PHASE

expected brutal math here?
well maybe later_
resonance depends on feedback you know;
so let me start with a poem . .
------
phase and delay
they are 2 brother
belive it or not
they belong 2 each other
change the delay
and the result will be
you changed the phase
2 a speziffic degree
-------

good vibes from vienna

A Delay is a Delay
Relative to itself
Its only brother Phase
Relative to another of itself

for(bool interest=0;!interest;) interest=waitforvibes();

$waitforvibes=hugevibefromSUI

vibes everywhere i turn my head

I seem to missing something here. Is there a point or question?

No question, I think just a reference to previous discussions about phase, turned into some poems and funny programming code.

no previous discussion but maybe there should be one to rise quality of discussions ?_

just some good vibes

the point
even 1 sample delay change the phase (equal the samplerate btw.);
if you mix the changed phase signal with the original you get a nice LP;
this is the most simple LP filter man may think of;

-------
could be you have more than 1 sample delay between dsps who knows . .
now the question
what would happen if you mix it up?

----
sorry thought there is more interest in some serious discussion resulting in some funny code for a nice free device;

good vibes from vienna

I'm interested in the topic of phase. It's been revealing to read previous discussions as they have led to me questioning my ears and altering my mixing practices. Xite's possible use of multiple dsp chips make understanding what's going on with phase a must.
Would like to read more on this topic.

well... as I'm not the brightest soul under the math sun, I take the opportunity...
Given a complex signal mixed up from (say) 5 diffent frequencies, a change in 'phase' will result in 5 different 'delays', with a specific amount for each of the frequencies.
A 'delay' in processing by one or more samples will 'shift' each component by an identical amount of time.
Which is obviously a quite different process.

While we're usually talking just about 'phase', we really mean the 'phase integrity' of a signal mix (as it's not about single sines).

Imho it's important to know what can happen, but otherwise ignore it as long as it doesn't disturb.
For my (personal) taste there is way too much focus on mathematically precise processing, instead of just recording the sh*t.

To be honest a post of Mr Arkadin totally opened my ears recently - he mentioned a record by some dude called The Man with the Stereo Hands which was done entirely on a Tascam 8 track cassette recorder

I didn't believe that and mailed him (yes, I bought the record...)

...it was recorded on a Tascam 488 Portastudio with no
bouncing of tracks at all, in other words only 8 tracks of sound were
recorded for each song

I think I can quote his answer in public 'for the sake of the song' (an old Townes Van Zandt album)

cheers, Tom

thank you for opportunity its the bread in each discussion
as well as the phase/delay is the bread for filters;

i would answer
if you just record that sh*t
noone will ever listen to that sh*t;
you had to have standards if you want to play with the big boys_
if not play with the kids for personal satisfaction only_

the smallest math number is 1 sample delay right;
but the probl. is that already 1 sample delay has a hugh effect to the frequency spectrum;
you will hear it for sure even in a low level mp3 on a 15euro headset;


btw. the cassetrecorders of back then had much better quality than any mp3 today;

as rule i would say:

check your lines (for lenght / delay)
be it the cables in your studio the reflextions of wall in a concerthall;
the reflextions of the speakers desk compared to the directsource or
the blue wires in your scopexiteproject window;
as soon as there are different delays you are creating primitive filters;

combfilter vibes from vienna

... if you just record that sh*t
noone will ever listen to that sh*t;
you had to have standards if you want to play with the big boys_
if not play with the kids for personal satisfaction only_

I don't mind them... at least not because of their name
I will honour their work when they deserve it and I will call it sh*t when it is

Bob Clearmountain epically failed on Costello/Van Otter 'For the Stars'
whoever mixed the Funkbrothers in 'Standing in the Shadows of Motown', obviously never heard on original track...
or he/she would still be blushing...
the latest release by Phil Collins is an acoustic desaster
how about JK's vocals on the recent Jamiroquai album ?

