I am personnally very interested in the M/S (mid/side) technic for recording (i have no experience when it comes to M/S mastering though).
First of all this allows a deeper exploration of stereo recordings as no paired-mics are needed. Above all. You can chose one mic for the mid and another for the sides which can give different colors to the sound and of course you can adjust and reconfigure the mid/side shares which is definitly a new approch of stereo image... With the release of the new version of BX Digital (which allows both recording and mastering in M/S mode) and as an increasing number of people are using this method for recording, i think we could gather all the experiences on this thread... To be honest i definitly want to work in this direction as I remember a past experience in Paris which was amazing...
M/S : recording and mastering
mid-side is a method of stereo recording. it can be used with close micing, but there's always the danger of phase cancellation. the purpose of mid-side recording is to capture an entire performace in stereo, the idea being a recording of the stereo space, a reproduction of the experience of being in the room... the choice of mics is always important whatever technique used. for m-s recording, the side mic must be a figure-8 pattern, usually a ribbon of dual diphram condensor, pointed 90 degrees to the subject. the mid mic must be cardiod, usually a small diaphram condensor pointed at the subject. the mics are placed with the mid just above the side mic so that the polar patterns do this: ( ^ ) the signals from the two mics are encoded into 3 tracks which are decoded into stereo for listening.
mid-side mastering is about constructing a stereo field for the listener. it is much like mid-side recording, but it's the opposite preocess. the idea is to take data that exists equally in left and right channels and mono it. this is the mid signal. the mid signal is then removed from the stereo track which produces the side signal. in this way, the mid and side can be treated individually, which gives a lot of control over the sound.
m-s recording is a great technique if you have the right tools, but it's really only good for a stereo recording of a whole subject(drums don't always have to be miced with 20 mics
). it's just one mic technique, but it's a good one. it just depends on what you're trying to do. i'd say it works best in the best sounding rooms, since the side element is mostly hearing the room's reflections. m-s would sound pretty awful in a mediocre room. then again, not much sounds good in a mediocre room...
mid-side mastering is about constructing a stereo field for the listener. it is much like mid-side recording, but it's the opposite preocess. the idea is to take data that exists equally in left and right channels and mono it. this is the mid signal. the mid signal is then removed from the stereo track which produces the side signal. in this way, the mid and side can be treated individually, which gives a lot of control over the sound.
m-s recording is a great technique if you have the right tools, but it's really only good for a stereo recording of a whole subject(drums don't always have to be miced with 20 mics
). it's just one mic technique, but it's a good one. it just depends on what you're trying to do. i'd say it works best in the best sounding rooms, since the side element is mostly hearing the room's reflections. m-s would sound pretty awful in a mediocre room. then again, not much sounds good in a mediocre room...I agree with what Gary said, M/S recording with 2 good mics will give you the sound that you would actually hear if you were IN the room of the source. We have uploaded a demo session that contains a drum-kit, recorded in M/S plus 1 extra mic for the bass-drum. It´s actually a Pro Tools session, but you could download the zip, take the audio files from the AUDIO folder and put them into any other audio software. Route the M and the Bass-Drum mic to the left channel of a subgroup, route the S-signal to the right channel of that group, insert a bx_digital (you may want to download the VST demo, i´t´s a 14days free trial on our website...) in M/S Recording mode, and then follow the PDF instructions that comes with the zip file...
http://www.brainworx-music.de/download/ ... ession.zip
I have taken a picture of the drum-kit when we recorded it, it can be found in the PDF I have attached...
I actually prefer a OMNI mic for the M rather than a cardoid because it will give you less loss of bass frequencies when you place the mic further away from the source, but that´s taste of course. The biggest advantage of the M/S recording to me is that you can adjust the stereo-width very easy by changing the output level of the S signal, and that the signal stays 100% mono-compatible, because played back in mono the S signal will simply phase out and be "gone"...
Cheers, Dirk.
