Narrowing a stereo track

[DavidK]

Hey kids,

I'm finding that some of the samples I use (piano, drums) are too wide in the mix. Some I can't change in the vst software. I bounce all vsts to audio. When I try to narrow them, they seem to lose some luster and perhaps high end. Why is that? Also, is there a preferred way to narrowing them? I can either record them as dual mono and do it that way, or use "Channel Tools" in Sonar. I'm not hearing much of a difference. Thanks.

 

[RAMI]

Hey kids,

I'm finding that some of the samples I use (piano, drums) are too wide in the mix. Some I can't change in the vst software. I bounce all vsts to audio. When I try to narrow them, they seem to lose some luster and perhaps high end. Why is that? Also, is there a preferred way to narrowing them? I can either record them as dual mono and do it that way, or use "Channel Tools" in Sonar. I'm not hearing much of a difference. Thanks.

Yeah, my first thought would be to reocrd them as 2 mono tracks and pan each as close or as far as you want. As for the sound changing when you narrow them, the only thing I can think of is some kind of phase issue when the 2 stereo sides start over-lapping? Just a guess.

 

[mjbphotos]

Reaper has a 'width' feature in its panning tools, I'm guessing Sonar doesn't?

 

[Greg_L]

I'd pan the stereo file all the way left, and bounce it out as mono. Then do the same with the pan all the way right. Then bring the two mono tracks back in and do whatever you want with them.

 

[jerberson12]

Dude, Ive been to this issue years ago. It has something to do with your recording interface. Ive been all over from cheap M-Audio Audiophile, delta 44, mid range Presonus Studio Fire, mid range Motu interface, and now I got the Digidesign HD.

There is nothing you can do on EQ, compressor technique. The more you make them thinner on those plugins, the more you make it sound bad. As a general rule, you pay for what you get. Cheaper interface will have a fatter sound and more expensive interface you get a thinner sound without any effects or EQ, and even you put more tracks on the expensive ones, they just sit really well on the mix without doing anything after the recording. The effects are just use to quick fix or make an obvious sound effect.

Another thing, when you export your project to mp3, they sound more thinner than playing your music inside your recording software. Your recording interface has to do with all this problems.
Remember, if you have an expensive interface and connect everything in a right way, you will get what you want without using any plugins, they will just instantly sound good. Trust me.

Even a pre recorded samples will sound different and better in an expensive DA interface.

 

[Steenamaroo]

Another thing, when you export your project to mp3, they sound more thinner than playing your music inside your recording software. Your recording interface has to do with all this problems.

That's not going to be true now, is it?


OP, none of this has anything to do with anyone's interface.
My best guess would have been the same as Rami's. If you're loosing something when you pan centre, then somethings cancelling.
The synths probably employ some techniques for stereo 'impressiveness' that just don't translate well to mono.

 

[DavidK]

Thanks for responding fellas.

Yeah, my first thought would be to reocrd them as 2 mono tracks and pan each as close or as far as you want. As for the sound changing when you narrow them, the only thing I can think of is some kind of phase issue when the 2 stereo sides start over-lapping? Just a guess.

That's my guess too. What I'm trying to find out is if there are any established "rules" about it i.e. a certain percentage or ratio. My guess is that anything past 10% will create this effect.

Dude, Ive been to this issue years ago. It has something to do with your recording interface. Ive been all over from cheap M-Audio Audiophile, delta 44, mid range Presonus Studio Fire, mid range Motu interface, and now I got the Digidesign HD.

There is nothing you can do on EQ, compressor technique. The more you make them thinner on those plugins, the more you make it sound bad. As a general rule, you pay for what you get. Cheaper interface will have a fatter sound and more expensive interface you get a thinner sound without any effects or EQ, and even you put more tracks on the expensive ones, they just sit really well on the mix without doing anything after the recording. The effects are just use to quick fix or make an obvious sound effect.

The interface isn't even used, the samples are already inside the computer.

Another thing, when you export your project to mp3, they sound more thinner than playing your music inside your recording software. Your recording interface has to do with all this problems.

You owe it to yourself and your recordings to take some time and learn how things work. The interface is not used in the process. You could have a $6,000 interface, a $6 interface or no interface and it will be exactly the same. No audio is moving through the interface at any time. You can unplug your interface while exporting to mp3.

Reaper has a 'width' feature in its panning tools, I'm guessing Sonar doesn't?

Sonar has "Channel Tools" which is probably the same thing.

What I'm trying to suggest/find out is that any stereo recording, whether 2-mic analog or bouncing a softsynth to audio, has some sort of finite limit of how much one can change the stereo image without seriously affecting it. As Rami said, it sounds like phasing/cancelling at a certain point. I'd like to know if there is a technical "breaking point". Thanks.

 

[jerberson12]

The interface isn't even used, the samples are already inside the computer.

isnt playing back a recorded audio not using the interface for output?
the interface is using its DA converter and 50% of the quality for your recording depends here.
people just oversee it.

what is your audio interface anyway?

I can help you with an experiment......

play your audio sample and listen closely.
Send me the same audio sample, I will import it on my Protools with a Digidesign HD interface 96IO. I will not add any effects not compressor etc....
I will then export it and send it to you and take a closer look and you will the see difference.

 

[DavidK]

isnt playing back a recorded audio not using the interface for output?
the interface is using its DA converter and 50% of the quality for your recording depends here.
people just oversee it.

what is your audio interface anyway?

I can help you with an experiment......

play your audio sample and listen closely.
Send me the same audio sample, I will import it on my Protools with a Digidesign HD interface 96IO. I will not add any effects not compressor etc....
I will then export it and send it to you and take a closer look and you will the see difference.