The producers of these tracks were all certainly real BIG BOYS, with the greatest tools on earth and budgets up to the sky
yet they all spoiled the job, more or less
and (imho) some of them did because they worked over-precise, over-balanced, over-transparent, over-brittle

those guys would never succeed on a 2nd 'Daddy was a Rolling Stone' (Temptations)
1 chord, the same 6 bass notes - repeated for 13 minutes of groove with increasing tension.
they could never record another 'Gloria' as played by the Patty Smith Group
you simply can't sequence THAT timing... but THAT's what makes the track go through the roof.

imo those 'Big Boys' lack any soul (I'm afraid) and I don't wanna be associated with them, not a single moment
(if you spoil a Funkbrothers Tour and the record you have to take the credits where due...)
ok, this just had to be said
possibly a bit harsh, but then it's me suffering whenever the wife switches on the radio in the car...

ranting vibes from the other side of the mountains, Tom

and now we can return to the subtle details of digital signal processing
of course I know about the comb filter effect (which is fairly easy to avoid)
I have a much harder time monitoring VST processing, which seems driver related
(sounds like there's data leaking in the process, adding the same sample a 2 nd time with a tiny displacement or so...)

cheers, Tom

ps: of course we should have good tools (and know them well), but if thinking about tool takes more time than the job ... something goes awefully wrong...

what did you expect from a man who 'cant dance'?
-----
but if these examples pass your taste test or not;
im sure there is no phasedistortion in;
and to be honest these 'boys' could even sell stuff with phasedistortion and earn millions_

U2? or anyone in here?
me not!
---

but what i realy dont get is_

you tell the people dont care about a displaced audiostream causing all sort of filtereffects in xite
and searching for a tiny displaced sample yourself???
didnt you tell us forget about that sh*t just record it. . . .
twotonguetom?

good vibes from old danube

sorry for my expression, 'tiny displacement' was intended as additional description - and 'tiny' is more than 1-3 samples.
Attacks seem to be almost exponential and are kind of distorted while the meter doesn't reflect this.
It happens under certain conditions related to VSTs when monitoring on a RME card, which also CAN deliver a clean monitor signal in another mode.

I'm certainly not going to dig it out, but will exchange the card (or setup a different monitor path).
It's not about a nuance one person may notice and another not - it's a severe decrease of the signal.

Actually I wouldn't mention it at all...
if I hadn't had the very same audible effect with a Scope card (or Pulsar?) once running a demo of IK's Ampeg SVX plugin.
At least one other person here heared it, too - because we both commented the plugin sounds like sh*t.
Which it really did - but not because of it's processing... embarassing.
The funny thing is that the 'effect' seems to be implementation dependent.
It was NOT with all VSTIs on that installation.
But since I don't do that much native processing it didn't reach a high priority on my list.

cheers, Tom

back to the 'real' sample displacements in DSP processing...
iIrc the 'problem' was completely overlooked in early Scope plugins, most prominent example the 'classic line' of Sonic Timeworks devices BEFORE Warp69's reverbs.
Since then developers have paid attention to that part of the processing.

It's certainly very important to have everything aligned perfectly in traditional orchestral music with dozens of mic channels.
The setup itself is sensitive in this domain already by it's physical dimensions and raw signal paths.
On the other hand one wouldn't expect heavily post processing there... (at least I wouldn't)

How about the rock/jazz/country band ?
The usual listening environement (of a live experience) is anything but ideal
... and has an influence on our listening experience.
Of course the 'problem' increases with degree of post processing in a studio record - a natural matter of fact.
But in my estimation it still remains relatively small compared to other things you can do wrong, starting with the mic and pre-amplification.

Then there's the contemporary solo artist: an entirely synthetic process of making a record.
As a producer you can run into trouble indeed, as heavy post-processing seems state of the art
.... really art ?

that's why my point above was: just record that sh*t...
focus on the moment and that great take - it contributes way more than those minor tweaks (possibly) failing
Imho you can't really argument with an unintentionally introduced filter (by sample delay) when they eq the sh*t out of a voice - see (hear) the Jamiroquai singer as an example.

Some of that stuff certainly is up to personal taste and preferences.
But there ARE recording references that probably everyone 'tuned' his or her senses on.
JK's squeezed voice and Babbit's bottom only Precision bass ARE fails
(you really wouldn't spend a 5 figure amount on that instrument (if it were on sales) to record THAT tone)

Many posters here seem more afraid about a (potential) tiny error somewhere in the processing chain, than committed to do their record.
Even WITH some misaligned stuff it might still have scored... if one only had trusted in the content and just DID IT.

cheers, Tom

i started this topic to tell the people some basics;
i think they should know now in time of dspselfassignment;
in time of ..
i know becorse i read that one hears about a man who hears that one had red
something _ sometime _ somewhere YO;
but there is not much interest it seams;
maybe becourse most red about one . . . .
----

i know you for a long time now;
i think i already read your posts at old tdatforum at CW later dspsystems;
i like your posts;
so i guess you have the same intention and take opportunity
just to go on discussion and maybe help some people improof their setups who knows
here we go


-----
lets take some white noise dublicate delay one stream mix together
and see what happen:


1 SAMPLE delay!!!

even a lowquality mp3 has a better frequency response no?
maybe some people aboth 80 cant hear a difference;

2 SAMPLE delay

here even people with a heavy tinitus sensed somthing wrong;

3 SAMPLE delay

do with any music of any style
nuances?

4 SAMPLE delay

starting to get whats going on?

8 SAMPLE delay

edited to get not missinterpreted
------------
sorry short in time
and i do not want to fill the server;

good vibes

and PLEASE let me add

independant from samplerate / bitdepth and taste

good vibes

and PLEASE let me add

independant from samplerate / bitdepth and taste

good vibes

Independent from samplerate?

Interesting. 5 samples at 11khz would be 4 times the delay timewise than 5 samples at 44khz wouldnt it ?

YES,

you are right;
if talking about basics i should start with the term samplerate;

its true divisions of SR will have a different value depending on SR;
but its the same effect no?
and the topic is about phase remember?
-------
these where FeedForward structs only so far_
im sure your FeedBack will have more Resonance;

now who if not you is the one telling us where to use such effects positive?

do we get some positive vibes from denmark?

So does this mean that a 1 sample delay at 96khz would be less of a bad phase than a 1 sample delay at 44khz ?

Or are they both just a bad phase ?

Lets say we have a project loaded on XITE that has some barely audible phase issue at 44khz. Would it be less noticeable running the same project at 96khz ?

So does this mean that a 1 sample delay at 96khz would be less of a bad phase than a 1 sample delay at 44khz ?

Or are they both just a bad phase ?

Lets say we have a project loaded on XITE that has some barely audible phase issue at 44khz. Would it be less noticeable running the same project at 96khz ?

Sure, if it stays at one sample, the most affected frequencies are way up in the ultrasonic.
(And for both, phasefix.dev has the solution.)

Here's a simple test you can do for yourself: split a mono track (a simple noise module will do the trick), send one end through phasefix or flexor's sample delay, to manually screw the phase, then add or mix both 'dry' and delayed stream again (using phasefix, an adder or mixer) and monitor the result, and repeat all this for different samplerates...

there is no good and bad;
there are just effects;
you may use or be used_


have a nice weekend to all vibes

I guess what I'm wondering is, these DSP's on this diagram that have the 7 sample delay - would that become 14 sample delay at 96khz ? Or stay the same at 7 samples ?

xite phase

Xitephase.jpg (73.56 KiB) Viewed 2779 times

Dante, haven't tested since I have no Xite here, but these samples are buffers inherent to the design. Each chip would take so many cycles to process, regardless of the samplerate.

the important point that changed from the previous implementation is that the processing delay (as at0m says, a natural matter of fact) ist defined and documented.
On a Scope card you had to make your own measurements, but probably more important:
the delay wasn't constant.
A mixer channel might add up to 3 samples for no obvious reason.
Mostly that's not a showstopper, but on a carefully adjusted drum kit it might well drive you nuts, if the channels 'move' from session to session.
Not that they regularily did (let alone often), but it could happen.
Inside setups of the Modular Synth that's also very critical - probably the first instance where the effect was discussed.
On the other hand on a background synth pad or rhythm guitar it doesn't really matter.
That was my original point:
one should know about the caveats, and be careful with critical signals (channels), but under no circumstances stay away from recording just because the setup might not be mathematically perfect up to the 28th bit

cheers, Tom

Ok, so the conclusions I draw from this are :

1) Upping the sample rate on XITE to 96khz may reduce the audible artifacts of the inter-DSP delays (notwithstanding loaded device delays on top of this though). And by this I mean the ones not already dealt with by the developer or phasefix etc.

2) These phase issues potentially affect transients (percussion) more than sustained materials.

2) These phase issues potentially affect transients (percussion) more than sustained materials.

