The secret benefits of mixing in mono

[Grappadura]

I'm confused. Can you just add Live's Utility effect to the master channel, then select either left or right, or does listening in mono involve changing signal routing? Or do you need a 3rd party plug-in?

If you're doing what the OP suggests then surely you'd just add the utility to your master channel, set width to zero and turn off one of your speakers?

I guess that is what he means. There is also another way to get the whole thing in mono: just add the left channel to the right channel, and the right channel to the left channel. What do u think of this tecnique, jason?

[Hermanus]

nice post thanks

[dna598]

Great read! I forgot to use mono when i started doing it all in the box for some reason. Some terrible mixdowns as a result.Especially with the drums.

[Big V]

I'm confused. Can you just add Live's Utility effect to the master channel, then select either left or right, or does listening in mono involve changing signal routing? Or do you need a 3rd party plug-in?

If you're doing what the OP suggests then surely you'd just add the utility to your master channel, set width to zero and turn off one of your speakers?

I guess that is what he means. There is also another way to get the whole thing in mono: just add the left channel to the right channel, and the right channel to the left channel. What do u think of this tecnique, jason?

I think it was previously mentioned in the thread that Live's utility-mono device just does this.

[evon]

...But 118 tracks!? That just seems unorganized and amateurish to me...

In what way does a "large" number of tracks indicate an unorganized project?

I agree..it seems amateurish (if there is such a word). Why not use sub mixes? I would prefer to use most of my CPU power for timing and DSP which are more important to me.
So, I guess I just answered my own question. It seems to all boil down to where the emphasis in CPU usage lies.

[Grappadura]

I think it was previously mentioned in the thread that Live's utility-mono device just does this.

thats interesting. Then it must have an algorythm that at the same time lowers the volume, or else the utility set to mono would increase the overall volume.

I just checked the manual, there is only the explained what happens if you set width over 100 % : It then lets you here the difference between the two channels, as a result of their subtraction.

[evon]

just drop it into your master track, set it to zero and you should be good.

I'm glad people are already finding this useful.

Jason

Never thought of the Master Track drop. I always put a plug on each track, but this is less CPU intensive. This is important to me because I am lacking CPU power.

[sporkles]

I think it was previously mentioned in the thread that Live's utility-mono device just does this.

thats interesting. Then it must have an algorythm that at the same time lowers the volume, or else the utility set to mono would increase the overall volume.

Yup. Normally, you'd have to lower it, but with Utility, the volume does drop when you turn the width down to zero.

[smaucher]

Very interesting approach. Thanks for sharing!

[Grappadura]

I think it was previously mentioned in the thread that Live's utility-mono device just does this.

thats interesting. Then it must have an algorythm that at the same time lowers the volume, or else the utility set to mono would increase the overall volume.

Yup. Normally, you'd have to lower it, but with Utility, the volume does drop when you turn the width down to zero.

Cool. Are you sure about this? Because I think it would be cooler if the overall volume was preserved, and I made a special rack because of this.

[sporkles]

Actually, I can never really wrap my head around Live's peak meter (I just tried it, to make sure; they do confuse me a little), but I definitely can't hear any difference, in volume.

[Big V]

thats interesting. Then it must have an algorythm that at the same time lowers the volume, or else the utility set to mono would increase the overall volume.

Yup. Normally, you'd have to lower it, but with Utility, the volume does drop when you turn the width down to zero.

Cool. Are you sure about this? Because I think it would be cooler if the overall volume was preserved, and I made a special rack because of this.

According to Live's level meter on the master bus the overall volume is indeed going down.

Doesn't a discrepancy in loudness when comparing mono and stereo relate to a psychoacoustic phenomenon like the way our ears perceive sound? Or am I mixing something up?

Edit: The volume won't be preserved, it'll get quieter.

[Grappadura]

Edit: The volume won't be preserved, it'll get quieter.

I guess if a straight mono signal is set to mono, there shouldnt be volume differences. so the algorythm probably works like left+right % 2, and since within this 1+1 some minor phase cancellation happens, the overall volume will be a bit quieter in mono. my 2c

[buzby]

im gonna try this for sure

questions i have are

- what about mastering - is this ever done using this one speaker mono technique?

- from what i know bass, kick drums and snares are not panned and i usually drop a utility on these tracks and set them to mono - would i still need to put these utilities on these individual tracks if im gonna drop a utility on the master track to mix with?

[Oscar F]

I always mix in mono first.
Use zero eq or compression.
Tend to go back to synth programming, filter types etc if the sounds lack definition before setting levels.
Then I will add eq and compression.
Then work on other inserts and fx sends unless the inserts are crucial to the overall track sound and/or synth patch.
Then work on panning and mixer automation.
Probably a rather anal way to work but it gives me consistently detailed and god sounding mixes in general.