Mide-side plugins what r they good 4?

[DCrown]

Do you use mide side plugins?
I have some, but have not found any use for them, especially not on master track.
If mono lead vocals or bass do not sound right in a mix, I do not use mide side, I fix it in the mix on the track.

[Ah_Dziz]

Trying to clean up a large reverb is one thing I often use M/S processing for. Often I also will use a compressor in M/S mode if I'm going to trigger it via a sidechain so that I can duck the mid channel without diddling the stereo image too much. sometimes it's just a fun sound design tool to run some crazy processing with different mid and side settings.

[Bodhisan]

Do you use mide side plugins?
I have some, but have not found any use for them, especially not on master track.
If mono lead vocals or bass do not sound right in a mix, I do not use mide side, I fix it in the mix on the track.

Yeah, I agree with you (and above with Ah_Dziz, though I'm not that artful). I'd say m/s e.q.ing, especially, would come in handy more for mixers who don't have access to the individual tracks. Truly, if we can't fix everything before it hits the master, we're just being lazy.

[antic604]

Do you use mide side plugins?
I have some, but have not found any use for them, especially not on master track.
If mono lead vocals or bass do not sound right in a mix, I do not use mide side, I fix it in the mix on the track.

Yeah, I agree with you (and above with Ah_Dziz, though I'm not that artful). I'd say m/s e.q.ing, especially, would come in handy more for mixers who don't have access to the individual tracks. Truly, if we can't fix everything before it hits the master, we're just being lazy.

But this topic isn't for mastering engineers only, surely?

M/S processing is huge for sound design and creating spatial effects. A DAW that doesn't have Mid/Side splitter device and thus ability to make anything Mid/Side - like Cubase, for example - isn't a real DAW in my opinion

[legendCNCD]

Voxengo MSED for the rescue

Always using M/S when its needed. Its just another tool in the pack.

[jBam]

M/S has its place. The fact that it can destroy panning makes me confused why people relate it to / use it in mastering so often.

That said, I'll still use it on a bus... just with that issue in mind (hard or high panning is a goner). Great for shifting power/density around to greet a more defined stereo sound... I'll normally eq as normal, and then reduce gain or even cut power areas from sides (same freq/q).

Similar approach to compression... I tend to be gentle though... subtle changes.

Adjusting the level of m/s channels has a more obvious effect than most eq / comp applications. Worth a shot for anyone wanting to better understand the scope of options that narrow/wide m/s processing can produce.

[MogwaiBoy]

A lot of it is marketing hype. Messing with the sides can really mess with your mono compatibility.

There are subtle 'tricks' like compress the mid and expand the sides etc that can be excellent fairdust. As mentioned above often a lot of reverb space exists in the sides and if you need to rein that in a bit you can isolate it best with M/S.

But for plugins that have switchable modes, I almost always prefer L+R rather than M+S, ie: Soothe.

[foosnark]

I use M/S a lot. I make ambient/drone music for headphone listening, and dislike hard panning in general, and for the most part I'm more interested in a rich stereo field than specific L/R position.

Running mid and side through different sets of effects, or maybe a VCA in mid and LPG on side, can be really satisfying.

Some of my Euro sound sources have two outputs with different groups of harmonics or I'll use pairs of oscillators in stereo or M/S, or even tap feedback loops at two different points -- but that can lead to phase correlation problems. Mid/side EQ often can correct them (though I also like SideminderZL to automatically handle a lot of that; it had 3 bands that automatically narrow when necessary to maintain mono compatibility, as well as a bass mono knob and a handy mono monitoring switch).

[jBam]

A lot of it is marketing hype. Messing with the sides can really mess with your mono compatibility.

^^ this... for "normal" applications. Probably the key to not making a complete mess.

Mix the M channel like its you're preferred sound (e.g. eq and comp on M should be what you want to hear tonally); and then S channel is your "look mum, no hands" show off / stereo effect for wide speakers and headphones or anywhere it's able to be played in proper stereo. Various club sound systems for instance will still sum to mono, which effectively mutes your S channel, so you wanna make sure "M" is the over sound you want.

[kingozrecords]

Well, plainly; real stereo is very very rare (in the way of recordings). So in the end in the way of left and right you often lose nothing from the reduction in phase cancellation due to the use of mid side.

But where you notice it is in the way of reverb and room noise. Side strengthens both to a large degree; and it can make a slight echo sound a bit cavernous, forcing you to use a good gate at times.

In My mind mid/side is something you need to use a lot filters so to perfect. Just by itself there really isn't much need for it, especially given the fact that in its true form; it requires a sub-standard hookup or codec that makes it hard to mix with.

But often you find the pseudo mid/side made with and for stereo; which is ideal often-times.

[chagzuki]

Mid/side eqing is crucial for making mixes mono-compatible, at the mix stage, if mono-compatibility is a concern. Pads spread out in the stereo field will disappear in mono, but one can dial in some of the desired frequency in the mid channel, usually around 450 Hz.

I also like mid/side compression for mastering.

[MogwaiBoy]

So in the end in the way of left and right you often lose nothing from the reduction in phase cancellation due to the use of mid side.

Not in my experience and this can be confirmed in any analysis tool (ISOL8 is my fav) or realtime phase correlation meter. The only truly "free lunch" stereo effect is stereo comb filtering, which sums perfectly to mono. Otherwise any kind of gain increase in the Side is not a "lose nothing" scenario. The classic "lift the highs only on the sides" EQ shelf trick is a classic example - do it carefully and check in mono because those highs will dull in mono due to phase cancellation.

[kingozrecords]

So in the end in the way of left and right you often lose nothing from the reduction in phase cancellation due to the use of mid side.

Not in my experience and this can be confirmed in any analysis tool (ISOL8 is my fav) or realtime phase correlation meter. The only truly "free lunch" stereo effect is stereo comb filtering, which sums perfectly to mono. Otherwise any kind of gain increase in the Side is not a "lose nothing" scenario. The classic "lift the highs only on the sides" EQ shelf trick is a classic example - do it carefully and check in mono because those highs will dull in mono due to phase cancellation.

Well, I don't mean stringently, it's a destructive effect; I've always been an advocate of that. But all in all no. Rare that any of us find real mono, rare that any of us find any real stereo. Unless you or your stereo mic, or a pro studio actually made it. Rare all the same.

But, yes - strictly speaking absolutely.

[crickey13]

Reducing the side level is a good way of improving overall cohesion if you don't have access to the source material.

If your mix doesn't sound supermono, boosting the side signal is kind of just asking for trouble and there are better ways of widening the mix and it's usually done at the mix stage.

Even if you listen to the artificially widened mix on a proper stereo playback system, there is still a very good chance it's going to sound quite mushy and muddy.

[kingozrecords]

Reducing the side level is a good way of improving overall cohesion if you don't have access to the source material.

If your mix doesn't sound supermono, boosting the side signal is kind of just asking for trouble and there are better ways of widening the mix and it's usually done at the mix stage.

Even if you listen to the artificially widened mix on a proper stereo playback system, there is still a very good chance it's going to sound quite mushy and muddy.

Yes, if you bring down the punch though with a peaking filter at 125hz resonance of about 0.89 and you reduce by about 6-12 dbfs you may have better results. Also, a lowpass at about 14 - 16k is relevant for side, assuming that you have a mid signal present, or it sounds un-natural.

Maybe even a hp for side would be good too. like 80hz with a high resonance.