Is Mono Bass DESTROYING Your Low End?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 авг 2024
- ✅ Try Warp Academy for Free ➤ warpacademy.com/free-stuff-bu...
✅ Join our Discord Server ➤ / discord
★ SKIP TO SOMETHIN’ ★
0:00 Intro
1:20 The big questions about bass mono
2:00 Why are we told you need to mono the low end?
2:57 Test 1: Making space for the kick and sub - is sides info masking?
5:08 Test 2: Does cutting sides give you more headroom?
8:53 Test 3: Does bass mono improve correlation?
12:25 How to mono your low end / bass correctly
16:23 Does this vary at all by genre? Is this relevant for you?
17:26 Outro
★ STAY IN TOUCH ★
Discord ➤ / discord
Instagram ➤ / warpacademy
Facebook ➤ / warpacademy
★ ABOUT WARP ACADEMY ★
Warp Academy empowers artists to reach their full potential, create exceptional music, and live their passion. We’re a global, online collective that includes music producers, audio engineers, label owners, sound designers, festival organizers, booking agents, managers, leading audio brands and more.
We hook you up with all the education, tools, and connections you need to create professional-quality music and launch a successful career. You can learn almost any topic by searching our library of hundreds of free tutorial videos and production tools. Join us. We’re stoked to meet you!
#musicproducer #mixingtips #musicproduction
Hey everyone. Thanks to you all for watching and supporting the channel. This video has spurred on a very active discussion. 10,000 views in the first 48 hours with very active comments (even saw Dan Worral joined in the discussion).
I wanted to offer some additional information that I feel is of benefit:
1) This doesn’t apply to vinyl. I should have mentioned this in the video, but TBH my clients have never asked for a vinyl-compatible master. When mastering for vinyl you’d definitely use an elliptical filter to remove sides information in the lows. Thanks to the folks who pointed out this oversight. Good catch!
2) I’m not the only one speaking about this topic. I highly suggest you watch this video on @mixbustv from the platinum engineer & producer, David Gnozzi: ruclips.net/video/5tGpNAC1x2Q/видео.html
3) And this video from Nicholas Di Lorenzo at @panorama_mastering: ruclips.net/user/shorts7ZgZjngvaLc
4) Watch this video from Wildcrow: ruclips.net/video/Ld_xTBbzabI/видео.html
5) There is a new(ish) plugin from Tone Projects with mastering engineer Ian Stewart that does some magic allowing you to recover out of phase sides information in the bass for better mono compatibility. See it here: ruclips.net/video/Gc7xbYisIo8/видео.html
6) Another technique to have wide-sounding bass with excellent mono-compatibility is to use a special saturator that can produce harmonics and pan them without affecting the fundamental at all. Look at Wavesfactory Spectre with it’s De-emphasis mode. You can have a bass with some width and not lose anything by converting it to mono. Watch out video on that here: ruclips.net/video/SyqG98MSHQU/видео.html
Hope that’s helpful. Happy music making!
What technique is used in your widener tool in this video ? Have you made a video on mono compatible widening techniques or how to create mono compatible stereo info out of mono audio ?
@@bontempo1271 Hey there. Do you mean in that 808 rack I demonstrated in the hip hop example? If so, I'm layering in 2 Ableton Operator synths. One of them is fully mono playing the main 808-style sound. Then I duplicated that synth so all the envelopes are the same, highpassed it above the fundamental of the main sound, and added additional harmonics in the additive synth engine. Then I used the built-in spread function of the synth. If these wide harmonics are summed to mono they won't substantially cancel the main 808-style sound because A) They're highpassed, and B) they primarily sit in anti-phase, in the sides of the signal.
I have not yet filmed a video on how to create mono-compatible width, but that's going to be one of my next big ones for sure. I'm working on my list of techniques and plugins right now. Stay tuned!
@@warpacademy I can't actually remember if that's what i was referring to, but the technique you described here is a good one :)
I'll keep my eyes peeled for future videos, cheers !
Cheers!
The vast majority of large soundsystems are going to mono sum the subwoofer band anyway (typically below a crossover point of 80-100hz), for various good reasons I won't get into here.
Bass below 100hz is difficult to localize anyway, so stereo information in this range offers little benefit.
The important point in production is to make sure that this range responds favorably, and remains phase coherent when this sum occurs, and also that a fullrange mono sum remains acceptable, as some soundsystems are mono in all bands (as are some radio stations, and some portable speakers).
So it's not that you need to produce bass in mono, but that you need to confirm mono sum compatibility.
Turns out, the reason why my tunes aren't in the top 100 is because there is a conspiracy theory from the top telling me to mono my low end! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
Just flip the polarity of one channel of your bass and you’ll instantly be in the charts ;)
@@warpacademy HA!
😂
That was a nice video. Shows nicely how important it is to stay open minded about how to approach a track and mix. I remember when monoing bass was pretty much all over youtube and I was kinda suprised to see where you were going in this video. Cudos to you for admitting that you also recommended it when everyone was raving about it.
Cheers mate. Yeah it’s always good to be willing to rethink.
I used to mono bass until relatively recently. I started meticulously referencing low end on some of my favourite tracks and seen the side information on the low-end. It was a lightbulb moment and went against so much of the assumptions that are held as Gospel in much literature. I am never mono-folding the low-end now. I create reggae and dub.
Nice one. Exactly how I arrived at this as well. I got curious and started looking, listening and critically thinking for myself versus blindly following advice.
I think this came into full swing when the hass effect from massive was first really popular in bass driven music .... as that stereo widener left barely any center info when really cranked up, and people were slapping on their basses with disregard. It's kind of become a misnomer rule for all stereo information on basses as a result since somehow.
Hey mate. I think you're talking about the Dimension Expander effect right? That one from Massive sounds great in stereo, by adding width. And you're right that it started to get used a lot, due to the effect it had. Adding a 3D effect to bass.
I use the xFer Records freeware plugin version of this a lot. Initially I was very careful because I thought it must be creating mono issues with the bass. So I tested it carefully in every application. What I discovered was that, as long as it's not pushed too hard, it's very mono compatible. I usually only use it at 15-30% width and 10-20% wet. It eventually falls apart. But in small doses it's amazing and correlates well.
That said, I think it would be good to run it in parallel on a send/return and use a linear phase highpass on it so it's not affecting the very low end or phase of the parallel signal (hence the use of linear phase EQ).
i never made the bass mono with the digital versions. i didn’t knew why it did sound better though, but now i know why. thanks!
@@warpacademy Yeah it sounds sick when used tastefully, or like you say on a parallel send would be nice. I used to automate it when making moving basslines along with the filter, so when it was playing low frequency sections of the bass it would close up and then open up when in the higher range. That way you can have it super wide in the higher end, which you otherwise wouldn't be able to get away with if your low end was stretched that far apart too. 👍
Most of the time it worked really well, but other times, depending on the bass (with detuned saws especially), you can get a bit of a weird flange effect in the mids sometimes if using a really thick sound with a lot of detuned waveforms due to the movement you create by mapping it to the same trigger as the filter. In them instances I would just map the dry wet on it's own rather than a mixture of both. 😉
Amazing video thank you so much for sharing your knowledge.
