Treefight
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 868
- Joined: 2007/11/23 15:57:41
- Location: Boston
- Status: offline
Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
Folks:
Can someone explain whether (and how) the selection of stereo versus mono interleave on a track affects the track once a multi-track project is bounced down to a single stereo track?
In other words, I record in audio, all mono, and end up with, say 15 tracks. Some of them simply "sound" better with the stereo interleave button lit up, for example, if I want to widen the acoustic guitar.
I assume - but have no idea whether - the stereo interleave "sound" is bounced down when I render the project to a single stereo track, so that one would hear a discernable difference between the guitar on a bounced-down stereo track FROM a project in which the guitar's interleave was on "stereo" versus one in which it was on "mono."
Is that correct?
If so/not, what is the purpose of interleave and/or how is it normally used?
I seem to be getting fine results, it's just an annoyance that I've never really understood it's purpose - other than it apparently can take a mono track (again, like a guitar) and make it "sound" in stereo? - or is it actually somehow 'converting' it to stereo? And does it matter?
Also note the strong corellation between what you can do with Channel Tools depending on whether interleave is set to stereo or mono(?)
Thanks!
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 14:25:58
(permalink)
Take a look at this thread Here. It may answer some questions.
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 2004/11/15 12:40:02
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 14:37:54
(permalink)
Greetings Chris,
Open up the help file and look for the signal flow diagram. You will see the Phase/Interleave switches just below the volume trim. The Interleave switch controls whether the signal path is stereo (with interleave on) or mono (with interleave off) from this point to the stereo pan.
If you have a stereo effect in the effect bin, then you need to have the interleave on, and yes, this will have a dramatic affect on the sound.
Regards,
David
P.s., This diagram will answer a lot of SONAR questions.
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 2004/11/15 12:40:02
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 14:40:58
(permalink)
Greetings Chris,
Continuing …
The interleave has a huge affect on mono tracks that have stereo reverb applied to the effects bin. See if you can figure it out and describe it in 1000 words or less.
Regards,
David
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
Treefight
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 868
- Joined: 2007/11/23 15:57:41
- Location: Boston
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 15:24:52
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: dcastle
Greetings Chris,
Continuing …
The interleave has a huge affect on mono tracks that have stereo reverb applied to the effects bin. See if you can figure it out and describe it in 1000 words or less.
Regards,
David
1000 words or less? Since I charge by the hour, they will be very LOOOOOONG words, written V E R Y S L O W L Y...
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 15:39:02
(permalink)
I could answer better if I had a question that I could deal with. What you ask in your first post is based on the idea that a mono recorded track doesn't sound as good as a stereo track to you. You mention width as a reason. I am not sure how you got width from simply changing the interleave.
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 2004/11/15 12:40:02
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 15:46:32
(permalink)
I am not sure how you got width from simply changing the interleave. Unless there is a stereo effect, like reverb in the effects bin...
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
Treefight
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 868
- Joined: 2007/11/23 15:57:41
- Location: Boston
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 15:48:21
(permalink)
John - my question was not very specific, you are correct - the reason being that I didn't know enough to ask a better question. I apologize.
Since booting up Sonar and checking the help files (and the signal flow chart...) I have learned the answer to what I was trying to ask, which is that the interleave button simply determines whether the a track's "signal enters an effect or chain of effects as mono or stereo, regardless of the nature of the track" (quoting Sonar 8PE Help File, "Changing Track Settings" page).
As to my "width" comment, I was saying that a track sometimes sounds wider when interleave select is on "stereo" as opposed to mono. But that's probably because I likely had a stereo effect in the bin (e.g., S1, Channel Tools) and, therefore, the track (effect, actually) was working better with interleave set to stereo.
Thanks very much
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 2004/11/15 12:40:02
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 16:04:22
(permalink)
Good job! High five to you! [edit]BTW, this was in response to "Since booting up Sonar and checking the help files (and the signal flow chart...) I have learned the answer to what I was trying to ask"
post edited by dcastle - 2009/02/10 20:22:08
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
montezuma
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2520
- Joined: 2004/10/07 03:44:28
- Location: Australia
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 16:54:06
(permalink)
John - my question was not very specific, you are correct - the reason being that I didn't know enough to ask a better question. I apologize. You apologise? That's not good enuogh. Beg for forgiveness. More guilt...more guilt! jj
post edited by montezuma - 2009/02/10 17:02:34
|
Treefight
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 868
- Joined: 2007/11/23 15:57:41
- Location: Boston
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 17:25:30
(permalink)
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 19:54:38
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Treefight
John - my question was not very specific, you are correct - the reason being that I didn't know enough to ask a better question. I apologize.
Since booting up Sonar and checking the help files (and the signal flow chart...) I have learned the answer to what I was trying to ask, which is that the interleave button simply determines whether the a track's "signal enters an effect or chain of effects as mono or stereo, regardless of the nature of the track" (quoting Sonar 8PE Help File, "Changing Track Settings" page).
As to my "width" comment, I was saying that a track sometimes sounds wider when interleave select is on "stereo" as opposed to mono. But that's probably because I likely had a stereo effect in the bin (e.g., S1, Channel Tools) and, therefore, the track (effect, actually) was working better with interleave set to stereo.
