I'm curious about how doubling the channel can make a difference in width. I'm not sure if Im using the right words

 

Slightly detune both channels, pan one left and the other right and play one of them a bit delayed in time

 

I mean for example how to double ddmf magicdeatheye compressor to simulate a stereo version but in cubase

 

In general (not a Qbase user anymore): what you're talking about is a dual mono compressor like in its stereo version, where left and right are compressed individually. This can basically be achieved with any compressor by either splitting a stereo track to left and right or using two mono tracks. When you just duplicate a mono track and use the same settings for both compressors, it wouldn't change a thing. But TBH, I've never tried to duplicate a mono track and use different settings for the compressors, I don't think that's a great idea.

 

wouldn't the sound different if the compressor is doing something different on each channel?

 

Most VSTs are deterministic. Meaning, the same input will always produce the same output if the settings are the same. So maybe add a little analog mojoinator or what have you before the nonlinear processing.

Also you don't need wide signals generally. If you want sense of space, use subtle reverb and delay sends on a (optionally panned) mono signal.

 

What sound is it? I strongly recommend double tracking it in real time, as you would a guitar or voice. No shortcut will ever sound as good.

 

I guess you are talking about double-tracking. You don't even need a plugin.
Double-track (record the same passage twice) and counter-pan them (one hard left and the other hard right) for a really wide sound.

There is no plugin substitute for double-tracking. Do the real work and you will get rewarded.

 

Last edited: May 24, 2023

If you do this with duplicated mono tracks the signal would move in an unpredictable way around the center, different EQ settings would just blur the signal.

You maybe should make clear if you're talking about a (duplicated) mono or a stereo signal.

 

I would put a bit of stereo width on the just the mids and leave the sides untouched

 

I was inspired by a post here: Tim Petherick 37J Tape | Patreon

"while planning out my next purchase (this is on the list) I saw on the page Tim P says to split the tape into a separate left and right channel. I can't seem to find more about this- is there a page somewhere with more details?

he later says:

"if anyone reads this- I found there to be a noticable difference switching to dual mono. wider for sure. if I understand it right, it in theory should be "cleaner" as well, harmonics also add intermodulation distortion. with the envelope filter being mono any stereo differences will be added together- so the left channel might end up getting the imd from the right channel when it wouldn't in dual mono. Its subtle of course, but when you think of the result of stacking nebula instances over an entire song that can really add up at the end, plus any stereo effect like a chorus running into a reverb will benefit as well (true stereo.) so worth the hassle, but I'll be purchasing meta plugin soon haha."

 

So you're talking about dual mono instead of (linked) stereo. This can have great benefit when left and right are pretty different (strumming and picking guitar) but it can also be a big disadvantage when there're additionally centered sounds (snare, kick, bass) because they'd be moved out of the center. Of course the latter depends on the differences between L and R and the amount of applied FX (compressor).

 

Maybe check out the 'Haas effect'?

 

he's talking of dual mono, he just should do what I wrote above

 

It is different, because this psychoacoustic "trick" for added perceived width is normally done by just using a Sample Delay plugin with only a few samples difference from the R-L. They are not unlinked or split, so the signal cannot be separately effected. It remains a stereo signal with no real change in Width at all. We just hear it as if it was. Plugins used to alter width/imaging can have other less than desirable side-effects, that Sample Delay generally will not.

 

Last edited: May 26, 2023

I second (actually third) the motion of double tracking as it sounds to me better than ordinary sample delay ever can. It can be more effectual as it is humanistic, the small differences in the performance of the two tracks seems to in my gut resonate emotionally while the sample delay is mechanistic. It might take a few takes in order to get it right but the reward is greater than just throwing software at it.