It’s not likely that the Mastering Book I have ordered will involve too much explaination into mixing… But the book may make reference to other books that may discuss that in detail…
I’m gonna be looking for it in the mail tomorrow…
Some of the stuff I listen to has panning down to a sicence… For example… If you put your face right in the left speaker of a properly panned song, you’ll be able to hear the right speaker and whatever is panned to the right with pretty good detail… But, I think there’s a whole lot more to it than what comes easy…
Bill…
The Allman Brothers hard panned the twin guitar leads in their earlier albums, but also hard panned the effects for each guitar…I have tried this and it worked nicely…did twin leads and hard panned left and right…then hard panned opposite reverb or chorus for each guitar giving slight mixes with the other guitar…gave more definition to the parts in the overall mix and created a more spatial sound
| Quote (Bubbagump @ Sep. 21 2004,11:51) |
| There si nothing wrong with hard pans I have to add. Hard pans are done all the time. Heck, listen to stuff from the 60's, they were hard pan crazy then. |
..tho that was more due to the mixers having panning which was HardLeft, Centre, HardRight... So anything different to that was difficult...
I use panning alot to separate out mixes, but having things sit approximately in their own frequency space helps too. I know Jezar has a view on that, and I don't disagree - I don't carve niches in the spectrum, but rather do approximate pairings.
DSP
I think hard panning works depending on its use. I know a lot of punk bands that hard pan all of thier guitars on every song. It gets very annoying when the guitar parts are playing entierly different things. What I usually do for most song is, if I want that seperated sound, is to pan to about 80-90% panned left/right. That way there is just a little in the other speaker in case you are, say, in a car or large room or something. I find it takes the distracting element of the panning out and lets me accept the seperated nature of the sounds. Hard panned sounds rarely sound natural to me, so if it is a very “natural” recording (that is, recording music that stylisticly should be recorded simply to reflect the perfect live recording that could never be played in person), then I do not hard pan, unless I am trying to get that “dueling” effect on a certain lead part or something (say, one guitarist plays alone, then the other).
fish
Hard pans have their use. You woul dbe amazed at some of the old 60’s cheese I listen to. As Duncan mentioned, they hard panned everything if they wanted to pan anything. BUt, through speakers they got very natural sounds. In head phones, it is very weird. It is all about what your target is and being tasteful. Point being, don’t be afraid of it, but don’t over do it either.
Much old hard panned stuff was never intended to be heard in stereo. They were early multitrack recordings (2, 3, or maybe 4 track) intended for mono, which was the only option for records at the time…mixed to mono.
About that time stereo records were invented and the record companies decided they needed records released in stereo. So, they went back to the original multitracks and stuck the channels hard left, right, or centered, with only a little thought given to placement, an most of the time the original artists and producers had zero input.
That became the norm of the day and ultimately quite a few records were released that way that WERE intended for stereo. They were learning about stereo and mixing for stereo, but what we consider to be “right” hadn’t really been ingrained yet.
Many years later some artist are still trying to duplicate the feel of those old records by panning they way they did and recording will very few microphones. (The Finn Brothers comes to mind, but that was a few years ago.)
It’s kind of cool actually.
What do you mean “old” guys? Seems like just yesterday. 
Anyway, being pedantic, doesn’t “panning” mean continually moving the signal hard left to hard right (or the other way) across the sound stage?
Isn’t just statically placing it somewhere on the sound-stage called “positioning”?
But, I suspect many of those energetically panned albums, like Electric Ladyland or most early Pink Floyd were designed for headphone users.
They sure as #### used to blow my socks off anyway! 
Pink Floyd and Hendrix were mixed for stereo for sure and did some really cool stuff. The stuff I talking about was later 50’s and early 60’s. Most early Beatles was mono only until the record execs got a hold of the tapes. When CDs came around George Martin INSISTED they be released on CD in the form they were originally intended and not like the stereo albums most of us have heard. He had a hand in the remastering of most of those for CD. That’s why many of The Beatles early albums on CD are mono content.
Also, much early stuff was recorded with very few mic, but more importantly, they were recorded with everyone in the same room standing around those few mics. When mixed to mono the bleed can’t be heard. When the tracks are panned apart there is this wonderful ambiance that just shows up that wasn’t there before. The whole thing can just open up. That doesn’t happen with close miced and isolated tracks.
Panning and positioning! Yep. You are right, but it’s not limited to that and most engineers don’t give it much though one way or the other. The act of panning is to actively move the apparent position of a track (instrument - voice - etc), as in panning from left to right. Put panning can also be the act of positioning a track in the mix, where it stays. Positioning can mean more than panning, especially when you take 3D into account. You would say I’m panning this track behind the listener, though that might be true. It’s semantics, but you are right. 
