Mid-side recording

Tech talk about audio recording and live stage production.
---Hosted by Andrew MacRae & Malcolm Boyce

Mid-side recording

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 12:26 pm

What are the advantages and or disadvantages of using this technique? What instruments would benefit by using this mic technique? Can it be done without the decoder? Does the 90° mic have to be a figure 8 pattern?
I have the decoder but have never tried using it before.
I have some acoustic guitar tracks to do and thought I might try this just to see what it does.
Any help or advice is welcome.
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby macrae11 » Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:48 pm

Some of the advantages: Perfect mono compatibility. Nice wide stereo image. Wider than XY anyways. You can also vary the amount of L and R information vs. center information. That can be very handy in post. This is basically what stereo widening plugins are doing.

It can be done without the decoder quite simply, although the decoder can make it faster. To do it without the decoder: Duplicate the side mic's track. Flip phase on the duplicate. Pan hard left and right. Adjust to taste.

The Side mic does have to be figure 8, but the mid mic can be any polar pattern. Although if you use another figure 8 it technically becomes a Blumlien pair.

MS works great on acoustic guitars provided you have a decent room. With a poor room the side mic can become a bit useless, as it is picking up more of the room than the mid mic. I usually like MS quite close to an acoustic. Position the mid mic as if was going to be a mono recording, and then put the side mic in there. The mid mic has to be mostly straight on to the guitar though.

MS works great for any acoustic instruments, particularly ensembles where a nice natural stereo image is needed. Great for string sections, bluegrass quartets, choirs etc.

Al will probably chime in on this, he just did an MS recording that he said turned out very well.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:56 pm

If I don't have a figure 8 pattern mic, can I use 2 omni mics back to back, both 90° from the source and have a cardioid pointing straight at the source? Would this give me a similar result?
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby macrae11 » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:18 pm

Well that might get the sound you're after, but it won't be MS. Being that the two omni's are so close together(back to back), they would be getting very similar signals I would think.


I think you would be closer if you used 3 cardiod's. You could try running it through your decoder, and it might something cool, but MS it ain't.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:39 pm

macrae11 wrote:Well that might get the sound you're after, but it won't be MS. Being that the two omni's are so close together(back to back), they would be getting very similar signals I would think.

I think you would be closer if you used 3 cardiod's. You could try running it through your decoder, and it might something cool, but MS it ain't.

Well, I was going to try it without the decoder so I can see (hear) exactly what's going on first. The decoder doesn't have a lot of adjustment on it and, as with most 'automatic' or default settings, I'd like to have the option to tweak it a little.
Doesn't a figure 8 mic have an omni pattern on each side? Or are they both hemispheric in nature?
Anyway, I will try several scenarios just to see what happens (I have that luxury when I'm working on my own stuff...lol).
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby RoadDog » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:34 pm

MS works very well on ensembles as previously stated and the room comes into play absolutely, and yes three cardiods will do the trick with a mix minus approach for imaging.
A spider wanders aimlessly within the warmth of a shadow....
User avatar
RoadDog
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:11 am
Location: Rothesay, NB

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:36 pm

What do you mean by "mix minus aproach"?
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby RoadDog » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:43 pm

Sorry, just adjusting fader levels on the recorded tracks, as MS will give you more than one per your multiple sourses, to acheive your stereo image. I'll toss this across to Alain and Malcolm for clarification. I must admit that I haven't actually used the technique since school days, so someone who is tracking with this method more recently than 1989 may have a clearer insight. Al, Andrew, Malcolm???
A spider wanders aimlessly within the warmth of a shadow....
User avatar
RoadDog
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 5:11 am
Location: Rothesay, NB

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 4:00 pm

What I was thinking was using 2 mics (because I don't have a figure 8) and running them into 2 separate channels panned left and right with the phase inverted on one of them. Then keep the third mic (directed toward the source) cloned into 2 tracks, 1 panned left and the other panned right.
Then I can mix in the ambient mics as needed.
Won't this accomplish the same thing, using 4 tracks?
Then if set to mono, the out of phase mics should cancel out and leave just the directional mic.
Am I on the right track here?
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby macrae11 » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:03 pm

That sounds good in theory, and you should give it a try, but I'm pretty sure it won't work.

My Reasoning:
If you are using two mics that are out of phase, and then try to phase cancel them, they won't. The signals will be very similar, and I'm sure there be some "phasing" but they won't perfectly cancel like a single mic in Figure 8 mode will. I think this will just cause more phase "issues" then a properly stereo mic'd source with two "in phase" mics.

If you clone a signal and just pan it hard left and right, it will sound the exact same as a single source panned in the middle except that it will be 6 dB louder. This is due to the magic of binaural hearing. When you hear an identical source coming from each speaker at an equal volume our brains interpret that as being panned up the centre. It is the same as hitting your mono switch in a stereo listening environment. It doesn't mute one speaker, it will send the exact same signal to both speakers equally.

You should experiment and then report your findings back to us. I would be excited to be proven wrong, but I don't believe I will be. I think with your setup an XY technique or maybe ORTF will work best. I've been using kind of a modified ORTF for drum overheads and really love it. It gives a beautiful wide stereo image with minimal mono compatibility issues. It might be a little to wide for a single point source like an acoustic though.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Jef » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:53 pm

Yes, I normally do use the xy mic placement on acoustic guitars and I've also used the 110° ORTF method a time or two. But MS is something I've never done before and I'm curious to see what results I can come up with.
I think I'll borrow a mic that has a figure 8 pattern from the studio though just so I can see what the true mid side stereo effect is like. I just thought I might be able to do it with what I have here at home.
I'll also try the 3 mic set up just for curiosity sake and I'll post my results.
Probably get to it next weekend.
Thanks for the input.
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby Alain Benoit » Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:19 am

As Keith, Andrew and Matt can attest I am a huge fan of M/S.
I have used it often with great results.
On two specific occasions including one very recently with excellent results.
I will ask Matt to get the latter example linked with a pre and post "decode" example.

I have never used a purpose built decoder in either hardware or software format.
In the days before DAW I would simply use a "Y" split on the MID mic and a polarity inverter on one leg of the "y" adapter. Contrary to some peoples thinking this can be done before or after the recorder if you are running low on availlable tracks.

The last time I did M/S was also my first time doing my own project entirely on DAW. In trying to keep things simple I stayed fully within Matt's post prod. station. This includes an interface with only four pres. One pre was for the MID mic then SIDE, Bass DI, and finally lead spot mic. Its funny cause as the clients would listen to takes they would comment on how great things sounded yet the M/S setup had not yet been decoded, I had tried to achieve the best sound possible by way of mixing through distance as this was an "in the round" style live off the floor recording. After many rehearsal type takes and many directives as to positioning and continuity of positioning and performance, we had a take that everyone was happy with and I sent the performers on their merry way.

To be continued......................................
Last edited by Alain Benoit on Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
www.fluidaudiogroup.com

"No one has time to do it right, but we all seem to have time to do it twice."
User avatar
Alain Benoit
Self Biased Resistor
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Jef » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:28 am

Alain Benoit wrote:I have never used a purpose built decoder in either hardware or software format......

The MS decoder was something that came bundled with a bunch of other stuff. I had no idea what it was, other than a brief description from Chris (the studio owner) so I did a little reading on the subject.
It's mostly a curiosity thing for me, that's why I'm experimenting with it at home on my own time. But I think I will skip the automated MS decoder plug in and just do it manually. I think i will have a better control over things that way.
"I did what any good producer would do. I rolled a fatty." - Mixerman -
User avatar
Jef
Gold Member
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:00 am

Postby Alain Benoit » Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:28 am

Once everyone split, it was time to mix it. First thing I did was instruct Matt to pan the mid track to center and copy the side track and phase invert it. I also of course had him pan both side tracks hard left and right respectively and tie them as a stereo track. When Matt played the track back his head was blown straight back, he had a half stunned, half confused and half shocked look on his face. I knew what to expect but because I had been tracking semi-blindly I was happy when it turned out better than I had expected.

You see all afternoon, Matt acting as my assisstant, had followed my instructions blindly and I had to keep telling him "just trust me, I know what I'm doing". The funny thing is how everyone accepted the product as is before anyone it was even mixed or the MS mics decoded.

To be continued..........................................................
www.fluidaudiogroup.com

"No one has time to do it right, but we all seem to have time to do it twice."
User avatar
Alain Benoit
Self Biased Resistor
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby macrae11 » Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:58 am

I don't think you even had to track blindly Al. At least I know in Protools you don't have to, and I'm pretty sure Cubase could do it as well. You could have actually recorded the mid mic to two tracks and flipped the phase on one to hear the final, while tracking. I mean it's ggreat that it turned out well anyways, but might make life a bit easier for next time.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Sat Apr 19, 2008 3:29 pm

RoadDog wrote:... and yes three cardiods will do the trick with a mix minus approach for imaging.
But as Andrew mentioned, this isn't an MS setup at that point. Cool, and stereo, but not MS.

A proper MS setup is a cardioid facing the source, and a figure-8 90 degrees off axis horizontally. The cardioid panned center, and the figure 8, feeding two channels, one panned left, and the other panned right and flipped phase. Adjusting balance between the figure 8 and cardioid to taste.

The reason why two cardioids in place of the figure 8 won't work as an actual "MS" setup is, when you merge an MS setup into mono, you end up with the front facing cardioid only, and a perfect mono "mix". The same can't be said with the three cardioids in the same position.

You can also get just the figure 8 signal back from the "stereo" mix by inverting phase on the right channel (or either channel for that matter) before combining into mono.

My understanding is this is similar to the process in FM radio for stereo broadcasting and reception.

