Regarding the human voice ....what is stereo? What is panning? What's the difference?

Lt. Bob said:
Miro ..... stereo by definition means having some sounds that go into one ear only and other sounds that go into the other ear only.
A grand piano meets that qualification if you're up close to it.

Further ....... people are here stating what they consider to be stereo sources and in this context it means things that need to be recorded in stereo to capture them.


I'm indifferent as to what your definition is nor am I interested in your usual circular arguments where you will never concede the slightest thing and continue to bludgeon everyone with your opinion until they accept it in exhaustion.

Have fun with your self perceived 100% knowledge of everything.

:laughings:
Click to expand...

This x 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
 
Weissey said:
I would like you to answer specifically in the context of recording the spoken word of one person, recorded with 2 mics at once, one mic plugged into channel 1 and the other mic plugged into channel 2. Just one voice, two mics, recorded live.
Click to expand...

If you are indeed recording with spaced mics your result should be in stereo. Listen carefully, and I think you will find subtle differences between this and a "mono" recording. Are you listening with earphones or speakers? Our ear-brain connection can be a tricky thing.
 
After seven pages of beating,
I persevere the horse to be dead.
Now get back to work,
you knuckleheads, nuk nuk nuk...Gunadoo.
 
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this before in this thread as I have not read all 7 pages.

What has been said about recording a voice (or guitar or any other single instrument for that matter) with two mics will basically only give you a mono (or center positioned signal) when mixed or played back at equal volumes through a two channel system is basically correct.

HOWEVER, if you undertake the recording with two entirely different microphones (remember every microphone ---even the same brand/model --- has a slightly different characteristic/sound), then you will get a slightly different sound and pick-up pattern from both of them. Now if you play them back through the stereo system or mix them with one mic panned (ie NOT BALANCED!!!) left and the other right (I would not pan to the extreme outer position for either mic), then although the final voice (or instrument) will be heard psycho-acoustically to be coming from the center (ie sounding as if in mono) the differences in the sound picked up by the two entirely different microphones, will give a slight difference in the sound heard in the stereo spread (ie through the two speakers).

Depending upon the final sound required and the number of available multi-tracks, I will often place a single close-up mic on the instrument (or vocalist) and then at a distance of about 6ft place two other mics spread about 6ft apart (all three mics being different brands/models) and then mix these so the main mic is (say) center and the other two at about (say) the 10 and 2 o'clock position (or the same positioning ratio if the main mic is off to one side a bit). Just be VERY careful of the positioning of all three mics to ensure there is absolutely NO phasing effect between the mics as this can ruin an otherwise excellent sound--- although not part of this thread, it is VERY important to be aware of this problem when undertaking a multi-mic drum recording or live mix -- in the studio for a major recording I can spend a whole day getting the drum mics correct, especially when using 10 or more drum mics, as is often the situation and when the correct/desired sound is achieved, the drums ARE NOT moved until the session is fully finished (or a new drum sound is required and then I start all over).

Doing the above can give some very good sounds and a sense of stereo spread for a solo instrument/vocalist.

I have not gone into the situation with placing a very small amount of delay on one or both distant mics --- remember anything above about 20ms can be heard as a delay or doubling effect. But that's the subject of another discussion !!!!!

Just some thoughts for you to consider and experiment with.

David
 
I have a couple of Binaural LPs & CDs: mainly Lou Reed interestingly enough.
With headphones the image is amazing.
Through speakers it's pretty much just stereo as we know & love it.
The stuff on Utub was fun though the barber shop was a little overdone.
There're a couple of decent sites on the net that deal with Binaural.
I've always been confused about how binaural is achieved for a modern album.
Mix etc as desired and play the mastered mix at the head?
Advanced deployment of the ignore option saved me about a page & a half.
 
Holy hell.

The only reason there is anything called 'stereo' is that fact that us dumb ass humans have two ears on opposite sides of our heads. There is only perception of 'stereo' by the way we are able to hear. It allows us to find depth and direction of a mono source.

Every 'EVERY' sound 'is' a 'mono source. No way to argue that with any kind of quantum physics or bullshit.

