The Young Guy
Carbonite Member
My Boom mic is able to produce great quallity audio but it only recoreds Mono audio. I was wondering if their is a program or trick in Final Cut Pro or Soundtrack that could make my audio to stereo?
Mono to Stereo
- Thread starter The Young Guy
- Start date
The Young Guy
Carbonite Member
Thanks but im unable to do that because i only have one microphone. Thanks though
The Young Guy
Carbonite Member
I thought boom mics usually have Stereo audio!?!? Do most of them produce Mono only?
Jim Brennan
VHS Member Old Skool
yes, boom mics are mono. dialogue is recorded in mono. You can pan it to one side or the other for effect in post, (someone talking off screen to the left for example) if you want.
you tough wrong , the 95% of shotguns or any other hypercardiod /supercardioid microphones which use for booming work have one capsule only ( except the sankencs-3e .and at supper directional microphone , sorry dont remember the name ,which use 4 capsuls as i know-but the output are one signal only ), very small part have additional 8 capsule inside the same body , part of these have mid /side multiplexer which combine the both signals to stereo image , these which dont have you multiplex on your mixer .
the common way is recording mono track dialog or separate mono track dialog which lately will be mix to mono in the final editing ( there are some exceptions , BBC in some of their programs do record stereophonic image during dialog recording- don't ask me why
)
the stereo image( sound fx , music , stereo ambiance are add to the dialog during the mix proses , but they are have been recording separately from the dialog .
you can create stereo recording by using 2 microphones at least in the way that each side have part of the other for stereophonic effect , there are few ways to create stereo image , x/y recording . mid/side recording or blummen , eachof them use different pattern ,setting or placing of the mikes .
start with good mono
the common way is recording mono track dialog or separate mono track dialog which lately will be mix to mono in the final editing ( there are some exceptions , BBC in some of their programs do record stereophonic image during dialog recording- don't ask me why
)the stereo image( sound fx , music , stereo ambiance are add to the dialog during the mix proses , but they are have been recording separately from the dialog .
you can create stereo recording by using 2 microphones at least in the way that each side have part of the other for stereophonic effect , there are few ways to create stereo image , x/y recording . mid/side recording or blummen , eachof them use different pattern ,setting or placing of the mikes .
start with good mono
stephenlnoe
Well-known member
The Young Guy said:
I don't know those programs but you have three options for making stereo out of mono audio.
1. Take your mono track and duplicate it. Place each on it's own tracks in your NLE. Pan one track 75% to full left and the other 75% to full right. Now use your fader and do a mix automation between the two tracks to create your own stereo. Automation is easy if you're following talent on screen. Just fade between the tracks to follow the talent.
2. If your program supports VST plugs then there is such an animal called a 'stereo spread' plugin which will take a mono clip and spread it with a delay which is built into the VST. It's a nice invetion from Steinberg and adds a mild compressor along for the ride. This is by far the easiest way.
3. Just add a cross delay on the mono clip. In order to do this you'll need to take the mono clip and place it on a stereo track. By default the mono will play equally in the panorama but if you put a cross delay audio effect on the clip you'll see that it spreads the mono clip on the stereo panorama and will create a very shallow echo across the channels. Make sure to set the delay time yourself and not take the default unless there is a defaul specifically made to 'thicken' or 'sweeten' vocals. The delay should be short, not long.
These techniques are true across the board for Sonar 4 Producer to Wavelab to Nuendo to Adobe Audition. I'm sure FCP or it's companion that you list will have one of the three methods for you.
good luck and post some results if you have the time...
stephenlnoe said:
1. This isnt stereo, this is just panning. There is no point to cloning the track, as you get exactly the same result panning a mono track.
2 & 3: These are fine suggestions for music (I do similar things all the time), but they are not really apropriate for dialogue (for example) unless you were trying to match ambience. The original poster never actually mentioned what they wanted to do, but I assumed the topic was dialogue since he mentioned a boom.
stephenlnoe
Well-known member
tigeba said:
#1. You can't apply a panning law to a mono track in stereo. It doesn't work that way. You'll have to fill the ambient sound on the other track in some way. This is why two clips are necessary instead of one. Now you could just place the mono clip on a stereo track and pan it around where you want it, that is for sure. If you want stereo you'll need both tracks panned and then fade between them. Do you see? If you pan the mono full left then there is no way to get stereo on the right. If you have a separate track you can use the faders instead and retain the stereo.
Another trick I've learned over the years is to manually delay one of the tracks by a frame. This simulates the delay without the echo. True this is great for music and I don't know this mans piece he's putting together so you can try any of the suggestions and see if will do the trick.
s.noe
stephenlnoe said:
This is incorrect. If you want something in the left speaker you put it on a track and pan hard left, and there is no signal on the right channel. If you want a little signal on the right , then you pan it 90% left (for example) and you get a little audio on the right. All that panning does it control the relative level of signal in the left or right channel. You gain nothing by duplicating a track. The source material is completely correlated, it is not stereo. The only thing you gain is volume. This has nothing to do with panning law. Panning law is just a formula that a particular mixer (assuming it implements some sort of panning law) uses to make sure that the output maintains equal power (relative to other sources) as you pan.
stephenlnoe
Well-known member
tigeba said:
I do not want to mentally masterbate with you. Your formula works for sure as I stated above but if you want to pan hard L or R you'll have nothing on the other channel, no room noise, no ambient anything. They're wanting stereo. You'll need a second track even if it's just room noise. Panning L or R puts more signal on a specific channel as you know (stereo panning law). If you want to keep the signal level between the two tracks you have to have signal on the other track.