I always set my bass to mono, but that's only because all of my songs feature bass neutral tones, I think the main difference that pushed your point is that your using bass synths which that feature a lot of information across the frequency spectrum. I also think that 200Hz is aggressive for a cut, the most I ever go is 60Hz because at the end of the day I just want my bass and kick to be as neutral as possible
200 Hz is aggressive for sure, but I sometimes see pre-masters where producers have highpassed the sides up to 400 Hz because they're so scared of the low end "not sounding good in the club".
Really insightful and that part where you say at 18:07 - 18:26 "strong beliefs loosely held" where you explain a little bit about its meaning. Really describes a family member who struggles to just take that incomplete knowledge and just go for it. He's caught in a loop of never ending education, and I am glad you said it this way because when I am tuned out because of way in which my tone of my voice is widely muted a lot I feel like you're approach can reach people in a way that I have been trying for decades. I also learned a lot I had no idea the phase was pushing the gain higher I always thought something was going on and now I know thanks Vespers!
Thanks for watching and commenting. Nice to hear from ya. Hope to see you around the channel. More videos soon :). Cheers!
Wow! The mono low end is one of the last “rules” i always follow when making songs. This opens so much
funnily enough I just got metric A/B yesterday to do referencing of my own mix against a Bonobo track and I noticed this exact thing. I decided to undo the monoing of certain elements in the sub regions and the mix just sounded better. But this was a real aha moment for me, so thought it was even more perfect that this video popped up in my yt feed today XD.
Nice one. Yeah no matter what we’ve been told it’s good to test things for ourselves with music that we like. And see what we can learn from it. Good on you for keeping an open mind.
This is my "ah-a" moment after seeing THIS revelation of wisdom. I watched a bunch of EQ videos without challenging the overall feel of the track. Thanks a million - sides is a completely new concept for me now!
Happy to help. Cheers!
You can hear the subby stereo on all EDM tracks, if you listen close. We have been taught that this can't be but stereo information is absolutely present and it is audible when played in stereo format. The phasing issue of filters was extremely enlightening. I use a dynamic EQ shelf on the low end sidechained to the kick now instead of filtering. I thought it sounded better and you pointed out why with the phasing issue. Great video!
Right on. Thanks for watching and commenting. Yeah, a dynamic EQ can be really good here as well like you said. Especially if you can dial in the attack time with some lookahead so the kick transient really comes through.
I really appreciate critical examinations of techniques and theories, such as in this video. I have had my own doubts about the mono bass theory. From what I understand, as J. Josh explained it, mono bass creates space in the mix. While I have found this to be true, I have also found that using this technique makes my beats sound hollow and cuts the energy in half. So, I questioned that theory and found myself second-guessing. While no-one can question or doubt J. Josh's skill or technique, I think it all boils down to taste, goals and how to compensate for losses in the mix because it obviously works for him. I just don't think that it's been working for me all that well. This video helps a lot. Thanks!
Hey hey. Thanks for the comment and kind words. Glad you found this helpful. I’m not sure who J Josh is, maybe link me to his stuff?
In terms of mono low end. A lot of producers don’t actually know that you can have a mono correlating / compatible low end while having some low level side information there like early reflections. Those actually give a mix dimension, girth and a sense of acoustic realism. Especially when listening in headphones or dry acoustical environments.
Cheers!
Coming from a DnB background I was always taught to keep your bass mono to avoid issues pressing to vinyl as lots of stereo bass energy causes the needle to move too much
Yes, I know many people in electronic music have been taught this. But what I would say is analyze 50 of your top producer's tracks. You'll likely see some variation. Fade Black, for example, has songs out with a wide low end. I did a post on that here: instagram.com/p/CvEEmhILz9Z/
The thing is that you have have a bottom end with some nice controlled width in it that's still fully mono compatible and correlates well, if you use the right tools and techniques.
Absolutely brilliant info !! 😁 Cheers for this
Glad it was helpful!
Very useful information! Thank you!
You're most welcome.
Great educator, just as usual !!!
Excellent tutorial. Thanks for this detailed tutorial. 🎉
Glad it was helpful!
Outstanding! Kewl that you referenced mixbustv as well. Thank you for doing your homework!👏
Cheers mate. MixbussTV is an awesome channel. Respect to David.
Great video. Liked and subscribed
I can't thank you enough. Last week I've realised it too but it was just a feeling. I didn't did proper practical research to believe that what I'm hearing is right but you did it. This video was much needed!
Glad to hear that. Yeah, doing the research and vetting the advice we've been given with first-hand tests is always a good idea when deciding how to approach your production and engineering decisions.
great video !! thank you
You are welcome!
This is exactly what I needed thank you
Cheers. Thanks for watching and commenting.
We need to get you a grey monochrome coat and some of those single lens glasses and you'll be your logo. Fantastic to see you still guiding producers throughout the years. Big ups!
Cheers. Thanks for watching and commenting.
GEEEEZIZ!!! THIS IS A GREAT VIDEO!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!! 🔥🔥🧨🧨
You're very welcome. Happy music making.
Fantastic video. Lots of my suspicions were confirmed.
Glad you liked it!
As you said , in sound design phase go for stereo methods like unison , Phases offsets. and its also mainly depends on genres too. Also use tools like TDR Nova to undeerstand the difference between summing and difference signals.
TDR Nova is an amazing freeware plugin. And yes, it's good to differentiate what works for what genres, and what should be done in sound design, vs mixing, vs mastering. Cheers!
Man, this is something I wish the tutorials I watched back then have actually clarified whenever a muddy mix was the main subject.
They go on and on about cutting the lows to fix muddy mixes but never elaborate on the effects of MID low freq VS SIDE low freq.
Only after a long time I realized that it's not a matter of whether the low end is mono at all. like all things in music production, is about finding balance, not about following rules.
I only started paying a lot more attention to how important it is to have these side low freq's in there once I approached the production of orchestral music and needed those heavy impactful and wide drum sounds, it's a true eye opener that made me realize I was mindlessly following rules and concepts that were never fully explained to me the way they should.
These days the only rules I have stablished to myself are directly tied to my production workflow and the mixing rack I built in Ableton.
>Compressor | Take care of dynamics as needed.
>EQ Three | Simplify the first approach to 3 knobs and follow my ears.
> FabFilter Pro-Q | Take a closer look at problem frequencies and MID|SIDE.
>Utility | Generally good to have.
>SPAN Plus on my master, of course.
Get the main functions mapped across 16 macro knobs and from there, just go with the flow.
Glad you've found this useful. It's always good to think for yourself and see if the established guidance "rules" apply for your style of music. You discovered something important here; that big drum sounds can sound great when they have the sides left in (this doesn't mean you don't still need to control or process the sides). Ian Stewart, mastering engineer, and contributor to the plugin Basslane Pro by Tone Projects, also mentions this in his interview with Panorama Mixing & Mastering. Basslane Pro has a "sides saturation" mode that operates in dual mono, which allows the harmonics applied to a tom drum roll to follow the panned toms around. The harmonics move around the stereo field with the drums, imparting a really neat sense of width that is perfectly mono compatible.
Always break the rules and experiment! - cheers! 👍👍👍
Great Vid. 👍
Thanks! 👍
I realy looked a looong time what makes my Sound rich and fat. In the end i used special EQing Saturation and processed Mono Aux Return mix of the Signal back to the Stereo. That was doing such an impact that i would say thats great to do.. but its also easy using it to much and destroy the whole mix. But if you looking out for some more contrast use an Spl twin Tube and Pultec Clone for the Aux Send and mix it back into the mix just a little bit. You will direkty get a fatten up mix. I prefer using up to 5 Groups and using it only on the Bass and Kick. Great result also came by using Maag EQ4 and no pultec and Push the Air Band and mix it back via Aux. It helps basslines to crunch out but stay clean a bit on the High end make it more into face. I Like Aux becourse its easy to just mute it and listen if it brings realy something that is better for the mix. And it often does. Like upward compression. It is often overlooked by beginners. Everyone use muliple Instance on Chains becourse of CPU or DSP Power nowdays. But some things are just better for some reason. And a tube AmP Aux with an Pultec or EQ4 can realy help out. Becourse if you need more crunch or fatten up you just go 10 - 20 % Wet on the Signal and its done. Mono has no mid Side spec. Its just mono so if you mix it it will go full spectrum and if there is any mistake in the low end that collaps you will make it more worse in Mono. But if you did it right - you get it done.
What a great video! Thanks for your hard work on your analysis!
Happy to help.
Fantastic demonstration and advice. Thank you so much for posting!
My pleasure.
11:50 JUST BLEW MY MIND. I make heavy bass music (dubstep, tearout, riddim, dnb) and bass is everything..this is huge for me. Thank you. Subscribed
Thanks for subscribing!
Hear, hear! Well done, sir. Mind successfully blown. Subscribed. Edit.... is running low shelfs in series in small steps equal in phase result as just one big move on one instance of the shelf?
Cheers. That sequential low shelf setup would be a good thing to test.
❤ wow that's an ear opener! I'm a long time proponent of large full range stereo speakers, or smaller speakers with STEREO subs. A prime example that pseudo science theory vs reality are often very different!
Cheers mate! Yeah, I'm also a huge fan of large stereo mains or stereo subs for exactly that reason. So many studios use smaller nearfields with a single sub, forcing LF to mono and never realize that they won't hear the LF correctly to mix it.
finally someone speaking the truth...i did this months a go with some tracks...thanks man (from Brazil)
Cheers. Thanks for watching.
I always figured if the Side information is greater than the Mid information in the low end; the Sides need to be addressed. I never understood why the Sides needed to be eliminated completely. Vinyl & Genre are definitely a deciding factor. I tested a bunch of Bass & Electronic music tracks that were pressed to vinyl and almost all of them have the sides removed around 100 - 200Hz. I would assume that there are exceptions to the rule. Great video, Drew. Something to think about anyway. Bless.
Thanks for commenting. Yeah vinyl is a separate conversation. You want to remove sides with an elliptical filter.
Otherwise, if your sides level is equal to or higher than your mid level then you’ll get correlation issues. Especially in the low end.
@@warpacademy The cutting tip that cuts the acetate can vibrate out the grove and possibly break if stereo side info is in the sub area when cutting vinyl (due to the large wave length and the way stereo is cut into vinyl (by cutting each side asymmetrically, kind of it's hard to put into text), so it was always wise to just cut it below x freq above the subs on the sides for this reason as well as the other issues you mention if you didn't want your cutting house to hate you. ;)
Exactly.
@@DaftFader On another note, those who DO want to keep the side information ( and some some sub frequency) in vinyl could still be present but greatly reduce the over play length of the album. You see this often on albums that only have 2 or 3 songs as those artists opted to retain that low end creating a wider / more seperated cut band or distance between cuts. These albums are most likely pressed at 45 RPM as well.
@@triin6859 Very interesring, I never heard about that before!
This needed to be done.
Thanks for tuning in.
Used to be so, so that the needle wouldn't jump off a record on a wide stereo low end and it's also friendlier on cheaper multi-speaker setups, where the bass can be routed to a more expensive powerfull competent speaker because, we hear bass worse for it needs more gain to stack up to the mids, and as to do so, it carries a lot of air at meter long wavelenghts, which means we lack direction sensitivity to bass, we can't locate it, so it being stereo is - perceptionally - kind of an oxymoron... Having more info on the sides just means more bass, you won't feel much width, just more amplitude (loudness) assuming it doesn't cancel out with the other side, a lot can happen to those meter long reflections, specially if they hang around stationary...
Agreed about the vinyl mastering thing. And yes that a sub located in a room is less able to be sensed directionally.
That said there is a pleasing effect when you’re able to monitor the low end fully in stereo and there is an interaural time difference to some content in the subs.
STRONG BELIEFS LOOSELY HELD... that's a gem👌
Good on you for watching right to the end! Yes, that's a quote that's always stuck with me. When learning, applying our knowledge, and teaching, it can be tempting to "stick to your guns" on stuff that eventually becomes outdated. I try to keep this quote in mind to humble myself when I'm presented with something that conflicts with or disproves something I have believed and to keep me curious. Thanks for watching.
Wow, really interesting, I will experiment with wide low end.
Cheers mate.
thank You
A brave video mate. Shows your integrity 👍🏻
Thanks for watching. Happy music making!
Thanks. I have to rethink and get back to my ears 🙂
Rethinking habitual ways of working is a great way to learn and grow.
@@warpacademy wise answer and made me subscribe Thanks
Thanks for subscribing.
I am feeling kinda sheepish!!! Thanks for setting a beginner straight.
Happy to help. Stay in touch and best of luck with your music.
I FRICKIN ALWAYS HAD THAT INTUITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it always felt and sounded wrong when i did that. EVERY TIME, I listened to a professional song that I look up to, I thought, I always heard massive sub and bass in the sides, but right after I said to myself, SURELY, they are professionals, SURELY they all follow that "rule" that everyone is preaching to mono your bass completely below 200hz and left it at that.
Thank you so much!!!
Happy to help. Key lesson. Trust your intuition and always be willing to second guess “pro” advice.
One reason people mono the bass is because it's easier to avoid phase cancellation issues without accidentally making something that sounds good but cancels too much when in mono. But this can be addressed by checking the mix from time to time with mono bass and then turning it off. Listening to the whole mix in mono is too painful for extended sessions. Sometimes I use mono bass for a whole day then shut it off the next day.
Yes. You nailed it. Too many people design all their sounds, mix the tune, and then just "mono the low end" in their mastering session. Dead wrong. All that does is force any phase cancellation that's there in the low end to be baked into the final master.
What people should be doing is, exactly like you said, check their low end in mono all throughout the production and mixing process to ensure that the information in the sides (if any) is not significantly cancelling when summed to mono. It's entirely possible to design and mix sounds with low end width that still sound just as good and powerful when folded to mono.
But if there is a problem, you want to catch it early in the production process or mixing process and fix it. Thanks for the comment!
I love the way how you present this, great job, mate
Thanks for watching and commenting.
Greate video 💪😍
Thanks for watching.
Mono for headroom never made any sense to me, my only concern was always how stereo bass translates in Club sound systems. This video is food for though tho, thanks. I wonder how well all this translate for people who only use mono-bass in the actual bass / kick and not in the master stage.
Yeah the translation to PA systems has always been a big one for me too seeing as I engineer music mostly for club and festival play. It’s good to understand where your music is going to be listened to most frequently.
