recording questions re-stereo/mono

Good advice all around.

One thing to seriously consider with recording tracks from a keyboard, especially with multi-timbral layered sounds. You will find that even when capturing these as a stereo track that the panning given by the presets makes zero sense as far as an actual L/R relationship. I find a lot of these are out of phase as well as having the pan-centric anomolies.

It's usually stereo from the perspective of the player, so it makes sense when you sit down and play the thing - Bassier on the left, less so on the right.
 
It's usually stereo from the perspective of the player, so it makes sense when you sit down and play the thing - Bassier on the left, less so on the right.

Yes as far as where the programs are usually split concerning the keyboard itself. And this does have a lot to do with live performances so that the spatial awareness generated is one that is pleasant to the listener. However, there are always elements in each program (factory ones for certain) that are put in the pan perspective in such a way as to tie the generated sounds to a 'center' point of reference (if you will) and in capturing these into a recording device you wind up with strange phasing and when the captures, (especially in dual mono) are played back there will be some of this spatial ambience that you can hear when played but will be missing from the recorded tracks altogether. The recorder has no way of translating or separating these multi-layered sounds and with each layer containing it's own set of reverbs,delays,tones, etc, you could wind up with only partial reenactments of the original sounds.

A capture device is only going to have volume and left/right panning in it's abilities. With some sounds generated by a keyboard you might be better off capturing in mono so you have all the intended parts of the multi-layers and then sending that track to a stereo aux or sub. But experimentation is always the key and if the OP has the ability to edit within his workstation he will most certainly have the ability to assign certain parts of each sound to a 'position' in the pan and go from there.

My original thought was to be sure you are hearing all the parts of the sound you are recording on the capture without phase anomalies which can and do occur with modern keyboard sounds.
 
Steenamaroo re-first post above,thx for keeping me on my toes w/this re-posts last week that gave me the needed viewpoint on how this stuff works...I meant by that the Stereo Mix Track produced in Mixing Mode,not the initial track or 2 tracks recorded to....
Thx for the clarification re-L/R being tied to keyboard L/R range,didn't think of that at all.....which is why I'm over here a lot so as I get a sense of whats' what w/recording processes this will be informed by the valuable tips from people like yourself.....

What about that though,also cavedog1 etc for other people that might want to reply over here-what approach from the ones described above do you think is going to produce the best result when making the SMT from the individual ones?

CD1 re-"A capture device is only going to have volume and left/right panning in it's abilities."- actually I have both input EQ and compression as well as de-esser/exciter available on each track(Eq along w/one of the three types of dynamic effects)...the input compression settings are complete while mastering compression just allows for threshold/ratio and makeup gain....

To reply to the point you are making CD1,the term phase anomalies as you use it usually refers to miking techniques where the sound as recorded differs from one mike to another in terms of the balance/signal simultaneity if I'm not mistaken;is that what I referred to above in term of adjusting input gain levels and L/R output pan etc?

Capturing the sound in mono-I don't have stereo tracks available on the DP008ex so I am always using mono but I can record to one or two tracks at a time......or are you suggesting that I use the keyboard single-channel-out/ L channel mix of both which is a mono signal made up of what is also output through the L/R as a second option....?

I understand what you're talking about in term of how the presets are configured...
I don't use layering in of itself ,just a single preset if that is the way you're using the term or do you mean in terms of the preset itself there is some layering involved in the signal as it is produced?

As far as the " spatial ambience that you can hear when played but will be missing from the recorded tracks",again the best result for the SMT made from the individual tracks is my focus,appreciate your thoughts on the different approaches to this I described above......which do you think will be best?

Again thx to both of you for keeping this thread going-picking up some good info/ideas..........
 
I will try and answer the questions individually as best I can..........
Steenamaroo re-first post above,thx for keeping me on my toes w/this re-posts last week that gave me the needed viewpoint on how this stuff works...I meant by that the Stereo Mix Track produced in Mixing Mode,not the initial track or 2 tracks recorded to....
Thx for the clarification re-L/R being tied to keyboard L/R range,didn't think of that at all.....which is why I'm over here a lot so as I get a sense of whats' what w/recording processes this will be informed by the valuable tips from people like yourself.....

What about that though,also cavedog1 etc for other people that might want to reply over here-what approach from the ones described above do you think is going to produce the best result when making the SMT from the individual ones?

CD1 re-"A capture device is only going to have volume and left/right panning in it's abilities."- actually I have both input EQ and compression as well as de-esser/exciter available on each track(Eq along w/one of the three types of dynamic effects)...the input compression settings are complete while mastering compression just allows for threshold/ratio and makeup gain....

>>>Having additional devices to enhance or alter your recording is not what I was referring to. None of those things changes the initial capturing of a sound. A recording device no matter what it is, only has volume and pan for the capture. Compression/EQ/effects does not alter this basic fact.

To reply to the point you are making CD1,the term phase anomalies as you use it usually refers to miking techniques where the sound as recorded differs from one mike to another in terms of the balance/signal simultaneity if I'm not mistaken;is that what I referred to above in term of adjusting input gain levels and L/R output pan etc?

