Stereo understanding

[Dor Avitan]

Hello,

Im mostly new to the technical side of sound and music in general.

2 days ago I was doing live sound to a small band and one of the band member had an accordion.

From what I know an accordion has 2 outputs.

A left side and a right side, one for bass and one for mids - highs.

I chose to connect him through 2 DI'S, one for each side.

The pan was center at both channels.

Does that qualify as a stereo output or does it not?

Thanks for your time

 

[Steenamaroo]

Hi,

Whether the source itself can be considered 'stereo' is the centre of an mind-numbingly tedious debate, but let's just say it is stereo.

You'd need to record the left and right output as separate tracks, then play those tracks back panned left and right, respectively, to reproduce the effect.
Some software will let you use stereo tracks which is basically the same thing in different packaging. (two ins/two outs).

The important point is you should have two separate audio channels, each with it's own input and output; Left and Right.

 

[miroslav]

Does that qualify as a stereo output or does it not?

Technically no...it's more like dual-mono...but Steen is right that it can be a mind-numbing debate...

Whether the source itself can be considered 'stereo' is the centre of an mind-numbingly tedious debate, but let's just say it is stereo.

... much of it due to how the digital world decided to label "stereo" tracks (most people think that a single mic recorded to a "stereo" track = stereo, but it doesn't).

So you can call it pseudo-stereo recording...but of course, once you mix it, you can certainly have a stereo mix made up of mono tracks. Huh?


True stereo *recording* is done with some type of dual/multi-mic (or single stereo mic) setup, to a pair of (L & R) tracks.
Just splitting a source into high and low frequencies to two tracks doesn't = true stereo.

I think the real question here is why are you asking...do you need it to be "true stereo"...or is it to satisfy some debate on your end...?
I think the most important thing to consider is how does it sound to you...does it give you what you want...and don't get bogged down in the minutia.
However, if you want to read more about stereo recording methods....here's a quick overview of some different mic options that give you that.
7 Stereo Miking Techniques You Should Try | Sweetwater

 

[Farview]

In the scenario that you gave, you were listening in mono. If you had panned the two channels left and right away from each other, then you would be listening in stereo.

The debate happens because the way you described it, the two outputs were not supposed to be stereo, just a crossed over version of the same signal. If one output was the chord side of the accordion and the other was the melody side, then it would be closer to stereo.

Your example of an electric accordion, an uncommon instrument, muddies the waters since not many people are familiar with the instrument.

 

[ashcat_lt]

If you pan them anywhere other than exactly the same place, you could call it stereo. I don't think I'd want to do that with this instrument, and I generally run live shows straight mono anyway. In a recording you'd maybe pan them each to fit where they make sense as part of a whole stereo mix.

 

[gecko zzed]

If you pan them both centre, then you have created a mono signal.

 

[rob aylestone]

Even worse - do you pan wider as the bellows expand, and bring it back more to mono when they close? Seriously though, the usual reason they have dual outputs is so you can eq them separately. The chord buttons, especially if they have bassy options can be very muddy and murky, so you might need some eq to tame it, while any melody played on the keyboard might need brightening to cut through and mabe some effects? Then combining back together either as mono or gentle 10 o'clock/2 o'clock panning. Normal stereo on wide instruments goes bass one side, treble the other, but in an accordion, they are stacked vertically so there's no bass/treble movement on a run, for example. In essence, treat an accordion like a pair of keyboards - you don't pan one of those left and the other right, do you?

 

[RFR]

Hello,



From what I know an accordion has 2 outputs.

A left side and a right side, one for bass and one for mids - highs.

We don't know how it was internally 'miced'
If it has two small mics, or transducers isn't known.
But.....if there were two distinct 'micing' devices, one on the bass side and one on the treble side, and each were connected to its own output jack......

Then yes, it would be true stereo because it was capturing two seperate sounds in different locations. Not very far apart, but still different locations

So that plugged into two different channels panned apart would probably decently approximate the natural sound of the instrument.


But what if it wasn't? What if there was only one micing device run to two jacks??

Then for sure it would be mono.

Whew.....hope that made sense.

 

[ecc83]

"Stereo" really has little to do with two channels (we SHOULD all be enjoying four but everybody fell out decades ago about how to do it!). The word means "solid", an impression is attempted to create an illusion of the actual performers in a believable space between the speakers.

In its "purest" form you would use co-incident cardiod or figure eight pattern microphones ar a "spaced pair" but both systems have their pro and cons and in any case, real world constraints mean there will be extra mics to fill in. Often it is said that there is no point in using stereo on a solo instrument?
I would say there is. Largish instruments, guitars, pianos ACCORDIANS! Spew sound from all over the body and grabbing just a tiny percentage of it hardly constitutes fidelity. Then, the instrument or singer might be in a glorious acoustic? Mono will get rid of most of that. (and even in a poor acoustic, co-i stereo can sound more natural) Of course, the microphones need to be placed such that you reproduce the instrument at a sensible "size". Accordians are not 2-3mtrs wide!

