mid-side micing question

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Generic, you can think of M/S recording as just an indirect way of
recording with two coincident directional microphones ("X/Y" ). Once you
dematrix the M and S signals, you'll have stereo left and right signals
representing a single point in space. So any room that can be used for
ordinary coincident stereo recording with directional microphones
should also work for mid-side recording.

It isn't necessary that the figure-8 microphone get tickled exactly the
same way on both of its axes. Orchestras aren't symmetrical, after all,
and neither are pianists or string quartets. In fact reality in general
seems rather lop-sided these days, don't you think?

--best regards

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 01:00:04 -0400, genericaudioperson@hotmail.com wrote
(in article <1125896404.764742.89830@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ):

> hello,
>
> let's say you were recording mid-side, but the side walls were
> asymmetrical in some way (different distances from each other, windows
> on one side, etc.). would this totally screw up the mid-side
> recording?
>
> basically, i'm wondering if side-wall symmetry is an essential
> ingredient to a quality mid-side recording.
>

pends on how close they are and how much is coming off of them.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

genericaudioperson@hotmail.com wrote in news:1125896404.764742.89830
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> hello,
>
> let's say you were recording mid-side, but the side walls were
> asymmetrical in some way (different distances from each other, windows
> on one side, etc.). would this totally screw up the mid-side
> recording?
>
> basically, i'm wondering if side-wall symmetry is an essential
> ingredient to a quality mid-side recording.

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Ask your ears. Listen for odd reflections, level imbalance,
or change in timbre. If all that's OK, you're good. If not, move around
until what you hear is what you want to record and park your mics there.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Carey Carlan <gulfjoe@hotmail.com> writes:

>genericaudioperson@hotmail.com wrote in news:1125896404.764742.89830
>@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>> hello,
>>
>> let's say you were recording mid-side, but the side walls were
>> asymmetrical in some way (different distances from each other, windows
>> on one side, etc.). would this totally screw up the mid-side
>> recording?
>>
>> basically, i'm wondering if side-wall symmetry is an essential
>> ingredient to a quality mid-side recording.

>Short answer: No.

>Long answer: Ask your ears. Listen for odd reflections, level imbalance,
>or change in timbre. If all that's OK, you're good. If not, move around
>until what you hear is what you want to record and park your mics there.

All good answers.

But also with M-S, you *must* be sure that the two microphones are
time-aligned. This means that you have a stereo mic designed to do M-S or
a mic/bar combination that holds them properly.

If not (or if there's something screwy about any of the geometry
involved), you might need to ever so slightly time slip one of the tracks
to make the M-S work ideally.

This is a darn good reason why to record the raw M and S mic signals and
*not* record the decoded signal. You can fiddle with decoding in post. (Of
course, you'll want a decode setup in your monitor channels during
recording.)

I've had situations where mediocre-sounding M-S came fully alive with a
fractional millesecond nudge on one of the mics. If you're not blessed
with a optimized M-S mic system out of a box and instead are using a
cobbled system, it's interesting to step through some time nudging to find
the "sweet spot" for the decode.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--
.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Federico <plokmichael@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> But also with M-S, you *must* be sure that the two microphones are
>> time-aligned. This means that you have a stereo mic designed to do M-S or
>> a mic/bar combination that holds them properly.
>
>Yes and no, if you're in digital world you can time-align after you've
>recorded....
>Is come out interesting stuff...
>I.E. "mid" mic 10ft. away and the "side" mic only 5ft.
>Then, in digital world, you move the side mic "5ft." back.

Which means that stuff from the edges of the soundfield aren't properly
aligned at all, and only stuff on the center of the soundfield is coherent.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 9/5/05 11:41 AM, in article 11hoppo8ukgvd49@corp.supernews.com, "Frank
Stearns" <franks.pacifier.com@pacifier.net> wrote:

> All good answers.
>
> But also with M-S, you *must* be sure that the two microphones are
> time-aligned. This means that you have a stereo mic designed to do M-S or
> a mic/bar combination that holds them properly.
>
> If not (or if there's something screwy about any of the geometry
> involved), you might need to ever so slightly time slip one of the tracks
> to make the M-S work ideally.
>
> This is a darn good reason why to record the raw M and S mic signals and
> *not* record the decoded signal. You can fiddle with decoding in post. (Of
> course, you'll want a decode setup in your monitor channels during
> recording.)
>
> I've had situations where mediocre-sounding M-S came fully alive with a
> fractional millesecond nudge on one of the mics. If you're not blessed
> with a optimized M-S mic system out of a box and instead are using a
> cobbled system, it's interesting to step through some time nudging to find
> the "sweet spot" for the decode.
>
> Frank Stearns
> Mobile Audio


It's GOOD to live in the age of digital...