There is no actual 'stereo' source of any natural sound. Unless a cow burps and farts at the same time, I suppose that could be considered a stereo source, but only to a dood who takes the time to hang out with cows and argue a silly point on a forum about cows and stereo recording.

Just saying. Not trying to start an argument.
 
I understand where both sides are coming from, and I sort of agree but disagree with both sides. (Yes, I'm insane! [Creature from the Black Lagoon Music]duh-Duh-DUUUH![/Creature from the Black Lagoon Music] ...Or am I? <wiggles eyebrows>)

Sound is a three-dimensional phenomenon, but sound sources are neither mono nor stereo, because "mono" and "stereo" really refer to the speaker setups that output sounds-- and to the microphones that are placed to capture the sounds-- not the sources of the sounds themselves.

Yes, sound sources exist within a three-dimensional space, and the sound waves from a single sound source expand outward from that source and fill up and bounce around in that three-dimensional space. But with regard to the specific examples of a piano, or a drum set, we could argue that they're really a collection of separate sound sources-- i.e., the individual strings, drums, cymbals, etc.-- rather than single sound sources in and off themselves. Sure, we think of them as single sound sources, and may even perceive them as such if they're far enough away from us, but they really aren't. Even a cow (or human) that's burping and farting at the same time is two sound sources-- the anus and the, um, mouthus.

The original question, as stated in the thread's title, was about the difference between "stereo" and "panning," not "mono sound sources" versus "stereo sound sources." And that question has already been answered. But to take this dead horse to a higher level, stereo recording doesn't really give a true depiction of how the sound sounds to a person who's listening to it with his or her two ears, because stereo isn't a three-dimensional capturing of sound-- it's only two-dimensional. We really need octophonic (i.e., "quadrophonic on two levels") microphone placement, and octophonic speakers, to get the true three-dimensional sound image. Or we could make do with a hexophonic placement-- front/back, left/right, and above/below-- but hopefully you-alls knows whats I means; we need to capture the sound within the three-dimensional listening environment, and play it back in a way that recreates that three-dimensional environment.

And even though we have only two ears, we can still detect whether a sound is coming from the left, the right, above, below, in front, or in back of us-- but we can't capture and replicate that with mere stereo microphones/speakers. I will even go out on a limb-- and then saw it off behind myself-- by stating that a person with only one ear still has a sense of a sound source's directional placement within three-dimensional space, albeit not to the same depth as a person with two ears, just as a person with only one eye can still tell whether an object is to the left, right, above, below, in front, in back, but not how far away it is in any of those directions (or, at least, not as well) due to the lack of visual depth perception.

Yes, most of us don't own quadrophonic or hexophonic or octophonic audio systems, just stereophonic-- or (if we're really, really, really deprived) monophonic systems. And yes, we could argue that a band on a stage is spread out along a horizontal plane, hence the above/below distinction is dispensable; and the band is in front of us (since we're "facing the music"), hence the front/back distinction is also dispensable. But it seems to me that that's kind of a "sour grapes" argument-- "I don't have a three-dimensional audio system, just a two-dimensional audio system, therefore I decree that a stereo system is good enough to depict all the music in the universe, because... waah! waah!... I don't have a three-dimensional audio system!" (sniffle)

Home recorders, unite! Begin recording everything in octophony! Or in a pinch, in hexophony!

Home listeners, unite! Demand that audio system manufacturers begin selling hexo and octo systems in addition to stero and mono systems!

Musicians everywhere, write to your MIDI Association representatives and urge them to support panning in three dimensions (PanX=left/right, PanY=up/down, PanZ=forward/backward), not just one dimension (Pan=left/right)!

Oh, wait. Is time the fourth dimension? And what about the Fifth Dimension? I used to listen to their album all the time! (Did they have more than one?) Okay, I guess the fourth dimension is already covered by NoteOn/NoteOff events. But what about the Fifth Dimension? Does anyone have MIDI files for the Fifth Dimension?!? I must have MIDI files for the Fifth Dimension!!!

[Doctors rushing in to pump me full of sedatives]

I feel sooo much bettttter!

