in mono at least as well as it does in stereo.


Agreed. But, in case you missed my point: think of "frequency bands' real state" as the spectrum you have to deal with and can fill up; the right and the left channels are both spanning for our practical purposes from 1 Hz to 20kHz.




I do not know what a "frequency bands' real state" is, but since you've used the term twice, I will eliminate the possibility of a typo in your previous post and guess that you mean "real estate", and that you are referring to some idea of capacity - that a stereo mix is two discrete volumes of frequency range which should be 'filled up' with as much material as you can possibly squeeze in there!

Forgive me if I feel a little queasy.  Smile


By the way - for our practical purposes - how much musical energy is there at 1Hz?



Quote:

Now, you can have same or similar elements filtered differently on both left/right channels, but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels.




Do what? ... middle and side? Or mono/stereo? Either way, I can make no sense of this statement whatsoever.



Edward Vinatea wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 17:21

Quote:

And sometimes mono really does just sound better.  Smile



You would need to test that against its stereo version and still, those results would be mainly 'subjective'.

Hope this clarifies.

Edward




Try and remember the word 'sometimes' - how much more subjective could it be?


You've not clarified anything, I'm afraid.


Logged

Music can make me get right up out of my chair and start dancing or it can get me so pumped up I have to walk around the block.
It can also knock me back and make me sit there and cry like a little baby. This shit is as powerful as any drug!!!
- Larry DeVivo

Jay Kadis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2165
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2011, 02:02:55 pm »

mgod wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 09:25

Mono is often more compatible with how people actually use music. You make a nice stereo mix, one speaker or earbud is out, a car's left door panel is blown or rotted, someone's stuck their speakers behind a couch and out of phase. Things are getting better this way, but there's still no way to control for it. Mono, everybody hears everything.
I'm not defining my mixes for people with compromised systems:  they wouldn't notice the difference anyway.

Having grown up with mono, the introduction of stereo was like opening a new vista.  I spent long nights with headphones listening to the creative ways to use the second dimension in music mixes.  Mono-ing stereo mixes to check polarity issues invariably makes the mix seem lifeless to me now.  I only do mono mixes if there isn't enough source material to warrant stereo.

Sean Eldon Qualls

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 445
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #23 on: January 02, 2011, 02:43:03 pm »

Jay Kadis wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 14:02

Mono-ing stereo mixes to check polarity issues invariably makes the mix seem lifeless to me now


much different from actually MIXING the song in mono, innit?
Logged
Sean Eldon
Gainfully unemployed / Back to freelancing

"Gearslutz -- Where the uneducated go to fight it out with the misinformed" - Dave Hecht

Jay Kadis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2165
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2011, 02:48:11 pm »

Sean Eldon Qualls wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 11:43

Jay Kadis wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 14:02

Mono-ing stereo mixes to check polarity issues invariably makes the mix seem lifeless to me now


much different from actually MIXING the song in mono, innit?
There's a difference of course, but I still miss the lateral spread even in mixes intended for mono.

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2011, 03:10:00 pm »

MagnetoSound wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 13:58



Wow Ed, you are really on it today. I can hardly stumble across a thread where you are not engaged in combat.


Combat? And you are taking things I'm saying very nicely out of context as the smart troll you think you are, aren't you?

Quote:

The premise of this thread is, Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go. Can you not comprehend this idea at all? Does your mindset allow no room for this concept?


And I did say 'sometimes', yes:
Quote:

Edward said:
Working with a mono mix is alright for speech, guitar/vocal performances and things that aren't too complex in both production and arrangement...


I can't help it if you don't "comprehend" my comments in your own native language.

Quote:


Edward Vinatea wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 17:21

Quote:

If you find that you need to be panning tracks apart to make them fit in the 'frequency band', I would suggest you look for the overlapping parts in your arrangement and fix them, or perhaps deal with the mush with a tad of EQ. IMHO, stereo panning should not be seen as a mandatory workaround for a cluttered mix. A good mix will work in mono at least as well as it does in stereo.


Agreed. But, in case you missed my point: think of "frequency bands' real state" as the spectrum you have to deal with and can fill up; the right and the left channels are both spanning for our practical purposes from 1 Hz to 20kHz.



I do not know what a "frequency bands' real state" is, but since you've used the term twice, I will eliminate the possibility of a typo in your previous post and guess that you mean "real estate", and that you are referring to some idea of capacity - that a stereo mix is two discrete volumes of frequency range which should be 'filled up' with as much material as you can possibly squeeze in there!

Forgive me if I feel a little queasy.  Smile


Can someone make the same spelling mistake twice? What difference does it make if even when you know what I meant to say, you just don't "comprehend" it? Real Estate is correct, though.

Quote:


By the way - for our practical purposes - how much musical energy is there at 1Hz?


On a "professional" forum where things like increasing the nyquist filter so as to avoid 'ripple effects' in the pass-band and which are discussed ad nauseam, you have the nerve to throw in that silly question? It's not about how much you can squeeze to 1 Hz or 38Hz for that matter, but balance. Just because one can fill it up, it doesn't have to be necessarily to the rim.