Actually putting on my headphones for this
Good idea.
I've heard this trend over and over again, and on my first few real mixes realized I in fact needed low shelf boosting on basses, specifically on the sides, to get the sound I was going for.
It all depends on what instruments are in the mix, how they’ve been micd and how they’ve been mixed. I’m just getting people to think twice before mono encoding the low end without evaluating the benefit objectively.
Thanks Drew very interesting I think the main issue people worry about is phase issues of which let's be honesty a little bit of phase issues is not a problem its using your ears. I keep under 120 mono so from now on I will use these methods for sure.
Cheers mate.
What about the neccessarity to have no sideinformation in the low-end for vinyl production?
This is totally true. You need to use an elliptical filter for vinyl masters for sure. You also can’t have too much bass info in the center. Vinyl mastering is its own thing. If you want to master for vinyl you’ll want to remove bass sides for sure.
What's mapped to the 'widen top' macro? Also, what software were you using to display the bass going out of phase when you were low cutting? I've seen that tool in a few videos now and it would be handy to have it. Cheers
Hey hey. The widen top Macro is mapped to stereo spread (unison detune, basically) in an instance of Operator. The Operator playing the sub stays in mono.
The software I was showing is likely Plugin Doctor by DDMF. It's a good platform for testing plugins. Cheers!
Im pretty sure clipping/limiting makes stuff less mono! (Clipping causes dustortion throught the entire spectrum, so im pretty sure its just reflecting the mid/side signal down!!) I usually mono stuff, and after my master it becomes less mono! Instead of fighting it i just roll with it, abd put my final stereo shaper just before my final limiter (not after b/c eq phase shift loses mr headroom)
You're correct here. Sides information is quieter than mid information. Any type of dynamic range reduction, be it compression, saturation, clipping, or limiting, done on the master buss, will increase decrease the distance between quiet and loud parts and bring up the relative volume of the quiet parts.
So sides information, with heavy gain reduction, will seem louder than before the gain reduction phases. This actually is an issue with mastering music because often notice producers use too much reverb, delays, and stereo widening effects, and it becomes over-exaggerated in mastering. Often, one has to compensate by reducing the volume of sides information in the mastering process.
The original reason to remove low end stereo was because on LP Records it caused the needle to jump, so it was necessary. If you intend to release LPs you'll still need it mastered that way. It's obviously possible to alter the tone settings on a hi-fi to make up for the loss rather than making unplayable LPs. Prior to CDs introduction in the 1980s there was no choice.& listeners never thought there was a problem, they just turned the Bass up on the hi-fi equipment..
Totally correct. I added this point to the pinned comment. That said, width in the low end sounds very good in many modern masters. It's a trend that many of the world's most popular artists / engineers are doing right now. Perhaps not in all genres though. For what I listen to, they are, and I feel like I'm missing something very 3D about the master when it's stripped out.
Yeah, I agree
Cheers. Thanks for watching and commenting.
i've learned that having the bass in mono is relevant for music thats being released on vinyl, eg House / Techno. Would this still hold up?
Yes. That totally holds. Vinyl masters use an elliptical filter that strips out sides.
I only mono 60Hz and below. 60+ Hz is within the territory of some bass guitars and even synths that sound fuller in stereo.
That’s a more reasonable target perhaps. Although you’ll see tons of top 100 songs that have prominent sides down 35 hz and below and they sound amazing. And correlate well.
@@warpacademy Yeah... I don't know about sound amazing. I was taught to mono low frequencies to avoid phasing and I've lived by that lesson. The one thing I've learned about modern music and even popular classic music is that 99% of listeners simply won't be able to discern mixing and mastering mistakes. Just because a song becomes popular doesn't boil down solely to its mix and mastering engineer. Kinda like the sum of all parts. If some engineers don't bother with mono'ing their low ends and they can get away with it... more power to them. 🤗
This is exactly what I’m pointing out in the video. Being taught to mono the low end…why? Why are we taught to do that? You say because of phasing. By that I assume you mean phase cancellation when the stereo signal is summed to mono. Keep in mind that the only time you have a mono sub is on a PA or possibly in a home system where the sub is in mono. In many (likely most) listening scenarios you’ll have a full stereo listening environment.
It’s entirely possible to have sides information down low and not have significant phase cancellation. I demonstrated this is my example.
The engineers in many of the top 100 tracks are not amateurs. They’re pros. They know what they are doing. You don’t get to mix or master a Post Malone track unless your top of the industry. And they’re leaving sides down low. And when I mono the low end it still sounds good.
Take any song off the Spotify top streamed 100 songs from 2022 and show me one where the bottom end doesn’t correlate in mono. Let’s bring real world examples into the discussion.
@@warpacademy I hear you. I respect your opinion and clear passion on the subject. And I've got one foot in the mix industry and I can tell you there is a lot of experimentation and time crunching to deliver a product for a release date. It's not always about the quality and sometimes more about the quantity, especially when you're in demand. Like I said before... 99% of consumers won't know the difference if experimentation, shortcuts or mistakes are made in mixing or mastering. I watched your video and took away what I needed ... let's just agree to disagree. 🤗
Without a doubt there’s time pressure and corners get cut out there in the industry. The nice thing is that at the end of the day when we’re engineering our own music we get to decide what’s right for it. Thanks for watching and commenting.
This "tip" is mostly applicable to bass heavy forms of dance music, where the bass is moving a lot, and the track will often be played on mono systems, and if they are just summing L+R channels, then excessive stereo image in the low bass/sub range can cause phase issues and make the bass weaker in certain spots of the spectrum (depending on how the waves interact and what you actually do to them) and as the song relies on the bass to drive the track groove it's often easier for people to just not have stereo bass at all, than to get it mono compatible with stereo information. However widening effects that leave very little pure center information are the real big issues here, a lightly panned send ping-pong delay with the original bass left in is nothing like say a Hass effect that doesn't leave a center channel and moves almost everything into stereo, delayed from each other (phase central, pun intended :P).
It's a lot less important with commercial style music with instruments and singers etc... but should still have mono compatibility ideally as it's often played on single blue tooth speakers or point source stereo from the other side of a room. Loosing a few db of bass at 70Hz then however isn't going to ruin a track hidden behind the wash of other sounds, but in a club when all you have is a bass and a kick/snare and some funky sounds in the mids to fill the space, it's much more important the bass doesn't phase with it's self at all (unless intended), as it's the main if not second main focal point.
It's very important if mixing for Vinyl however, but hardly anyone does this these days.
Thanks for chiming in. One might be tempted to think this applies only to dance and bass music, but let's refer to one of the top pop, hip hop, and rock engineers out there, David Gnozzi. See what he has to say about this here: ruclips.net/video/5tGpNAC1x2Q/видео.html. And listen to Nicholas Di Lorenzo from Panorama Mixing and Mastering: ruclips.net/user/shorts7ZgZjngvaLc
@@warpacademy Thanks for the reply and dedication to knowlage. 👍
I'm not sugesting you can't have stereo in bass heavy music's low end, I'm just saying there are more pitfalls to avoid when doing so and more reasons it would make sense to think that way and just opt to remove it, and that any mistake will be much more noticeable and that is where this trend gained more traction (I'm talking about drum and bass/ dubstep etc like realllly bass heavy music where the "melody" is played using sub bass) as so many people making bass heavy music were getting it wrong down there with their stereo and making it as wide down there as their mids! It's a cheap and cheerful shortcut to getting a working mix faster if you lack the skill to make it work, that someone mis sold as a rule/nessesity when it's not (there are no rules in creative artforms for the most part, only best practise guidelines for referance).
The fact someone decided to throw it out there as a hard and fast rule for so many to blindly follow, even when the main pitfalls they are hoping to avoid by doing it most likely won't even apply to the vast majority of people anyway is agrivating though. 😉👍
Cheers mate. Yeah, in bass-driven electronic music where the bass is the melody, I'd agree with you. You don't want any phase cancellation down there interfering with the low end. I've found that it is still possible to have some width to bass sound design and still have it sound just as powerful in mono. To me if can sound really good.
The tools I use to do that add panned harmonics that have perfect mono compatibility. Tone Projects Basslane Pro and Wavesfactory Spectre both do this. The harmonics don't interfere with the bass in mono, yet they impart a deep and fat sense of width because of psychoacoustic perception.
It's one of those rare "have your cake and eat it too" techniques. You can have fully powerful mono compatible bass on big PA systems, and a nice sense of width.
@@warpacademy I've heard a ton of good things about spectre too, but never tried it. I wanna try Mathew lane's DrMS too ... but as I've only just got back into making tracks after nearly a decade, I'm gonna wait until I've got my room set back up and have had a few more sessions playing about before sinking money into more plugins, before I've even found my old HDD with the codes for all my old ones. I really need to find my Ohmboyz product codes as I lived by their and D16's plug ins and don't have access to my old email to get it from the site, luckily I saved them all to disk, it's just finding that disk that's become the issue now lol xD.
I wish you all the best with your tunes mate. Cheers!
thanks
Cheers.
Gonna get that plugin doctor and test my plugins 🔥👍🏾
Plug-in doctor is a great app for analyzing what plugins are actually doing.
What is your thoughts on certain plugins that have a mono maker dial? OK to use or not?
Hey Louie. Good question. It really depends on how it's implemented. Usually it's rubbish and I avoid it. Most of them will be using a minimum phase filter that will mangle the phase relationship between your side and mid channel, which is certainly a big NO with your bass. If they use a linear phase side filter, then it can work. I prefer to simply use a linear phase MSEQ like Pro-Q3. Or use a really well thought out tool like Basslane Pro from @toneprojects or Monofilter by @NuGenAudio. Cheers!
@warpacademy thanks for the reply. I have the plugins you mentioned and will give it a try. Have a wonderful day.
Excellent. Enjoy!
Watching this, I am like why have we been lied to for so long lol🤣
An understandable reaction for sure. I think it comes not as much from being lied to as from people parroting outdated advice without ever questioning (or better yet testing) if it still is valid today. Much of this comes from the days of vinyl when you did need to remove sides information for good reasons. But that's not the context here.
More of this advice comes from people who either don't fully understand how audio and mono summing work, in practice, or haven't tested their advice for themselves in enough scenarios. There are definitely examples where stereo bass or sides information in the low end can be bad. But that's most often because it's been produced incorrectly without a proper understanding of how you can have fully mono compatible bass with some width.
There are quite a few modern production practices and plugins that can create low end width, even with a bass instrument, that will sound just as powerful when folded to mono. So the arguments that low end sides information will always substantially phase cancel the bass and kick, or that "you gotta mono the sub to sound good in the club", don't hold up to scrutiny.
When you know better you do better. So many top notch engineers I know leave the bass band in full stereo, unless they need to fix a production problem (these do sometimes happen). That's what's happening in these Spotify top 100 songs that I'm using as examples.
While there is stereo bass in most modern music, that doesn't mean that they're not keeping the main or dry signal in mono and getting the stereo effect from an aux send. That's usually how I do it so I can have more control.
I agree with you completely. It's clear you understand this. The bass and kick sources would typically be in full mono; that's how you get excellent correlation. Then you can create the sense of width that you can control by using parallel effects.
In this video I wanted purely to focus on showing that there is low end width in a great deal of modern music - and show that it can still correlate well and sound good when folded to mono.
Perhaps a deep dive into well devised stereo bass would be a good future video concept. If you don't mind sharing, what techniques and effects are you using on your aux sends to get some controllable width? Cheers!
Well said indeed. The Serum bass presets are thus a starting place with the 2 oscillators/6 unisons - split that sucker, dropping the 1 oscillator sine wave into mono, and oscillator 2 for the character/highs in stereo. Is this correct? Thank you
That's certainly one way to do it. But for me, I always use the sub-oscillator in Serum and then leave the 2 main OSC free to be wavetables. I typically set one of the top OSC to be mono still, to maintain the center of the image in the mids and highs, then set the other top OSC to be wide with Unison voices spread out. That way even when the wide OSC content is in full anti-phase, you still have a nice, powerful sound even if the whole mix is summed to mono.
BIG TUTORIAL
The natural ILD (Interaural Level Difference) of human hearing at bass frequencies (below 200 Hz) is about 0-3 dB for sound sources not very near head. ILD of 1 dB can be considered mild stereophony at bass frequencies. This is achieved by having side channel information about 25 dB quieter than the mid channel. ILD = 2 dB is moderate bass stereophony (mid about 19 dB louder than side) and ILD = 3 dB is full bass stereophony (mid about 15 dB louder than side). Instead of mono bass we should be talking about near mono bass where the side channel is at least 15 dB quieter than the mid channel below 200 Hz. Mono bass is just a trivial simple way to get there, but not optimal. Natural ILD increases with frequency. The side channel should get more and more active towards the high frequences. In case there is need to pan low frequency sounds to left or right, delay between the channels (ITD or Interaural Time Difference) + the small ILD talked above is the way to go. The natural ITD at bass frequencies is about 0-800 microseconds. This applies to headphone listening. On loudspeakers the interaction of the speakers and the room acoustics shape the bass spatiality in its unique way, but the result is similar except for anomalities at room mode frequencies.
Excellent addition to the discussion. Thanks for posting.
When you say “normal” or “natural” ITD or ILD, what information or research are you basing that on? Curious where that’s coming from. Are you talking about designing room sim or crossfeed apps for headphone monitoring?
@@warpacademy I am preferring to the science of human spatial hearing in general. For example if you have sound at frequency range 20-200 Hz coming from your far left side (and not very near) in a somewhat free acoustic field your left ear will receive the sound about 3 dB louder and up to 800 microseconds earlier than your right ear. These parameters are quite critical in headphone listening because the isn't any room acoustics to shape the spatiality into something natural. That's why some people (me included) prefer using cross-feed while listening to headphones, because music mixed for loudspeakers can have excessive channel separation not only in the bass range, but up to 800 Hz or even higher. Controlled natural spatiality at bass frequencies is "safe" for headphones, works with speakers, gives more "lively" sound than mono bass and is very mono-compatible. The downside is the extra work (compared to just making the bass mono) of controlling the spatiality and making it to be in the "natural" area. Hopefully this answered your question and thanks for your interest and kind words!
