Stereo Imaging

[357mag]

If I choose to use a stereo imaging plug-in do I insert it during the mixing phase or do I wait until the mastering phase to add it.

I may want to see if I can make my recorded guitar part a little wider.

[PH68]

Either.
Depends what else you have going on in the mix.

[Lynx_TWO]

I'd personally recommend doing it in the mixing phase since you only want the imaging plugin to affect specific tracks. If you use the imaging plugin during the mastering stage, it'll affect the entire mix including the vocals which is not ideal at all.

[SonicAxiom]

make sure to check the widening effect, whether applied to a specific track or to the master track, for mono compatibility with a correlation meter or stereo scope located after the effect. Also check solo'ed fx returns and keyboard signals for mono compatability during mixing. Too much widening creates phase issues that ultimately lead to frequency ranges or entire signals cancelling out when listened back in mono. Signals with poor mono compatibility show increasingly horizontally-oriented shapes in a stereo scope (in the S plane) with just a horizontal line being the worst case representing 100% cancellation of the signal when listened back in mono.

.

[Lynx_TWO]

True… but does anyone actually listen to mono anymore?

[serr]

Originally Posted by 357mag

If I choose to use a stereo imaging plug-in do I insert it during the mixing phase or do I wait until the mastering phase to add it.

I may want to see if I can make my recorded guitar part a little wider.

Don't worry about that... we'll fix it in the mix!
Don't worry about that... we'll fix it in mastering!
Hey why does this sound like this?!

So... "mastering" has become misunderstood and some people think it's synonymous with doing volume war damage to a mix. As opposed to putting a final mix into consumer formats while doing no damage to the sound.

Anyway, my point is to work on things immediately upstream.

Trying to cram a stereo effect on a guitar part in mastering?! Holy shit!

[ashcat_lt]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

True… but does anyone actually listen to mono anymore?

Short answer: Yes all the time.

[Lynx_TWO]

Originally Posted by serr

Don't worry about that... we'll fix it in the mix!
Don't worry about that... we'll fix it in mastering!
Hey why does this sound like this?!

So... "mastering" has become misunderstood and some people think it's synonymous with doing volume war damage to a mix. As opposed to putting a final mix into consumer formats while doing no damage to the sound.

Anyway, my point is to work on things immediately upstream.

Trying to cram a stereo effect on a guitar part in mastering?! Holy shit!

Exactly. Always fix it in the recording, and failing that, fix it in the mix. By the time you get to mastering, it’s too late.

[jamesp]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

True… but does anyone actually listen to mono anymore?

Anyone listening on a smart speaker or a phone is likely to be listening in mono which makes mono compatibility even more important nowadays. Nearly every time I've suggested some music to check out to someone recently, they've called it up on their smart speaker or phone.

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

True… but does anyone actually listen to mono anymore?

adding to what others already mentioned: radio transmission - which is done in MS stereo - falls back to only the mono channel under poor reception conditions. Therefore, in Germany, many braodcasters are checking tracks for mono compatibility and will refuse airing them if they are not mono compatible.

.

[Lynx_TWO]

Ok, some good points have been made about mono . Although I’d rather have something be brilliant in stereo than mediocre for the sake of mono compatibility…

Also, to be fair, more and more phones are integrating stereo speakers, such as the iPhone, so aside from radio, the mono thing is slowly becoming more of a non-issue

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

Ok, some good points have been made about mono . Although I’d rather have something be brilliant in stereo than mediocre for the sake of mono compatibility…

To each his own. Obviously, there's no rule in audio engineering that can't be broken. Over the years, I have become very sensitive to phase issues. I consider this a good thing! I can discern phase issues in a busy mix without even looking at a stereo scope. I've also gotten used to mix and master with electrostatic loudspeakers. These speakers reproduce signals in an extremely phase-coherent manner, far better than conventional box speakers and they have the ability to reveal the beauty of masterfully created stereo sound stages and spaces. If done correctly, spaces in a well-crafted mix naturally extend way beyond the left and the right speaker. It sounds amazing, almost like surround but with just two speakers. Any stereo sound that has been pushed below 0 correlation into the -1 correlation area (towards mono-incompatibility) sounds laughably unrealistic. Phase weirdness might not show when listening on a smart phone but a decent engineer cares about how good he can possibly make it sound when listened back on a very good sound system that reveals the slightest flaw of his work.

I'm aware of the fact that only a few hundred thousand individuals are mixing music (and also listening to music) the way I do. But creating a stunning stereo sound stage can be done in a healthy and masterly manner. It's an art that requires more than just pushing the slider of a stereo widener. You can achieve impressive width and depth without ceating phase issues if you now how to do it. Engineers decades ago respected the laws of audio. They strived for the perfect sound within those limits and they proved that it can be done correctly and beautifully. I have enormous respect for those engineers.

.

