Increasing stereo image

[swilow11]

Throwing my tunes against some references and into Metric AB I'm seeing maybe 30% more width in the references. What tricks do you guys deploy to get width?

I have Wider but find it colours sound a bit more than I want. Haas effect is useful but bit funky when collapsed to mono. 2 voice unison and random phase is good but again, mono compatibility is an issue. I'm using ping pong delays and stereo delays, also making reverb tails nice and wide, and trying to use mid/side EQ in a way that doesn't hollow the sound out to much but its hit and miss.

I should add that I'm mainly making psytrance and do a lot of random panning which helps, but reference tracks seem to have a more consistent over all width. Please share some techniques or tutorials! Or plugins but I'm more interested in technical rather than technological solution...

[adl]

I use izotope Imager (it's actually free) for widening and feel it doesn't alter the sound compared to widener (which was always to chorusy for me).
Ozone Imager—Free Stereo Imaging Plug-in | iZotope
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/ozo ... jP5ybryADB

[WackyZoundz]

These days I usually use multi-stage EQing. First comes the L/R stage (using randomized filter settings and mirroring them to the other channel) followed by a M/S stage (Based on Blauert's ribbons). Keeps mono compatibility, timbre and definition intact.

[swilow11]

^Now that's what I'm talking about (even though I'm not sure I get your idea- Blauerts ribbons??) Feel free to expand this, I'm interested...!

I use izotope Imager (it's actually free) for widening and feel it doesn't alter the sound compared to widener (which was always to chorusy for me).
Ozone Imager—Free Stereo Imaging Plug-in | iZotope
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/ozo ... jP5ybryADB

Oh cool, nice suggestion. I've actually got Ozone Standard so have this widening plugin, totally forget about Ozone outside of mastering...

[lobanov]

Stereo signal seems wider in contrast with mono signals. If all your tracks are stereo you won't get enough width.

[swilow11]

Stereo signals seems wider in contrast with mono signals. If all your tracks are stereo you won't get enough width.

True, and if I'm honest, to the ear my tracks sound quite wide, theres a blend of mono stuff with more bedlike wide stuff...but it was mainly via Metric AB that I see reference tracks as having that little bit of extra breadth, particularly around the very top end. Pretty sure that I can get there via mid/side.

I have learned over the years that, in general, pushing nearly any audio quality to the extremes generally sounds messy- like too much reverb, or too much feedback on an FM operator- usually the sweet spot is somewhat lesser than what sounds the most "intense". So I really tend to not pan harder than say 35% either side...but in this case, I think my conservatism isn't that effective. Something needs to be as wide as it can be to give that sense of encompassing sound, and it's not going to ping pong delays that do it the best...

[lobanov]

Stereo signals seems wider in contrast with mono signals. If all your tracks are stereo you won't get enough width.

True, and if I'm honest, to the ear my tracks sound quite wide, theres a blend of mono stuff with more bedlike wide stuff...but it was mainly via Metric AB that I see reference tracks as having that little bit of extra breadth, particularly around the very top end. Pretty sure that I can get there via mid/side.

I have learned over the years that, in general, pushing nearly any audio quality to the extremes generally sounds messy- like too much reverb, or too much feedback on an FM operator- usually the sweet spot is somewhat lesser than what sounds the most "intense". So I really tend to not pan harder than say 35% either side...but in this case, I think my conservatism isn't that effective. Something needs to be as wide as it can be to give that sense of encompassing sound, and it's not going to ping pong delays that do it the best...

Why do you believe in such an extent to visual tools? We listen to music.

[rosenfeldt]

I use the bx_solo plugin from Plugin Alliance (https://www.plugin-alliance.com/en/prod ... _solo.html) - and this plugin can really spread your mix. I set this to 150% spread, but you have to make sure that the heavy stuff like the bassdrum and bass is mono / or low-cut the side on your EQ.

[swilow11]

Stereo signals seems wider in contrast with mono signals. If all your tracks are stereo you won't get enough width.

True, and if I'm honest, to the ear my tracks sound quite wide, theres a blend of mono stuff with more bedlike wide stuff...but it was mainly via Metric AB that I see reference tracks as having that little bit of extra breadth, particularly around the very top end. Pretty sure that I can get there via mid/side.

I have learned over the years that, in general, pushing nearly any audio quality to the extremes generally sounds messy- like too much reverb, or too much feedback on an FM operator- usually the sweet spot is somewhat lesser than what sounds the most "intense". So I really tend to not pan harder than say 35% either side...but in this case, I think my conservatism isn't that effective. Something needs to be as wide as it can be to give that sense of encompassing sound, and it's not going to ping pong delays that do it the best...

