Can't be bothered standing above the parapet. Just creates more nastiness, pettiness, unfounded, contentless etc. Best to ignore.

This is not directed at any individual, just an observation, but why do people not use the BLOCK MEMBER option for those they find objectionable.  I currently have one person blocked and all I see are wonderful green lines where their posts would be.  Yes, it does nothing for me when others when they quote the individual, but ultimately it washes away any urges I would have to give into my need to respond. 

Jind


This is not directed at any individual, just an observation, but why do people not use the BLOCK MEMBER option for those they find objectionable.  I currently have one person blocked and all I see are wonderful green lines where their posts would be.  Yes, it does nothing for me when others when they quote the individual, but ultimately it washes away any urges I would have to give into my need to respond. 

While my gut tells me to just let this go - and I will - I will say I DID put him on ignore for quite some time.


But in my belief that we, as humans, evolve, I took him off ignore awhile back.   Oh well.


C'est la crap LOL

The basic idea is that you separate the shared content (the mid) and the unique content (the side) and treat them differently.

With the EQ you can make a signaificant low cut in the side and boost a bit of lows in the mid. You can also add a top shelf boost to the sides.
 
This will give the effect of centering the low frequencies and there will be probably less bass flutter in just about any listening room or situation you end up in. The bass will sound noticeably louder and more clear... more so than if you just turned the bass instruments up.

This will also enhance the unique info in the sides and make the mix seem wider as you push the top shelf levels up.

When you are done, you reassemble the M/S as L/R using a MS tool.

Of course one thing we are discussing is that many state of the art plugins have this built right inside... you don't need a special M/S tool.






Now imagine doing this with other processes like compression, or delay, or reverb.

Anything is possible.

all the best,
mike

Great topic Billy! 

Jind


For those having never dipped their toes into the topic, there are quite a few resources that will provide an introduction to the methods and impacts of Mid/Side recording, and processing.

A couple quick primers can be found in these links:

http://www.uaudio.com/blog/mid-side-mic-recording/

http://www.bluecataudio.com//Vault/Doc/MidSideProcessing.pdf

Personally, I'm not sure I could add anything substantive to a conversation on it, but it could be interesting to see what others bring to the table.

Thanks for these links...bookmarked them for further study!

Great topic, but any way the OP can edit the title to be more descriptive? I really missed that there was any content here from the title.

jamescollins


Billy, despite being treated so badly in this thread for absolutely no reason, I'd love it if you would explain, in detail, your uses for M/S processing. I have recorded a fair bit with the mics in an M/S configuration, but I must admit, I've mostly processed in M/S during post if there is a problem that needs fixing, never as a creative enhancement. 

I'll understand if youve been completely turned off on this thread, but I'd love to get a discussion going too. 

John T, why the constant effort to be a prick? It's working very well. Actually, don't answer that, let's get back to the OP and talk about M/S processing - I'm keen to learn. 

James,


First thanks for your support, I appreciate it.


Keeping in mind that less can be more (and often is), I really use M/S processing very very subtly.   If one records and mixes well enough, M/S processing is just another tool, like any other.


That being said ...  I mentioned that I have bx_control on my master bus normal template.   It's main purpose in most cases is to simply get rid of some of the mud that can and does build up in a mix.


This tends to be more acute in dance/techno music because EDM producers (of which I consider myself one on ocassion lol) push the "bottom" a lot.   Yet clarity is very important down there.


This is a classic area for M/S processing.


If we keep in mind that bass frequencies, generally are not directional (ie, it's hard to tell where they are coming from), one can change that dynamic by forcing them into the center OR removing them from there.


Again, in dance or techno type music, that "center" tends to get filled up reallllly quickly.  


Using BX_Control as an example, it simply allows you to dial in what frequency range will be forced into the MID (center/mono) area.


It takes about 2 seconds to experiment and hear the diff.   Sweet ;)


There was a time I was frustrated in not being able to get "that sound" I wanted on the kick in some of my tracks.  Then - like some of you, I was turned on to M/S processing (I blame Bit Flipper - our very special resource here lol).   

Reading about M/S processing seemed to be mostly about mic techniques which, while valuable and of interest, wasn't where I needed the benefit since I was not doing acoustic or mic recording.

When I got the bx_control (I forget which mastering engineer was using it at the time and wa why I got it to play with), I was immediately excited that such a slight/small twist of a dial would forever change me - and the sound I wanted to get, and now could.

The general concept, again is this:

The MID signal content contains what is mostly the MONO material (you can review the technical explanation at your own time) and the SIDE content contains mostly the STEREO material and each of these can be somewhat and/or mostly isolated.

If you add to that the ability to limit what frequency range is affected OR is fed or is REMOVED, well, I think you see how M/S processing can be a useful tool for adding or taking away some space or clutter or mud, etc.