I'm sure part of the concept of the MS technique came from wanting perfect mono compatibility from a stereo recording/broadcast.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Sat Apr 19, 2008 3:33 pm

RoadDog wrote:I must admit that I haven't actually used the technique since school days, so someone who is tracking with this method more recently than 1989 may have a clearer insight. Al, Andrew, Malcolm???
Yeah, other than teaching it over the years, I'm with you Keith. I haven't used this for anything in a long time. It does something all it's own, but was never my favourite "stereo" setup.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Postby Alain Benoit » Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:36 pm

macrae11 wrote:I don't think you even had to track blindly Al. At least I know in Protools you don't have to, and I'm pretty sure Cubase could do it as well. You could have actually recorded the mid mic to two tracks and flipped the phase on one to hear the final, while tracking. I mean it's ggreat that it turned out well anyways, but might make life a bit easier for next time.


I am well aware of this but I did it on purpose for final effect which was well worth it.
www.fluidaudiogroup.com

"No one has time to do it right, but we all seem to have time to do it twice."
User avatar
Alain Benoit
Self Biased Resistor
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby macrae11 » Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:48 pm

Alain Benoit wrote:
macrae11 wrote:I don't think you even had to track blindly Al. At least I know in Protools you don't have to, and I'm pretty sure Cubase could do it as well. You could have actually recorded the mid mic to two tracks and flipped the phase on one to hear the final, while tracking. I mean it's ggreat that it turned out well anyways, but might make life a bit easier for next time.


I am well aware of this but I did it on purpose for final effect which was well worth it.


Gotcha! ;)

You're ballsy I'll say that for ya.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:08 pm

Alain Benoit wrote:As Keith, Andrew and Matt can attest I am a huge fan of M/S.
I have used it often with great results.
On two specific occasions including one very recently with excellent results.
I will ask Matt to get the latter example linked with a pre and post "decode" example.


I'll get to this when I have some time next week, I'm swamped at the moment with a new project.
Alain Benoit wrote:When Matt played the track back his head was blown straight back, he had a half stunned, half confused and half shocked look on his face.


True story! This was my face---> :shock: and then---> :-? finally---> :-D

macrae11 wrote:I don't think you even had to track blindly Al. At least I know in Protools you don't have to, and I'm pretty sure Cubase could do it as well. You could have actually recorded the mid mic to two tracks and flipped the phase on one to hear the final, while tracking. I mean it's ggreat that it turned out well anyways, but might make life a bit easier for next time.


Absolutely, I could have easily set this up in Cubase, if I had a sweet clue what the hell he was up to...

Alain Benoit wrote:I am well aware of this but I did it on purpose for final effect which was well worth it.


It certainly was worth it. We were recording a bluegrass song and trying to emulate the sound of those old recordings. It did just that. Sounded great.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Mon May 26, 2008 3:29 pm

Drumwaiter wrote:
Alain Benoit wrote:As Keith, Andrew and Matt can attest I am a huge fan of M/S.
I have used it often with great results.
On two specific occasions including one very recently with excellent results.
I will ask Matt to get the latter example linked with a pre and post "decode" example.


I'll get to this when I have some time next week, I'm swamped at the moment with a new project.


Dammit...

I'm sorry guys, I totally forgot about this. I stumbled across it today as I was reading through old posts.

I'll export a pre and post decoding of the MS mix and I'll double check to make sure Alain received permission to post it, then I'll upload it to our webserver.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Alain Benoit » Mon May 26, 2008 5:17 pm

Permission graciously granted by Micheal McDonald of the Butterdonkeys.
www.fluidaudiogroup.com

"No one has time to do it right, but we all seem to have time to do it twice."
User avatar
Alain Benoit
Self Biased Resistor
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Tue May 27, 2008 1:15 pm

I'll be at the studio for a bit tonight, so I'll post them later in the evening.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Tue May 27, 2008 9:48 pm

Alright folks! I have 3 samples for you.

The first is just the Mid mic and the Side mic both at unity and panned to center, no processing or mixing of any kind:
Katie Brown M/S-UNDECODED

The next sample is the decoded version of the same thing. So all that's changed is I copied the Side mic, inverted the phase of it, panned it to hard right and panned the original Side mic signal to hard left. Here you really get to see how the stereo image is created using this technique.
Katie Brown M/S-DECODED

The last sample is the finished mixed result with the addition of the 4051 that is picking up the mandolin that was significantly quieter than the rest, and the bass DI track to was added to get more control of the bass track.
Katie Brown FINAL MIX

Enjoy!
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Re: Mid-side recording

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:29 am

Here's a very good, concise article on Mid-Side recording.
http://www.uaudio.com/blog/mid-side-mic-recording/

I'm about to do a session that will be completely recorded using M/S and I wanted to dig up a good article so I can explain the scenario to Nick. Basically it will be M/S set up somewhere in the middle of the live room and we'll mix by positioning with spike tape. I'm going to use the Lawson in figure 8 with one of the Gefells for the mid mic.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Next

Return to Sounds Good...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

cron