Yeah, I was thinking of that early stuff too Phoo, Please Please me, With the Beatles, were definitely both mono, in the UK anyway.
But, that didn’t bother me, I only had a mono record player. It wasn’t until around about '65 I bought my first stereo, and there was no thought of creating a balanced sound stage, it was one speaker in one corner of the room, and the other in the opposite corner. I paid for two speaker’s worth, I wanted two speaker’s worth!
But even so, I usually managed to hear a complete stereo image, but that’s only because it was generally chemically enhanced.
Then I went back to mono for a while. The flat I was in had an old fireplace in it. So I mounted a 13x8 elliptical driver on a baffle board, and cemented it into the fireplace. And I had an Audax tweeter mounted up high above the fireplace.
Best and purest bass I’ve heard in my life.
But by this time, I was well into my career as an engineer, (design and maintenance unfortunately, so I never really had much of a chance to play around with the operational or “artistic” side of things, 
), so I was able to set up and experiment with soundfield designs.
But, it’s an ongoing process I suppose. Fashions change, as does the technology.
But I’m still happiest with my Sennheiser’s stuck on my head, no matter how 'artificial" the sound is.
Ali
Cool. Thanks so much guys…
I am ready to begin experimaenting, mwah hah hah!
Yeah, there is a band I listen to called Pedro the Lion, and a lot of the time they will play the exact (or incredibly similar) guitar parts, and hard pan one left and one right… Which turns out to be a pretty neat effect… They even do that with voacls at times…
Cool. Thanks so much guys…
I am ready to begin experimaenting, mwah hah hah!
Yeah, there is a band I listen to called Pedro the Lion, and a lot of the time they will play the exact (or incredibly similar) guitar parts, and hard pan one left and one right… Which turns out to be a pretty neat effect… They even do that with vocals at times…
Sorry about double-posting… That was an accident.
I swear!
I just thought you were trying to post in stereo!
insert groan here
fish
Many years later some artist are still trying to duplicate the feel of those old records by panning they way they did and recording will very few microphones.
I'm one of them. With the accordion stuff I do I am trying to get that old 60s sound. It's friggin hard with modern equipment.
I'm one of them. With the accordion stuff I do I am trying to get that old 60s sound. It's friggin hard with modern equipment.
I just thought you were trying to post in stereo!
JJ, hard-panning two performances of the same part is a common technique and sounds great. Now if only I could play a part the same way twice, I'd be set.
Definitely try setting up a stereo reverb (like n-Track reverb "Ambience 2" setting) on an aux track. Set it with "wet" at 0dB and "dry" at 0dB. Use some aux send on most tracks (but not necessarily all -- I generally leave bass out). Use more aux send (more reverb) on tracks that belong further back in the soundstage. Use barely enough reverb to hear it. You don't want a reverby sound, you just want to hear the soundstage open up a bit, and the partially panned parts will take on a more distinct, more specific location. It's fun to play with, and really adds to the stereo image.
Use a completely different (longer-tailed) reverb on lead vocals. (You can use some of the aux reverb too, but not much.)
JJ, hard-panning two performances of the same part is a common technique and sounds great. Now if only I could play a part the same way twice, I'd be set.
Definitely try setting up a stereo reverb (like n-Track reverb "Ambience 2" setting) on an aux track. Set it with "wet" at 0dB and "dry" at 0dB. Use some aux send on most tracks (but not necessarily all -- I generally leave bass out). Use more aux send (more reverb) on tracks that belong further back in the soundstage. Use barely enough reverb to hear it. You don't want a reverby sound, you just want to hear the soundstage open up a bit, and the partially panned parts will take on a more distinct, more specific location. It's fun to play with, and really adds to the stereo image.
Use a completely different (longer-tailed) reverb on lead vocals. (You can use some of the aux reverb too, but not much.)
Hey… I tried to follow your advice, but tweaked it a bit… I would like you to take a listen and tell me how I did… (I know this is the wrong forum for that, I’m sorry)
Here
The track, “For Kathryn (Radio Demo)” is the one I just remixed. Hope you all enjoy it!
Crap, the html didn’t work… sorry…
www.purevolume.com/asunkenshipirony
And then, there is cross-fading. Listen to some of fellow n-Tracker edmon’s guitar work for a lesson. He draws pan envelopes that keep the lead guitar passing through your head. When tastefully done, as he does it, it is a nice, refreshing effect. I don’t think it would sound good with vox though.
Don