macrae11 wrote:Like say I want a BGV panned up the center but it's getting in the way of the lead a bit, sometimes panning it 5-10% left or right will cause it to still be perceived in the centre, but still give the lead a little more room.
I remember making the same observation about your mixes being "narrower" than they needed, or IMO, could have been. I wouldn't really say I "default" to LCR... Just that it's where a lot of things end up being, with a smaller number of things being 20%-50%-80%... I guess I maintain my neutrality VS some who are die hard LCR for everything, as Wittman has been know to say "as god intended".Mathieu Benoit wrote:So basically you default to LCR. The only reason I bring it up is that I see a lot of people getting hung up on moving things to 30% left, or whatever without first trying it all the way left. I seem to remember a comment that Andrew made about some mixes of mine a few years back when I was starting. He said my mixes were "not wide enough"...I didn't understand what he meant at the time, but I haven't had conversations liek that with him since I started defaulting to LCR.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:I guess I maintain my neutrality VS some who are die hard LCR for everything, as Wittman has been know to say "as god intended".
Mathieu Benoit wrote:Weedy simply describes things in a broad sense, then leaves people to discover the detail side of things for themselves. I agree with him and with his style of teaching. It's hard to teach details to someone especially over the internet, it's best to send them in the best overall direction and trust that from there they can sort the rest out if they are really cut out for this.?
Mathieu Benoit wrote:OK... Since you guys are hell-bent on making this conversation boring, I'll ask the questions.
Mathieu Benoit wrote:Why do you think that most of your panning decisions start in LCR then only a small percentage of those decisions ever deviate from that? What is it about LCR that you find is very effective 95% of the time?
I like wide mixes. I like stereo. I grew up listening to an awful lot of stuff in headphones for hours and hours. Hard panning stuff out allows them to breathe without dominating things level wise. Some times when things start to clutter up with a lot of things going on, you need to tuck some things in to the middle ground. I just don't start trying to find that special spot on the pan. Once I decide where it's going, (LCR) which is usually pretty quick, then I can work on tight balances instead of wasting time trying to find some special pan percentage.Mathieu Benoit wrote:Why do you think that most of your panning decisions start in LCR then only a small percentage of those decisions ever deviate from that? What is it about LCR that you find is very effective 95% of the time?
macrae11 wrote:Mathieu Benoit wrote:OK... Since you guys are hell-bent on making this conversation boring, I'll ask the questions.
Why is it boring... because we mostly agree? I don't think that's terribly surprising.
Rare, but it does happen for me as mentioned above. Some things sound pretty "wide" even when only 50% out depending on the other stuff that is going on.macrae11 wrote:It's very rare that a mix needs to be narrower...
I always find it funny how similar techniques can come from different ways of looking at stuff. I think I am more likely to hard pan something that is just frosting for the cake as opposed to keeping it center or in the no mans land between. Panning close miced elements to match the stereo OH or front drum mics is a given for me as far as what will go "in between" in the panning world. Like you said, more "extreme" sounds may sound better panned out hard.macrae11 wrote:...Which is why when I do deviate from LCR it's usually little things that are just sonic candy, or more background. Never something like a rhythm guitar. I guess my only exception to the exception is sometimes when mixing drums for a not so rocky tune I'll pan the individual elements to match their position in the overhead image. So in that case the toms might end up at 50-70%, hi hat 80% etc. With anything that rocks out I find having toms, hats etc panned hard gives much more impact. Of course in those lighter moments I'll end up with mono drums often as not anyways so...
Mathieu Benoit wrote:macrae11 wrote:Like say I want a BGV panned up the center but it's getting in the way of the lead a bit, sometimes panning it 5-10% left or right will cause it to still be perceived in the centre, but still give the lead a little more room.
That's pretty reasonable actually. It's never come up before, but I'll remember that one.
Although I will check mixes in mono to make sure things aren't completely out to lunch, I won't sacrifice balance in stereo for mono compatibility. It's impossible to not have one more what you want than the other... I choose stereo.sean.boyer wrote:One thing I do a lot to make sure things are positioned well is to listen to things in mono. You might be surprised at how different things will sound when mono summing the master, and moving your panning around. I spend a considerable amount of time in "mono conscious" mode, especially while working on drums.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:...and just to pick nits with terminology. When I see "LCR", although I know what you meant in this case, I think of surround environment mixing VS "LR" stereo panning. Some consoles that are "surround capable" allow you to switch the pan pot to run LR/LCR. In "LR", something panned center will go to the left and right buss equally as well as the center, and in "LCR" panned center will only go to the center channel.
Mathieu Benoit wrote:Malcolm Boyce wrote:...and just to pick nits with terminology. When I see "LCR", although I know what you meant in this case, I think of surround environment mixing VS "LR" stereo panning. Some consoles that are "surround capable" allow you to switch the pan pot to run LR/LCR. In "LR", something panned center will go to the left and right buss equally as well as the center, and in "LCR" panned center will only go to the center channel.
Call it something else then.... You won't hurt my feelings.
Malcolm Boyce wrote:Although I will check mixes in mono to make sure things aren't completely out to lunch, I won't sacrifice balance in stereo for mono compatibility. It's impossible to not have one more what you want than the other... I choose stereo.sean.boyer wrote:One thing I do a lot to make sure things are positioned well is to listen to things in mono. You might be surprised at how different things will sound when mono summing the master, and moving your panning around. I spend a considerable amount of time in "mono conscious" mode, especially while working on drums.
If you did a mix with a single mono guitar hard panned, and a single lead vocal center, and loved the balance, as soon as you mono sum it the balance will be different, "pan law" or not.
I totally get where you're coming from, and I always check things in mono to make sure that it isn't going to miss the point completely. I just don't spend time fine tuning balances in mono.sean.boyer wrote:Malcolm Boyce wrote:Although I will check mixes in mono to make sure things aren't completely out to lunch, I won't sacrifice balance in stereo for mono compatibility. It's impossible to not have one more what you want than the other... I choose stereo.sean.boyer wrote:One thing I do a lot to make sure things are positioned well is to listen to things in mono. You might be surprised at how different things will sound when mono summing the master, and moving your panning around. I spend a considerable amount of time in "mono conscious" mode, especially while working on drums.
If you did a mix with a single mono guitar hard panned, and a single lead vocal center, and loved the balance, as soon as you mono sum it the balance will be different, "pan law" or not.
I'm still a little more careful with mono compatibility than a lot of people may be for the simple reason that if your song is played on, say, CBC1 SJ, or CFMH, you're getting summed to mono. Having your mix played on Shift at 5pm on a Friday with however many people listening is a bad time to learn that your imaging was way wonky. Or at least I imagine it would be, as I've never had that happen because I try to be careful ;)
macrae11 wrote:I'm not sure what the question is since "Walking on the Moon" isn't mono.
Scott DeVarenne wrote:Just listen to the f'n song in mono.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests