Wide stereo image.

[Ben Jenssen]

I’ really getting into experimenting with delays these days. I’m trying to get really wide stereo image on my mixes.

Have you any experience with tap delays, ping pong and so on? They quickly become too obvious and mess up things (phasing, cluttering).

I stumbled on a way of making vocals sound pretty wide and impressing, but it sounds really dumb: quick autopanning! With Waves mondomod. Like 1/4 or 1/8 of the beat.
Not mixed 100%, of course, but mixed in carefully. The vox was three trax, one lead and two dubs panned a little to the sides. I used it on the vox submix. You should really try it. Doesnt sound obvious at all, like you might think.

Then you have the slap delay on the opposite side technique. I haven’t had much success with it. Kinda messy. I usually think a room reverb does the job better.

I never made any sense of the ping pong either.

And what about drastic EQ on delays...

What do the "pros" do? [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[Ben Jenssen]

Anybody like the "outside the speakers" stuff?
(Stereo prosessors like waves S1 or DUY Wide)
I dont know, I guess I just dont like the idea, sounds phasey and wrong.
But I think perhaps it is even being used on high end productions.

I use S1 to widen or narrow without going over the edge, of course. By the way it is VERY useful for image repair: Correcting an off-center vocal f.ex.

[Doc]

Generally, I don't use them on the whole mix but sometimes they can work well on individual mixes.

One area where I have found the S1 very useful is in broadcast post. I recently mastered a TV commercial and used the S1 on the music track set very wide. I was able to mix the music louder without effecting the impact of the dialogue (which I deessed, eq'd and L1'd). When the ad was heard on a ProLogic system, the surround channels were quite active and very effective. In stereo, the dialogue was clear and distinct and the music enveloped you. In mono, the music was a little lower keeping the focus on the dialogue.
The client was very happy and the ad sounded great on TV.

[SoundWrangler]

Have to agree with Doc re: use of stereo enhancers; for me they can generally be used more agressively on a sub-mix rather than the whole track. For music in particular (& as has been mentioned in previous threads on this subject) any more than a very small amount of S1, etc. applied to an entire stereo mix tends to be negative for elements in the center that you'd prefer to be really solid (like a kick drum, or a punchy bass gtr). For me, it generally works better to put this type of effect on a stereo Aux, to select which tracks will benefit from being routed through this kind of treatment.
Stereo "widening" is never a positive thing for mono compatibility, though. (Not a concern for my work, but for broadcast video post guys espec. it's something to keep in mind.)

Another (widely-known) tip regarding delays in music mixes: take the trouble to make your delay times correspond to some note value at the current tempo (i.e., 1/16, 1/8, 1/8 triplets, 1/4 triplets, etc.) - this can reduce some of the "clutter" Ben mentions above, from random, non tempo-related timing factors clattering around inside your mix. (Some people also apply the same idea to longer reverb pre-delays.)

[Doc]

Stereo "widening" is never a positive thing for mono compatibility, though. (Not a concern for my work, but for broadcast video post guys espec. it's something to keep in mind.)

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Actually, with all due respect, I wouldn't say 'never a positive thing' in this situation but it is crucial to monitor your mix in mono.
In my above example the music level drop in mono was a positive thing. When this mix is heard on a mono TV, it is actually desirable to have the music slightly lower for dialogue clarity.

[SoundWrangler]

Fair enough - "usually", perhaps? [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] I was thinking more in terms of the usual advice re: wide stereo FX etc. & phase cancellation, or UNWANTED level drops when stereo tracks are played in mono, espec. since I've seen some of these ugly little surprises happen when folks get too enthusiastic with stereo "widening" effects. Your example, using this to your advantage in the Surround context, was actually pretty clever & interesting.

[lwilliam]

I'll have to try the S1 on a submix. I find that it lowers the center-panned instruments (especially lead vocal) too much when used on a Master fader.

I guess it would work well on a stereo keyboard or other stereo sample track? How about drum overheads: does it work well there?

[Doc]

SoundWrangler,
Totally agree with you [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Anything where losing a little of the centre image level or a drop in mono level doesn't matter is my general rule. In fact, once again, I find these characteristics to be quite desirable at times. It allows for more instruments to have more separation in stereo and less clutter in mono.
One thing I haven't tried yet is using both stereo overheads and stereo room mics on drums and applying something like an S1 to the room mics. That way you'd get the accuracy of the overheads with the width of the S1'd room mics.

[Ben Jenssen]

It all comes down to the room, of course.

[SoundWrangler]

No, I wouldn't generally suggest it on drum overheads. It's great on synth pads, etc.; I sometimes use it if I have multiple strumming acc gtr parts, certain backing vocal parts espec. where they're doubled & spread across in stereo.

Once case where I DO often apply a little taste of this stereo "enhancement" to entire stereo mixes is when creating sound FX textures & music loops for computer playback (CD-ROMs, etc.).