Am I Doing M+S Mic Tracking Correctly?

[Muddy T-Bone]

I'm recording acoustic guitar using MS technigue, want to be certain I'm doing it correctly. This is not a question about mic placement, I'm reasonably certain I have this part correct.

Cardioid on Neck, Figure 8 perpendicular to cardiod. This creates 2 tracks. I am copying the fig 8 mic track mono track to a second mono track and placing 2nd track out-of-phase.

Is this the correct procedure?

Thanks in advance

 

[Steenamaroo]

Hey.
That is the correct procedure.

Centre mic pointed straight at the source, kept as one channel in your daw and panned centre.
The side mic (fig8) is duplicated in the daw, polarity of one copy is flipped, and the two copies are then panned wide apart.

Be sure to keep the volume the same for the two side tracks.(maybe group them).
Balancing these against centre will alter the stereo width.


You might want to consider moving your side mic up and forward a bit, so the two mics are end to end.
It's not going to make a massive difference but one mic is in the way of the other as it stands, and the side mic is slightly farther away from the source.

 

[Muddy T-Bone]

Hey.
That is the correct procedure.

Centre mic pointed straight at the source, kept as one channel in your daw and panned centre.
The side mic (fig8) is duplicated in the daw, polarity of one copy is flipped, and the two copies are then panned wide apart.

Be sure to keep the volume the same for the two side tracks.(maybe group them).
Balancing these against centre will alter the stereo width.


You might want to consider moving your side mic up and forward a bit, so the two mics are end to end.
It's not going to make a massive difference but one mic is in the way of the other as it stands, and the side mic is slightly farther away from the source.

View attachment 80861

Steen **,

Good call on mic placement. I realized it was not optimal after I posted the picture.

I thought I was BUFUD, as my first take was a keeper (surprise) but I flubbed a part in the last 10 seconds of the song. My plan was to add an alternate track to fix the 10 second problem. I thought I was going to have to keep the mics in the original position to have to lay in a 2nd 20 sec. fixer track to correct the problem and sound the same as the first take. When I studied the flawed tracks, I realized that the Fig 8 mic was input as the mono mic.......Which is why it sounded funky and I why I posted this question.

So, I did another take with the mics in the correct position. Thanks for the help.

BTW, great choice of mic's!

 

[John Willett]

Yes, you are basically doing it correctly.

Mid to mixer channel 1 panned centre
Side to mixer channel 2 panned full left
Side also to mixer channel 3 panned full right and polarity inverted

To set the correct level of the side mic. first set up channel 2 (as above) panned left - then set up the polarity-reversed channel also panned full left. Adjust the polarity-reversed channel until the sound totally cancels out and you hear nothing at all - only then, pan the polarity reversed channel full right.

 

[Bobbsy]

Yup, yup and yup.

Only thing is, I've always set up my mixer as:

Channel 1: Side panned left
Channel 2: Mid panned centre
Channel 3: Side panned right

It makes no technical difference at all but the above seems to keep my ancient brain happier. However, now I'm curious how other people arrange the inputs--any thoughts?

 

[bouldersoundguy]

You might want to consider moving your side mic up and forward a bit, so the two mics are end to end.
It's not going to make a massive difference but one mic is in the way of the other as it stands, and the side mic is slightly farther away from the source.

Hm, 2" is 180 degrees out of phase for about 3kHz (for exanple). Something along those lines could be significant.

 

[John Willett]

Yup, yup and yup.

Only thing is, I've always set up my mixer as:

Channel 1: Side panned left
Channel 2: Mid panned centre
Channel 3: Side panned right

It makes no technical difference at all but the above seems to keep my ancient brain happier. However, now I'm curious how other people arrange the inputs--any thoughts?

The main problem with the above is when you have to change the side level as the faders are separated.

The normal way is to use a fader bridge (see pic.) to clip two faders together so you can move them like a single fader - this is easy if the side mic. is on channels 2 and 3, but impossible if they are on channels 1 and 3.

 

[Bobbsy]

Makes sense...but on my digital mixer I can pair any two faders, even non-adjacent ones eliminating the problem.

However, with analogue that makes total sense.

 

[Muddy T-Bone]

The main problem with the above is when you have to change the side level as the faders are separated.

The normal way is to use a fader bridge (see pic.) to clip two faders together so you can move them like a single fader - this is easy if the side mic. is on channels 2 and 3, but impossible if they are on channels 1 and 3.


View attachment 80885

I'm using Reaper, so the side tracks could be on 2 an 9 for all that matter. I can right click the faders and set them identically.

 

[John Willett]

Makes sense...but on my digital mixer I can pair any two faders, even non-adjacent ones eliminating the problem.

However, with analogue that makes total sense.

I'm using Reaper, so the side tracks could be on 2 an 9 for all that matter. I can right click the faders and set them identically.

That's fine then - I have only used analogue mixers and nowadays don't use mixers at all.