I'm not sure if someone else mentioned it, too...
but if that conclusion refers to my statement about (seemingly) 'exponential transients', it has nothing to do with the topic.
I have absolutely no idea about the true source, it's a VST related thing that affects some devices, others not.
But under no circumstances it happened in the DSP (hardware) domain, it's a native thing.

cheers, Tom

Phasefix is convenient to compensate at any arbitrary position in the signal chain (in case that's needed)
But the 2448 (and similiar) Mixer has this for ages:
there's a 'delay' button and a dial to enter the number of samples in the channel view.
If you go outboard and back in (and possibly VST processing) you may need an additional millisecond delay for rough tuning

cheers, Tom

do we get some positive vibes from denmark?

Absolutely! Always positive vibes from snowy Denmark.

Christmas is my favorite time of the year.

it's funny there is no boost of the bass spectrum ?

Is the sound seen on spectrum doubled with the original ?
i suppose so otherwise it can't phase,
but if I add 1 feedback module in scope to create a 1 sample delay and mix this channel with the original, then i also have very hearable bass boost, those bass frequencies are more or less present dpending on the number of feedback module used (ie, the number of samples in the delayed channel) and actually much more hearable (ie without measuring instruments) than the comb effect for example, but i don't see this clearly on the pics or may be i am not concentrated enough. i talk just about scope here, mono signals from oscillators for example. may be it is bass created by room acoustics/reflections, ie not in the file? possibly a impression of bass boost due to cutoff highs... i haven't checked.


for musick makers only: (not engineers, not developpers/device makers because for them, it is a crucial issue so artists can forget about it whenever possible).
It is often easier to fix phase in the sequencer by moving samples around, it makes the project in the daw phase fixed itself, instead of having a project phase fixed "live" in another interface. Because that way, when you export tracks for another DAW like prottols or whetever else - which might happen if you intend to release something in the music market - , then the project tracks are aligned, and then it is the problem of each audio interface that add or don't add micro delays. let the engineers be responsible for their own equipement and sound results, you as musician or music maker should concentrate and work on your art and after that get into technicities if you feel you have problems because of this (i never met a producer or label that say something about phase, they like it or not based on very different criterias, but engineers will have to take time to look into this). The msucians should think about it, especially when the sound is not the one he wanted to record (like "uh, what happened to this preset after recording??," then yes, insuch situation, there is a serious phase problem to take care of at prodcution level. 7 sample is a very big delay if they are not aligned somewhere in the process, it is the delay i've used in a certain oscillator to create a totally different spectrum. it is clearly phasing when summed with the original source. 1 sample might be acceptable if it doesn't change the sound (i don't talk about recording several mics because this is not my field at all, i am into digital electronic music ony).

totally phase fixed is good, but not necessarily the best ARTISTIC approach for everyone, even if i know technicians will choke on that one (just drink a glass of water and prepare a bottle before reading the rest of that post
what is more crucial, is mono/stereo compatibility of your track as a stereo mix, because that way, it can be used in one of the latest popular emerging media: iphone speaker lol
but mono uncompatibility might come from an unaligned single track too that may disapear or sound very different for this or that reason. Slight DC offset can have more effect on sound than a tiny phase.
phase is also a component of 3D sound on stereo speakers, and mastering studios hate this when they see it as a uncompatibility for mono sum and that was a sound enginneer who actually played with phase to make voices and small fx seem to come from somewhere else from the speakers. Excellent job he did. MAstering studio went crazy but you know, you can tell them, no it doesn't matetr, i want this sound to be 3d on the stereo mix and too bad for the mono mix and mp3s. it is an artistic view and policy. let's make tracks that are all phased out, may be it is next fashion (lol ). I remeber a certain live of a famous band, where you could not hear half of the instruments when you were in the very center of the room.... bad speakers or bad engineer who forgot to check room acoustics and things like that... good musicians and good tracks, but that's is a serious issue when you are the one listening at the center of the room.

device makers might have to activate the attribute to load "on same dsp" as this might force the plugin to load on a single dsp, ie, making its several channels aligned (in theory at least). I don't think much more can be done at development stage except include micro delays modules inside the device for users that will have to enter the correct values for this or that channel (unless it is a constant, which can be determined in advance, and as such , may not require user's intervention).

the subject is very vast, and the art vs technic is an even more flamable field. Ok I know a lot of people hate me now, but it doesn't really matter because it is about an artistic approach (unless you are sexy feminine gender, then i would be sad and would be ok to do an effort on phase at an artistic level if you ask persuasively).

