No, to prevent this you don't make the bass mono, you just make the
groove deeper. It's obvious to anyone who has ever drawn on wet sand
as a kid.

D.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:38 AM, kent williams <chaircrus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well everyone knows not to give a mastering engineer a track with the
> bass out of phase. The problem is how stereo is encoded on vinyl --
> vertical motion is the difference between the signals and lateral
> motion is what's common between the signals.
>
> Out of phase bass signals will make the groove shallower at the same
> time the needle is being pushed laterally, and the needle pops out of
> the groove.
>
> I have a test press from a Detroit label I won't name, cut by a
> mastering engineer I won't name, that skips because somehow it got cut
> with this problem, so I know it's not unheard of.
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Tristan Watkins
> <phonop...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 21/10/2009 16:43, kent williams wrote:
>>>
>>> Which is why everything below 100HZ needs to be monophonic!  A cutting
>>> engineer can't fix that without putting your music through a crossover
>>> and messing with the bass phase while checking a goniometer.  They
>>> really hate that shit.
>>
>> It's interesting that Rashad Becker from D+M says it ain't so.
>>
>> Robert Henke: Does this imply that you can cut more complex signals if they
>> are in mono than if they are stereo?
>>
>> Rashad Becker: "Well in mono they /are/ less complex, so mono signals might
>> cause slightly less problems. But there is a huge myth about that you can
>> only cut bass in mono, thats something which is really resistantly in
>> producer's heads, *its absolutely not true!*
>>
>> I have been cutting several thousand of vinyls and I really have to think
>> hard about when ever I had to cripple a stereo bass signal beyond musical
>> recognition because it wasn't translatable to vinyl. That might be three
>> cases, in all that years."
>>
>> More here: http://www.monolake.de/interviews/mastering.html
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tristan
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to