[Lynx_TWO]

Oh man I LOVE electrostatic loudspeakers. I’ve heard the larger Magnepans and they sound amazing. Problem is you need a large space and get them 3-4 ft away from the walls for them to really sing…. And yes, definitely possible to get imaging to wrap around you with two speakers. Something that’s lost on most young people these days…

Have you looked into Pi by SoundRadix? As someone who’s trained their ears to hear phasing issues and have the speakers to really bring those issues out, I’d be highly interested in your opinion of it. Basically you throw it on every track as the last plugin and it dynamically rotates phase of each track real-time to avoid phase issues. I use it on all my mixes. Sometimes the difference isn’t noticeable, but sometimes it’s dramatic.

Any tips for doing as you mentioned?

[SonicAxiom]

I have actually been using Magnepan MG-1C's as control room monitors for almost 15 years before putting up the Quad ESL 63's.



In comparison, the Maggies were far inferior though not bad at all. I wouldn't wanna use anything else than the Quads. They are probably among the most accurate monitors one can find on earth. That's the kind of tool I like to use as an engineer

I have not yet looked into SoundRadix. Interesting plugin, though. I wonder how they defy the laws of physics and make signals sound phase alligned. With "normal" speakers, you probably can't get past a certain point of accuracy whereas the Quads have virtually no weight to move. It's probably still a great improvement for regular speakers to have some kind of dsp correction going on.

Not sure if I'd like to have a plugin messing with the phase of all of my tracks I'd rather put one or two phase shifters in myself if I feel the need. I'm occasionally using the free PhaseBug plugin. I always have RME DigiCheck Totalyzer open when tracking/mixing/mastering to check for phase issues.

.

[Lynx_TWO]

Very cool! I had not heard of the quads so I’ll have to check them out for sure! Having a house built now so maybe I’ll have the needed space

Yea I’d definitely check out Pi, I believe they have a trial. At least visually, it rotates phase faster than I can personally hear it (I can just hear the difference overall) but then again, I don’t have electrostatic monitors

EDIT: Holy sh-t: https://skyfiaudio.com/products/quad...des-subwoofers

[ScuzzyEye]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

Ok, some good points have been made about mono . Although I’d rather have something be brilliant in stereo than mediocre for the sake of mono compatibility…

The way I look at mono compatibility, is I don't need the mix to sound the same in mono, I need it to sound equally good. This take advantage of the fact that over-wide signals cancel when combined into mono. Knowing this you can design a mix that thins down (removes unneeded ear candy, and dense reverb) when played on one speaker. This can be a good thing, because what "fits" on two speakers might not fit on one. Selectively allowing parts to be canceled out becomes an extra tool.

Reaper has a monitor in mono button right on the master channel. Make good use of that when widening things beyond the stereo speakers.

[Lynx_TWO]

Originally Posted by ScuzzyEye

The way I look at mono compatibility, is I don't need the mix to sound the same in mono, I need it to sound equally good. This take advantage of the fact that over-wide signals cancel when combined into mono. Knowing this you can design a mix that thins down (removes unneeded ear candy, and dense reverb) when played on one speaker. This can be a good thing, because what "fits" on two speakers might not fit on one. Selectively allowing parts to be canceled out becomes an extra tool.

Reaper has a monitor in mono button right on the master channel. Make good use of that when widening things beyond the stereo speakers.

Will do! Yes I don’t think I’ve ever used the mono button… I’ll have to start utilizing that!

I do use iZotope’s stereo imager if I want to widen mono components as it is supposed to be completely mono-compatible…

[ScuzzyEye]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

I do use iZotope’s stereo imager if I want to widen mono components as it is supposed to be completely mono-compatible…

iZ's Ozone Stereo Imager has two modes of operation, and yes, one of them is mono compatible.

I think what it's doing in mono-compatible mode is using a comb filter on the "side" channel and spreading some parts of the signal to the left and some to the right. The comb is like a zipper coming apart. When you re-combine it into mono, the "teeth" on either side match up, and you get the original signal back. It does sound nice to the ears when played in stereo too. (Considering that a sound reflecting around a room causes self-combing, it's no wonder that we hear such an effect as adding space.)

[Lynx_TWO]

Originally Posted by ScuzzyEye

iZ's Ozone Stereo Imager has two modes of operation, and yes, one of them is mono compatible.

I think what it's doing in mono-compatible mode is using a comb filter on the "side" channel and spreading some parts of the signal to the left and some to the right. The comb is like a zipper coming apart. When you re-combine it into mono, the "teeth" on either side match up, and you get the original signal back. It does sound nice to the ears when played in stereo too. (Considering that a sound reflecting around a room causes self-combing, it's no wonder that we hear such an effect as adding space.)

Ahh that makes sense. Yes, I use it in mode II. I believe mode I is just a basic HAAS effect which from what I read isn’t mono compatible at all.

[Allybye]

Originally Posted by Lynx_TWO

Very cool! I had not heard of the quads so I’ll have to check them out for sure!

That made me smile!
Well before working in the industry ( where we did not actually use the Quad electrostatics , but did use their amps) I was taken to hear the speakers and was blown away by them. That was in about '66 or so.
Outside my amateur price range and space available now sadly.