Why do you believe in such an extent to visual tools? We listen to music.

Your comments here is just really unhelpful. Of course, I'm listening. I'm also looking at analysis tools because if I can get my mix even just a bit better by doing so, I'd be f**king stupid not too.

[osiris]

Be sure your mixer tracks are panned correctly. I used Wider but switched to the Ozone one because it sounds more natural.

[swilow11]

Be sure your mixer tracks are panned correctly. I used Wider but switched to the Ozone one because it sounds more natural.

Curious what you mean by "panned correctly" here.

Agreed re: Wider. I really don't like it on anything which needs to sound crisp and upfront- I think the spectral splitting it does seems to wash things out too much. However, it's great on pads or reberb tails where clarity isn't as much of a requirement...

I am quite partial to 2 forms of quick and dirty stereo width- 2 voice unison with random phase and very little detune- this can give nice width without creating a supersaw like washiness (not great for collapsing to mono) or just basic Haas effect. KHS Haas is nice for this though the effect doesn't really require a plugin to implement. Have also been experimenting with mono drum loops into Shadow Hills mastering compressor and having just a minor parameter offside between left and right compressor channels. With very subtle values, you don't get to much transient misalignment but can really add some juice width to a simple loop.

Really love how Current/Vital implement stereo spread on the filters. Just a smidgeon of spread really opens things up.

[billinder33]

Rather than mix wideners, imagers, Haas FX, etc, I much prefer working the sides with mid-side processing during the mastering stage. Properly done, this can do wonders for your mix width without the risk of wreaking havoc on the track when it's played back in mono.

[Daimonicon]

Rather than mix wideners, imagers, Haas FX, etc, I much prefer working the sides with mid-side processing during the mastering stage. Properly done, this can do wonders for your mix width without the risk of wreaking havoc on the track when it's played back in mono.

I second this. The best way to ruin a mix is using widener plugins. No pro master engineer use a widener. They will tell you stop using them on your mix. Mid-side EQ is the right tool. Wideners can be used on a individual channel sometimes but only a few procent for best result.

[mjolnir]

compose for stereo instead of mono / pre-plan some stuff to be ping ponged or panned or hard panned. also use MS eq.

[jtsterays]

It's really important to not be confused with wideners plugins/techniques (make mono sounds stereo : Haas, Unison, Chorus, Reverb, Doubling, Frequency panning)....) and Mid/Side volume balancer (changing side channel volume of already stereo sound to control the width : Izotope imager with stereorize off, Brainworx stereo width knob, Waves S1 width slider, Pro-Q output pan in MS mode...). They should have better naming to differentiate between the two.

A lot people will make the mistake of applying wideners to already stereo sounds with the goal of making them wider, resulting in extreme mess when collapsed to mono, basically stacking wideners instead of just increasing the volume of the side channel. It sounds like you're trying widening techniques to the whole song which i will strongly advise not to.

The first thing you need to address is why is your track narrower than the reference. It is because all your instruments are just mono sounds panned around? Or because your track already have stereo elements, *properly panned sounds* but just missing some side volume? If its the former then you will need to go back to the production and apply wideners to some of them (or just pan them more), then finetune the width with M/S. If its the latter then all you need to do is add more side to your liking.

Mono compatibility issue could mean two things : loss of volume or phasey, smeary when collapsed to mono, usually both. It's actually normal for wide sounds to be like this, they should be lower in volume and phasey (can be not phasey, depends on the widening techique : real double tracked are 2 different sounds = cant be phasey) when listening in mono, only a problem when too exaggerated, like pads basically disappear when listening in mono (too much side volume), or a main element (vox,lead...) sounds like theres a flanger in it (comb filtered). Plugin like Wider does have perfect mono compatibility (no volume loss, no comb filtering) but sounds terrible when the mid and side interact (listening in stereo). If you want transparent stereo sounds then you will have to have some compatibility issues, just not too much, its a tradeoff.

Notes :
- ** Sounds that are panned. When increase the side volume will just pan them more, you can get to the "out of speakers" zone if you hard pan first then increase the side volume, can do the same for stereo sounds, most reference are a bit "out of speakers".
- Haas can be really invisible if you tune the timing to get the comb filtered frequencies to not affect the sound if your sounds don't have a lot of harmonics. Or increase to the slap back zone (>~20ms) if your sounds are not transient heavy (drums, percs, plucks...)

My english is kinda shit so i hope im making sense.

TLDR : download Voxengo MSED and turn the side gain knob to the right, shit might slap.