recording questions re-stereo/mono

[smg]

Trying to figure things out in terms of output/input....from my keyboard workstation into my Tascam DP008-ex -i.e.-

if I record from L/R outputs to a single track would this be a mono recording?The same output to two tracks would be stereo or,since the same signal is being recorded to two tracks this would be dual mono?

If I recorded the same thing in the keyboards sequencer first ,copied it to a second track then adjusted the pan/vol of the two tracks before outputting it on L/R channels to the Tascam;this would be stereo recorded onto 2 separate tracks,i.e.L chamnel out of keyboard to one track + the same for right output?

One mono output w/L/R combined to one track would be mono,
while splitting this to record on 2 tracks would be dual mono?

Thanks in advance for any help figuring this stuff out....

 

[mjbphotos]

Stereo = 1 track with separate/different left and right parts
Mono = 1 track with single part (no left or right)
Recording left and right outputs from keys to 2 separate tracks = 2 mono tracks "dual mono" as you call it

 

[Steenamaroo]

The definition of stereo is one thing but what's probably more important is the definition of a stereo image.
Usually the point of a stereo recording is that L+R are different such that a stereo image is created.

If your keyboard patch is stereo, in that respect, then definitions and technicalities become less important.
The bottom line here is that to preserve that stereo image, you need to record L+R as separate things.

DAWs are all different so you may use a stereo track or two mono tracks, but as long as L+R remain different from each other, you've maintained the stereo image.

If, for example, the keyboard patch was just mono the fact that it's available to L+R outputs is irrelevant. That's a PA/Hifi hookup convenience.
If it's a mono patch then L+R will be the same and there's no stereo image to preserve.

Most keyboards will output a simulation of stereo audio. The left side will be bass heavy and the right the opposite, to simulate spaced pair stereo miking.


Any attempt to duplicate a single recorded track and pan this, that, or the other, will not create, or recreate, a stereo image.

Hope there's something useful in there.^

 

[smg]

Much thanks to the people who replied above,getting a better sense of things(also checked out the other related posts)...
the DP-008ex features stereo master track creation after mixing down the initial 8 tracks/setting the vol/pan.....so I'm thinking that whether I record L/R channels out of the keyboard to one or two tracks is not that important since they will be processed along with the other tracks as part of a stereo mix

However I would like to get the best sound possible and,especially in terms of the info above re-what type of mix keyboards L/R channels have typically,wonder what the best approach is i.e.doing what I've been doing- (L/R to 2 tracks), then I could set the pan/vol on the Tascam and bounce them to a third track (which would be stereo...? if I understand things as explained above)..this would mean that I'd be starting the stereo mixdown w/the key board in stereo which I'm assuming would lead to a better mix overall..or would the L/R channels to one track still be stereo initially and the bouncing would be unnecessary.....? Continued feedback appreciated ...

 

[ecc83]

The sonic illusion that we call "stereo" is one thing. What a "stereo signal" is, is something debatable!

Purists will tell you that you can only create a truly stereo recording by the use of "Co-Incident" directional microphones. Other techniques, "ORTF", "Spaced pair" also produce stereo and these and others have their merits and drawbacks.

You can of course produce the illusion of 'position' by panning MONO sources to various places on the sound stage but it is argued that this is not "true" stereo because the sounds (if they even ever existed 'in the world') are not part of a real, reverberant space.

Academic of course. You and everyone else WOULD pan the members of a 4 piece rock band. You would not (I hope!) pan individual mics on a Mozart string quartet! Horses for courses.

Dave.

 

[rob aylestone]

Ironically, the reverse is more real, isn't it. 4 instruments in a semi-circle, all close miked - pan would put them in roughly the right position in a stereo field. For the four piece rock band, then realistic panning often sounds wrong - because people are used to hearing amplified music panned more mono. Ironic!

 

[ecc83]

Ironically, the reverse is more real, isn't it. 4 instruments in a semi-circle, all close miked - pan would put them in roughly the right position in a stereo field. For the four piece rock band, then realistic panning often sounds wrong - because people are used to hearing amplified music panned more mono. Ironic!

Are you saying Rob that you would CLOSE MIC a Mozzy quartet in a glorious acoustic? Rock band? Could not give much of a monkeys.

Dave.

