Microphones needed
First, you’ll need two mics, one cardioid, and one bi-directional (“figure 8”). It’s traditionally recommended that you use either the same mics (two multi-pattern models, one set to cardioid and the other set to figure eight) or two similar mics, but this isn’t essential. I’ve experimented with a dozen combinations and have always achieved useable and often spectacular results.

Placement of a Mid-Side Mic Array

I find it’s always best to start with the “Mid” (cardioid) mic. You’ll need to aim that directly at the sound source. As with normal cardioid mic placement, adjust the “aim” to taste; but if you’re a fan of close mic’ing, try pulling back from the source a bit further; this will result in a more natural stereo image.

Next, place the “Side” (figure 8 ) mic so that the two lobes of the pattern are set 90° relative to the cardioid microphone (i.e. so that the side of the mic is facing the sound source [see picture 1]). Like the more popular XY, Mid/Side is a coincident microphone technique, so you want to get the diaphragms of the two mics as close together as you can. This position allows the figure-8 mic to pick up ambient and reverberant information coming from the sides of the sound source, although the sides will have opposing polarities.

Note: the bidirectional (figure 8 ) mic is not a stereo mic: if you turn the middle mic off, you will not hear independent left and right channels from the side mic.

Once you’ve placed your microphones in their proper relation to one another, feel free to experiment with position and distance in relation to the sound source. When used to record drums or grand piano, it can be placed as an overhead (for a more direct sound) or further back in the room (for ambiance). The closer you get to the source the more exaggerated the stereo effect becomes in relation to that source. Conversely (especially with Mid/Side recording), as you move further away from the source, you begin picking up more of the room ambience; how the instrument sounds in the room.

In this audio example, I have the Mid/Side array about four feet above the snare drum. I also pay close attention to where I point the array at the drum set. Since the snare drum is generally panned dead center, I make sure to point the mid mic at the snare. This is important to remember when recording individual instruments as well.

If you’re tracking an acoustic guitar, where you point the Mid/Side array will determine where in the stereo field the guitar seems to be coming from. In this case, I prefer to point the array where the guitar’s neck and the body meet. Experiment with angling the array more towards the body or toward the neck depending on where you think the instrument should be panned.

Mic Preamps

Now that you have your mics set up, what next? Well, you need to configure how you record your signals. To do this you’ll need either:

1. A mic preamp with a built in M-S decoder
-or-
2. An M-S decoder plug-in for your DAW and any two similar mic pre-amps (the ones on your mixer will do).
Here are a few suggestions of equipment and software that I’ve used over the years:

1. Mic-Preamps (w/ decoder): ART ProMPA, Mackie Onyx 800, Universal Audio DCS
2. Plug-Ins: Waves S1, Voxengo’s free VST format Mid/Side decoder

Each of these options comes with a few drawbacks. With the M-S decoder in the preamp, you’ll have to decide on the width of the stereo signal before you record. Whatever you choose, you’re stuck with that track as you cannot go back and change the stereo width. When using a DAW plug-in with standard mic pre-amps, you won’t be able to monitor the stereo signal until after you’ve recorded it. However, you can adjust the width of the stereo image to your heart’s content after the fact. If you’re recording someone with this method and they need to monitor their instrument with the rest of the mix (through headphones or in a tracking room), just feed them the signal from the “Mid” mic by itself.

Another alternative, which is my personal favorite, is to use a mic preamp with two identical outputs like the Joe Meek 3Q (a bargain at $250). This option would involve plugging the “Side” mic into the 3Q and sending both outputs into separate inputs on your mixing console and panning them hard left and right (and maintaining identical volumes). You will need to flip the phase switch on one of those channels (it’s the switch with this “ø” symbol on it) and actually record three separate tracks (the “Mid” signal and L/R “Side” signals coming from the 3Q). This method has the distinct advantage of allowing you to both monitor the sound before you record it and adjust it afterwards.

Mid-Side Mic Advantages

In case you’re wondering at this point why you would want to put forth all this effort just to get a stereo signal?   Let me point out the two substantial advantages.

A. When mixing in that previously mentioned acoustic guitar, for example, if you notice the Mid/Side recorded tracks taking up too much space in the mix, you can simply reduce the level of the side mic (narrowing the stereo image). Or, you can eliminate the side mic altogether and still have a perfectly recorded mono track. Just try that with the XY stereo technique.