Quote:



Quote:

Now, you can have same or similar elements filtered differently on both left/right channels, but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels.



Quote:


Do what? ... middle and side? Or mono/stereo? Either way, I can make no sense of this statement whatsoever.



Right, you don't comprehend or have any idea of what I am talking about, and thus, you feel intimidated to the extent that you need to ask me in the most impolite way to explain it to you on a public forum.

Maybe you've never captured and mixed stereo tracks in your life. Maybe I'll explain this approach another day when you don't feel so "queasy".

Until then, have a nice Sunday.

Edward,

PS: M/S channels always mean 'mid and side channels' not "mono/stereo".

Bubba#$%Kron

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 243
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2011, 03:24:30 pm »

index.php/fa/16102/0/
Logged
"When we make music we don't do it in order to reach a certain point, such as the end of the composition. If that were the purpose of music then obviously the fastest players would be the best. Also, when we are dancing we are not aiming to arrive at a particular place on the floor as in a journey. When we dance, the journey itself is the point, as when we play music the playing itself is the point."  -Alan Watts

MagnetoSound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2589
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2011, 04:19:32 pm »

Edward Vinatea wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 20:10


Dan wrote:

Ed wrote:

Now, you can have same or similar elements filtered differently on both left/right channels, but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels.



Do what? ... middle and side? Or mono/stereo? Either way, I can make no sense of this statement whatsoever.



Right, you don't comprehend or have any idea of what I am talking about, and thus, you feel intimidated to the extent that you need to ask me in the most impolite way to explain it to you on a public forum.

Maybe you've never captured and mixed stereo tracks in your life. Maybe I'll explain this approach another day when you don't feel so "queasy".




No, I think you need to explain it more coherently. I'm feeling fine. Please, explain how you can manipulate M/S signals after they have been blended with discrete stereo (or mono) material in a stereo mix.



Logged

Music can make me get right up out of my chair and start dancing or it can get me so pumped up I have to walk around the block.
It can also knock me back and make me sit there and cry like a little baby. This shit is as powerful as any drug!!!
- Larry DeVivo

mgod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4020
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2011, 04:30:04 pm »

Jay Kadis wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 11:02

I'm not defining my mixes for people with compromised systems:  they wouldn't notice the difference anyway.

Yeah, sure - why not? But a lot of people aren't going to hear a goodly chunk of your work. Just the way it happens, unfortunately. Like watching Kubrick in pan and scan.
Logged
"There IS no Coolometer." - Larry Janus

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2011, 07:12:56 pm »

MagnetoSound wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 16:19

Edward Vinatea wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 20:10


Dan wrote:

Ed wrote:

Now, you can have same or similar elements filtered differently on both left/right channels, but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels.



Do what? ... middle and side? Or mono/stereo? Either way, I can make no sense of this statement whatsoever.



Right, you don't comprehend or have any idea of what I am talking about, and thus, you feel intimidated to the extent that you need to ask me in the most impolite way to explain it to you on a public forum.

Maybe you've never captured and mixed stereo tracks in your life. Maybe I'll explain this approach another day when you don't feel so "queasy".




No, I think you need to explain it more coherently. I'm feeling fine. Please, explain how you can manipulate M/S signals after they have been blended with discrete stereo (or mono) material in a stereo mix.







I beg your pardon? Now that I've called upon your manipulative and berating comments, you expect me to "explain" things? FYI, I don't need to explain anything to you. Especially when your question has nothing to do with what I've even said.

I said:
Quote:

"but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels".


My statement assumes that you know how to create a sum-and-difference matrix and that your mix is still a work in progress, i.e., maybe you are even mixing with stems. But that's another subject for another day in another thread.

Here is a clue: the mid and side channels can be adjusted and reconfigured to more accurately represent the conventional left and right stereo image, thus useful for corrective phase cancellation issues, controlling frequency content, and while you can go overboard with m-s foolishness, it isn't really anything that a well balanced, well distributed {frequency wise} "discrete" stereo mix can't achieve. But for some situations, very useful indeed.

Edward

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #30 on: January 02, 2011, 07:27:47 pm »

mgod wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 16:30

Jay Kadis wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 11:02

I'm not defining my mixes for people with compromised systems:  they wouldn't notice the difference anyway.

Yeah, sure - why not? But a lot of people aren't going to hear a goodly chunk of your work. Just the way it happens, unfortunately.


...but we're not working for the "lowest common denominator" -- we're supposed to be making the highest quality product possible.

We need to consider "sub-standard" listening environments -- but only to make sure that our product works "everywhere" - not an effort to tailor the product for those "sub - standard" environments.

Peace.
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

mgod

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4020
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #31 on: January 02, 2011, 09:39:47 pm »

Fletcher wrote on Sun, 02 January 2011 16:27

...but we're not working for the "lowest common denominator" -- we're supposed to be making the highest quality product possible.

We need to consider "sub-standard" listening environments -- but only to make sure that our product works "everywhere" - not an effort to tailor the product for those "sub - standard" environments.

Peace.

