Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Repairing Channel Loss  (Read 1972 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chairman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 943
  • Gender: Male
  • Return of the Shredi
Repairing Channel Loss
« on: December 24, 2005, 01:14:27 PM »
Converting some old analog tapes that have been sitting around for a while.  I'm getting to the masters that have some problems and need some work (did the easy ones first).  At 9-18-88 we had a bad mic cable and couldn't remediate until the third song.  So, the first two songs have left channel only. 

I use SoundForge.  So far, the channel drop out repairs I've done have been glitches, very short in duration.  Now I need to repair almost 8 - 10 minutes.  The "copy other channel" option is great but definitely reduces the ambient quality of the recording, which is better than not having the channel at all.  Any other tricks with SoundForge that I have not discovered regarding repairing the loss of a channel?
Team AARP

Offline cleantone

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1676
  • Gender: Male
Re: Repairing Channel Loss
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2005, 02:54:54 PM »
As far as I know, maybe somebody knows better, your gonna have to drop to mono. You can do fake stereo, or dual mono but it still sounds mono. Again, that is as far as I know. Perhaps someone has a better trick? I'd like to hear it too.
ISO: your recordings of The Slip, Surprise Me Mr. Davis and The Barr Brothers. pm me please.

RebelRebel

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Repairing Channel Loss
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2005, 03:10:23 PM »
Ive got this bookmarked and tried it one one of my wife's recordings..a  buddy of mine said that if i  copied the one channel to the other, and did a little bit of eqing on one channel, OR adding a VERY small bit of delay on one channel(not enough to cause a phase-y sounding recording)..you can sometimes fake it. I wouldnt do it with something I spread,(im a dumb newbie at this stuff) but for my own listening it sounded better..I think Mr. Kwon posted something about that here as well.


How can I convert my mono recordings into stereo?

Due to either ignorance or just a simple misunderstanding of audio recording and mixdown, I recently found that all of my previous recordings from the last six years are in mono, simply because I failed to pan my tracks. I know how to use panning correctly these days, but how can I convert my mono recordings to stereo using my PC?

Dave (by email)

Editor Paul White replies: As you already clearly appreciate, there is no way to convert a mono recording into a true stereo recording, but there are recognised ways of 'faking it' that work well enough in practice if you're truly unhappy about your work being in mono (and so many great records were, of course). Adding delay to one of the channels is not recommended as the mix may well sound 'phasey' when played back in mono.

A number of plug-ins simulate stereo by boosting some frequencies in one channel while cutting the same frequencies in the other channel by the same amount. If you have access to one of these, that's great, but if not, you can do the same thing with a graphic equaliser (hardware or plug-in) by setting alternate bands to cut and boost on the left channel, then making the right channel a mirror image of this. I find that it's best not to process frequencies below around 120Hz when doing this, so leave all the bands below 120Hz or so in their flat position.

A refinement of this technique is, instead of setting the frequency bands randomly or alternately, is to try to pick out the key frequencies of specific instruments (some in the left channel and some in the right). Again, both channels must be mirror images of each other, otherwise the tonal balance will change and your mono compatibility will be lost. The result of this processing is a significant sense of stereo spread, though the positioning of individual instruments remains quite vague.

Another option, which can be combined with the above or used on its own, is to process the entire mono mix using a short stereo room ambience reverb setting comprising early reflections with little or no following reverb. This adds a sense of the performance taking place in a real three-dimensional space, but take care to add only enough to create the right illusion -- you don't want your mix swimming in extra reverb. If you plan to denoise your mix, do this before adding the reverb, as this will help put back some of the low-level information that budget denoisers often take away.

Technical Editor Hugh Robjohns adds: If your source material is something fairly simple and inherently 'narrow' or mono anyway, like a single vocal over a single acoustic guitar part, for example, adding a little stereo reverb with some nice early reflections is all that's required to produce a perfectly valid stereo track.

With more complex material, the classic way to fake stereo is by using comb filtering. The detail of the way to do this is will depend on your own equipment and I note that you want to achieve this with a computer. However, the basic plan is as follows.

First, arrange for the original mixed mono track to feed both left and right stereo outputs. Next, derive a post-fade feed from the original track and pass it through a high-pass filter (possible in another channel strip) set to turn over at about 100Hz -- but feel free to experiment. The idea of the filter is to ensure that low frequencies remain in the centre of the stereo image, since otherwise they'll tend to move over to the left-hand side.

Now, take the output from the filter and pass it into a delay line set to about 7ms, and again, you can experiment with the delay setting. Don't go too short, but anything from about 4ms up to 70 or 80ms will work well -- the bigger the value, the bigger the 'room' will sound, especially at the top end of the range.

Split the output from the delay into two and mix it back into the stereo output along with the original mono track. Pan one delay output fully left and the other fully right, but with a phase inversion. It's vital that the split delay cancels out in mono, which means that there must be exactly equal and opposite amounts of the delay in left and right. You can check this by muting the original mono track, and it should all go very quiet.

If you adjust the level of the delay output, you can control the apparent stereo width from mono with no delay output at all, through to very wide as you match levels of original mono source and delayed output. However, don't go mad -- try to keep the stereo effect reasonably subtle.

The advantage of this technique is that while it sounds complex to achieve, it's completely mono-friendly, meaning that it will work perfectly when broadcast over mono radios and the like.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2005, 03:25:38 PM by Teddy »

Offline alpine85

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 329
  • Gender: Male
    • avatar (full-size)
Re: Repairing Channel Loss
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2007, 09:11:52 PM »
sorry to dig up an old thread here, but the other newer thread referred to this one, and I have a Q about this:

Quote
Now, take the output from the filter and pass it into a delay line set to about 7ms, and again, you can experiment with the delay setting. Don't go too short, but anything from about 4ms up to 70 or 80ms will work well -- the bigger the value, the bigger the 'room' will sound, especially at the top end of the range.

I'm wondering about the 70-80 ms figure.  I remember reading in the old Doug Oade boards that when doing a SBD/AUD matrix you never want the delay to be longer than 30ms or so.  Any longer than that gives you a distinct second arrival, which is undesireable.  Wouldn't that apply here too?
MICS: AKG CK-1/CK-63/CK-8/CK-22 --> AKG 460/JW460/JW452
CABLES: GAKcables and Mogami
PRES: Apogee Mini-Me, SD USBPre-2, Busman UA-5
RECORDERS: Oade R-44, Tascam DR-100-MKII, JB3

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18873
  • Gender: Male
Re: Repairing Channel Loss
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2007, 09:23:34 PM »
A good mono recording doesn't sound that bad to my ears.  That said, I'm intrigued by the comb filtering technique.  I usually just set the recording to dual-mono for the portion where I only have a single good channel, and then crossfade into stereo at the appropriate point so the change from dual-mono to stereo doesn't sound too abrupt.
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) > Roland R-05

Offline boojum

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Gender: Male
Re: Repairing Channel Loss
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2007, 10:00:20 PM »
^^^ Comb filtering is cool, but your suggestion is the best and easiest implemented I have seen. 
Nov schmoz kapop.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.04 seconds with 29 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF