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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
