Topic: Levels of Mid Channel vs. Side While Recording

[stevetoney]

In another thread, someone stated that the levels of the mid channel are usually louder than the side.  However, without giving it any prior thought and out of sheer habit, I've always tried to balance the levels of both channels after the music starts.

It just occurred to me however, that perhaps it's best NOT to have the side levels as high to give proper balance to the reverberent room sounds...or perhaps there are times when side needs to be the same level (stage lip) and others where it's not best to have the side at the same level.

Just wondering what others' thoughts are because I just realized that the habit of balancing levels might not be the best thing to do when running M/S.

Thanks.

[DSatz]

Tonedeaf, when you directly record the signals from the "M" and "S" microphones without matrixing, you can't possibly know in advance what the optimal settings will turn out to be later on during playback over loudspeakers at home or in your studio.

So it's best to just set normal, reasonable levels, or more or less as high as you can get in both channels without touching 0 dB full scale levels. Then in the comfort of your home or studio you can decide how much "M" versus how much "S" should go into the matrix.

In two-microphone M/S recording, as you add more "S" signal relative to the "M" you get both a widening of the apparent stereo image and more reverberance from the room at the same time; those two parameters are interdependent. So there generally is one setting that will sound optimal for a given playback system, and it doesn't take very long to find it. But such decisions can't be made reliably with headphones while you're actually on location; I really wouldn't recommend trying to do that.

--best regards

[page]

Tonedeaf, when you directly record the signals from the "M" and "S" microphones without matrixing, you can't possibly know in advance what the optimal settings will turn out to be later on during playback over loudspeakers at home or in your studio.

So it's best to just set normal, reasonable levels, or more or less as high as you can get in both channels without touching 0 dB full scale levels. Then in the comfort of your home or studio you can decide how much "M" versus how much "S" should go into the matrix.

In two-microphone M/S recording, as you add more "S" signal relative to the "M" you get both a widening of the apparent stereo image and more reverberance from the room at the same time; those two parameters are interdependent. So there generally is one setting that will sound optimal for a given playback system, and it doesn't take very long to find it. But such decisions can't be made reliably with headphones while you're actually on location; I really wouldn't recommend trying to do that.

--best regards

From one of Satz's earlier posts (quoted from memory since I can't find it at the moment) "why waste perfectly good headroom on the side signal" and once I got comfortable with doing raw M/S recording, it made sense to amp the side component separately during recording. Now, if you apply equal gain to both mid and side tracks, then most of the time (stage lip being the exception in my experience) you will most likely end up with a mid track that's louder.

[stevetoney]

Thanks guys!  Always looking to learn more and more about this oh so fun hobby.  It's amazing to me after diving in how many variables there really are.  When I first got into this, I thought point the mics and get a good recording.  Then after I learned that's not true, I thought spend alot of money and get a good recording.  Then after I learned that's not true...ummm I was broke.  LOL.

[baustin]

Tonedeaf, when you directly record the signals from the "M" and "S" microphones without matrixing, you can't possibly know in advance what the optimal settings will turn out to be later on during playback over loudspeakers at home or in your studio.

So it's best to just set normal, reasonable levels, or more or less as high as you can get in both channels without touching 0 dB full scale levels. Then in the comfort of your home or studio you can decide how much "M" versus how much "S" should go into the matrix.

In two-microphone M/S recording, as you add more "S" signal relative to the "M" you get both a widening of the apparent stereo image and more reverberance from the room at the same time; those two parameters are interdependent. So there generally is one setting that will sound optimal for a given playback system, and it doesn't take very long to find it. But such decisions can't be made reliably with headphones while you're actually on location; I really wouldn't recommend trying to do that.

--best regards

i've always read/heard that its best to run the M/S signals on the same gain setting (ie - both at +30 db for example), then matrix in post.

but, i guess if you're matrixing in post, it'd be best to get the most out of each channel (as close to 0dB as possible) in the field, then adjust as desired with a better monitoring system.

[page]

i've always read/heard that its best to run the M/S signals on the same gain setting (ie - both at +30 db for example), then matrix in post.

but, i guess if you're matrixing in post, it'd be best to get the most out of each channel (as close to 0dB as possible) in the field, then adjust as desired with a better monitoring system.

I learned the same thing, and if your interested in creating something that is of a specific pattern/angle then you can reasonably figure it out, but you have to amp the signals the same to do so since it's based on a ratio of M:S signals. If your not interested in creating a specific pattern (say, for academic reasons or whatever), then there isn't much reason to waste the headroom. The danger is in your intial judgement on how much gain, and if later you encounter a sudden jump in S signal information thus pushing you up to 0. If you tweak just that channel, you'd have to fix stuff in post to prevent your pattern/angle from changing when you do the mix.

[DSatz]

baustin, there's no technical advantage to having the same gain in both channels when the signals have different peak levels, and when you're going to adjust the output levels from each channel separately anyway in playback ... or at least I hope that you are. With M/S recording, if you can't control the gain going into the matrix in playback, then you're really just letting the (usually non-identical) sensitivities of the two microphones determine your stereo image width and the degree of reverberance in playback for you.

Much of the value of M/S recording comes from the ability to control those parameters during playback. So, assuming that you do have some control over the playback gain in each channel, why (I ask rhetorically) throw away dynamic range by not using both of them optimally?

