Sacraficing your sound for mono?

[Bob Womack]

Let's be honest: there are a million places a piece of music can be folded* to mono. A couple quickly come to mind: you'd be amazed how many video editors don't understand the difference between stereo and mono. If it has two channels, many think that's enough. They'll import a music clip and the software breaks it from a single stereo track into two mono tracks. They'll often leave the two tracks panned to the center and export it. Instant mono. The same thing happens daily in broadcast facilities everywhere. You call 'em up:

Me: "Hey, this clip is mono!"
Editor: "But it's on both channels!"
Me: "But that's not stereo!"
Editor: "Huh?"



Bob

* Folded, spindled, mutilated, etc.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Let's be honest: there are a million places a piece of music can be folded* to mono. A couple quickly come to mind: you'd be amazed how many video editors don't understand the difference between stereo and mono. If it has two channels, many think that's enough. They'll import a music clip and the software breaks it from a single stereo track into two mono tracks. They'll often leave the two tracks panned to the center and export it. Instant mono. The same thing happens daily in broadcast facilities everywhere. You call 'em up:

Me: "Hey, this clip is mono!"
Editor: "But it's on both channels!"
Me: "But that's not stereo!"
Editor: "Huh?"



Bob

* Folded, spindled, mutilated, etc.

If you receive something like that then pan the two mono tracks back to hard right and left and you will have your original stereo sound back.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

If you receive something like that then pan the two mono tracks back to hard right and left and you will have your original stereo sound back.

Well....it's not quite that easy What Bob is talking about is a fairly common process in the post industry. The flow is almost always video production first, audio second. Depending on the project , the editor and the facility the video project (when finished) gets saved as an OMFI file and passed on to the audio department. Most busy production facilities have "rules" that they try to impose on the video editors so that when the OMFI is opened in audio it's not a complete disaster. Traditionally at this level video editors scoff at conforming anything for the audio department. Apparently some oath they take to maintain a long and painfully history of screwing the audio department. Consequently it's not uncommon to get an OMFI file of hundreds of tracks interlaced with dialog on the same track as SFX's and music tracks (for some unknown reason) married to SOT and or audience reaction tracks. All of them may or may not be actual stereo files. All of them may or may not be panned. Some will be panned hard left, some will be panned hard right, some will be some combination therein. It's the equivalent of a hand-grenade going off in a session.

Everything we do is on a predetermined allotment of time. I've had OMFI files from editors in which I spent more time untangling their mess than mixing.

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

If you receive something like that then pan the two mono tracks back to hard right and left and you will have your original stereo sound back.

Actually, if the tracks are panned into the center and the editor is working in stereo, many editing programs will sum the two stereo tracks to mono and then export two summed mono tracks. Ya can't get it back from the OMF and have to go scout up the source tracks.

Joseph has it right - if it can be Osterized into an ugly mess, someone in the industry will find a way to do it. Because the whole production process lives on deadline there may not be time to undo it. If you aren't mono-compatible there's a chance it will have to air as-is. Simply making your mixes downward compatible is a good discipline and an investment in keeping control of your quality in your own hands.

Bob

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Actually, if the tracks are panned into the center and the editor is working in stereo, many editing programs will sum the two stereo tracks to mono and then export two summed mono tracks. Ya can't get it back from the OMF and have to go scout up the source tracks.

Joseph has it right - if it can be Osterized into an ugly mess, someone in the industry will find a way to do it. Because the whole production process lives on deadline there may not be time to undo it. If you aren't mono-compatible there's a chance it will have to air as-is. Simply making your mixes downward compatible is a good discipline and an investment in keeping control of your quality in your own hands.

Bob

That is not what you wrote in your prior post. In that you said a stereo track was imported, split into two mono tracks,
and then each mono track was panned to center. That you can recover to the original stereo.

Now you are saying the stereo track is summed to mono first. Of course in that case it does not make sense to export
two mono tracks (which is just two of the same thing).

Anyway this is somewhat tangent to topic of to how much you would alter your stereo sound in consideration of mono compatibility.

I was also thinking of what an individual would do who has control of decisions from A to Z - i.e. most of us on the forum doing our
own recording. If you have second, third, and fourth parties messing around with your work its get pretty vague as to what are the
"correct" choices given what is coming later.

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

That is not what you wrote in your prior post. In that you said a stereo track was imported, split into two mono tracks,
and then each mono track was panned to center. That you can recover to the original stereo.

Now you are saying the stereo track is summed to mono first. Of course in that case it does not make sense to export
two mono tracks (which is just two of the same thing).

Anyway this is somewhat tangent to topic of to how much you would alter your stereo sound in consideration of mono compatibility.

I was also thinking of what an individual would do who has control of decisions from A to Z - i.e. most of us on the forum doing our
own recording. If you have second, third, and fourth parties messing around with your work its get pretty vague as to what are the
"correct" choices given what is coming later.

Sorry I wasn't more specific.

Bob

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Let's be honest: there are a million places a piece of music can be folded* to mono. A couple quickly come to mind: you'd be amazed how many video editors don't understand the difference between stereo and mono. If it has two channels, many think that's enough. They'll import a music clip and the software breaks it from a single stereo track into two mono tracks. They'll often leave the two tracks panned to the center and export it. Instant mono. The same thing happens daily in broadcast facilities everywhere. You call 'em up:

Me: "Hey, this clip is mono!"
Editor: "But it's on both channels!"
Me: "But that's not stereo!"
Editor: "Huh?"



Bob

* Folded, spindled, mutilated, etc.

+10!

Hey, the needle moves, it's OK.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

+10!

Hey, the needle moves, it's OK.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Well (and I can't BELIEVE I'm doing this) in their defense the video guys and gals have no particular dog in the fight when it comes to audio and quite frankly at this level, with these workloads and the constant drum beat of a feed deadline, they honestly don't have much time to be too terribly concerned. The production flow here goes from video to the shows EP. From the EP it goes to legal. From legal it comes back to audio. So the editor really only needs to appease the EP and legal neither of which are concerned about stereo pans or mono audio. From there the editor gets to go home.

Of course for those very few here that might be interested, the industry (at least those around me) are taking a look at a different that general work flow. The recent hefty fine by the FCC for an audio department that used the "Emergency Broadcasting Test Tones" in a production sequence has legal departments all over town wondering what a audio department might inadvertently use as a sound bite that unfortunately ends up costing the show or the networks lots-o-dollars in fines.