>>>>Phasing can occur in direct recordings as well as using a mic and this is my initial point. Capturing multi-layer multi-timbral settings from keyboards can exhibit phase problems due to the complexities in the layers that are used to create the image of spatial awareness from the sounds generated by the keyboard. It's not just the split where the low notes are heard left and the high notes heard right....but rather it's the effects that all key presets use to create this space when played live. There's an old mixing technique that's been around for many years where the source is panned dry one way and is then ghosted through a reverb added to it panned opposite. Then a balance is achieved with panning to create a larger than life sound. We did this throughout the 80's and 90's especially on heavy background guitars.

Capturing the sound in mono-I don't have stereo tracks available on the DP008ex so I am always using mono but I can record to one or two tracks at a time......or are you suggesting that I use the keyboard single-channel-out/ L channel mix of both which is a mono signal made up of what is also output through the L/R as a second option....?

>>>>Yes. You may need to simply record the entire output of the preset in mono and split to a stereo aux track at mix. But only if you find parts of the preset sound missing at playback from multi mono recording of L/R.

I understand what you're talking about in term of how the presets are configured...
I don't use layering in of itself ,just a single preset if that is the way you're using the term or do you mean in terms of the preset itself there is some layering involved in the signal as it is produced?

>>>>Yes. There is always something in the presets that is basically all on the left at a certain pitch but has elements that are present in the right side too.

As far as the " spatial ambience that you can hear when played but will be missing from the recorded tracks",again the best result for the SMT made from the individual tracks is my focus,appreciate your thoughts on the different approaches to this I described above......which do you think will be best?

>>>> Only your ear can determine this. My point was to call attention to these things that I personally have experienced in recording modern keyboard sounds. I will generally capture all keys in midi which seems to alleviate this and makes editing a snap as well.

Again thx to both of you for keeping this thread going-picking up some good info/ideas..........
 
CD101 appreciate you taking the time to reply in detail....definitely understand the points you're making-

Not familiar w/the term"ghosted through a reverb" although I understand what you're talking about in terms of the wet/dry concept/wide panning/blending in terms of studying I've done about parallel compression w/the drum mix...if you have a chance to explain this thx....
 
You take a track...in my example it was a guitar track....and you dupe or split it out to another mono track. You apply a dense reverb to the new track and run the gain down while increasing the reveb volume so most of what you hear is the reverb of the track. You then pan these two tracks opposite each other in the mix. Sidechaining can also get you there.
 
CD101 thx for the info...understand it now...

Since it seems from your posts that unlike my home studio approach you are someone w/pro recording exp,appreciate if you have a chance at some point to go into reverb use itself as this is an area I have yet to focus on..

Just been adding whatever info was there on it to things I copied onto a sheet from online sites where I was focusing on EQ/compression for elements of drum kit + the individual instruments I am using to put these tracks together off the keyboard workstation-all the usual keyboard sounds esp EP along w/pad and bass...

W/this kind of instrumental approach,what do I want to focus on re- types/amount of reverb?I'd like to use it to enhance the natural instrument sound/affect the way the stereo image result in the Stereo Master Track made from the individual mono ones sound ....rather than as an effect where it's pronounced I.e. the difference between wet/dry sounds re-its usage ....


I have it as an option on the Zoom,on the keyboard tone edit screens as well as for individual tracks on the DP008ex....
I would appreciate any tips re-pointing me in the direction I want to go so I'll know what type of online info to look at...
For ex I've been doing some snare sound work w/the Comp/EQ settings on the Zoom RT 223 and saw where plate reverb is suggested for snare in general...
 
Last edited:
Focus on what your ear is telling you it wants to hear. I realize that having a technique to try makes it easier to start from some place but its also easy to over analyze whats going on and lose sight of what you want things to sound like.
 
I will record the stereo output of my keyboard to a stereo track when it is the main instrument in the song - this is most often with a grand piano sound (and I usually layer 2 piano sounds for a fuller tone). I've never noticed any phase issues.
With my keyboard if I plug only 1 output cable into it (left output), then the output is summed L+R mono, and I record it to a mono track. This is what I'll use if the keyboard is not the main instrument in the song.
 
Appreciate the above Mike as I am focusing on this myself because for the most part my tracks are keyboard-oriented.-

-I had been recording L/R to 2 tracks since I only have mono track rec until I make the Stereo Master Track.....

My approach was based on using EQ/dynamics effects for each track which I was familiaring myself with and wanted to see how things worked....setting up each differently then checking the combined result and panning them so the end result in the SMT had a developed stereo image.....a big part of what I was trying to do had to do w/the limited EQ I had (built in high/low shelf)on the DP008-ex; I was trying to set up some frequency areas using 2 tracks EQ'd differently so the result would produce a boost/cut effect.....

Got tired of this approach so I got a 1/3 oct graphic EQ...now I won't have to worry about the EQ but I think I'll still record to the two tracks for the panning/balance factors involved..... although I understand what CD101 was talking about + see you did this(L mix to one track instead).....

Not sure which approach is best for the SMT result yet....but given the factor of the keyboard being the main instrument I'm leaning towards using the 2...since I only have the 8 tracks I am thinking in terms of a lot of combining tracks to make a SMT then copying it back to the multitrack....I did this w/the drum track/bass track as well.....now that I have the 1/3 Oct I'm gong to be focusing on range allocation;something I couldn't do with the shelf EQ....I think this will make a big difference in terms of the mix....
 
Back
Top