B. Absolute phase coherency. You won’t hear swishy cymbals or phased sounding notes from a piano or guitar, because the mid mic picks up its sound at the null point. What is the ‘null-point’? Well, the array derives its information from three completely different points in space, so the ‘null-point’ is where these 3 points intersect. The spot where the figure 8 pattern mic picks up nothing at all, and the side mic receives information from both sides of the same diaphragm (when the right side goes in, the left side is going out).

When working with an XY array, you have two independently moving diaphragms picking up much of the same information in the middle but the mics are pointed 90º away from each other. This independent diaphragm movement and the opposing direction of the mics almost guarantee that you will suffer some comb filtering from the sound picked up by both mics. This won’t always ruin a stereo track but it only had to happen to me a couple of times before the Mid/Side became my preferred method for stereo recording.

Back to Decoding

If you’re using a preamp with the M/S blending feature built into it, then your decoding has already been done. Again, there’s no adjusting the stereo image. That glorious, phase free stereo track you’ve recorded is what you’re stuck with. If you’re using one of the other methods I mentioned earlier, let me explain how to record and use those tracks.

DAW Recording

First, add two mono recording tracks in your DAW software, making sure to route the inputs of your software to their corresponding tracks. I have a trick that keeps me from screwing this up! I always organize my tracks as follows: “Mid” first track and “Side” second track. I always use odd/even pairs to send to those tracks.

Example: “Mid” mic goes into channel 1 on my mixer, then into input channel 1 on my DAW software, then into rec/playback track 1 which I’ve labeled “Mid”. The “Side” mic is plugged into channel 2, and follows the same numbering as track 1. This helps me keep track of pretty much any stereo recording method.
Now, record-enable both tracks, make some noise and record for a few seconds. When you playback these two tracks, you’ll hear an odd, sort of “sideways” sounding analogue of your original sound source. This is not what you were hoping for! So we need to move onto the decoding phase…

You’ll need to create a stereo “group/submix” track in your project. Make sure this stereo track is routed to the Master output. Load your M-S decoder plug-in onto the “group/submix” track.
Note: No adjustments to the decoder plug-in are needed; it simply “decodes” the information that’s fed into it.

Now, pan the “mid” track all the way left and the “side” track all the way right. All you need to do next is route the outputs of your “mid” and “side” tracks to the inputs of your “group/submix” track. Set the ”mid” track at “0” gain, neither boost nor cut any of the signal, and set the ”side” track at “-5” gain.

If you’ve routed the tracks properly you should hear your Mid/Side signal in all its glory. If it sounds too wide, simply turn down the “side” track. If it’s not wide enough, then turn it up. As I mentioned earlier, experiment with the placement. Angle the array to the left or right, move it closer or further back, to the left or right. And know that, when mixing, if the song calls for a subdued mono version of your M/S recorded tracks, you can mute the “side” track and pan the mono “mid” track wherever you want to.

So you don’t have an M/S decoder plug-in. There is still hope; oh, and another option for you. You can make a copy of the “Side” track and then invert the phase on it. Simple enough…just add another mono track to your song, make sure the song position indicator is exactly where the “side” track starts, paste the copied audio recording onto that added mono track and then “invert phase”.   Next, simply pan the original and copied track hard left and right while making sure they maintain identical volume levels.  Blend these tracks with your “mid” track and presto, Mid/Side without the decoder! Like plug-ins, you aren’t able to hear the stereo signal until after you’ve recorded and copied it, however, you can adjust the width of the image after recording.

Feel free to comment & discuss further as this can be a bit tricky the first go around.  Again, the results are incredibly satisfying.

Subscribe in a reader

Groove Tubes - The Brick

Your problem, though, will be that you probably won’t be able to try out dozens of pre amps through every price range, and possibly, find an inexpensive nugget. Having said that, I can say, with all confidence, that the finest sounding pre amp for vocals (under $1,000) I’ve ever used is a little box called The Brick. Made by Groove Tubes, it’s an all tube mic preamp, and best of all, it costs only $400. I try not to make too many definitive statements, though I feel pretty confident that The Brick will always be my favorite preamp under $1,000. Unfortunately, I can’t say whether it will sound great with every voice.

Presonus - Comp16

The cool thing about it, for us tweekers is that we can swap out several different tubes in the pre for different tones (some for brighter sounds, others for darker tones). But a tube mic pre will always have a slower, less defined transient response, so it’s not always suited for everyone’s voice. One downside to The Brick is it only has one knob, “gain.” There’s not a lot of control over how hard you can push the tubes, unless you can provide another gain/attenuation stage after The Brick (a compressor or equalizer). Thus your solution requires another investment, like a cheap EQ or compressor, which will run you between $150 & $300, pushing your $400 mic pre to around $600 or $700.