My very point - for music makers - is that a bad track or poorly creative song/mix will remain the same with or without phase, and a good track will be good even with phase problems, of course, it is better that it sounds as you wish it to sound. thats' why i say musik maker should concentrate on their art because that will not play a big role in a musician/composer carreer is that's what is at stake for you. if the trafck is very good, they might ask you for the bounces and give it to a studio for these kind of issues, even nowadays in music industry crisis, it is still possible and common (but didn't happened to me).

I have a track that is probably gonna be released in 2011 i don't know when. After signing, I went to mix it back, because i felt there were phase issues and whetever i did on a technical level, made the track less interesting than the way i made it at first (ie without looking into any of those technical things that i decided to forget once i went back to music making, especially because i had no time to dwelve into this). It was better before, not only for me, but also to my partner in this project who is not at all a musician or sound engineer, but has good tastes.. "uh what happened to the track, it sounds weird now" "yes you are right it sounds different, and i also liked it better before ,let's go back to the original"..the new mix was perfectly aligned everywhere.. and perfectly dull compared to the original and quickly made mix... So i decided to go back, and so far, noone ever said anything negative about the production of the track or its sound quality (on the contrary!).
I do know it is not top notch production, it was made in my bedroom studio (what can i expect from that!), i am sure there are lots of phase issues on voices due to weird stereo effects of mine, but i wanted to have some fun and keep it close to the way it came out...I also know it has been signed like that and will be released "as is" for good or worse (and i hope for your support so i can finally buy an xite-1 !!!!!!. .. i have no idea when it is released though, so let's keep in touch, may be you will hate this track, everything is possible except shame on my part) . The mastering studio will say "oh, you have phase issues here and there", i will answer "yes, but it doesn't matter anymore now, and i think it sounds better like that, please do the mastering for me as is, or please go negotiate with the producer the funds for me to take care of this" . he will smile or cry (probably smile), but will do the mastering... listeners will not like or dislike the track based on phase issues, because the yare not very obvious, and in any case, too bad, the way it is now is the way i like it, and the way it will remain , for the very only reason that i like it that way... the sound and balance will be destroyed by the headphones of the listener anyway (i don't know if you went to check headphones nowadays, .... it is crazy how the same song sounds good or muddy or even slightly chorused with this or that headphone or each user "preset"... and that were it's going to end in most cases...and i listened to top-notch productions, blockbuster quality by international megastars... sounded like sh*t on some headphone, nothing you can do about that). There have been two years in my life where i could not listen to music without thinking "oh that's a saw oscillator and such filter, oh, the compressor here has a nice attack...wrong... nothing good came out of my musical attempts during that period. interssting stuff sound wise, but nothing valuable artistically.
Later, if i am really into making tracks professionally full time, whihc is not the case, then i will have the time to take care about this kind of things - like i do when i do devices (oh, yes, i promiss that i try the best i can once i learned how it could work in scope) - and will read stuff because i will have the time to drive the production from a to z . etc.. for the moment, it is not needed !!! may be even not wanted due to time issues (i also have an interesting experience in mixing with professionals when i was really a beginner and could not say what is a compressor , so may be it is my experience that makes me give those advices to music makers). In fact,when I think aboutit, theonly tracks of mine that have been signed, were the ones that would make a pro engineer crazy sound wise.. it is true..but it was always stuff that was done with sincerity in the artistic approach, and that's what people will hear before anything else. I will certainly not get a grammy for my sound, a lot of pro engineers will regret it happened, but this is not the problem, i prefer to try to put out things that come from the soul and mind and keep an emotion just like if it was a demo track recorded in a garage, and then i do what i can to make the sound better.. I hope you get this important point "if you think technicities will stop you from reaching your objectives as an artist, you might be on the wrong path as a musician and loose a lot of time". Of course, there are extremes (if your equipment is not good or else, it happens of course) and knowing about technics is always good, but not as crucial as you might think. I hope it helps some people bypass the fear they might have when doing this or that "out of the rules". It is your soul and sincerity that is perceived in an artistic point of view. As I say, always... remember... to have fun and take pleasure, this will probably be one of the most appreciated quality of your compositions.... it is also my religion by the way it is just pop songs after all, nothing that will revolutionize the world, just trying to bring moments of pleasure to few people who will like the track (like all of us try to do?)... and don't take it wrong, it doesn't mean you should do "anything" , you must try to reach a certain standard for the audience, but not at the expense of the feelings in your track .. i hope....

sincere natural vibes and smiles from snowed and phasing musical PVrVs

it's funny there is no boost of the bass spectrum ?