But, for PA repro most people I think stick to mono? In most rooms/halls stereo would only benefit perhaps 50-60% of the audience afront the speakers.

I trust that was all suitable mind numbing?

Dave.

 

[Dor Avitan]

Hi,

Whether the source itself can be considered 'stereo' is the centre of an mind-numbingly tedious debate, but let's just say it is stereo.

You'd need to record the left and right output as separate tracks, then play those tracks back panned left and right, respectively, to reproduce the effect.
Some software will let you use stereo tracks which is basically the same thing in different packaging. (two ins/two outs).

The important point is you should have two separate audio channels, each with it's own input and output; Left and Right.

Technically no...it's more like dual-mono...but Steen is right that it can be a mind-numbing debate...



... much of it due to how the digital world decided to label "stereo" tracks (most people think that a single mic recorded to a "stereo" track = stereo, but it doesn't).

So you can call it pseudo-stereo recording...but of course, once you mix it, you can certainly have a stereo mix made up of mono tracks. Huh?


True stereo *recording* is done with some type of dual/multi-mic (or single stereo mic) setup, to a pair of (L & R) tracks.
Just splitting a source into high and low frequencies to two tracks doesn't = true stereo.

I think the real question here is why are you asking...do you need it to be "true stereo"...or is it to satisfy some debate on your end...?
I think the most important thing to consider is how does it sound to you...does it give you what you want...and don't get bogged down in the minutia.
However, if you want to read more about stereo recording methods....here's a quick overview of some different mic options that give you that.
7 Stereo Miking Techniques You Should Try | Sweetwater

Well I asked simply because i want to know, and i wanna do my job correctly.
Imaging go on to play and your soundman uses the term stereo uncorrectly and you correct him.
That's just means i failed to me.

In the scenario that you gave, you were listening in mono. If you had panned the two channels left and right away from each other, then you would be listening in stereo.

The debate happens because the way you described it, the two outputs were not supposed to be stereo, just a crossed over version of the same signal. If one output was the chord side of the accordion and the other was the melody side, then it would be closer to stereo.

Your example of an electric accordion, an uncommon instrument, muddies the waters since not many people are familiar with the instrument.

If you pan them anywhere other than exactly the same place, you could call it stereo. I don't think I'd want to do that with this instrument, and I generally run live shows straight mono anyway. In a recording you'd maybe pan them each to fit where they make sense as part of a whole stereo mix.

If you pan them both centre, then you have created a mono signal.

Thank you very much guys, that pretty much cleared my misunderstanding.

 

[Dor Avitan]

Even worse - do you pan wider as the bellows expand, and bring it back more to mono when they close? Seriously though, the usual reason they have dual outputs is so you can eq them separately. The chord buttons, especially if they have bassy options can be very muddy and murky, so you might need some eq to tame it, while any melody played on the keyboard might need brightening to cut through and mabe some effects? Then combining back together either as mono or gentle 10 o'clock/2 o'clock panning. Normal stereo on wide instruments goes bass one side, treble the other, but in an accordion, they are stacked vertically so there's no bass/treble movement on a run, for example. In essence, treat an accordion like a pair of keyboards - you don't pan one of those left and the other right, do you?

We don't know how it was internally 'miced'
If it has two small mics, or transducers isn't known.
But.....if there were two distinct 'micing' devices, one on the bass side and one on the treble side, and each were connected to its own output jack......

Then yes, it would be true stereo because it was capturing two seperate sounds in different locations. Not very far apart, but still different locations

So that plugged into two different channels panned apart would probably decently approximate the natural sound of the instrument.


But what if it wasn't? What if there was only one micing device run to two jacks??

Then for sure it would be mono.

Whew.....hope that made sense.

Yeah that made sense, thank you very much and i didnt use any microphonse, i used DI's.

"Stereo" really has little to do with two channels (we SHOULD all be enjoying four but everybody fell out decades ago about how to do it!). The word means "solid", an impression is attempted to create an illusion of the actual performers in a believable space between the speakers.

In its "purest" form you would use co-incident cardiod or figure eight pattern microphones ar a "spaced pair" but both systems have their pro and cons and in any case, real world constraints mean there will be extra mics to fill in. Often it is said that there is no point in using stereo on a solo instrument?
I would say there is. Largish instruments, guitars, pianos ACCORDIANS! Spew sound from all over the body and grabbing just a tiny percentage of it hardly constitutes fidelity. Then, the instrument or singer might be in a glorious acoustic? Mono will get rid of most of that. (and even in a poor acoustic, co-i stereo can sound more natural) Of course, the microphones need to be placed such that you reproduce the instrument at a sensible "size". Accordians are not 2-3mtrs wide!

