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.
|
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".