"We now return you to your regularly hijacked thread, already in derailment."
 
Greg_L said:
Guitars and vocals don't really act that way. Electric guitars can if you're using a stereo cab setup with stereo effects. Vocals, not so much. Not at all. You can mic a vocal with ten mics if you want, it's still not really a "stereo" source.
Click to expand...

Well, if you held your face an inch away from the 12th fret you could hear the sound of the strings on the lower frets in the one ear and the sound coming from the body in the other...
:drunk:
 
jimmys69 said:
Every 'EVERY' sound 'is' a 'mono source. No way to argue that with any kind of quantum physics or bullshit.

.
Click to expand...
actually a grand piano is approximately 240 sound sources since each and every string is a separate sound source.
 
Lt. Bob said:
actually a grand piano is approximately 240 sound sources since each and every string is a separate sound source.
Click to expand...

OMG... I'll have to get more microphones... :laughings:

What's the best 240 channel interface for piano under $100?;)

---------- Update ----------

To Greg's point way way back there somewhere... recording something with two microphones doesn't make anything automatically stereo... (I think it was Greg), it just means you've recorded it with two microphones.
 
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Armistice again.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Behringer will be along with one soon...except they'll call it a 480 channel interface by counting each XLR/TRS dual socket as two inputs.
 
Seems to me that recording with two mics to capture a stereo image would have nil effect recorded outside a room. For example, the walls are creating reflections which allow the sound to reach your ears at different times allowing you to capture a stereo image. If an instrument was recorded in the middle of a field both mics would capture the exact same thing even if they were in an X/Y config.

Now then, I'm on my first cup of coffee and this may not even make any sense
 
Beerhunter said:
Seems to me that recording with two mics to capture a stereo image would have nil effect recorded outside a room. For example, the walls are creating reflections which allow the sound to reach your ears at different times allowing you to capture a stereo image. If an instrument was recorded in the middle of a field both mics would capture the exact same thing even if they were in an X/Y config.

Now then, I'm on my first cup of coffee and this may not even make any sense
Click to expand...

Have another cup of coffee and try again.

It is true that there are no walls to create reflections, but a field isn't a vacuum. All around are the noises of fields, e.g. insects chirruping, birds squawking, maybe a cow somewhere. Instead of early relfections, there may be late reflections (e.g. off a hillside).

So using two mikes for a voice in a field will still give you a definite sense of space, even though maybe the voice is contributing less to that sense. But, just thinking about it now, that 'less' it contributes is as important as the 'more' it contributes in a small room.
 
gecko zzed said:
Have another cup of coffee and try again.

It is true that there are no walls to create reflections, but a field isn't a vacuum. All around are the noises of fields, e.g. insects chirruping, birds squawking, maybe a cow somewhere. Instead of early relfections, there may be late reflections (e.g. off a hillside).

So using two mikes for a voice in a field will still give you a definite sense of space, even though maybe the voice is contributing less to that sense. But, just thinking about it now, that 'less' it contributes is as important as the 'more' it contributes in a small room.
Click to expand...

What if it were in a vacuum? Would there be such thing as a stereo source?
 
SeaGtGruff said:
.... sound sources are neither mono nor stereo, because "mono" and "stereo"....
Click to expand...

Yes, that's actully the best answer.
We kind of got into the whole "stereo/mono" angle earlier....but you're right, it makes no sense to refer to sound sources as either stereo or mono.
Those two terms are purley used for recording technique and playback system description.

Beerhunter said:
What if it were in a vacuum? Would there be such thing as a stereo source?
Click to expand...


Sound waves don't travel/propogate in a vacuum.
Like the classic line (not sure what sci-fi movie it's from)....."in space, no one can hear you scream"....or something like that. :D

Been gone for a day, but now glad to see that some other folks stepped up and made some sense for the whole "stereo space" thing.
 
gecko zzed said:
So using two mikes for a voice in a field will still give you a definite sense of space, even though maybe the voice is contributing less to that sense. But, just thinking about it now, that 'less' it contributes is as important as the 'more' it contributes in a small room.
Click to expand...

:thumbs up:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top