If you have an M/S plugin (channel tools is one, but there are others that have more control/functionality) you can experiment by just listening to the M or S and you will see/hear right away what a M/S processor does.

It's not as complicated as it may seem or sound.  But with the right plugin and settings, you get control of material that most non M/S plugins simply can't yield.

There are some old and new techniques that have all been based around M/S processing but I think what matters most is how one decides to use it at the moment because every track is different and that M/S material changes in that regard.

As has been pointed out ... using M/S processing for EQ is a big deal these days and really does open up some possibillities that non M/S EQ simply cannot.

Well I hope this has been useful.  And I'm glad some of you actually do see the benefit of this topic- and I thank those who have contributed to it.   My whole intention was to add to our collective dialogue of sharing ideas, techniques.

Thanks.

jamescollins

The basic idea is that you separate the shared content (the mid) and the unique content (the side) and treat them differently. With the EQ you can make a signaificant low cut in the side and boost a bit of lows in the mid. You can also add a top shelf boost to the sides.   This will give the effect of centering the low frequencies and there will be probably less bass flutter in just about any listening room or situation you end up in. The bass will sound noticeably louder and more clear... more so than if you just turned the bass instruments up. This will also enhance the unique info in the sides and make the mix seem wider as you push the top shelf levels up. When you are done, you reassemble the M/S as L/R using a MS tool. Of course one thing we are discussing is that many state of the art plugins have this built right inside... you don't need a special M/S tool. Now imagine doing this with other processes like compression, or delay, or reverb. Anything is possible.

Thanks Mike, sounds like I'm going to be having a whole lot of fun over the next few weeks!

James,


As has been mentioned here and elsewhere, I would suggest heading to the FabFilter Site and watch some of their videos.  There's some really cool techniques available to us all using M/S plugins.

Thanks a tonne billy - like I said, I previously viewed M/S processing as a technique to fix problematic mixes, I really have no idea why I haven't delved deeper into it, because as you have pointed out, it can be a very powerful and useful technique. Maybe I've been too caught up trying to master other areas of production and didn't even want to think about something new! It's definitely time now though, so thanks Billy, you've Inspired me to grow in another area of audio production (well, at least attempt to grow!) - maybe this forum isn't so bad after all!!

jamescollins


Thanks a tonne billy - like I said, I previously viewed M/S processing as a technique to fix problematic mixes, I really have no idea why I haven't delved deeper into it, because as you have pointed out, it can be a very powerful and useful technique. Maybe I've been too caught up trying to master other areas of production and didn't even want to think about something new! It's definitely time now though, so thanks Billy, you've Inspired me to grow in another area of audio production (well, at least attempt to grow!) - maybe this forum isn't so bad after all!!

I Am humbled by your comment, James.  Thank you.

bitflipper


I am extremely hip. Unfortunately, I am hip based on the standards of hipness from 1973. 

John, you're being disingenuous. Yes, M/S technology is almost as old as stereo recording, but it was invented to solve the problem of mono/stereo compatibility on vinyl records and only much later became a creative tool. And it's only been in the last 4-5 years that it's become a popular enhancement to digital plugins.

However, I get your point, which is "what is there to say about it, really?". 

I think it's worthy of discussion for the simple reason that it's a useful technique that most bedroom recordists don't use. Or worse, use badly, to the detriment of mono compatibility.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. It's a great tool for widening or narrowing something but like most effects, a little can go a long way. If most would check their mixes as mono more often, they would notice how detrimental it could become if overdone.

Great topic Billy!

I'm looking forward to reading more about this as I learned it recently and any info would go a long way. I just wish the BS was not in the thread.

I think you got it wrong though. Humans have not evolved that much from the caveman days in how we treat each other as a species. Were still a savage bunch or dumb****es. Sad isn't it? With all we've learned technicly, we still can't treat each other with respect.

Thanks Billie,

Apart from the bits of trash our friend has sprayed about the place, this has been a really informative thread.
You write very well, and I for one (and many others I'm sure) enjoy reading your comments. It's given me food for thought. Just wish I had a studio in which to play around with it.

BTW - nice to see you around here more regularly now that SONAR is again workable for us. The journey from X1 release to X1C (and now X1D) stability was sure a rough time for some of us.

Hi Billy,

I'd like to explain that my initial response was based on my mistaken impression that the thread was focused on advocating for M/S implementation in ProChannel.

I like the M/S and dislike the ProChannel... so I became confused about your more general intent, which it seems, was to encourage discussion and learning.

Please accept my apologies for having initially responded in a way that served to trivialize your interest and the subject. I see now that my post demonstrated poor behavior on my part.

all the very best,
mike