Herbert Verdino Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Is it right, that, if you link the channels 1 and 2 on the 633 you only link the post faders? How stupid is that...? When I use a stereo pare I want, that they have the same input gain. Specially when I record MS Stereo, I want to use the post fader on the S channel to control the stereo wideness in my mix, but still want the full gain on the S iso track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Thomas Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 It's more usual that you set the gain and control both sides on one fader, so can set fine adjustments for minor differences in sensitivities between mics on the gain control and keep them the same on the fader. Is the gain control on the 633 digitally controlled or are the gain pots analogue? You can link gain on the sonosax sx-r4, but it doesn't have faders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbert Verdino Posted April 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 I think the gain control is analogue, but I am not sure. If you record XY or AB or any combination of this it makes more sense. But for MS Stereo it is really useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 HV: " but I am not sure. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbert Verdino Posted April 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Do you know it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 13, 2014 Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 HV: " Do you know it? " nope, but if I was interested, I know how and where to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herbert Verdino Posted April 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2014 Thank you for that good advice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted April 14, 2014 Report Share Posted April 14, 2014 Is it right, that, if you link the channels 1 and 2 on the 633 you only link the post faders? How stupid is that...? When I use a stereo pare I want, that they have the same input gain. Specially when I record MS Stereo, I want to use the post fader on the S channel to control the stereo wideness in my mix, but still want the full gain on the S iso track. Are you putting a stereo pair (ab/xy) through a matrix to record MS? Or are you starting out with MS and converting this at some point, to a pair? I'm not sure from how I read your question. If you're starting out with MS mics, the gain/trim on the 2 mics involved might be quite different and if you're 'baking' any of this into your mix is it not just the level of the mid into a mono mix, leaving the side for the editor to decide how much 'width' works with picture and then for them bake these MS elements it into LR stereo mix? Or are you putting an MS set up through a matrix before the mix and you want to 'bake' the width into a LR stereo mix? If you're starting out with a stereo pair, do you not set the gain/trim for the isos (ganged or otherwise) and leave it (mostly), using a single ganged fader to easily adjust the amount of this stereo element is used in a LR stereo mix (where the lip sync is probably in the centre and the width of the stereo image is determined by the mic position? It's probably clear from my questions I don't do much stereo recording, hence my questions. Trying to think this 1 through a bit more and jeez there are so many ways to go with this: 1 ~ MS mics > MS isos using (un)ganged side i/p trim to effectively control width (in the mix) > send to LR mix via matrix and ganged fader to control presence. 2 ~ MS mics > matrix i/p into LR isos using (un)ganged i/p trim to control width (and iso level) > send to LR mix via ganged fader to control presence. 3 ~ ab/xy mics > LR isos > send to LR mix via ganged fader (width set by mic position). 4 ~ MS mics > MS isos > send mid to mono mix via fader > matrix mono mix with side element on output to spare tracks or separate recorder or by editor with the inclination. 5 ~ ab/xy mics > matrix i/p into MS isos > send mid via (un)ganged fader to mono mix > fade side o/p into matrix with mono mix o/p to control width (similar to 4). 6 ~ ab/xy mics > LR isos > send to MS mix via matrix using (un)ganged fader to mix mid with mono elements > fade side o/p into matrix with mono mix o/p to get LR and to control width (similar to 4). This thinking out loud thing (again) is not doing me any favours i'm sure and i don't know the 633 and quite what it is capable of but it sounds like an extra box might be needed if you want to use MS mics, a fader to control width and also a fader to control the presence in the mix. Does 633 give options where you put the matrix in the signal path? There are of course monitoring considerations. As an aside, the tascam dr-680, which is not to be considered 'professional' has quite nice ganging options (trim/mix/pan and any combination of channels), but the matrix is only available on input or monitoring (not on the mix) - another indicator of the target market for this recorder. The SQN 5s uses a ganged fader for gain of both channels of MS and the another fader for the width of the stereo image in matrix mode but this device is very different beast to the 633. I guess in this setting the SQN level fader is bringing both up elements and the width fader attenuates the side element before the matrix but I'm not sure how practically different from independently fading both M and S elements into the matrix this is? atb, dan. ps sorry no answers, only questions and a possible hijack of your thread HV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.