Is the sound seen on spectrum doubled with the original ?
i suppose so otherwise it can't phase,
but if I add 1 feedback module in scope to create a 1 sample delay and mix this channel with the original, then i also have very hearable bass boost, those bass frequencies are more or less present dpending on the number of feedback module used (ie, the number of samples in the delayed channel) and actually much more hearable (ie without measuring instruments) than the comb effect for example, but i don't see this clearly on the pics or may be i am not concentrated enough. i talk just about scope here, mono signals from oscillators for example. may be it is bass created by room acoustics/reflections, ie not in the file? possibly a impression of bass boost due to cutoff highs... i haven't checked.


for musick makers only: (not engineers, not developpers/device makers because for them, it is a crucial issue so artists can forget about it whenever possible).
It is often easier to fix phase in the sequencer by moving samples around, it makes the project in the daw phase fixed itself, instead of having a project phase fixed "live" in another interface. Because that way, when you export tracks for another DAW like prottols or whetever else - which might happen if you intend to release something in the music market - , then the project tracks are aligned, and then it is the problem of each audio interface that add or don't add micro delays. let the engineers be responsible for their own equipement and sound results, you as musician or music maker should concentrate and work on your art and after that get into technicities if you feel you have problems because of this (i never met a producer or label that say something about phase, they like it or not based on very different criterias, but engineers will have to take time to look into this). The msucians should think about it, especially when the sound is not the one he wanted to record (like "uh, what happened to this preset after recording??," then yes, insuch situation, there is a serious phase problem to take care of at prodcution level. 7 sample is a very big delay if they are not aligned somewhere in the process, it is the delay i've used in a certain oscillator to create a totally different spectrum. it is clearly phasing when summed with the original source. 1 sample might be acceptable if it doesn't change the sound (i don't talk about recording several mics because this is not my field at all, i am into digital electronic music ony).

totally phase fixed is good, but not necessarily the best ARTISTIC approach for everyone, even if i know technicians will choke on that one (just drink a glass of water and prepare a bottle before reading the rest of that post
what is more crucial, is mono/stereo compatibility of your track as a stereo mix, because that way, it can be used in one of the latest popular emerging media: iphone speaker lol
but mono uncompatibility might come from an unaligned single track too that may disapear or sound very different for this or that reason. Slight DC offset can have more effect on sound than a tiny phase.
phase is also a component of 3D sound on stereo speakers, and mastering studios hate this when they see it as a uncompatibility for mono sum and that was a sound enginneer who actually played with phase to make voices and small fx seem to come from somewhere else from the speakers. Excellent job he did. MAstering studio went crazy but you know, you can tell them, no it doesn't matetr, i want this sound to be 3d on the stereo mix and too bad for the mono mix and mp3s. it is an artistic view and policy. let's make tracks that are all phased out, may be it is next fashion (lol ). I remeber a certain live of a famous band, where you could not hear half of the instruments when you were in the very center of the room.... bad speakers or bad engineer who forgot to check room acoustics and things like that... good musicians and good tracks, but that's is a serious issue when you are the one listening at the center of the room.

device makers might have to activate the attribute to load "on same dsp" as this might force the plugin to load on a single dsp, ie, making its several channels aligned (in theory at least). I don't think much more can be done at development stage except include micro delays modules inside the device for users that will have to enter the correct values for this or that channel (unless it is a constant, which can be determined in advance, and as such , may not require user's intervention).

the subject is very vast, and the art vs technic is an even more flamable field. Ok I know a lot of people hate me now, but it doesn't really matter because it is about an artistic approach (unless you are sexy feminine gender, then i would be sad and would be ok to do an effort on phase at an artistic level if you ask persuasively).