--best regards

[yug du nord]

I've only gotten into M/S recording this year, so I'm no expert...  at first, I just set the channels on the same gain level...  then after a few recordings, I discovered that I liked my results better if I push each channel independently.  With Busman LD's > V2, I typically need to raise the side channel 10db's higher than the mid channel to get them close to each other.  Then adjust as necessary in post.   

[boojum]

I also set the volumes of each channel equal and about as loud as I feel safe.  I can play with the ratio easily in post with the free  VoxenGo decoder.  It works in-line and encodes and decodes.  Nice tool and it is a VST plugin so it works in many editors.

[taperj]

I've found it easiest to take it discrete and mix it later, recording each as you would a regular recording as far as levels. In post all you have to do is clone the side track, pan left/pan right, flip phase on right, join the new panned side tracks to a stereo track and mix the new stereo track with center. This way you can decide on how much stereo effect you have etc in post, it gives the greatest flexibility imho. Everything you need to mix it from discrete source is in this article...

http://www.wikirecording.org/Mid-Side_Microphone_Technique#Mixing

Hope this helps.

J

[edit: corrected my stupid spelling mistake]

[DSatz]

Discreet: judicious in one's conduct or speech, esp. with regard to respecting privacy or maintaining silence about something of a delicate nature; prudent; circumspect.

Discrete: apart or detached from others; separate; distinct.

A recording can be both at the same time--but what we're discussing in this thread is "discrete," as in not yet matrixed.

--best regards

[taperj]

Discreet: judicious in one's conduct or speech, esp. with regard to respecting privacy or maintaining silence about something of a delicate nature; prudent; circumspect.

Discrete: apart or detached from others; separate; distinct.

A recording can be both at the same time--but what we're discussing in this thread is "discrete," as in not yet matrixed.

--best regards

Bleck, thanks for the correction DSatz , I had a feeling I had my spelling fudged this morning  but had to get to work, those pre-coffee posts always end up getting me

Cheers,
J

[stevetoney]

Discreet: judicious in one's conduct or speech, esp. with regard to respecting privacy or maintaining silence about something of a delicate nature; prudent; circumspect.

Discrete: apart or detached from others; separate; distinct.

A recording can be both at the same time--but what we're discussing in this thread is "discrete," as in not yet matrixed.

--best regards

Warning...threadjack...warning...threadjack...warning...threadjack
David: 

You reminded me of something I thought was both humorous, interesting and revealing about a 2 1/2 year overseas assignment that I recently completed.  I was in Slovenia.  It turns out Slovenians, as in most EU countries, study English as their second language in school.  In Slovenia, formal English class starts in school at age 9...I think that's typically 4th grade.  It continues through 12th grade. 

Here's the interesting and humorous part...they study English from both the technical perspective AND the 'just learn how to speak it' perspective.  Since they are still studying technical aspects of our language through 12th grade, it turns out that my Slovenian friends know that aspect of my language MUCH MUCH better than I do.  Recall that in our training in the US, we stop studying nouns and verbs...hmmm...somewhere around 8th grade maybe.  After that, my English classes were all about reading books, composition, stuff like that.

So what was quite revealing to me was that, when getting into specific discussions about English, my Slovenian buddies would tell me things about my language that I'd long since forgotten.  Even though it was my language, there were times when they'd correct my use of grammar.  Funny nuance about differences in cultures.

I'd think that if I were to study Slovenian language for 8 or 9 years, I'd probably be able to turn the tables on them and do the same thing. 

On a related note, I did note while in Slovenia that European culture values education consistently higher than American culture does.  That's somewhat disturbing to me also.  Lots of high school kids in the US feel they can get by without college and because of things like minimum wage, government assistance and the concept of entitlement, I suppose they're right.  I'd say that nearly 100% of the young people that I met in Slovenia were in or on their way to university and were keenly aware about how this was a requirement to self-sufficiency later in their lives.  I even spoke to a number of 15 - 16 year olds that said they didn't feel like they needed their drivers license until they are 18 (that the driving age over there) because 16 is too young and irresponsible to be behind the wheel!  Wow, coming from young people, that really shocked me as being ultra mature and responsible perspective!  Here, a kid feels entitled not only to drive, but expects to have his own car given to him/her at 16!

[yug du nord]

^^^Threadjack continued..... 

Out of curiosity, what is the Slovenian language?

Maybe the big difference between the EU and the USA is Timothy Leary.  For better or for worse....  lots of Americans followed his plan.   

[stevetoney]

^^^Threadjack continued..... 

Out of curiosity, what is the Slovenian language?

Maybe the big difference between the EU and the USA is Timothy Leary.  For better or for worse....  lots of Americans followed his plan.   

All of the former Yugoslavia nations, such as Slovenia, have thier own language.  Not surprisingly, it's really the thing that caused the nations to split the way that they did after the whole breakup of Yugoslavia and Bosnian war.  So, in Slovenia they speak Slovenian; Croats speak Croatian, etc.

Tim Leary and many others.  I don't really have a problem if a person chooses a path of self denial.  What I do have a problem with is the entitlement that many of these same people seem to have later on after they've taken the easy road for many years and then at some point there seems to be an expectation that those that didn't 'go to the party' and paid their dues should pay to support those that didn't.  To alot of those people, it's a crime in the USA to work hard, achieve, and have money to show for it.