But, for PA repro most people I think stick to mono? In most rooms/halls stereo would only benefit perhaps 50-60% of the audience afront the speakers.

I trust that was all suitable mind numbing?

Dave.

That helped alot, thank you guys.

 

[mjbphotos]

Yeah that made sense, thank you very much and i didnt use any microphonse, i used DI's.

The posts were referring to how the accordion sound is being picked up internally.

 

[miroslav]

Imaging go on to play and your soundman uses the term stereo uncorrectly and you correct him.

Good luck trying to correct the soundman.

 

[rob aylestone]

Practically all keyboards with a left and right output are labelled stereo - it's easy to understand. I think that two channel is perhaps more accurate but two channels doesn't always mean stereo. I remember my dad with his first stereo record player and one big band record. The saxes were in the kitchen, and the trumpets in the living room - hearing the do-wap, do-waps of the band flipping between rooms was unreal! That, apparently, was what stereo was.

 

[mixsit]

Good luck trying to correct the soundman.

Practically all keyboards with a left and right output are labelled stereo - it's easy to understand. I think that two channel is perhaps more accurate but two channels doesn't always mean stereo. I remember my dad with his first stereo record player and one big band record. The saxes were in the kitchen, and the trumpets in the living room - hearing the do-wap, do-waps of the band flipping between rooms was unreal! That, apparently, was what stereo was.

Rob I loved your first line in post 7.
And thus here in Excess Land, we'd want an inverse automation link pair, 'bellows width' to mono track pan positions, back in the DAW.

Obviously..

 

[ashcat_lt]

If you're panning anything in a live situation, you're probably wasting about half of it. At least half the PAs I mix through are mono. Most of the others are just vocals anyway. Stages that are big enough for more than vocals through the PA have the FOH speakers far enough apart that stereo doesn't make much sense if I want to keep the whole crowd happy.

 

[jimmys69]

If you're panning anything in a live situation, you're probably wasting about half of it. At least half the PAs I mix through are mono. Most of the others are just vocals anyway. Stages that are big enough for more than vocals through the PA have the FOH speakers far enough apart that stereo doesn't make much sense if I want to keep the whole crowd happy.

Well that of course depends on the venue, the system, and the soundman. But yeah, most times it is all mono, or at least close.

 

[ashcat_lt]

Well that of course depends on the venue, the system, and the soundman. But yeah, most times it is all mono, or at least close.

Most of the places I mix are underspecified to begin with. Sending a signal that I want to hear to less than ALL of the system doesn't help.

 

[jimmys69]

Most of the places I mix are underspecified to begin with. Sending a signal that I want to hear to less than ALL of the system doesn't help.

Agreed.

There are a few venues in Denver that do have good FOH PA and side fills for the stage. Front row gets the guy on the left from the right side and VV.

Many touring bands demand a stereo setup, but in the end, it is so fucking loud that it really is just mono from 20' back. But then, I have heard some really good sound guys pull some shit out of systems the everyday hired guy cannot.

Not many have the luxury of that every time.

 

[ecc83]

Yes. Isn't stereo a trick trying to let hifi sound at home sound like your ears will capture it in a big space?
Two ears hearing slightly different, with bass and high tones both acting different in a big space?

So if that is then live in a big space the space itself will automatically will create "stereo sound" from the mono.

No, it won't. Yes, if you play a mono source in an olympic swimming pool you will get a lot of reverberation, a "spacey" sort of sound but the basic sound source will remain resolutely one dimensional.

We locate sounds in space because of different arrival times at our ears* and the "shadowing" effect of our head. Note, because our ear are ASIDE the head we are much better at horizontal location than vertical. Microphones can capture some of this effect and the basic idea with the "co-incident pair" is to put them at "the best seat in the house". In practice the co-i pair is often flown above interferring fingers in concert halls.

The fact is, plonking a co-i pair in front of a band can often make a very good recording although they need to be good musicians with a good sense of internal sound balance. The ego tripping guitarist with a 100W stack or a rabid drummer can bugger things mightily. (the old saw, "All superb soloists in their own right you know? It's when they play together we get trouble!") But then, such balance problems are almost as bad even if you multi-micc'ed everyone.

Because a $250 stereo pair is far more useful than is often thought (always KISS first) I always try to put noobs off buying a cheap, single mic input AI.

*Even when one ear is well down on harkability, "stereo" still seems to work fine and I know this from personal experience.

Dave.