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>SSJVCmag wrote:
>
>> Agreed, you pick your MS mic position mainly by deciding that it's where you
>> like to have your head to listen to whatever you;re recording. Symmetry is
>> nice, but not always what you want...
>
>Hard to tell at this point, but often a question like this really means
>"How bad is it going to be if I put the mic where I can and not
>necessarily where I've determined sounds best."

If I don't know the room and I don't have time to explore it properly, I
will usually avoid being anywhere near the center line. All kinds of things
happen there, not just flutter echoes.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 18:37:26 GMT, in rec.audio.pro SSJVCmag
<ten@nozirev.gamnocssj.com> wrote:

>On 9/5/05 11:41 AM, in article 11hoppo8ukgvd49@corp.supernews.com, "Frank
>Stearns" <franks.pacifier.com@pacifier.net> wrote:
>
>> All good answers.
>>
>> But also with M-S, you *must* be sure that the two microphones are
>> time-aligned. This means that you have a stereo mic designed to do M-S or
>> a mic/bar combination that holds them properly.
>>
>> If not (or if there's something screwy about any of the geometry
>> involved), you might need to ever so slightly time slip one of the tracks
>> to make the M-S work ideally.
>>
>> This is a darn good reason why to record the raw M and S mic signals and
>> *not* record the decoded signal. You can fiddle with decoding in post. (Of
>> course, you'll want a decode setup in your monitor channels during
>> recording.)
>>
>> I've had situations where mediocre-sounding M-S came fully alive with a
>> fractional millesecond nudge on one of the mics. If you're not blessed
>> with a optimized M-S mic system out of a box and instead are using a
>> cobbled system, it's interesting to step through some time nudging to find
>> the "sweet spot" for the decode.
>>
>> Frank Stearns
>> Mobile Audio
>
>
>It's GOOD to live in the age of digital...
Bit OT, but what does a jellyfish display show while you are trimming
the MS time difference, anything interesting?
Or does it just " click" when you get it correct?


martin

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

i'm talking about the cardioid and figure-8 mic being as physically
close as possible. the assymetry was to do with the walls, not by
spacing the mics away from each other. also, i would record the
figure-8 uncoded and then duplicate/phase reverse the track in the daw
to get the m/s to happen.

you do bring up an interesting idea. there's always the tricks of
doing something like time-aligning the drum overheads with the snare
drum mic. but i never thought about doing something like intentionally
spreading out the m/s mics from each other.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<genericaudioperson@hotmail.com> wrote:
>could you elaborate on m/s = xy cardioid?

That's the whole point of the M-S thing. It gives you basically the
same single-point pickup of an X-Y array, but the center of the soundstage
is on-axis with the M mike and in the null of the S mike. This means
the center of the soundstage is going to be the least colored place in
the soundfield. With an X-Y, the center of the soundstage is off-axis on
both mikes.

>ironically, the recordings i've heard that i really liked have so often
>been either coincident cardioid x/y or mid/side. i had no idea on the
>planet they were the same thing! but now that i think about it, they
>do have that same sort of "focus yet width" that i intrinsically like.

I personally prefer the slight interchannel phase differences that you
get with ORTF. You can't hang an ORTF array off the back of a motorcycle
like you can with a single-point stereo mike, though.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Joe Kesselman <keshlam-nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> the center of the soundstage is going to be the least colored place in
>> the soundfield. With an X-Y, the center of the soundstage is off-axis on
>> both mikes.
>
>That's the best short description of "why MS" I've seen. Thanks, Scott.
>
>(Now if I could find a good cheap MS... well, I can dream, can't I?)

You can. Pick whatever good cardioid you already have, then add a
Beyer M-130 to it. Well, it's not all THAT cheap. But it's not a
fortune, and it sure sounds good, even if higher frequencies will tend to
skew toward the center of the soundfield.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."