Mono to Stereo

Dave_Fisk 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
Click to expand...

Dave, we are on the same page. What was shown is the start, not the finish. I don't know what sound floor you're working with but we are talking the same language. You need control of the dialog(s) on a discrete channel if you want to work with them in the mix. Let's not do this.

Let's let YoungMan post some results and then suggest on improvements instead?
 
stephenlnoe said:
You need control of the dialog(s) on a discrete channel if you want to work with them in the mix.
Click to expand...


Usually it depends on what the re-recording mixer wants. About 99% of the re-recording mixer I have dealt with don't want each character on seperate tracks. They want the dialogue tracks to be the same number of different angles, or shots in a given scene. This makes it much easier for them to eq and use any other effects that they may need.

I used to cut dialogue the way you described, where each character had their own track, and I cut around the dialogue, meaning anything else in the track I got rid of. Then I would try and fill in with BG's that I cut in later. That's how I was taught to do it from other people when I was an intern. That kind of worked fine for me when I was doing everything myself. However, once I started taking things to real mix stages, every single mixer kept telling me not to do that, and to put the dialogue on tracks that go along with the camera angles. I started asking around, and come to find out, this is normal practice. I had one guy say he only knew of one person who actually likes each character on their own track. Since I really don't consider myself a re-recording mixer, I thought of that as a really good learning experience.

You are definitely going to have seperate dialogue tracks, I'm with ya there. It's just what's in discrete tracks is where we differ. Sometimes, if the camera shots change from one character to the next, then you will have discrete tracks for each person, so it's really going to depend on a given scene.

-Dave
 
Dave_Fisk said:
You are definitely going to have seperate dialogue tracks, I'm with ya there. It's just what's in discrete tracks is where we differ. Sometimes, if the camera shots change from one character to the next, then you will have discrete tracks for each person, so it's really going to depend on a given scene.
-Dave
Click to expand...


Dave,

I'm with you as well. In our case the type of setup you describe belongs on a 5.1 mix. 30 - 60 seconds of stereo doesn't require such an elaborate setup if your just panning 2 or 3 characters for a commercial. It's all good. :thumbsup: Live long and prosper.
 
If I wanted to record a mono source onto both channels in the first place. Doyou simply use input 2 and then set both channels (the little switched on the DVX) to input 2?
-thanks.
 
Dave and stephenlnoe,

A couple of points. First though technically any panning involves a pan law it adds confusion to refer to a linear pan as one involving a pan law. When folks talk about pan laws they are (99.999%) talking of a formula that dips the center position level by a bit so the pan sounds even.

Second your talking about two different things when you talk about stereo recording VS mixing. Dave to use your definition pretty much all music recordings are mono. And it's true that the originals are mostly multi tracked mono BUT the mixed version is stereo.

ster·e·o·phon·ic (str--fnk, stîr-)
adj.
Of or used in a sound-reproduction system that uses two or more separate channels to give a more natural distribution of sound.

So what goes to the mix stage IS muti track mono but what comes out IS stereo (or 5.1 or whatever).

SK
 
Not really. Since dialogue comes from the center channel 99% of the time (which is only one speaker), that is mono. If it is panned around the stereo (or surround) field, it is still a mono signal that is being moved within that field.

To relate to your music analaogy, in the grand scheme of a mix, whether it be stereo or surround, the final mix is what is called stereo or surround. The actual dialogue itself is still mono, no matter how many speakers it comes out of. If it's more than one speaker it's dual mono. Music is mixed in "stereo", meaning you are panning the instruments wherever you want in the stereo field, some things may even be recorded in stereo (drum overheads, guitars..). If you record the vocals mono, then they are mono, no matter how many speakers you put them in. Your overall mix is a stereo mix made up of several mono sources.
 
Dave_Fisk said:
Not really. Since dialogue comes from the center channel 99% of the time (which is only one speaker), that is mono. If it is panned around the stereo (or surround) field, it is still a mono signal that is being moved within that field.

To relate to your music analaogy, in the grand scheme of a mix, whether it be stereo or surround, the final mix is what is called stereo or surround. The actual dialogue itself is still mono, no matter how many speakers it comes out of. If it's more than one speaker it's dual mono. Music is mixed in "stereo", meaning you are panning the instruments wherever you want in the stereo field, some things may even be recorded in stereo (drum overheads, guitars..). If you record the vocals mono, then they are mono, no matter how many speakers you put them in. Your overall mix is a stereo mix made up of several mono sources.
Click to expand...


No matter how many times someone says this, nobody ever seems to believe it.
 
If it's placed in a stereo field the result is stereo. Sorry it's just a fact. It's not a stereo source but it is a stereo mix. Dialog straight up the middle is mono if it is a discrete mix going to the center channel (or actually if it's coming from only one speaker where ever that is). Dual mono would be a stereo mix where it ended up in the phantom center, but again that would be a component of a stereo mix, the mix would not be dual mono unless everything was the same in both tracks. Stereo isn't some magic recreation of reality it's just two speakers contributing to the sound with non identical signals. It sounds nit picky but any other definition is meaningless. There are other terms like binaural that have to do with a specific kind of stereo recording.
SK
 
Dave_Fisk said:
Not really. Since dialogue comes from the center channel 99% of the time (which is only one speaker), that is mono. If it is panned around the stereo (or surround) field, it is still a mono signal that is being moved within that field.
Click to expand...

With very few exceptions all sounds are mono sources. If you set up two microphones and record someone singing you are just recording a mono source placed in a stereo field. If you have a choir they are just a bunch of mono sources placed in a stereo field. It pretty much doesn't matter what you record it all breaks down to a bunch of mono sources. So if I agreed with your definition it would eliminate stereo from the dictionary.
SK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top