 

[Steenamaroo]

...then I could set the pan/vol on the Tascam and bounce them to a third track (which would be stereo...? if I understand things as explained above)

Tascam literature states 8 mono tracks on that unit so no; Bouncing two tracks to one is not going to be, or maintain, stereo.

The reason is that with two tracks for a stereo image you'll have one panned left and one panned right.
Different signals on each side, which creates the image/width.

If you were to pan them both dead center you'd lose stereo image, and bouncing them both to one new track is about the same thing.
Just like using a mono/unbalanced plug adapter for headphones; You end up with L+R in the left and L+R in the right or, (same thing), everything in the center.

Some recorders (the 006) and DAWs do have stereo tracks but, to be honest, that's just confusing matters,
because there'll be two inputs, two outputs and two pan knobs so..it's basically just two tracks grouped together.

In short, you're going to have to dedicate two tracks to anything that should be stereo.

 

[smg]

Again much thanks to everyone for reading this/replying esp.last response thx man for getting into the specifics of the TASCAM....
I did some tracking today and then made a stereo master track ...this can be copied back to multitrack mode on a pair of tracks....

Why is it necessary to use two tracks for this since its a stereo mix?The option to copy it to a single track isn't there...I checked each of the tracks and see they have a different mix...if I was to bounce them to a single track would it be a stereo track?

 

[Steenamaroo]

Again much thanks to everyone for reading this/replying esp.last response thx man for getting into the specifics of the TASCAM....
I did some tracking today and then made a stereo master track ...this can be copied back to multitrack mode on a pair of tracks....

Why is it necessary to use two tracks for this since its a stereo mix?The option to copy it to a single track isn't there...I checked each of the tracks and see they have a different mix...if I was to bounce them to a single track would it be a stereo track?

Apologies in advance if I'm wrong about your specific gear,
but what you'll have is a stereo mix comprised of individual single channel, or mono, tracks.
The mix/output is stereo, meaning there are two discrete output paths; That enables you to pan elements any amount of left or right.

I don't know, maybe it's simpler to take two unrelated things as an example.
Imagine you want bass hard left and vocals hard right, for some reason.
As two tracks that's great. Just pan them and you're done.
Now, if you tried to bounce those two things into one track, you'll lose the left/right separation. The pan control for that new track sets them both left/right/whatever.
The "stereo image" is lost.
Does that make sense?

 

[jimmys69]

Apologies in advance if I'm wrong about your specific gear,
but what you'll have is a stereo mix comprised of individual single channel, or mono, tracks.
The mix/output is stereo, meaning there are two discrete output paths; That enables you to pan elements any amount of left or right.

I don't know, maybe it's simpler to take two unrelated things as an example.
Imagine you want bass hard left and vocals hard right, for some reason.
As two tracks that's great. Just pan them and you're done.
Now, if you tried to bounce those two things into one track, you'll lose the left/right separation. The pan control for that new track sets them both left/right/whatever.
The "stereo image" is lost.
Does that make sense?

Well stated.

 

[rob aylestone]

Are you saying Rob that you would CLOSE MIC a Mozzy quartet in a glorious acoustic? Rock band? Could not give much of a monkeys.

Dave.

Ha! No - but if I were faced with having to do this in a noisy environment so I could 're-create' it later, so using your 4 mics on a string quartet question, then yes, panning would be essential if you wanted something that sounded like a coincident pair (as one technique) would do. What I never do is mid-field miking - it's never useful, as the spill usually wrecks it.

 

[smg]

thanks again steenamaroo for taking the time to get into this...been using two tracks approach suggested above to record single instrument then to stereo master track..

Am I correct that a single track which has panned/stereo field type depth width/separation would technically be a stereo track in of itself ? i.e.each of the 2 tracks the stereo master is copied to is a stereo track.....and by bouncing them to a third track made from them w/each panned individually I'd have another single stereo track?....

......unlike the results produced by the example used above where 2 single instruments recorded each to its own track then panned to produce a stereo field that outputs together as stereo but combined into one loses the stereo aspect and becomes a mono track.....

...... as even though they were bounced w/the same panning used to produce stereo as output to 2 speakers,this wouldn't transfer to a single track....?

Want to make sure I understand this....

 

[mjbphotos]

A single source panned over a Left+Right field is not a stereo track - once sent/mixed to a stereo master track it is, of course.

