Thank you, Paul. As see with the Synchron Imperial, I understand that it is easy to change the pan of the room mics blending them with the close mics. Let's see what happens with such a radical change.

Paolo

I did my tests, and I admit it's an impressive acoustic effect.

Room mics do contain position information, but very much blended with the ambience, much more diffuse and less directional.

Add the mid, or even close mics, and you have the image move towards the spot/medium mics.

Paolo

@PaoloT said:

I did my tests, and I admit it's an impressive acoustic effect.

Room mics do contain position information, but very much blended with the ambience, much more diffuse and less directional.

Add the mid, or even close mics, and you have the image move towards the spot/medium mics.

Paolo

It's not the phase you need to switch, but you can swap L/R in the power pan of the tree/room mics to complete the effect. I've done this both for second violins and to move Synchron pianos around, with much success.

Just wondering: isn't reversing the L and R channels the same as inverting the phase? The Power Pan would allow intermediate steps, but if completely wide, wouldn't it be the same?

Paolo

Paolo, Richhickey's method of swapping L-R using Power Pan is very good. The Power Pan control itself does nothing in terms of signal-inversion (or so-called "phase-inversion"); I'm not sure why you're concerned about that.

The psychoacoustical realism achieved by the method comes largely from the direct-path L-R timing difference being reversed. That timing difference is one of the key factors that let our ears sense azimuth (known as the "precedence" effect).

@Macker said:

I'm not sure why you're concerned about that.

Just a moment of brain meltdown. Thank you for bringing me back to reality!

Paolo

@PaoloT said:

Just wondering: isn't reversing the L and R channels the same as inverting the phase? The Power Pan would allow intermediate steps, but if completely wide, wouldn't it be the same?

Paolo

Dear Paolo

No, it is not the same. "Ch-Swap" means that the right channel is played in the left channel and vice versa. Practically speaking: If something sounds first on the left (e.g. the 2nd violin), then it sounds after the "SWAP-Channel-Efect" from the right.

Inverting Phase means that if the oscillation of a tone starts first in the positive direction (imagine a sine wave), it will start in the negative direction after pressing the "Phase Invert Switch".

----------------------------

If you want a real redistribution of the instruments from left to right, sometimes it also helps if you select "unprocessed" (for the "Synchronized" instruments) or "without synchron stage" (default) for the synchron libraries. You actually have to experiment a bit.

For mixing reasons, a distribution of 1 viol 1 left, viol 2 right, viola and cello half left/half right and bass in the middle is the better solution than the classic setup. It offers a nicer stereo image, is better in terms of bass for many (small) speaker systems and a soloist is hardly covered by the bass in the middle. Personally, I am a big fan of the above mentioned setup. Moreover, this setup is sometimes used in reality. In addition, we are allowed to mix our orchestra the way we want, if no client wants it differently, because he pays.
All the best

Beat

Beat, thank you very much for the explanations, clear and detailed as usual.

I know the difference between phase inversion and channel swapping, yet here I am: in that moment they were overlapping concepts, with one calling for the other. I was probably caught by a Mid/Side loop…

I too greatly prefer the configuration of 2nd Violins to the right. The channels are more balanced, and basses are more to the center. I've been very happy to discover that it is easy to achieve this configuration even with multi-mic orchestras recorded in the 20th-Century Cinema configuration. I'm happy to see that the old setup is more and more adopted by live orchestras.

Paolo

The Violas, now.

They have to be shifted 30° on the left. What about the room mics? Should I move the R channel a bit to the left, or use the Balance slider to make the L channel stronger than the R?

The first solution would make the stereo field a bit narrower. I've no idea if this also happens when using the Balance control, or the stereo field remains the same, only moved on the same side.

Paolo

I could finally devoted some time to experimenting. To move the Second Violins to the right here is what works for me:

- Move the Close and Mid mics completely to the right. Don't change the width of the Mid mics.

- Invert the L and R channels of the Room mics. Don't change their width.

- Move the Balance slider of the Room mics to the right, matching the Close and Mid mics.

Paolo

I'm more and more convinced that Second Violins on the left should only be used sparingly, and only if the piece allows for it.

Now, try to do this with that configuration, and try to preserve the original intentions of the composer.

Paolo

When swapping the L and R channels, it's obvious it has to be done for the Room microphones. But what about the Mid mics? They have a very narrow stereo configuration. Should they also have their L/R channels inverted?

Paolo

[Edit] Try it and see, Paolo. Not only are the Close mics almost summed to mono, but also their residual room ambience is so 'polite' and non-assertive that it doesn't seem to interfere at all with L-R-swapped Mains, nor with the HRTF panning and artificial reverb I sometimes add to Mid. But let your ears tell you what's what, when deciding which mics you need to L-R-swap.

@Macker said:

But let your ears tell you what's what.

My ears say that not swapping the Mid channels is fine, but my mind says otherwise! 😊

But it's probably so subtle that nor me, or my listeners, will be able to ear a difference.

Paolo

You seem to have sorted it then. Never mind that intellectual nagging in the background - it'll soon clear off once you've put your foot down and said this is how it's going to be!

My brain is sending me contrasting ideas.

Reversing channels in Mid mics will make the ambience "straight".

But it will reverse the player's position, that I don't know if would be always desirable.

Paolo

Oops! My comment about the Mid mics being summed almost to mono was incorrect; I was mistakenly thinking of the Close mics - I've just been working with SS Elite and there I have to regard Mid mics as the nearest approximation to Close for the ensemble. In Synchron libraries Close mics are summed almost almost to mono; ensemble Mid mics of course can have considerable L-R contrast. Sorry about that.

So to revisit your question, Paolo, yes of course you could swap Mids too if it's an ensemble and if you can hear distinct azimuth placement (other than by pan and/or balance settings in the  Synchron Player's mixer) as well as L-R stereo contrast in the Mid pair. (Before I begin my spatialisation of a Synchron library I always change all pan and balance settings in the Synchron Player mixer back to default.)

"Straight" and "reversed"? Oh dear, what a situation. Lolol.

@Macker said:

you could swap Mids too if it's an ensemble and if you can hear distinct azimuth placement (other than by pan and/or balance settings in the  Synchron Player's mixer) as well as L-R stereo contrast in the Mid pair.

I'm not totally sure I can hear a contrast between the reversed Room mics and the non-reversed Mid mics, when moving the 2nd Violins to the right.

However, I've the feeling of doing it right by also swapping the Mid channels. My brain may be tricking my ears, but I feel they sound that bit more coherent.

Paolo