Thanks very much
Cool!
|
plectrumpusher
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 479
- Joined: 2007/10/22 04:29:27
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 20:25:25
(permalink)
Just to further edumacte others who may dig this thread up later , some older stereo effects take the right and left and either sum them or dump one side all together then use delay , chourusing or phase tricks and other reverb DSP to generate a right and left "stereoized " version. That's how they can take a mono signal and make it sound stereo . More sophisticated pluggs maintain the left and right signal paths but as a result they sometimes don't "stereoize" mono signals .
Sorry if that is'nt 1000 words ! some of you earlier posters should Please feel free to elaborate and share more of your wisdom on this subject.I'm always looking to pick up all I can learn about all things stereo !!!
If you haven't got a smile on your face and laughter in your heart.......Then you are just an old sour fart!!
|
...wicked
Max Output Level: -1.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7360
- Joined: 2003/12/18 01:00:56
- Location: Seattle
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 20:31:38
(permalink)
I'm a big fan of mono sources wherever possible, so I can't say as I'm a big fan of "fake stereo". however, sometimes just wanna make that guitar/string/pad/etc. just fill up your soundstage. Especially when you start slathering on some verb or other time-based effect.
=========== The Fog People =========== Intel i7-4790 16GB RAM ASUS Z97 Roland OctaCapture Win10/64 SONAR Platinum 64-bit billions VSTs, some of which work
|
plectrumpusher
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 479
- Joined: 2007/10/22 04:29:27
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 20:37:51
(permalink)
agreed ,
to many faux stereo tracks only give you "Big Mono "
If you haven't got a smile on your face and laughter in your heart.......Then you are just an old sour fart!!
|
plectrumpusher
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 479
- Joined: 2007/10/22 04:29:27
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 20:42:11
(permalink)
John ,
I read that thread you linked and all I can say is that you are a very patient man !
If you haven't got a smile on your face and laughter in your heart.......Then you are just an old sour fart!!
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 21:02:51
(permalink)
John ,
I read that thread you linked and all I can say is that you are a very patient man ! That is a really nice thing to say. It made me laugh too. Its really great when someone understands things as I believe you do. Thanks.
|
rocket
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 88
- Joined: 2006/02/04 14:49:06
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 23:18:41
(permalink)
John, Normally, I wouldn't reply to this thread or drag up arguments from another thread, but, I too read the (lengthy) thread that you linked above and feel compelled to express my observations. It seems that the main thrust of both arguments were correct...you arguing the merits of the sonic characteristics of a stereo sound source vs. he arguing the merits of panning two or more mono sources within a stereo field to produce a single composite stereo image. Both arguments are valid and seemingly unrelated, i.e, apples to oranges. the threads have been entertaining, though...thanks for the input. 
post edited by rocket - 2009/02/10 23:24:31
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/10 23:30:22
(permalink)
John,
Normally, I wouldn't reply to this thread or drag up arguments from another thread, but, I too read the (lengthy) thread that you linked above and feel compelled to express my observations. It seems that the main thrust of both arguments were correct...you arguing the merits of the sonic characteristics of a stereo sound source vs. he arguing the merits of panning two or more mono sources within a stereo field to produce a single composite stereo image. Both arguments are valid and seemingly unrelated, i.e, apples to oranges.
the threads have been entertaining, though...thanks for the input. I think you may have missed the basic point of the thread. Also why I engaged in it.
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 2004/11/15 12:40:02
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2009/02/11 11:01:08
(permalink)
Greetings, Since nobody answered my implied question… ORIGINAL: dcastle
The interleave has a huge affect on mono tracks that have stereo reverb applied to the effects bin. See if you can figure it out and describe it in 1000 words or less. If you put a stereo reverb on an interleaved mono track and then pan it, you are not panning the mono signal and adding stereo reverb — which is probably what you would think — but you are changing the stereo balance of an effectively center panned signal with a stereo reverb. These are completely different and don't sound the same at all. The only way to pan a mono signal and apply stereo reverb is to pan the signal in its track and use a post fader send to a 100% wet reverb bus! Regards, David
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
rocket
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 88
- Joined: 2006/02/04 14:49:06
- Status: offline
|
mangoldp
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6
- Joined: 2007/11/08 06:10:32
- Location: Hanover, Germany
- Status: offline
Re: RE: Stereo v. Mono "interleave" and mixing
2014/02/21 13:17:21
(permalink)
Hi all,
I have a topic that fits to this interesting thread:
Due to the fact that the interleave switch is located in front of the Prochannel/EffectsBin I found an impact on my audio that I did not expect. If you use dynamics (mono) plug-ins like limiter/gate/compressor usually present in a vocal track you can not switch the track to stereo because of e.g. a stereo reverb at the end of the effects chain. If you do this the output of the dynamics plug-ins is getting diffuse.
My guess is that the two signals of the stereo audio are not processed exactly the same way by the mono effects a so they add an 'unwanted' stereo effect to the audio which corrupts the result.
Am I right? Can somebody confirm my analysis?
It would mean that you can NOT combine mono an stereo effects in the Prochannel/EffectsBin.
You always need a separate stereo Send/Return Bus in this case. A pity, because the latency of the system is getting worse then.
Thanks and regards,
Peter
|