My very point - for music makers - is that a bad track or poorly creative song/mix will remain the same with or without phase, and a good track will be good even with phase problems, of course, it is better that it sounds as you wish it to sound. thats' why i say musik maker should concentrate on their art because that will not play a big role in a musician/composer carreer is that's what is at stake for you. if the trafck is very good, they might ask you for the bounces and give it to a studio for these kind of issues, even nowadays in music industry crisis, it is still possible and common (but didn't happened to me).

I have a track that is probably gonna be released in 2011 i don't know when. After signing, I went to mix it back, because i felt there were phase issues and whetever i did on a technical level, made the track less interesting than the way i made it at first (ie without looking into any of those technical things that i decided to forget once i went back to music making, especially because i had no time to dwelve into this). It was better before, not only for me, but also to my partner in this project who is not at all a musician or sound engineer, but has good tastes.. "uh what happened to the track, it sounds weird now" "yes you are right it sounds different, and i also liked it better before ,let's go back to the original"..the new mix was perfectly aligned everywhere.. and perfectly dull compared to the original and quickly made mix... So i decided to go back, and so far, noone ever said anything negative about the production of the track or its sound quality (on the contrary!).
I do know it is not top notch production, it was made in my bedroom studio (what can i expect from that!), i am sure there are lots of phase issues on voices due to weird stereo effects of mine, but i wanted to have some fun and keep it close to the way it came out...I also know it has been signed like that and will be released "as is" for good or worse (and i hope for your support so i can finally buy an xite-1 !!!!!!. .. i have no idea when it is released though, so let's keep in touch, may be you will hate this track, everything is possible except shame on my part) . The mastering studio will say "oh, you have phase issues here and there", i will answer "yes, but it doesn't matter anymore now, and i think it sounds better like that, please do the mastering for me as is, or please go negotiate with the producer the funds for me to take care of this" . he will smile or cry (probably smile), but will do the mastering... listeners will not like or dislike the track based on phase issues, because the yare not very obvious, and in any case, too bad, the way it is now is the way i like it, and the way it will remain , for the very only reason that i like it that way... the sound and balance will be destroyed by the headphones of the listener anyway (i don't know if you went to check headphones nowadays, .... it is crazy how the same song sounds good or muddy or even slightly chorused with this or that headphone or each user "preset"... and that were it's going to end in most cases...and i listened to top-notch productions, blockbuster quality by international megastars... sounded like sh*t on some headphone, nothing you can do about that). There have been two years in my life where i could not listen to music without thinking "oh that's a saw oscillator and such filter, oh, the compressor here has a nice attack...wrong... nothing good came out of my musical attempts during that period. interssting stuff sound wise, but nothing valuable artistically.
Later, if i am really into making tracks professionally full time, whihc is not the case, then i will have the time to take care about this kind of things - like i do when i do devices (oh, yes, i promiss that i try the best i can once i learned how it could work in scope) - and will read stuff because i will have the time to drive the production from a to z . etc.. for the moment, it is not needed !!! may be even not wanted due to time issues (i also have an interesting experience in mixing with professionals when i was really a beginner and could not say what is a compressor , so may be it is my experience that makes me give those advices to music makers). In fact,when I think aboutit, theonly tracks of mine that have been signed, were the ones that would make a pro engineer crazy sound wise.. it is true..but it was always stuff that was done with sincerity in the artistic approach, and that's what people will hear before anything else. I will certainly not get a grammy for my sound, a lot of pro engineers will regret it happened, but this is not the problem, i prefer to try to put out things that come from the soul and mind and keep an emotion just like if it was a demo track recorded in a garage, and then i do what i can to make the sound better.. I hope you get this important point "if you think technicities will stop you from reaching your objectives as an artist, you might be on the wrong path as a musician and loose a lot of time". Of course, there are extremes (if your equipment is not good or else, it happens of course) and knowing about technics is always good, but not as crucial as you might think. I hope it helps some people bypass the fear they might have when doing this or that "out of the rules". It is your soul and sincerity that is perceived in an artistic point of view. As I say, always... remember... to have fun and take pleasure, this will probably be one of the most appreciated quality of your compositions.... it is also my religion by the way it is just pop songs after all, nothing that will revolutionize the world, just trying to bring moments of pleasure to few people who will like the track (like all of us try to do?)... and don't take it wrong, it doesn't mean you should do "anything" , you must try to reach a certain standard for the audience, but not at the expense of the feelings in your track .. i hope....