 

[smg]

In other words re-my post above,the 2 individual tracks the stereo master track is copied to,while producing a stereo effect when played together and output to 2 speakers,are considered mono tracks in of themselves unlike how I was conceptualizing it?

Due to the separation/miv balance in each one I thought they were stereo re-your first reply to my initial threadl post above...Don't understand the difference between the definition of a stereo track you posted and these...unless although they have separation/mix balance re-depth/width the signal itself is centrally panned and those individual track instruments are all in the center( although due to the vol levels of each instrument they give the impression of being in a stereo field)....

.......along these lines, how would I produce a single stereo track using my setup or would it require a different kind of recording process where the pan/etc elements used would transfer to a single track in a way that would make it a stereo one?

Really appreciate yourself Mike,steenamaroo etc taking the time to go over things with me until I get it...unlike all kind of advanced musical concepts I understand and could explain in detail,I'm new to pro recording/mixing/mastering + things take me a minute to process ....before I posted this thread I was still thinking of stereo/mono in terms of using one or two speakers only or the difference between recording w/stereo line out from the headphone jack vs using a dual 1/4 in. stereo cable out of the L/ R inputs...didn't have any sense of things now being focused on....
.

 

[Steenamaroo]

Generally in hardware recorders that offer stereo tracks, the max number of tracks is fixed.
IE You can have 8 mono or 4 stereo. 6 mono and 1 stereo. Total always = 8.
The idea of it being a stereo track is really just a control/operation convenience, like physically tying two faders together on a console.


If your thinking is 'I have this stereo recording but it's consuming two of my tracks; How can I bounce them to save track count?', you can't.
Your recorder doesn't offer stereo tracks and, if it did, it would still eat up two out of your maximum track count.


Just to confuse matters further, what you could do is bounce several lefts to one track and several rights to another, if you had more than one stereo instrument recording.
Lets say you have four tracks used - Piano left, piano right, guitar left, guitar right,
You could bounce 1+3 to 5, and 2+4 to 6.

That would maintain stereo image, halve your track count, but irreversibly 'mix' your guitar and piano together.
Make sense?

Just FYI, if you did have access to stereo tracks and wanted to bounce 1(GtrLeftMono)+2(GtrRightMono) to 3 Stereo,
you'd have to pan 1+2 hard left and right or, depending on the recorder, tell it you want it bounced to 3L or 3R in order to preserve stereo image.

When bouncing a monos to a mono, I'm not sure that the pan knob matters? Someone else will know.

 

[smg]

Hey steenamaroo thanks for more help understanding this-

Re-above-

1."stereo instrument recording"= piano recorded to two tracks w/different pan ,vol level,instrumental factors like EQ being different in each of the 2 tracks so combined and output to 2 speakers the effect in them would be stereo, as opposed to being dual mono which would mean each of the 2 tracks were the same, just output to 2 speakers where the sound would be the same as if I used one of them centrally panned....?

2."recorder doesn't offer stereo tracks and if it did..etc"...in other words this would be a single track w/2 pan controls and a configuration that would split up the signal being recorded so the track itself played back on 2 speakers would produce the same effect as the stereo master track my unit makes( or the 2 tracks it gets copied to do as played together w/panning used to separate them)does....

Basically in terms of my unit a single track out of the 8 in multitrack mode is always going to be mono(unlike the stereo master track or the two tracks it copies to played together)but recording to two tracks would produce a stereo effect depending on the factors ID'd above...?

Not sure if I understand the difference between dual mono + stereo as this applies to what we're focusing on......unless you're referring to the stereo master track copied to two tracks as being a "stereo instrument recording" and the initial pre-stereo master track recording process using two tracks as described above would be still be dual mono regardless of individual track settings re-pan etc..(although using this 2 track initial recording process would produce a better result in the stereo master track than if I just recorded to one track initially....)

 

[Steenamaroo]

1."stereo instrument recording"= piano recorded to two tracks w/different pan ,vol level,instrumental factors like EQ being different in each of the 2 tracks so combined and output to 2 speakers the effect in them would be stereo, as opposed to being dual mono which would mean each of the 2 tracks were the same, just output to 2 speakers where the sound would be the same as if I used one of them centrally panned....?

Yes, that's right.
Well, technically summing the two components of a stereo image wouldn't be identical to just panning one of them center, but for the purposes of this discussion, in the context of maintaining stereo image, yes.