FMR Audio - RNC1773

The Brick is a solid, well-built, high-quality mic pre made in the U.S.A. with the best parts available.  And it’s what I’d get if I were on a budget and starting from scratch.  Then I’d probably get a Presonus Comp 16 compressor (because it has balanced ins & outs) for $159 or an FMR Audio RNC1773 (unbalanced, but a great sounding compressor) for $199 to control the volume.  Keep in mind you’ll also have to buy good quality patch cables to go between the boxes (another $20 to $40).  And none of these items are rack mountable (they’ll just sit on your table).

Joe Meek - SixQ

Now, if what you want a sub $500 mic pre that does it all and does it all pretty well, the Joe Meek SixQ, mic preamp, compressor and EQ at $499 is a damn good bargain. I don’t think it sounds nearly as interesting as The Brick but it is a quality channel strip and it is very flexible. It uses Burr-Brown Op amps (made in Tucson, AZ) and features separate EQ and compressor stages, both designed by Fletcher Electronics in Torquay, England. This preamp also has a nifty button on the front panel called “Iron.” It sends a bit more voltage to the transformers, making it sound a little fatter a little more “British” (like a Neve or a Trident)–not half bad.

My last mic preamp recommendation would be the $700 Toft EC-1. Again, the Toft uses Burr-Brown Op amps, with an all British design (by Malcolm Toft, the man who designed all those Trident mixing consoles in the 70′s) and made in China. I actually think the preamp section of both the Joe Meek and the Toft sound identical as far as quality of sound goes, with the nod going to the Joe Meek because of the “Iron” button (adds more flexibility). But the EQ part of the Toft preamp is some of the best sounding analog EQs I’ve heard in any channel strip under $2000—I believe it sounds better and is more useful than the EQ in my Avalon.  But if you’re using this mic pre primarily for your vocals, you probably won’t be using a lot of EQ.

Toft - EC-1

The reason I don’t mention any ART pre amps is because I haven’t found them to meet my needs sonically with the projects I’ve worked on over the last five years, and I don’t think they sound any better than an M-Audio box. I think people like them because they’re so forgiving.  Being tube preamps, you can push them into peak levels and they just give you that warm, pleasant, even order, harmonic distortion. They’re not very detailed or present.  On the other hand, your voice could very well be one that just sounds great through it.  Though any of my three recommendations are for a mic preamp that would not just be really useful for vocals, but also for acoustic guitar, electric bass and guitar, piano, finger cymbals, hand claps, congas, mandolin, just about anything!

And by the way, if you decide that you’re willing to spend more than $1,000 for a mic preamp, then your options will get much bigger.  I’ll address that cornucopia of options in my next article… Mic Preamps Pt. II.

Subscribe in a reader

For illustration, compare CD mastering to the editor’s job of taking a raw manuscript and turning it into a book. The book editor must understand syntax, grammar, organization and writing style, as well as know the arcane techniques of binding, color separation, printing presses and the like. Likewise, the CD mastering engineer marries the art of music with the science of sound.

As an artist, producer, engineer or independent label you may ask yourself, “Why do I need to master?” Of course this is a valid question, particularly when you are on a tight budget and pre-mastering represents spending more money! There are several reasons for mastering:

1. Perfecting the spacing and level changes between songs.
2. Perfecting the overall tonal balance of each song that may not have been achieved in mixing.
3. Perfecting the dynamics of each song so that the record is at its optimum level.
4. Consistency between songs so that transitions sound natural.
5. To gain that competitive, world-class sound worthy of comparison to any major label release.
6. To acquire a low-BLER master disc, suitable for mass replication, that retains every nuance of your original performance and is truly ready to be accepted by a manufacturing plant.

In fact, many producers often have no idea in what order to arrange the tracks until after all mixes are completed. Track mix down can take anywhere from 4 hours to 4 weeks, depending on the producer’s predilections, the artist’s whims and the budget. Normally each tune is mixed in isolation and rarely does one have the luxury to switch and compare the songs as mixing proceeds. Some mixes may be done at 2 am, when ears are fatigued or at 12 noon when ears are fresh. These things can even happen after weeks in the studio, and the problems sometimes don’t become apparent until the album is assembled in its intended order.

Tending to all these factors will result in a release that is far superior in sound quality to one that has been poorly mastered or not mastered at all. Mastering requires an “accurate” listening environment, specific outboard gear and a mastering engineer with years of experience to do a good job. After all, you are relying upon this person to make final judgments about the sound of your music.

Why spend money on Mastering?