Jerberson, you have fundamental misconceptions about how audio works. Your interface does not "import" anything. If someone sends you any sort of audio file, it doesn't go through the interface at any point in time. As I said, you don't even need an interface to import or export anything. Nothing is going through any a/d or d/a converters, nothing. A/D is for putting audio inside. Well, the audio is already in there. Your cable modem doesn't route through an audio interface.

Your D/A converters will affect nobody except YOU. We can't hear them unless we are at your house. When you make a recording and send it to anyone, it becomes analog in THEIR house through THEIR gear. Unless you mail your interface box to someone, it won't matter.

isnt playing back a recorded audio not using the interface for output?

I could burn to disc (data or audio) and not touch the interface or even need an interface.

I can help you with an experiment......

At this point, I think it would be better if I helped you with an experiment:

1. Go out and buy a $50,000 interface.

2. Leave it in the box unopened.

3. Convert a .wav to mp3.

4. You're done. If you want to take the interface out of the box now, you may. Or, you can leave it in the box if you are going to convert mp3s, import or export audio. If you hook it up to perform those tasks, it will perform exactly like it did in the box unopened.

 

[jerberson12]

Ok

Jerberson, you have fundamental misconceptions about how audio works. Your interface does not "import" anything. If someone sends you any sort of audio file, it doesn't go through the interface at any point in time. As I said, you don't even need an interface to import or export anything. Nothing is going through any a/d or d/a converters, nothing. A/D is for putting audio inside. Well, the audio is already in there. Your cable modem doesn't route through an audio interface.

Your D/A converters will affect nobody except YOU. We can't hear them unless we are at your house. When you make a recording and send it to anyone, it becomes analog in THEIR house through THEIR gear. Unless you mail your interface box to someone, it won't matter.



I could burn to disc (data or audio) and not touch the interface or even need an interface.



At this point, I think it would be better if I helped you with an experiment:

1. Go out and buy a $50,000 interface.

2. Leave it in the box unopened.

3. Convert a .wav to mp3.

4. You're done. If you want to take the interface out of the box now, you may. Or, you can leave it in the box if you are going to convert mp3s, import or export audio. If you hook it up to perform those tasks, it will perform exactly like it did in the box unopened.

 

[Steenamaroo]

isnt playing back a recorded audio not using the interface for output?

Yes.

the interface is using its DA converter and 50% of the quality for your recording depends here.
people just oversee it.

Your , when you're playing back, but like 38% of all statistics, you've just made that up on the spot.

Send me the same audio sample, I will import it on my Protools with a Digidesign HD interface 96IO. I will not add any effects not compressor etc....
I will then export it and send it to you and take a closer look and you will the see difference.

You are wrong. Sorry.

The only way you'd observe a difference is if you re-recorded your analog playback in a controlled environment, then compared with the OP,(who, of course, did the same thing with his interface, in the same environment.)

This is a pointless comparison. You want crystal clear A/D D/A for accurate capture and, i guess, analysis of audio;That makes sense, but a bounce is a bounce, regardless of hardware.

 

[Greg_L]

This was pretty LOL

 

[Steenamaroo]

 

[CFox]

Was gonna say that Jeb is the new VP* but it seems s/he can take correction.




*Victory Pete has got to be an alias and I am surprised so many take the bait, he is the Lambo of electronics.

 

[Steenamaroo]

Vp's a knob.

I told him that once, but apparently it was 'off topic'.

 

[CFox]

VP provides "solid entertainment".

 

[Jonesey9]

Hey kids,

I'm finding that some of the samples I use (piano, drums) are too wide in the mix. Some I can't change in the vst software. I bounce all vsts to audio. When I try to narrow them, they seem to lose some luster and perhaps high end. Why is that? Also, is there a preferred way to narrowing them? I can either record them as dual mono and do it that way, or use "Channel Tools" in Sonar. I'm not hearing much of a difference. Thanks.

I'm amazed that you say you've tried Channel Tools but can't hear much difference.

CT is the perfect tool for what you're trying to do - I use it on virtually every stereo track in my projects. You can also automate the sliders and get as crazy as you want with placing stuff in the stereo field - and you should hear NO signal degradation

 

[DavidK]

I'm amazed that you say you've tried Channel Tools but can't hear much difference.

CT is the perfect tool for what you're trying to do - I use it on virtually every stereo track in my projects. You can also automate the sliders and get as crazy as you want with placing stuff in the stereo field - and you should hear NO signal degradation

To say one should hear no signal degradation just doesn't make any sense. I also use Channel Tools a lot, mainly for widening/doubling tricks. It doesn't matter what tool is used, there will be some degradation when altering a stereo image. I'm trying to find the best way to do it. I've tried every tool I own, right now the Waves S1 is winning.

 

[Tim Gillett]

Another trick you could try is an "azimuth corrector" plugin. It's normally used as an audio restoration plugin and for FM radio broadcasters, where some of the audience will be picking up the stereo broadcast in mono. It's designed to correct slight timing issues between left and right stereo tracks, usually with analog tape source tracks where there has been a tape head misalignment.

Basically it dynamically time shifts one of the tracks to conform with the other track in terms of the phase, but weighted towards the high frequencies. If the program was dual mono, it allows true mono summing without loss of highs.

You might find it useful with your situation. They're not very common. The few pro ones I've seen on the market were very expensive but there's a much cheaper one called "Stereo Tool" which can be purchased as a VST plugin.

Hope this helps

Tim