@Young Guy- Have you had any luck with your mono to stereo attempts?
The Young Guy
Carbonite Member
stepheninoe-no i have not but i'm still trying different methods. Wish me luck
Ruff_Futtidge
Active member
That'll teach you to ask such questions of "experts" Young Man. See what petty bickering you've started ? - it was all sweetness and harmony (in stereo) here before you came in with your foul, crowd-stirring questions. Let this be a lesson to you. Don't upset the apple cart with such dangerous topics. . . that's just how the war started you foolish whipersnapper !
- - you can mess with mono/stereo waveforms using 'Goldwave' from goldwave.com - it's shareware and ruddy good at that. I found out in 1976 , using a mono vinyl record and a mono reel-to-reel recording of the same, when fed into left and right headphones and getting them in sync. - although left and right signals are same in 'content' and volume, a very slight phase-shift, (amounting to a left/right delay - but VERY short) , has phenominal effects on spatial positioning within the stereo space between the ears! - message me if you want more info.
The BBC state that stereo mics are nearly always 'rubbish' - altho' they didn't say it quite like that ! - Best Wishes - RUFF
- - you can mess with mono/stereo waveforms using 'Goldwave' from goldwave.com - it's shareware and ruddy good at that. I found out in 1976 , using a mono vinyl record and a mono reel-to-reel recording of the same, when fed into left and right headphones and getting them in sync. - although left and right signals are same in 'content' and volume, a very slight phase-shift, (amounting to a left/right delay - but VERY short) , has phenominal effects on spatial positioning within the stereo space between the ears! - message me if you want more info.
The BBC state that stereo mics are nearly always 'rubbish' - altho' they didn't say it quite like that ! - Best Wishes - RUFF
Dave_Fisk
Well-known member
Well, if you knock things out of phase, maybe add some delay, you can create the illusion of stereo, but that's not stereo. Stereo is either two mics, or a stereo mic, with two seperate signals onto two tracks of tape (or disc, or flash card), that then is two tracks in post, that then gets mixed in stereo (or into the surrounds).
Again, if you take a mono signal, and put it on the left and right channels, that's dual mono, even if you mess with it with plug ins.
Even then, production dialogue is ALWAYS recorded in mono, and almost always mixed to the center channel in the final mix. The only times it's not in the center is if the character is off camera, or is close in the shot, and walks across the frame, and you need to do a pan on it.
-Dave
Again, if you take a mono signal, and put it on the left and right channels, that's dual mono, even if you mess with it with plug ins.
Even then, production dialogue is ALWAYS recorded in mono, and almost always mixed to the center channel in the final mix. The only times it's not in the center is if the character is off camera, or is close in the shot, and walks across the frame, and you need to do a pan on it.
-Dave
stephenlnoe
Well-known member
Dave_Fisk said:
Let's say you have two people in the scene and you have recorded dialog between them in mono. If you take the single track and duplicate it onto two tracks you can pan them to different positions in the sound field. Now intercut between the tracks according to the dialog and use faders and panners to position the dialog where it needs to be and the level you want . Fill in the cut out dialog (per track) with room noise.
This is done all the time as well as the other effects. Here is an example screenshot in which I created a stereo effect from a mono track.
Click Here to view
Completely OT: While I'm at it and have your attention. Will you give this a listen on your monitors and tell me if it's bass heavy please?Click here to listen
Dave_Fisk
Well-known member
stephenlnoe said:
I cut dialogue every day. This is called split mono. If you pan them in different places in the stereo field, then they are just panned, that doesn't make them stereo. Now, you can do a stereo or surround mix, in which case you will most likely place your dialogue in the center for almost everything. Even on a wide shot, if people are moving around in the frame, they are still right smack dab in the center of the mix. If you start moving people around all over the place in the mix, unless they are really out of frame, or it's a close up, and they move across the frame, you tend to make the audience uneasy. They don't know why, but they know something is funky. I've seen it happen. You know the "something didn't sound right, but I'm not sure what it was" kind of thing.
You usually want to keep as much of that production sound as possible. You don't want to cut around the dialogue, and try to fill it in with bg's later. You'll have huge gaping holes in your dialogue tracks that will make it nearly impossible to mix. You do want to have bg's cut, obviously, but the main goal of adding bg's is not to cover up, or fill in. You want to add bg's to sweeten, or add a certain feel. Also, when cutting dialogue you usually don't put each talent on their own track. You have different tracks for different camera angles. It ends up being better for the re-recording mixer.
-Dave