sincere natural vibes and smiles from snowed and phasing musical PVrVs

hearing this kind of crap from one of the usual trolls wouldn't bother that much.. but come on.. you are a professional plugin developper.................. be serious, please.

no i don't think i am... and i agree there's a lot of crap and now that you cited it i can not make it temporary, it is fixed for ever so it doubles the dose...

no i don't think i am... and i agree there's a lot of crap and now that you cited it i can not make it temporary, it is fixed for ever so it doubles the dose...

it depends on how much you can pay

i'll tell you that next year

as soon as you split an audiostream into 2 or more streams and mix together later->
you are dealing with phaseeffects_________

there is nothing you can FIX; sorry;
you can deal with the probl. if you are aware of it and have the knowledge what to do to get what effect;
but the only fix would be -> dont split!

the spectrum seen is the best you may get out of it -> a primitive filter;
but i aggree in most case without to care about you just get some awful distortion;

there is a filter topic somewhere at planetz;
you may check out how some primitive filters are made in sdk;
but this topic is about phase_

i cant talk about others but in all our plugs the user dont have to care about the phase;
if its on same dsp or spread over severals;
the delays between its parts are measured in realtime and compensated on the fly;
but thats another story_

all you are right:
you dont need 3000 euro+ equipment to write a good song_
you need some paper and a pencil_
if you are not able to write notes take the voicerecorder of your mobilphone and sing in the melody;

but this is just an idea_
if you want to have a product that sells you need to invest a bit more im afraid;

here would be my hint for the artist for the soundengineer and for the developer;
give your best_
and always try to get better_
there is no top_
this could be the small difference that rise you and your work out of the masses;

good luck to all vibes

you don't totally get my point.
I said it's ok to mix on Scope... but if YOU tell me it is not ok, then it's not ok, simple as that.
I know your thread is technical and i agree with the maths and theory, but in a musician point of view, it's really like saying "don't mix on scope, because it sucks"...
what is the thruth about that, is the only thing i NEED to know.... because I have used scope for mixing for years, but I am ok if you tell me i've been wrong all these years and that it's possible to have only 1 mono channel... the solution is simple (and cheaper!) (also I never said you just need paper and pen to write music neither, it's not possible nowadays, but i don't care about that at all).

Spacef want to say that sometimes these tiny so called errors are desired as an artistic effect(not just phase there is dozen off that, clip, crosstalk), sometimes not. The choice is up to you - producer.

Which is absolutely right point of view (i support it). Artist need to make an art. That's all what he is saying.

sorry was bussy for a while with other stuff_

please let me add for the record:

there was no scope or xite in the circuit when i did the pics sorry!!
you will have this effect at ANY mixer be it HW or SW;
the phase does not care about the mixer to be used;
it only cares about brother delay remember?_
-------------------
maybe i add the comment:
'not spezifical scope/xite related true for ALL HW or SW'
-------------------

but it makes me happy that at least there is an agreement on the technical point of view and the math;
thats all what this topic is about;

with so much resonance now we maybe should go on with FeedBack structs?
course the feedforwardstructs shown so far has only a 'tiny' effect compared to feedbackstructs;

IIR vibes from vienna

Seems to me to be as simple as what you say tgstgs - never split parts of the same signal (e.g. left and right of a stereo, or two microphone inputs from the same group of instruments) into a different path. If you do, you create yourself a potential complex scenario to fix. Better to avoid the problem in the first place, and that means knowing as much as possible about all the associated delays of the paths you're working with.

Just finished, yesterday, the mastering of 5 tracks of mine, in 2 different mastering studio in Paris and it cost me half a leg for all the track to do 2 or 3 different masterings.... All was mixed on Modular Mixer on Scope PCI (Scope pro), and there was not a single phase issue as I asked both studios to check any phase issue.... this is certaibnly important in a development point of view, but if you don't hear anything strange in your mix, there is probably no phase to take "that" care of when mixing in scope. I will continue not to take any special care for phase because it doesn't happen here. If it happens, you hear it obviously (or you have a problem). I don't do multi-mic recording though. i use plugs which are bigger than 2 sharc dsps too, i can split stereo channels into 2 mono ones and eq differently... nothing special happened that required special care in any of the track... I don't know xite though and if it requires all this shit as this thread tends to say (which would be unfortunate for any audio card...)