mono to stereo?

A

AbuseTheMuses

New member
I am spoiled I guess. I am so used to recording everything in stereo from the moment of first tracking it, even the simplest guitar parts I usually use double mics, or a stereo out of my amp sim pedal (If I have to use it for volume neighbor reasons, yuck). I double the bass parts for tone (standard DI + mic on cab) but keep it mixed center. In general though I am used to working in the stereo field from the getgo, so I have a problem now.

Yeah I dunno if this can really be considered a problem, but here it is: I am going away for a couple of weeks to see my GFs family for holidays. This means a LOT of quiet alone time off in the country while she scuttles around town with her mum and her cousins and her aunts getting nails and hair and such done. Hardly sounds like a problem, right?

Trouble is, the only recorder portable enough to take with me in my guitar case is a little old portable thingy that only has 1 track at a time recordings. It can pan, and has stereo out, but only 1 input. I want to make an 'album' (does that word even make sense any more? - but that's a different topic) while I am there as I always get inspired with so much alone time off in the silence of the country. I don't want the final result to be mono though. When I get home I can stick it into my main recorder and send to some reverb that will return in stereo, but the actual sound sources will still all be flat mono centered, which lacks thickness, or be panned unrealistically for the sake of stereo presence, which is annoying in headphones.
I hate hearing an instrument louder in one ear than another, I like it sounding different in each ear as far as individual tone and nuances go (this is why I double mic everything), but not louder in either ear for the basic meat tracks.


SOooooo...
Are there any easy ways I can take my mono tracks (1 guitar, 1 bass, 1 drum, and 1 vocal) and get them into a more stereo-ish spread? Like adding a fake dimension through EQ, or does that usually sound too doctored? I've never tried this before since I have always just doubled everything from the start.

I have access to a stereo parametric EQ and a stereo multi band compressor once I get back home, which I figure might be tools for the job, but not much experience using them for this type of application. Normally I just use them for mastering, not really playing tricks with sound, just using them to polish out peaks. So yeah I know how that stuff works, and have a hunch they (along with the reverb) could help, just not really sure how/what to do with it for this type of application. Any tips for a starting off point from which to tweak around with?
 
If you're recording the mono tracks separately, just keep them separate, import them into your PC when you get back home as separate mono tracks, and just pan them to your heart's desire in your DAW software.

Or maybe even better yet, use the vacation as a chance to record "studies", i.e. sample tracks of ideas you come up with for riffs, songs, solos, etc. When you get home, use the recordings you can - especially the "lightning in a bottle" ones that might be difficult to re-create with the same "magic" - but for the rest, re-record them in your studio environment where you can get just what you want and need.

G.
 
Why are you afraid of mono?
Firstly, you do have panning, so it wont be mono.
Secondly, It's a great opportunity for you to learn and explore mic techniques, and make better decisions about where you sholud place your mic.

Listen to Sgt. Pepper, It has 4 tracks(well, we know that because the multi-track that leaked to the internet):
1 - Applause and crowd noise - the effects they were using, that must have stereo verb but the track itself is mono.
2 - Backing track - yes, 3 guitars and drums, and a latter overdubed bass, and it's mono, it's panned somewhere to the right.
3 - Lead and backing vocals - all the vocals in one track, nothing more, if it was today, it must of had like 4 tracks at least. the panning varies, sometimes center, sometimes sides. BTW, the echo was on the go, not on the mixing.
4 - Lead guitar and brass - the lead guitar is fading out when the bridge comes and the brass is fading up, it's a horn quartet in one mono track!! also varies, both left, and center.

I Belive that you should give it a try, and I hope you would learn from that experience!
 
also ...... having something equally loud in both speakers IS mono. When you say you double stuff do you mean you actually play the thing twice, recording each pass seperately? Then that's not really recording in stereo ..... that's recording two tracks and panning them hard L and hard R.

personally I find recording stuff in stereo to be just as restrictive as doing everything in mono can be.
IF you record stuff in stereo you don't have much choice in how you pan it because as soon as you do anything other than L and R you lose the stereo and so there's no point in tracking in stereo in the first place.
Except for FX mono is often just as good a way to track individual instruments as stereo and there's no reason to avoid it..
 
From what you are describing, you are really mixing in 'big mono' as it is. If you record everything in stereo and pan all the instruments wide, all you are actually doing is putting all the instruments in the middle with the stereo ambiance out to the side.

Normally, a stereo image is achieved by panning a bunch of mono tracks around the stereo field to create the illusion that different instruments are coming from different points in front of you.