Right on. Thanks for the elaboration. This parallels what I’ve heard Dan Worral present in his video about the Haas effect and how to create a more realistic Haas than just using ITD.
Also, I’m curious what crossfeed app you’re using for headphone listening?
Best!
could it be that the side info test results were meaningless because you tested on a 2-track?
i wonder what differences it would make if that test was done during the stem mixing process.
I tested on the master bus for a really good reason. It's that so much of the advice around this topic is specifically saying to do this on your master. Of course when you do this on the mix then it should be unnecessary to do it on the master. But that's for another video. I can't cover every scenario in a single video, and this was already nearly 20 minutes. Catch ya on another one soon. Cheers!
If you make dance music for big club systems you need the bass in mono or you are going to lose power, the mix must sound good in mono. The best thing i think is to synthesise your own sub so you can have control on the phase and the side information
I completely agree that for dance music designed for PA play you must consider mono sub correlation / compatibility. Not full spectrum mono. PA systems are configured in stereo in most cases except for the subs.
I also agree that designing your sub to be mono is a good idea in EDM / bass music.
What I don’t agree with is that everything (IE things aside from kick and sub) in that frequency range needs to be mono.
The statement that “you must put the bass in mono or you’ll lose power” is exactly the type of often parroted statement that I’m challenging here.
If you think that’s true, explain why and how having some low level sides information robs you of power? What is your definition of power? Some people define power or energy as having a degree of spaciality, of dimension and width.
Here’s someone who’s a well known and ace enginner explaining it in detail: ruclips.net/video/5tGpNAC1x2Q/видео.html
@@warpacademy sorry I wanted to say that most big club systems sum to mono so if the mix loses power when summed it might not sound good on a big club. I 100% agree with what you say in the video
Ah yeah with that clarification I agree. That’s why with the DJ IBG track I checked it in mono to see if it still sounded good in the bottom end when folded down. Which it did.
Also in my experience I’ve found that not many PA systems are fully in mono. I talk to the live sound engineers all the time. It’s just the subs that are in mono. Perhaps you’ve found systems that are fully in mono? Did you ask? I think that’s also something that’s not done currently.
@@warpacademy never asked but I was reading a book from Mike senior on general mixing rules. I agree that it’s just the sub, if you synthesis just the fundamental armonic on some synths you can have a phase randomisation control that is on by default and causes a lot of problems when summing. For the higher armonics I read it’s good to have stereo info
"You gotta mono the lows, bruh" is advice spouted from people who only heard of it because of the practice for vinyl. And it's always spouted by people who have never, and never will, cut anything to vinyl.
Fair point.
I actually heard the negative effects of mono bass while mixing a track few years back, while a/bing the settings I came to the conclusion that I should trust my ears and not do this on autopilot.
Exactly what I’m getting at.
There's two types of producers. Those who twist only the knobs and press the exact same buttons that previous successful producers have taught them... And then theres producers who go on to be successful... The two are often times mutually exclusive.... Music is an art... If you're just replicating the creative mind of other people then you've already failed at it.
Thanks for the comment and for watching. Great insights. Cheers!
I usually add more fatness/sub/punch to the sides rather than cutting
Playing with the side information is something to explore for sure. It all depends on the song and the audio material it contains. But it's great not to be afraid to keep or accentuate information in the side channel as long as the mix correlates well.
Should we still high pass filter other instruments to make space and remove the rumble of recording ? I am lost
Is there rumble in the recording? There are certainly lots of reasons to remove LF from individual sounds. Sometimes a low shelf is better than a hard cut. It all depends on the source material.
@@warpacademy Most of the pro mixing engineers on youtube like warren huart say to high pass most of the instruments except kick and bass, I just wanted to understand if it was to your opinion a valid approach ? (Considering what you said here on phase issues when high passing bass). I understand that "if" it should be done a low shelf should be better
Good question. Cut filters that are not linear phase with phase shift a lot. Not necessarily a bad thing depending on the application. Cut filters can increase level too. A shelving filter can be a great alternative to removing lows from things without the phase shift issue. It can also be much more gentle and allow things to bleed and blend more.
I've heard from a very good mastering engineer that only cut off the low end of something IF YOU NEED TO, don't do it by default. Especially don't do it by default to things with harmonics there unless specifically going for a psycho-acoustic effect (like missing fundamental etc). If you are making bass heavy music, it's more important to clear that area up than if you're mixing for a band, especially as live instruments can sound unnatural fast if you cut too much, where as a synth is how ever you want it to sound. A lot of instruments loose weight when you cut the low end, so do it sparingly unless you want your mix to sound thin af.
Fully agreed here. Who was the engineer you're referring to? This has been a big topic on RUclips lately. I've heard frequent comments on this from Streaky, Panorama (Nicholas), MixbusTV (David), and Baphometrix.
This video deserves an Oscar! Kudos, Vespers! 🙌
Thanks for watching mate.
Wait! But how about vinyl?
Hey Andris. Good catch. This does not apply to vinyl. I should have mentioned it in the video, but I honestly have never had a client ever ask for a vinyl master. You're correct though, if you're wanting the song on vinyl then you'd have to cut the sides. But in that case I'd recommend doing 2 masters. 1 for vinyl and 1 for everywhere else. Cheers!
Thank you for the revelation 🙏
the adjustment poles on your headphones look like two bic biro pen's!!!
They've aggressively cut the Seids information 😢
3. Yes it does matter what genre.
Indeed. That’s what I also landed on.
All the bad mixing advice comes from broadcast and this sub harmonizer device that was standard.. bc there was a mechanical limitation to the low end with vinyl playback itd be added artificially by this device during playBack..
Yeah, I think part of this mentality does stem back to the use of elliptical filters for vinyl mastering.
I would 100% argue in favor of out of phase wide bottom, the monoed out version sounds sufficiently good and the advantage you have is immense, so much space for the vocal it's insane. There's more than half of the french rap scene that have super wide low end. If you get the kick right, less bass is not that bad in a club or a car (that have static modes and build ups in every corner anyway)
You illuminated an important point. "IF the monoed out version sounds sufficiently good." IE if you test the low end in mono, to simulate what would happen on a PA or mono-sub system, and it still sounds great, then you have no issue with the sides information in the low end and it makes complete sense to leave it in.
It is completely possible to be doing the mixing and sound design in a way that adds mono-compatible width to the low end. And, when done right, it doesn't have any issues "in the club" or on car systems with mono subs.
yes Vespers, Ableton OG !
Cheers mate.
where can one download the 808 maker?
I can make it available in a template soon. Cheers.
@@warpacademy would love that!!
'There is something special down there' -that`s what she said :D
That made me think of what it would be like if Steve Carell was in a show called "The Studio" instead of The Office.
@@warpacademyGood call.
Only a question of phase
4:00 I have a single 12in sub with 2 8in monitors and I couldn't hear much of anything at this point. I have L + R going into the sub but here's a 100hz highpass filter coming out of the sub going into the monitors, could that be why I don't hear it? I'm going to switch it later and see what it sounds like without the highpass. Great video though, I learned a lot!
Hey hey. Likely an acoustics issue with your room. The low end is fully there in the headphones I’m using and on any full range monitoring system.
Sounds like your system is not producing proper frequency response at your listening pos. Have you ever shot your room with a measurement mic and Room EQ Wizard?