Because it will sound better, of course! But seriously-you’ll prefer the sound of your recording after it’s spent some time in the mastering room. Most importantly, don’t skimp on this stage! You’ll want an objective ear, with years of mastering experience to give your music that “major label” sound.

Mastering facilities won’t change your music unless they have your explicit permission to do so. If you want your CDs to sound exactly the same as your digital master, then all they do is make sure that the highest peak actually reaches -0.1dBfs, that each track starts and ends cleanly and that there is digital silence between the tracks where appropriate. This is usually accomplished on a computer by carefully monitoring the levels to within one-tenth of a dB, then adjusting the overall peak and silence with digital faders; the time taken for mastering is consequently only about twice the program duration. These leave-it-alone jobs are very quick, easy and economic.

However, good mastering engineers know how to make your music sound better. Using sophisticated techniques, they can improve the clarity, definition, and depth of your recording. They can add equalization and limiting, remove hiss, hum, crackles and clicks; they take care of timing problems, dropouts, glitches, and dropped notes. They can even get rid of unwanted words for radio play.

What to look for in a Mastering Engineer

The mastering engineer must have a musical as well as technical background, good ears, and an excellent sense of pitch, sophisticated digital processing tools and the knowledge to use them correctly. They are sensitive to the producer and artist’s needs while treating each project or CD with individual attention. They must also understand what will happen to the CD when it hits the radio, car or home stereo system. Just because the engineer who recorded your music did a good job, does not mean he can master it equally as well.

The engineer should be willing to explain what it is they will do in the mastering process.

There are many mastering studios that claim they have some “magic” technology that is not available anywhere else. Although it would be nice if there was some “black magic” box that would make your music sound incredible, this is simply not true. The quality of mastering is determined by only two things: the quality of the mastering studio and the experience and expertise of the mastering engineer.

The days when a major label whisked you away from the club scene and hooked you up with an A/R buy to help nurture the band through a couple of records are long gone. Fortunately, the same technology and innovations that altered the music business have also driven the introduction of tools that allow anyone with a couple of thousand dollars to set up a recording studio. This is both a good and a bad thing. Good because more studios and less expensive gear mean far more competitive pricing. And bad, because slapping the label “recording studio” on a door doesn’t always make it one.

So, since you’re more likely to be awarded a Nobel peace prize than a major label recording contract, what’s a budget-conscious band to do? How are you going to know which studio has the services you need to make the product you want? For example, does the sound you’re going after require an expert (i.e., a producer) who can translate your ideas into reality? Which songs will you record? How much should you spend?

Just because there are no record company executives around to tell you what to do, don’t let that give you a false sense of artistic freedom — these decisions still need to be made. And if you don’t do this before you go in, you’ll be making these decisions on the fly, always with unpredictable results. Without a label guy to make these calls, it’s up to you. You have to answer the questions before you go into the studio.

So, if you’re thinking about booking some recording time, let’s ask our first question:

What type of recording do you want to have in your hands at the end of the process?

Is it just a demo to get more shows, or a CD of your best stuff to sell at those shows, or a radio-ready recording to sell on your website and send out to record labels?

Think about this long and hard. Just because it cost Fleetwood Mac $150,000 in 1979 to make a record doesn’t mean anything in 2005. I recently recorded a CD for a local musician for just under $1,000 and it sounded pretty good. So good in fact, that it got picked up by a small distributor and through them has sold several thousand copies. Not earthshaking numbers but at $11.99 a CD, he’s already recouped his recording budget times ten. And the attention it gained got him a booking agent, much better shows, and local papers reviewing his CD. This in turn has caused even more CDs to be sold. Be aware that good- quality recordings can be made on the cheap. Whether you or your music is worth buying is a matter for the listener. So it helps to know what you’re trying to make before you try and make it.

Once you’ve decided on the purpose of your endeavor, you’ll also need to consider whether you have the instruments necessary to play it. I’ve worked with a lot bands that swear they’re just putting together a rough demo, and then ask me to try and “fix” the sound that came off of their $60 pawn-shop amplifiers. In all my years of recording, I have yet to find a magic box that makes cracked cymbals and bow-necked bass guitars sound like a powerful rhythm section. Crap instruments are sometimes sonically useful, but not often. So, even if it’s just a demo to help you get gigs, try and use the best instruments and amps you can get your hands on. You can always make a Les Paul sound cheap, but that poorly intonated $50 guitar your mom got you for your 11^th birthday will never sound like a Les Paul.

Answering the above question will also help you decide what type of studio to look for. But it is by no means the only criteria. This leads us to the second question:

What type of sound are you going for?