[/img]
http://www.brainworx-music.de/download/ ... ession.zip
I have taken a picture of the drum-kit when we recorded it, it can be found in the PDF I have attached...
I actually prefer a OMNI mic for the M rather than a cardoid because it will give you less loss of bass frequencies when you place the mic further away from the source, but that´s taste of course. The biggest advantage of the M/S recording to me is that you can adjust the stereo-width very easy by changing the output level of the S signal, and that the signal stays 100% mono-compatible, because played back in mono the S signal will simply phase out and be "gone"...
Cheers, Dirk.
[/img]
- Attachments
-
- bx Demo Instructions MS drum session.pdf
- PDF for M/S recording (drum kit recording with3 mics)
- (362.67 KiB) Downloaded 305 times
heu... thank you guys... that's what i call a reply !
Hey dirk, could explain me how does your new version work ? Within the rooting window, how does the blue square (that represents your device) look like ? i mean how do we wire this device in scope environnement ? I suppose the scope version offers less (quite none?) latency when recording, right ? Or are there other differences ? I don't even mention your hardware version except if there is a -90% discount on it
.....
thanks !
Hey dirk, could explain me how does your new version work ? Within the rooting window, how does the blue square (that represents your device) look like ? i mean how do we wire this device in scope environnement ? I suppose the scope version offers less (quite none?) latency when recording, right ? Or are there other differences ? I don't even mention your hardware version except if there is a -90% discount on it
.....thanks !
Each bx device in SCOPE has two inputs and two outputs... the inputs are L/R channels in M/S Mastering Mode and Dual Mono Mode (=L/R mode), and they are M/S inputs in the M/S Rec mode (because you already "deliver" M & S signals from the M/S mics or tracks...). The outputs are always L & R, so just wire the bx´s like any other device in SCOPE.
There is no latency in SCOPE except for maybe one or two samples (I guess?!) for the EQ bands and the matrix to be passed. No look-ahead or similar involved for sure...
Dirk
There is no latency in SCOPE except for maybe one or two samples (I guess?!) for the EQ bands and the matrix to be passed. No look-ahead or similar involved for sure...
Dirk
Excellent article on M/S and your DAW.
http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_front_center/
It explains how to achieve and work with M/S recording without any special plug-ins.
http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_front_center/
It explains how to achieve and work with M/S recording without any special plug-ins.
I feel ashamed...
I just did my first experiments with MS-recording after recording piano-concerts, organ-music, choirs etc. for many years back in my university time with only AB, XY & dummy-head techniques.
I just MS- recorded an acoustic guitar with rode NT2a, t-bone SCT2000, AKG C3000 and Sennheiser MKH 416 in different combinations. First I thought I would need two equal microphones but that seems not to be the main point.
It's great!!! I often record seperate cymbals for a samplebased-drumkit or guitar and I'm convinced this will bring a lot of fun into it, because of the great potential of influencing stereo-image & sound!!!
Only a stupid autodidact like me could oversee such a great technique.
Thanks for these enlightments
Martin
I just did my first experiments with MS-recording after recording piano-concerts, organ-music, choirs etc. for many years back in my university time with only AB, XY & dummy-head techniques.
I just MS- recorded an acoustic guitar with rode NT2a, t-bone SCT2000, AKG C3000 and Sennheiser MKH 416 in different combinations. First I thought I would need two equal microphones but that seems not to be the main point.
It's great!!! I often record seperate cymbals for a samplebased-drumkit or guitar and I'm convinced this will bring a lot of fun into it, because of the great potential of influencing stereo-image & sound!!!
Only a stupid autodidact like me could oversee such a great technique.
Thanks for these enlightments
Martin
And another article on stereo mic techniques of all kinds.
http://psbg.emusician.com/ar/emusic_double_pleasure/
http://psbg.emusician.com/ar/emusic_double_pleasure/
check this song that I recorded in M/S... 1 Stereo track (Acoustic Guit) and 1 Stereo Track for the Vocals... www.giftig.org/mp3/GIFTIG-mein_traum---pre-prod.mp3
Cheers, Dirk.