@@warpacademy thanks so much for confirming for me! my room, of course, is not treated, and very small, and square… your video on acoustic treatment is amazing btw! One day I’ll get to it, but in the meantime I’ll take my monitors off the high pass channel and maybe even take out a 2nd sub, because more bass solves everything, right? Jk, thanks!
Right on. More acoustics videos coming soon. Cheers!
keep in mind, the example you're showing on the track from DJ IBG, is being shown on a finished mix. The -0.1db reduction seen here by cutting the low end of the sides, would be compensated for if the limiter was after it on the master chain, and would go back to -5.5 in this example depending on the limiter/clipper. Overall, it doesnt make much difference. I personally like a mono sub though. Great Video and the moral of challenging what we're taught is absolutely critical, in many aspects of life, far outside of the studio!!
Not following what you’re saying here. The DJ IBG track with the sides cut increased (not decreased) headroom by 0.1 dB. This would never be “compensated for” by a limiter in a mastering chain because it would be pushing into a limiter less, not more. What this example showed is that cutting the sides, in this case, did produce a tiny and negligible increase in headroom. But nothing worth sacrificing the sides into for.
@@warpacademy You shouldn't be doing this to a finished track. You should be doing this to a mix in progress. Dont see the value in testing this on an already mastered track? Feels dumb.
@@IngoGarza Ableton treats sound the same if it’s “mastered” or not. If he had the project file it would literally do the same. I could be misunderstanding you like the author is lmao.
What I’m talking about in terms of context is when mastering a track that has been completed or in treating a mix bus in the mixing phase. So the DJ IBG track, which is ready for mastering is a prime example.
If we’re not at the mix bus treatment or mastering stage then we’re talking about production and sound design, which is a totally different conversation.
And I also did use the example of the Glass Animals completed master because it has a high level of sides information despite being mastered. I demonstrated that removing even a large amount of sides information (sides are louder in a master vs a premaster) still did not free up headroom. Especially with a non-linear phase cut filter on the sides.
Okay…..while I get where you’re coming from, and agree that no one should automatically do anything advised on RUclips,
There’s quite a bit missing in this discussion, rendering its insinuations and conclusions misleading at best.
I don’t have time to deep dive, but a couple questions:
A) I might’ve missed it, but didn’t hear mention of where mono bass originates, Vinyl and EEQs. Essentially, almost Every song that left the mixing studio, entered the mastering studio, and instantly had this done. The simplified reason is, if the bass was too wide, the actual needle would jump out of the actual groove on the record.
Now you could say: Well who cares about Vinyl anymore? (The answer is plenty of people.)
But my question is: Was all of that music ‘damaged’ or ‘sub-optimal’ in some way, following the main theme of this video. ALL of those engineers were Wrong?
B) Speakers and Headphones.
In short, on speakers what leaves the left speaker reaches both the left And right ear, at different times and levels. This is not true on headphones, which isolate one from the other.
So music mixed in Stereo on speakers then played back on headphones, is simply not the same, in terms of stereo imaging. It doesn’t translate.
As a listener, you can get headphone amplifiers (or software) with a “cross feed” feature, allowing you to blend some of the left signal into the right earphone and vice versa. This helps with a more realistic sound stage listening to existing music.
As a mix engineer however, presumably you want your music to translate to as many listening devices and scenarios as possible, specifically so that the listeners experience on speakers or headphones is more or less consistent. So similar to checking a stereo mix for mono-compatibility, and making adjustments to the mix to ensure that the mix works in both experiences, you Also check a stereo mix for Stereophonic and Binaural compatibility, and similarly make adjustments to ensure translation.
One common phenomenon is that if during the stereo imaging phase of a mix, you adjust every tracks Width and Panning while listening on Cans as opposed to triangulated Monitors, you won’t be able to push things out as far before the image “breaks”.
For one thing, as we all know, items panned up the middle, on speakers occupy a “Phantom Center” that sits out in front of you between the speakers, as if there were a third speaker in that position. However, on cans, that phantom image is inside your skull, behind your eyes, between your ears. (Again cross feed helps pull that forward).
So when you’re panning, at some point on cans, the image appears Behind you and confuses the stereo image and soundstage that you’re presumably trying to construct. Furthermore, if you push to the boundary on Your cans, are you sure that the listener’s headphones and more importantly their sense of Psychoacoustics will allow the same panning as yours?
One technique for addressing this is Mono the Bass, but not to a specific frequency, rather to adjust that frequency along with adjusting the width of the track in question. There seems to be a direct relationship with how Centering the low end, allows for more widening of the upper frequencies. There are scientific arguments that pertain to human evolution and frequency perception etc, but everyone can, and probably should, just try it for yourselves.
So I guess my question is this: If what I just said is true, and again try it yourself, then by Not monoing the bass, contrary to this videos implication, you are panning less wide by instinct, and therefore Losing width overall….Right?
C) Methodology.
By trying to show examples of mixes that are successful, that have wide bass, you did prove that monoing the bass isn’t essential for commercial success. Okay. But you went on to imply that people who do mono, are concerned that their entire mix will fail otherwise. Who is that scarecrow?
And, taking ANY mix and dramatically cutting frequencies after (HPF at 200hz!) a carful mix and master has been balanced, will pretty much destroy the intentions of Any mix.
The point is:
What would that mix have sounded like had that engineer used this technique?
Would they have constructed a Wider or Narrower mix overall?
Would that mix have translated to more or less listening experience?
But kinda like mixing Into bus compression or “glue”, and then disabling the compressor after every mix decision was made with it in place, of course the results are gonna be worse, you just undid Every prior mix decision.
You can’t just unbake a cake.
D) Lastly (not because it’s the last argument, just the last I have time for)
I would have thought, given your experience in Electric Music, that you’d have focused on the implications of mono bass to maximizing reproduction in venue spaces.
1) Many clubs and other common venues have their entire system mono’d. There are many reasons and not much you can do about that, and it speaks more to checking overall mono compatibility, but it’s part of the same set of mix awareness items.
2) Send sound to one speaker, then switch on another, and you doubled the SPL. Send a signal to the left, then also the right, same. You can use that to either get double the SPL, or get the same SPL by sending half the signal to two speakers. Simple math.
Well a venue doesn’t have hypothetical speakers, they have real ones, with finite output levels (even at a festival with a hundred Dave Rat Super-Subs). So anything that is Not mono’d is in effect Not using the potential budget of allotted power, and anything that is Stereo information is in mastering terms “Difference” between the two speakers, rather than “Sum”. Stereo is the left and right working against each other, mono is both speakers moving air together.
Obviously the Subjective side of mixing say do whatever tf you want, but Objectively stereo speakers work a certain way, and Many people make the subjective choice that: since humans perceive lower frequencies in a less localized way anyhow, and I don’t know how much power any given playback system can produce from Each side, then I’m going to deliver most of my bottom end to Both speakers giving me or rather the end user, the maximum amount of potential SPL before the amps or speakers clip.
Is this too incorrect?
Even if you conclude that spreading the low end doesn’t significantly reduce any potential SPL, and that you prefer to trade off that loss against a subjective gain in lowend Stereo imaging, are you suggesting that this should be everyone’s calculus?