Sure, sure, we always do. But we ought to be doing it knowing that for a lot of people, maybe most people, mono would work better  for hearing all the parts of the music.
Logged
"There IS no Coolometer." - Larry Janus

marcel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #32 on: January 03, 2011, 12:08:12 am »

A good mono mix is a thing of beauty, at least as much as a good stereo (or surround, for that matter) mix.

While I agree that we should be striving for the best possible product, I don't think mono mixes are somehow inferior to multi-channel.
Logged
Best, Marcel

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #33 on: January 03, 2011, 12:59:07 am »

The great thing about using M/S in rock recording is that you just eliminate the S, and have a decent sound.
Logged

MagnetoSound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2589
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #34 on: January 03, 2011, 07:38:36 am »

Edward Vinatea wrote on Mon, 03 January 2011 00:12

I said:


Quote:

"but with the advantage of being able to manipulate the M/S channels".




My statement assumes that you know how to create a sum-and-difference matrix and that your mix is still a work in progress, i.e., maybe you are even mixing with stems. But that's another subject for another day in another thread.

Here is a clue: the mid and side channels can be adjusted and reconfigured to more accurately represent the conventional left and right stereo image, thus useful for corrective phase cancellation issues, controlling frequency content, and while you can go overboard with m-s foolishness, it isn't really anything that a well balanced, well distributed {frequency wise} "discrete" stereo mix can't achieve. But for some situations, very useful indeed.

Edward





Edward,


As we all know, good stereo recordings are designed to be collapsible to mono and M/S recordings are no different in that respect.



In fact they are, in essence, mono to begin with!




Edward said:

Working with a mono mix is alright for speech, guitar/vocal performances and things that aren't too complex in both production and arrangement...




You are correct here, but it is not just about what is 'alright' - mono can actually be preferable!


Sometimes less is more, you know - is what is being said by the majority of posters in this thread.



So I would like to offer some friendly advice to help you get along: instead of talking down to people here in the manner that you do, why don't you consider the opinion of some of the most learned and experienced professionals on this forum (I do not mean myself, even though your suggestion that I have no experience of the various techniques of stereo capture is incorrect and unnecessarily insulting) - and actually read the posts of those for whom mixing in mono has been no hindrance to achieving great success in their careers, and who are extolling the virtues of mono mixing for a variety of sonic reasons - rather than dismissing it out of hand for reasons of marketability?



In my humble opinion, and many others, stereo is not an absolute requirement for a good mix - it is simply an effect, one of many, one that can be chosen or not according to taste and/or desirability.


That said, I do not live in an ivory tower - of course I accept that, in the modern world, stereo is the accepted norm and for that reason is generally expected by both producer and consumer alike. However, in my experience, mono done well is almost indistinguishable from stereo on casual listening. It can have depth, nuance and texture just like a good stereo mix, but greater solidity - and with the advantage that the balance is secure at all listening positions, and on all playback systems that one is likely to encounter in the real world.



YMMV.

Best Wishes,

Dan


Logged

Music can make me get right up out of my chair and start dancing or it can get me so pumped up I have to walk around the block.
It can also knock me back and make me sit there and cry like a little baby. This shit is as powerful as any drug!!!
- Larry DeVivo

Edward Vinatea

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 204
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #35 on: January 03, 2011, 09:58:31 am »

MagnetoSound wrote on Mon, 03 January 2011 07:38


So I would like to offer some friendly advice to help you get along: instead of talking down to people here in the manner that you do, why don't you consider the opinion of some of the most learned and experienced professionals on this forum (I do not mean myself, even though your suggestion that I have no experience of the various techniques of stereo capture is incorrect and unnecessarily insulting) -.....



And my advice to you is that you learn the difference between having confidence and having an 'attitude' on a professional forum. In addition, learn to respect and pay careful attention to what others are saying. When you leave comments such as the ones you just did above, it only makes you look more insecure than knowledgeable.

After your seemingly unprovoked and pointless bickering, I am glad we can finally establish that "mono is preferably" to you, while stereo is preferable to my clients.

In the future, keep in mind that my personal views don't have to automatically negate your own.

Have a nice day,

Edward

MagnetoSound

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2589
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #36 on: January 03, 2011, 11:33:04 am »


Have a nice day Edward.  Smile


Logged

Music can make me get right up out of my chair and start dancing or it can get me so pumped up I have to walk around the block.
It can also knock me back and make me sit there and cry like a little baby. This shit is as powerful as any drug!!!
- Larry DeVivo

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Sometimes a mono mix is the way to go.
« Reply #37 on: January 03, 2011, 02:00:27 pm »

Most of the elements in "stereo" mixes are indeed mono sources that are panned for the illusion of space.  There are some stereo elements that are often found - usually things like reverbs and such, but other than things like "drum overheads" and possibly "room tracks" there are usually rather few elements that are truly stereo.

At the end of the day, I've always found it to be rather important that the "mix" not lose anything but "left / right size" when the mono button is engaged.  There shouldn't be a build up or cancelation in any of the frequency ranges... which I've found is usually best accomplished by mixing in mono for the majority of a mix situation... panning when monitoring in mono can actually give you quite a bit of information that you won't necessarily get from the mix when monitoring exclusively in stereo.

To each their own... but I have found this to be a viable working program.  As always, YMMV.

Peace
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up