2."recorder doesn't offer stereo tracks and if it did..etc"...in other words this would be a single track w/2 pan controls and a configuration that would split up the signal being recorded so the track itself played back on 2 speakers would produce the same effect as the stereo master track my unit makes( or the 2 tracks it gets copied to do as played together w/panning used to separate them)does....

It doesn't 'split up the signal'. Input one would record down to track left, and input two would record down to track right.
Exactly the same as having two regular tracks like you do now, except they're grouped/connected/tied as one in your hardware, or software.

Basically in terms of my unit a single track out of the 8 in multitrack mode is always going to be mono

I only glanced at the spec sheet but yes, I believe so.
The 006 model makes a point of detailing mono/stereo tracks whereas yours does not.

Not sure if I understand the difference between dual mono + stereo as this applies to what we're focusing on......unless you're referring to the stereo master track copied to two tracks as being a "stereo instrument recording" and the initial pre-stereo master track recording process using two tracks as described above would be still be dual mono regardless of individual track settings re-pan etc..(although using this 2 track initial recording process would produce a better result in the stereo master track than if I just recorded to one track initially....)

This probably ends up in a semantics battle.
I think the technical definition of stereo is simply that left and right are different.
Personally, I use the word stereo when a left right image, as perceived by your ears, is capture and maintained.

By the book vox on the left and bass on the right is stereo. By my book, I'd want two mics on a single source creating an image.

The only time I ever use, or see, the phrase 'dual mono' is when bouncing out of ProTools.
Dual mono will give me two files - Mix Left and Mix Right, whereas Stereo Interleaved will give me one stereo file, just like any mp3 you listen to.
In that case it's simply about how the files are presented. The content is the same.

The stereo master is really just your output path.
If you bounce a mix that happens to be comprised of 8 unique audio tracks all panned dead center, then the 'stereo' output left and right will be identical.
By the real book that's probably not technically stereo.

Having fun?

As is often the case, the words are a lot less important than the understanding.
If you understand the ins+outs+routing, and know what's going to come out, it's all good.

 

[cavedog101]

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.

 

[smg]

Appreciate your post cavedog101....as this is a big part of what I'm focusing on right now....

I found when running a line out dual cable from the L/R outputs of the keyboard into the TASCAM DP-008ex and recording to 2 tracks that I had to adjust the pan position of the keyboard(the one I have has a mixer that allows for this)as well as set each tracks' input gain at different volumes to get a balanced recording..

.Looking at the meters I saw that the sustained sound continued on one track instead of both without this kind of adjustment.. in other words the sound into the unit showed as a shorter duration on one meter while the other continued at the initial level..

I would be very interested in your continued feedback about anything and everything related to using a keyboard workstation to set up tracks...especially in terms of this thread's focus (which thanks to the people who responded I now have a much clearer sense of...)

In specific do you think the L/R out to one track or two makes for a better stereo mix track?I had been using two tracks as I wanted to get familiar w/the input EQ/compression settings and worked on each track individually.....

Earlier posts over here got into the way the keyboard separates the sound output into L/R channels in terms of frequency range distribution if you have any ideas about this...

I have been wondering about what type of result would be produced if instead of recording one track out of the keyboard as recorded on it using the built in sequencer( same as playing it directly into the TASCAM)to the 2 tracks on the DP008ex I set up a second track by copying the first on the keyboard sequencer,panned them apart and even staggered them by a ms in terms of start time(double tracking)using the keyboard digital controls to adjust this ...then having two tracks on the TASCAM with each having a complete signal instead of one signal split into L/R ...

(hopefully this explanation is understandable......)

Do you think the overall stereo mix track would be better if I did this?

I am using the keyboard workstaion to set up the tracks and use the bass presets a lot as well as the EP/organ/clavinet/synth/pad....The keyboard is a fairly sophisticated one w/tone edit capacities so even before working on the track's EQ/compression on the TASCAM(I have a 1/3 octave graphic EQ coming I ordered online as I found I could only do so much w/the high/low shelf EQ on the unit)I can work on getting the kind of sounds I want....I just figured out how to use the DSP compressor on the keyboard + this improved the EP sound a lot...

I mentioned the above in case you have any ideas about the specific sounds for each instrument digital keyboards across the board have in common as opposed to individual models...

I have a ton of material developed and have begun focusing on recording/mixing/mastering to get it online and start marketing it...

Again thx for posting...interested in seeing what you think re-above...