--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
> At 11:45 AM +0000 7/8/06, maxfrick78 wrote:
> > > M-S can be recorded as "encoded" or as discrete M and S channels. I
> >> prefer the later because there are more options when creating the
> >> stereo image in post using speakers or whatever monitoring I want to
> >> emulate.=A0
> >Hi everybody,
> >many people have expressed the preference of
> >recording MS-mics to discrete mid and side
> >tracks. I would prefer the opposite since if you
> >record a decoded "normal stereo" signal
> >you can much easier audition and handle your
> >material because it's just like using any
> >other stereo file.
> Hi Max--
> [An aside: M-S stereo image monitoring in the
> field isn't a high priority for me. Because its a
> fixed jig, I usually position my M-S rig in a
> setting with my ears/hand claps and referring to
> vegetation, land-forms, relief etc. I do refer to
> headphone monitoring with my adjustable ORTF rig.
> My monitoring needs are quite different from
> recording a specific species with a shotgun mic!
> :-) ]
> My question is, when you save your field
> recordings in your library, do you use a system
> to identify the stereo files that you recorded
> with an M-S array?
I would call the files "FileName MS-ST.aif" (for MS-Stereo). Then "FileName=
be a discrete MS-recording.
Unfortunatly the decent MS-setup I would like to own is out of my budget so=
far, so I can't
record my own sounds in MS but I regularely use MS-recordings of ambiences =
others) in my job (film post). And yes, they always record it as discrete M=
and S channels,
that's why got a bit annoyed by it.. ;-)
It would be simpler for me if they had decoded it to stereo and I would hav=
e to use MS-
encoders/decoders only if I really needed it for the scene (if we're talkin=
g about sound in
film-post). But maybe it's just me..
> > ...the conversion LR -> MS -> LR is fairly
> >simple and doesn't change a thing in the actual
> >source material.
> Have you tested this by chance? I've been
> thinking it might be prudent to confirm that an
> identical pair could be re-created if needed. Rob
You can easily try it yourself using two MS-decoders in a row and boosting =
+6dB in the end. You'll end up with what you started. I have to admit that =
I haven't done
any really heavy testing on this but it is a technique used in music-master=
ing; encoding +
decoding complete mixes to alter the mid-channel only, for example.
And yes, Ed is right, as in any processing in the digital domain there woul=
d be some
changes if you dive deep enough. 24 bit files are a great plus here.
My point was that nobody should be afraid of storing their MS-recordings de=
stereo because you can alway turn it back to MS. It's just a bit of summing=
swapping, nothing more. No magical "messing with your stereo-image" or some=