Cheers, Dirk.
-
hubird
the signal only makes sense after encode/decode...the process is relatively simple as far as how you encode/decode for play back mid/side data. in order to hear the stereo image, the mid needs to be removed from the figure eight mic. this can be done with or without the bx. the bx is already routed and phase aligned, however. the bx also has a nifty eq.
Dirk, you owe me an upgrade.
Dirk, you owe me an upgrade.
Hey Gary! I always respect your knowledge and opinions, but I feel compelled to make some slight corrections regarding your explanation of the M/S process.
It is not really correct ot say that the process involves taking out the M signal out of the S mic.
What we have is one track that is the M mic which is panned dead center.
On another track is the S mic which is a figure eight mic.
To achieve the M/S image, we copy and paste the S signal so that it is now on 2 tracks, and then invert the phase on the left track's channel. Now pan them hard left and right. What this results in is a right channel which contains the M+S signal, and the left channel contains the M-S signal.
You don't need any special gear at all to do this. No magic plug-ins are required. If you want to EQ or effect only the Mid signal, then insert an effect on that channel, If you want o effect just the Side channels, then insert effects or EQ on the side channels.only.
Simple.
BTW all of this is covered much more thoroughly in the article I posted above.
For mastering, just copy the left stereo track and invert it, pan hard left and right, and treat the audio as you see fit. You are now mastering an M/S signal.
It is not really correct ot say that the process involves taking out the M signal out of the S mic.
What we have is one track that is the M mic which is panned dead center.
On another track is the S mic which is a figure eight mic.
To achieve the M/S image, we copy and paste the S signal so that it is now on 2 tracks, and then invert the phase on the left track's channel. Now pan them hard left and right. What this results in is a right channel which contains the M+S signal, and the left channel contains the M-S signal.
You don't need any special gear at all to do this. No magic plug-ins are required. If you want to EQ or effect only the Mid signal, then insert an effect on that channel, If you want o effect just the Side channels, then insert effects or EQ on the side channels.only.
Simple.
BTW all of this is covered much more thoroughly in the article I posted above.
For mastering, just copy the left stereo track and invert it, pan hard left and right, and treat the audio as you see fit. You are now mastering an M/S signal.
yes, that's correct.
when you do this, the middle data is phase cancelled on the figure 8 mic, leaving a track with the middle data and a stereo track with side data......
the thing the bx does is phase align everything while adding a really nice eq to the mix, not necessary, but a nice thing anyway....
when you do this, the middle data is phase cancelled on the figure 8 mic, leaving a track with the middle data and a stereo track with side data......
the thing the bx does is phase align everything while adding a really nice eq to the mix, not necessary, but a nice thing anyway....
I have no experience with this type of recording, but as any eq modfies phase (at least in my humble understanding) in one or the other way, it's a good thing to have all that neatly under one hood.
The example that Dirk postet sounds 'correct' under headphones, but it's really close to start to get 'out of control'.
From the degree comparable to a filter immediately before self-oscillation - just a tiny bit more offset and it would ring in my ears.
I'm pretty convinced a 'regular' eq just thrown into a project set up as described above would NOT give the same result.
Btw I have the old AKG 301 cans which have a more 'room-like' soundstage than the 240/271 types, but these vocals (seem to) come right from the middle of the head - (for me) a clear sign that there's some serious processing going on, as it's not the usual impression under these cans.
cheers, Tom
The example that Dirk postet sounds 'correct' under headphones, but it's really close to start to get 'out of control'.
From the degree comparable to a filter immediately before self-oscillation - just a tiny bit more offset and it would ring in my ears.
I'm pretty convinced a 'regular' eq just thrown into a project set up as described above would NOT give the same result.
Btw I have the old AKG 301 cans which have a more 'room-like' soundstage than the 240/271 types, but these vocals (seem to) come right from the middle of the head - (for me) a clear sign that there's some serious processing going on, as it's not the usual impression under these cans.
cheers, Tom