On Sat, 21 May 2016 09:43:35 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:08:22AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 May 2016 08:34:55 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>>
>> >Do you claim that such cases don't exist ?
>>
>> I never did! I _unambiguous_ pointed out that I agree with Jörn.
>
>Then what is your problem ?
I don't have a problem with this thread, I just disagree with Wiliam,
because Wiliam disagrees with Jörn.
>> Regarding the pan pots, what exactly is beyond completely to the
>> right and completely to the left?
>
>You can decrease stereo width by moving the panpots on L and R
>towards the center. This is equivalent to reducing the S gain
>of an M/S signal. To increase width you'd boost the S signal.
>That would correspond to turning the panpots beyond full L and R.
This is true for a stereo signal, but from where do you get a stereo
signal? In origin there can not be more than left only and right only,
there is nothing beyond those extremes. Regarding a spatial impression
of a stereo signal, were you can't change the origin, you're right. But
from were do come stereo signals in the field?
>> ... but it's more likely that you never experience that rare cases.
>
>Clearly you haven't.
Actually I experienced such cases, but then there wasn't the gear
available to do M/S processing and under better circumstances there
likely would have been the needed gear available, so that M/S processing
anyway wouldn't have been needed.
>I've done a lot of recording using [...]
Yes, that's what Jörn already mentioned and I agree with this.
>Of course that's very different from the type of music that
>William is making, but if M/S based processing is useful for
>his workflow I don't see any reason why he shouldn't use it.
I also don't say something against his work flow. I only pointed out
that Jörn isn't mistaken. So regarding the OP's request
"What are your thoughts on M/S EQ processing ?"
Jörn was the first one who has given a reasonable explanation. If
somebody likes another work flow is something else, but actually
everything Jörn mentioned is correct. If you have access to all
components, M/S processing doesn't make sense. How can one disagree
with this? If you e.g. use the sampled gated drums, then you already
have no access to the components. If you use sampled drums that aren't
gated and you gate them, you have much better control. I neither would
use a samples of gated drums that don't fit my stereo requirements, nor
would I use a sample of normal drums and do the gating myself, I simply
would chose other gated drums samples.
To disagree with Jörn's explanation is wrong, because he doesn't
pointed out something that is wrong. He pointed out that you gain
nothing by using M/S processing, if you have access to all components,
He did not mention that you couldn't use it, even if you have access to
all components. If you e.g. wish to use M/S processing for the stereo
sum of the final mastering, you are free to do so, but an experienced
engineer usually makes live easier, by mixing the individual channels
as wanted in the first place. The result with M/S processing could be
perfect, but it unlikely makes it easier to get the wanted result, more
likely it would be harder to get the wanted result. If you don't
exactly know what you want as the result, experimenting with what ever
tool is ok, but to precisely get what you want, it's not a good
work-flow.
Regards,
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sat May 21 16:15:02 2016
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat May 21 2016 - 16:15:02 EEST