Even if I have multiple mics on something, most of the time it's for the tone combination and they are panned to the same place (like your bass guitar) The exceptions are acoustic guitar (when there is only one performance), drum overheads, and keyboard patches. Even though, sometimes I drop one side of the keys, depending on what they are doing in the song.
 
That is a good point ykarkason, and motivational to hear, thanks. I know I will experiment around quite a bit anyways because it's the middle of nowhere with limited tools, but I don't expect much sgt peppers grandoise arrangements. I'm afraid I won't be able to fit my horn quartet in my guitar case :(
It could be a lot different with a lot of sound sources on each track so there's a lot going on voice-wise, but I only have me, so each track is one instrument whether I like it or not unless I graft on some limbs. What I was getting at is trying to fill out that 1 track into 2 with subtle tricks tricks after the fact? If there are any little tricks people use for this kind of thing. I have thought of using a copied track a tiniest delay fraction apart on the other stereo channel and EQing them slightly inverted here and there. Are there any standard approaches to this kind of thing because I'm just kind of making stuff up to try, I wonder if there's some normal tried and true method of doing this that is used for instance when people stereo remaster the sound for some ancient movie or something.
 
AbuseTheMuses said:
I am so used to recording everything in stereo from the moment of first tracking it, even the simplest guitar parts I usually use double mics, or a stereo out of my amp sim pedal (If I have to use it for volume neighbor reasons, yuck). I double the bass parts for tone (standard DI + mic on cab) but keep it mixed center. In general though I am used to working in the stereo field from the getgo, so I have a problem now.
Click to expand...

Just for the sake of clarity...most of what you describe above isn't really *stereo* tracking...it's more like "dual-mono".

But I get what you are saying...you want to be able to record more than just 1 guitar track, 1 bass track....etc.

Well...there are a bunch of "doubling/panning" processes you can use after the fact to get more than single tracks of each...but why not just record the single tracks and see what you get when you sit down to mix? You might be surprised.

It can get addictive...always wanting more tracks or doubling everything...but it's really not always needed. Besides...you can always add/record more tracks when you come back from your country excursion. Record some more in the studio environment and add it to the "country" tracks for some interesting textures.

But you know...you're going to be out in the country...a quiet/mellow atmosphere...heck, it's begging for a simplistic, somewhat "acoustic" vibe...so all that doubling up may not the way to go, IMO.
Keep it simple and spacious/open sounding instead of too produced.
 
AbuseTheMuses said:
That is a good point ykarkason, and motivational to hear, thanks. I know I will experiment around quite a bit anyways because it's the middle of nowhere with limited tools, but I don't expect much sgt peppers grandoise arrangements. I'm afraid I won't be able to fit my horn quartet in my guitar case :(
It could be a lot different with a lot of sound sources on each track so there's a lot going on voice-wise, but I only have me, so each track is one instrument whether I like it or not unless I graft on some limbs. What I was getting at is trying to fill out that 1 track into 2 with subtle tricks tricks after the fact? If there are any little tricks people use for this kind of thing. I have thought of using a copied track a tiniest delay fraction apart on the other stereo channel and EQing them slightly inverted here and there. Are there any standard approaches to this kind of thing because I'm just kind of making stuff up to try, I wonder if there's some normal tried and true method of doing this that is used for instance when people stereo remaster the sound for some ancient movie or something.
Click to expand...

These techniques with delay and panning are mixing techniques, not tracking techniques.

Still though, My mixing and arrangement view is to be as minimalistic as you can, it may come from the time when I started recording (sort of 5 years ago, yes, I'm still an amateur), where I had one mic, and a one input device, and I had to work on the angels, and the placing of the mic to make it sound better.
It was mono back then, but when I panned it in the computer, I got a stereo sound. And with double tracking(which you can do), I got a quite nice sound.

Don't try to be so bombastic beacuse it can easily break apart.

BTW, how many tracks are available?
You should try to leave the non-needed thing out, and be as simplistic as you can.
I know that I respect songs which are written good and they are simplistic rather then songs which were written baddly and to try to cover it it has so much things that just make it sound bad.

I hope you'd have yourself a very productive time, enjoy it!
 
is there not a computer you can use at their house?i would just download a daw trial,and burn ur work 2 disk or what ever and sort it out when you get back
 
AbuseTheMuses said:
What I was getting at is trying to fill out that 1 track into 2 with subtle tricks tricks after the fact? If there are any little tricks people use for this kind of thing.
Click to expand...
All you have to do is play it twice and pan the two tracks away from each other. That's the way most stereo guitar rhythm beds are made. Copying and delaying just makes a phase mess. It also isn't really any different that putting a stereo chorus on it with the sweep at 0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top