And shouldn’t the Whole discussion about a particular Extremely Common audio technique be discussed before being dismissed on RUclips in a clickbaity audio mythbuster video?
Is it possible that countless audio engineers who Do use this technique, kinda know what they’re doing?
Hey hey. Thanks for commenting and offering your perspective. Couple quick notes here.
I mentioned in the pinned comment at the top of the thread about vinyl. Agree with you fully there.
When I said in the video that cutting the sides will damage the integrity of the mix, I was referring only to using a sides cut filter that is not linear phase. Because that puts the sides out of phase with the mix of the signal. Not an idea tradeoff.
I'm also not against putting the low end into mono entirely. I'm saying to evaluate what's down there and if you're losing something by stripping the low sides. And to check correlation. Evaluate the trade off. Do what the song needs and look at what music you really like is doing down there. That's my guidance.
For years and years engineers were, necessarily, stripping out the sides to master for vinyl. Before the days of digital linear phase filters they were using mastering-grade elliptical filters, which would have been minimum phase. I'm sure the engineers did all kinds of things like playing with low shelf vs low cut filters in an attempt to minimize the phase shifting. I'm sure they also played with the slope of the filter as well.
While it was possible to strip sides out using analog filters, modern linear phase filters are a better option IMO.
I started referencing tracks like this with SPAN in m/s mode about a year ago and noticed the same thing. Since I stopped cutting the lows on the sides, my mixes have a lot more weight to them. So much bad information on the internet that's probably ruined so many mixdowns.
there's a free EQ plugin called Marvel EQ that has a linear phase
Ah, nice one. Thanks for letting me know. That's a Voxengo one. Didn't know they made that as freeware. Cheers!
@warpacademy but one thing to keep in mind is you can't completely kill a frequency range. That's why it has some transparency when it comes to shifting phase, "I guess"
Noted. Thanks!
so, don't mono the bass with ableton's utility alone ??
Correct. Ableton's Utility uses a non-linear phase filter which will shift the phase of the sides signal. Don't use it, especially on your master or mix busses. I would instead opt for an EQ Eight plugin in mid-side mode and then use a low shelf filter, which will not have such a strong phase effect. Or use a linear-phase filter.
You DONT want stereo bass in the low frequencies when you are cutting vinyl records. God forbid you are slightly out of phase, the needle will jump out of groove. I learned this in the 90s making electro breaks. You learn quick when you ruin a acetate and a short run of test presses.
Indeed. You're 100% right. Perhaps you didn't see my pinned comment to that effect, but that's at the very top of the thread.
LP EQ has its own side effects which can ruin kick/bass more than a standard EQ. I wouldn't use it anywhere besides multi-mic kick and snare.
Also 48dB slope cut is too extreme for any genre. People do even 96dB cuts - pure madness :)
Phase side effects of HPF can be desirable but it requires experience and trained ears. I've been telling for years that doing HPF on autopilot is bad idea but well... Some people doesn't want to listen and later they complain that their bass with HPF at 120Hz (for real) is weak. Psytrance genre was (or still is) a victim of this autopilot mentality and that the higher you cut, the better.
Thanks for joining in the discussion. Yeah, cut filters can easily be overused when people don't understand the impact they have. I've been using shelving filters much more than cut filters in my workflow lately. But cut filters definitely still have a roll, such as when you need to be more aggressive at removing a frequency range, or if you intentionally want to shift phase. Obviously, they also play a big roll in multi-band plugin design in the crossovers, and in anti-aliasing filters.
So what I started doing for mono bass, is to flip the phase on one channel of the "sides" to collapse THAT to mono, and then I mix that with the "middle" mono bass, and make sure those two are in phase.
Now the "sides" bass is all still there, but in mono.
I should mention that I never actually need to do this in the first place with the stuff I mix, because there's nothing in the low frequencies of the sides to begin with. I developed this trick for mono summing entire tracks specifically, and only appropriated it for low end for when I want to do mono bass (which is never, thus far).
You're throwing away the right channel and getting mono *left channel only* bass.
@@DanWorrall with the sides being the same signal but phase flipped, does it make a difference? The alternative, assuming you are going to do mono bass at all, is to have the sides bass juat cancel out and go away.
@@MFKitten mid channel + side channel = left channel. You can lose the sides, or you can lose the whole right channel. Your call.
Could you please describe and explain this more specifically if you have time? I didn’t quite follow.
Regards
8:09 isn't this to be expected though? You're applying EQ after the master limiter on a commercially released song. Of course it's going to clip. If one were to mono the lows it would have to be done before the master limiter.
I realize it's not how EQ would normally be applied, you're on point there. However, when you think about what I'm doing it makes sense. I'm not adding EQ by boosting. You'd expect that to clip. I'm removing sound. And you can see clearly in SPAN, there is actually quite a lot of amplitude in the sides that is being cut. You'd expect subtractive EQ to be lowering peak level right?
So why isn't that happening? This is what I really want you to understand. The reason level is increasing is because I used a non-linear phase sides HP filter. When the sides are phase shifted relative to the mids in the signal, then you now have the sum of those parts causing constructive and destructive interference. When it's constructive interference, it's summing the waveforms together that create a higher peak. That is why you're seeing the increase in level.
Does that make sense?
Wouldn't you get a different result with something already mastered vs unmastered? Mastered music (especially pop) is squashed to hell. Seems like that would potentially give you a different result.
I’ve used both unmastered and mastered examples in the video. The level of the sides in a premaster would be proportionately lower compared to a mastered song as the gain reduction in the mastering process would bring up low level information.
U shouldn 't use the mono knob in utility or eq indeed.
U also shouldn 't use linear phase eq 's.
But, sub bass should be in mono.
Yes of course your sub bass should be in mono for good correlation on mono sub systems. But what about when you’re mastering and you get a mix with excessive sides info that doesn’t correlate? Then you need a solution. That solution is usually to sides filter either with a linear phase HP or a low shelf.
There are tons of scenarios where you’ll get mixes with sides info below 60 hz from mics in rooms or reverbs and delays or unison voices on synths.
At that point you have to evaluate if it’s adding to the mix and if it’s correlating at an acceptable level with the mid signal.
@@warpacademy You should mail your client and tell em to deliver the mix properly.
You don’t always get to do that mate. In real life you often have to work with what you’re given and get it done.
Careful with 13:45 "the sides would be out of phase with the mids and that's universally a bad idea" it's the same as saying "you always mono the bass". Not true as @DanWorrall also demonstrates 😊🤙🏼
Did you see the text I put on screen at that moment? I said that sides out of phase with mids can soften and blur things around the cutoff frequency and you may want to use that as a special effect. Using non-linear phase side cut on a master is a bad idea, I stand by that. On a master. There may be reasons to shift phase on a individual sound or bus.
Hi. I did. So I guess agree to disagree, IMHO saying IT'S BAD is wrong since it's just a thing that happen, a tool you may even want to use, etc.✌
Hey I also can understand that you had the video recording done, you did put the phrase on screen. etc. So I don't want to be picky! :) I just love to de-demonize this stuff. It helped me a lot in mixing /mastering
Yeah this is exactly why I put the clarification on there. Shifting phase is not in and of itself a bad thing. It can be used as an effect. But many people are applying cut filters without understanding their real phase effect and damaging their master as a result without knowing it.