Topic by azrael4

  • Avatar
  • azrael4
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Salzburg
  • Registered: 17-09-2007
  • Posts: 200

Topic: Phase experience

Hi!

During the work on my new musical project, I've tried to get some PTQ problems fixed. One thing I always recogniced that there is a little phase confusion which does many bad things on the sound. If I use the presets as they are "in full bigscreen Piano focused, I am what I am mode" there it is not so obvious. But that's how I don't use it in a mix  very often. If I switch into MONO in PTQ itselfe , the result is far away from good sounding MONO. So I've started to figure out what can be done. And first of all there is to say: Mono is not Mixing L and R together and get a good result in any case. Depending on the source signal and it's phase coherence, it is not that easy at all. I've started with the Mono Knob in the Nuendo Monitor Mixer. Awfull sounding PTQ! The Lawo X-Imager did a much better job there ( more options of mixing A and B together) but I've still recognized a big sound damage on the PTQ capabilities. Which is a result of phase incoherence which is still a bit of a PTQ problem (makes also a bit of the nasal and muddy quality) So I've started to use a tool which allowed an MS decoding/processing and  encoding to find out more.
I've tried Brainworx EQ in MS mode where you have the option of balancing the Mid and Side channel seperatly and there I recognized that the sound became much more stable and locatable than before when I switched the Side Chanel to one side (L or R it of course makes a difference if you use L than R)  also the frequ. dependent Monomaker of the Tool helps to get an still  roomy but much more stable and mixable signal. So now I could mix the PTQ without sound damage more right or left in the Stereo field of the Mix!
For me there is still the question why the result of the Mono output in PTQ itselfe is so poor sounding but I think it's part of the architecture of the output section and the Pickup-like concept of the pseudo-mic's.
I would say that PTQ could profit from an more phase coherent design because the potential of the software itself is still unquestioned , and I could help myself now with some additional Plugs.

As a resume: Stereo is good stable Mono with an extra benefit from one or the other channel everything else brings you into  good clean trouble but may make you feel good and save under your headphones.

Watch out!

Heinke

http://www.heinke-aussenegg.com/

azrael4's Website

Reply by wolfgang

  • Avatar
  • wolfgang
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Graz, Austria
  • Registered: 28-03-2010
  • Posts: 39

Re: Phase experience

Hi Heinke,

thanks for sharing your experience!

In fact, I also started to think about PTQs mono-compatibility one or two weeks ago when I tried to place two mics very close to each other at the side of the piano. I recently had good results with a similar positioning when recording a *real piano* ... so I thought I might give it a try, although it's not really quite comparable...
Anyway, I really liked the sound...
Then I switched to mono, as I wanted to know whether I had any chance of getting it sounding good on my mono monitor in my band's rehearsal room... And it sounded absolutely horrible! I must admit, though, that my "real piano recording" also sounds horrible when I mix them in mono... -.-

Setting the output mode to mono isn't an option for me, either, cause that way I lose the "sonic benefits" of my mic placement... Guess, I'll have to fiddle again with the mic placement...?!?

azrael4 wrote:

I've tried Brainworx EQ in MS mode where you have the option of balancing the Mid and Side channel seperatly and there I recognized that the sound became much more stable and locatable than before when I switched the Side Chanel to one side (L or R it of course makes a difference if you use L than R)  also the frequ. dependent Monomaker of the Tool helps to get an still  roomy but much more stable and mixable signal.

Sounds like an interesting idea... I understand that you panned the Side Channel hard left or right...and left the Mid channel at center, I guess?
I don't see though, how you can pan your piano sound in a mix without altering the sound?
Cause changing the L/R balance of the sum of the M/S EQ will obviously change the balance between mid and side signal, thus resulting in a different sound.

Very interesting observation, though.

Regards,
Wolfgang

PS: Grüße aus Graz! Schön dass es hier doch ein paar Österreicher gibt

Reply by Philippe Guillaume

  • Avatar
  • Philippe Guillaume
  • Admin
  • Offline
  • Registered: 25-04-2007
  • Posts: 5,251

Re: Phase experience

One thing that you may find of interest: the Pianoteq "Monophonic" OUTPUT setting produces, for acoustic instruments such as K1, C3 and M3, the sound of a specific single mic sent to both channels 1 and 2.

For example, you will get the same sound from the K1 in the two following cases:

A) Select K1 default preset "K1 player", and select "Monophonic" in the OUTPUT pull-down menu.

B) Select K1 default preset "K1 player", then:
- open the mic section (click on the mic right to the OUTPUT pull-down menu) and switch off all mics except mic #1,
- put mic #1 at position [0.83 -0.85 1.4],
- rise level in channel 2 (OUTPUT 2) to 0 dB (level slider appears after clicking in the corresponding cell in the mix matrix).

Hence, “Monophonic" is just a particular position, and if you don’t like this particular sound, you have several possibilities:
1) Simple: you can change this mic position in the mic section,
2) More complicate: you can combine several mics, outputting each mic at the same level in each output to remain mono, which means that the level values OUTPUT1 and OUTPUT2 are the same for each mic. If needed, you can pan by using the delay sliders (click in the corresponding mix matrix cell).

Philippe Guillaume's Website

Reply by wolfgang

  • Avatar
  • wolfgang
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Graz, Austria
  • Registered: 28-03-2010
  • Posts: 39

Re: Phase experience

Thanks a lot, Philippe!
That's some very interesting information!

Panning by using delay is a great idea...I hadn't thought of that before.
Might also lead to phase issues, but I guess not as much as summing a stereo signal.

Reply by azrael4

  • Avatar
  • azrael4
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Salzburg
  • Registered: 17-09-2007
  • Posts: 200

Re: Phase experience

Oh yes, there are possibilities like that in many ways, but when you have recorded some tracks with a preset where you liked the sound color as it is, the mic replacing leads to maybe very different color. (As everyone here knows what deep effect the mic placement has on the PTQ sound) So this could lead into hours of PTQ programming instead of mixing as song . And I've tried this with a special MONO edition of PTQ presets, but I didn't get the same result as I got with the MS EQ from Brainworx (http://www.brainworx-music.de/de/plugins/bx_digital_v2) (I didn't EQ there, just did the MS Balance changes). It's like using the "NuGen Monofilter" (http://www.nugenaudio.com/products.php) in a Master Sum. Cleaning up some freq. ranges and leaving some stereo impressions left. Its quasi the best from both worlds.
The result is a Piano which is locatable in front of you IN a room, and not so an ultra broad owerwhelming bigscreen sound. But still not so "far away"  sounding (as some of the PTQ standard classical) presets.
But what ever, many ways to Rom (Paris?) just wanted to share some thoughts and solutions.

Wolfgang you know :
Panning with delay is very effective but keep an eye on your Phase meter!

To Philippe: Does that mean that when you switch to the mono output the mic section settings are summed to mono?

Last edited by azrael4 (22-11-2010 10:15)
http://www.heinke-aussenegg.com/

azrael4's Website

Reply by Philippe Guillaume

  • Avatar
  • Philippe Guillaume
  • Admin
  • Offline
  • Registered: 25-04-2007
  • Posts: 5,251

Re: Phase experience

azrael4 wrote:

To Philippe: Does that mean that when you switch to the mono output the mic section settings are summed to mono?

No, when when you switch to the mono output, one single mic is sent to the 2 channels, there is no sum.

Philippe Guillaume's Website