How do some guys get away without Panning

[Maxxan]

How do you feel about panning two hats, one to each side.

Well, I guess you could but it sort of feels like overkill, don't really see why you would want to even if it works. As long as it's taking up the same general area in the frequency spectrum and they're hitting at more or less the same time I don't think it's annoying to listen too but otoh I don't really think layering hi-hats is necessary, might as well just put some reverb and stereo separation on a single, solid sample if you're going for width.

Layering synths/pads and panning them hard left/right can be cool though I guess. It's a little different from panning to preserve space in the mix though IMO, if you do it like that it's becoming more like an effect/sound design than a mixing technique if you get me. Unless maybe you have another lead synth occupying the middle, in which case it's a pretty nifty way to clear up some space. But then again if you have a lot of sounds occupying the same frequency you probably shouldn't be layering a fuckload of pads anyway, unless you really need too. But most of the time I'd say a stereo widener or something is the way to go, but that's just me.

[Talált]

i find ableton's utility plugin's stereo separation does the trick. everyone on this thread is dead on as far as panning.

i've used it to mix up my highs in my drum sets. IE one shaker slight right a different sample of a shaker slight left. or making use of the autopan plugin.

i've also used it to create new leads/atmopsheres. where i will have one synth patch panned one way and a totally different patch panned the other way, meanwhile they take up the same spectrum. and then bus them together and compress. what you get is a totally unique sound which can keep the listener interested.

[Dustwyrm]

There are so many possibilities when working with panning, that's what's so great about it. Ultimately it keeps a listener interested like you say which is important too.

I'm going to look for an auto pan plugin - I don't think my FL has that built in. If it does I've never seen it.

[goldengrime]

Why dont you just try it and go from there?

[mthrfnk]

I'm going to look for an auto pan plugin - I don't think my FL has that built in. If it does I've never seen it.

Lol... yes it does, it's v. useful.
http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... OMatic.htm

[Dustwyrm]

Didn't realize Autopan = Panomatic. I was visualizing something called "Auto Pan" lol well that's good to know I was about to go download something I already have/use.

[Dustwyrm]

Why dont you just try it and go from there?

?

[mthrfnk]

Didn't realize Autopan = Panomatic. I was visualizing something called "Auto Pan" lol well that's good to know I was about to go download something I already have/use.

I've made the same mistake before tbf with some native FL plugins.

[Talált]

because it's a pan in the ass

[__________]

the '60's when people first discovered stereo and hard panned instruments to the right or left. Consequently, when you played the tune in mono, you only heard half the track.

No, mono is L+R. When you play a stereo track on a mono system both channels are summed in to one. You hear it all.
You're thinking of having two speakers hooked up to L or R. I don't think there's a name for that except 'broken'!

I'd rather have 60's style production with hard panning than a boring dead-center mixdown. With near-hard-panned samples you can separate the L and R channels, make each mono, then flip them differently

[mks]

That is true.

I think I was trying to listen to some Miles Davis records from his mid '60's quintet and all I could hear was the saxophone and some drums.

Turns out that one of the channels on the power amp was blown.

[AcidRat]

a question I have always wanted to ask...

I'm deaf in my right ear I don't know much about panning and such but I believe this is a setback for me? Can anyone give me some advice on this?

[nowaysj]

Like completely deaf? I'm down 28 db in the 4khz - 8khz range, right ear. I just go for it.

Perhaps you could sit in a chair and spin really really quickly?

Make a decision facing your speakers, then turn around, check the decision? Flip your master?

[dickman69]

the '60's when people first discovered stereo and hard panned instruments to the right or left. Consequently, when you played the tune in mono, you only heard half the track.

No, mono is L+R. When you play a stereo track on a mono system both channels are summed in to one. You hear it all.
You're thinking of having two speakers hooked up to L or R. I don't think there's a name for that except 'broken'!

I'd rather have 60's style production with hard panning than a boring dead-center mixdown. With near-hard-panned samples you can separate the L and R channels, make each mono, then flip them differently

the break in that 1 sly & family tune off that album from like 68? is like that

[Efrafa11]

Depends what I am going for in terms of atmosphere but when I use self-recorded guitar it always gets two tracks panned hard.

[NinjaEdit]

^^^ Try narrowing them somewhat.

I don't pan, ever. Stereo separation and width I do use but never actual panning. When I produced metal and hardcore I would always pan guitars etc but I don't think it sounds good in EDM.

I completely disagree. I think electronic music is more flexible for panning because there are no physical performers to determine the panoramic positions.

When listening to music and one element is hard panned to one side for a long time, like a cymbal or guitar something, I think it's annoying as fuck to listen to unless there's something occupying the same space to the other side.

So don't hard pan, and keep the overall image balanced.

[Monosphere]

I don't think people "get away with it". I think it's a matter of the track itself. For anyone that is used to mixing things like rock and punk or something along those lines, yea, you'll probably see a ton of panning simply because the instruments being used tend to inhabit the same frequencies. I think that's one of the great things about Electronic music.

With electronic music you have the ability to control the frequency ranges of every single sound you use. Sure you could potentially EQ the crap out of guitars and bass guitars and what not but the familiarity that we all have with these instruments means the overall quality of the sound will be completely destroyed. It's completely unacceptable as a listener to hear a guitar come through like shit because someone decided to cut all the high frequencies out of it. But if I program a synth sound and cut all the high frequencies out the listener wouldn't know one way or the other.

Really what that leaves you with is stereo widening. This is much more heavily used in electronic music than panning and it will give that same full sounding result that panning would have. Not to say that panning isn't used. Of course everyone will use it I'm sure. I know I pan things, but usually only about 25% at most. But I use it more for flavor rather than effectiveness.

[NinjaEdit]

But panning does more than avoid masking. Yes you could do that with radical EQ, like completely notching out the mids and highs out of your synths for the snare (your drums and synths both occupy the full frequency spectrum), but your sound will still be more impressive and interesting if you pan from there, and hey, you could use more reasonable EQ. We have two ears.

In order to increase stereo width, you should pan, and not use stereo widening effects on individual elements. If you increase each element's width, you have less room to pan them, and consequently a narrower stereo field. The reverse is true if you decrease the stereo width of individual mix elements.

When you sum to mono, your mid channel will sound clearer if you panned instruments, because it helps avoid masking.

[timmyyabas]

the '60's when people first discovered stereo and hard panned instruments to the right or left. Consequently, when you played the tune in mono, you only heard half the track.

No, mono is L+R. When you play a stereo track on a mono system both channels are summed in to one. You hear it all.
You're thinking of having two speakers hooked up to L or R. I don't think there's a name for that except 'broken'!

I'd rather have 60's style production with hard panning than a boring dead-center mixdown. With near-hard-panned samples you can separate the L and R channels, make each mono, then flip them differently

the break in that 1 sly & family tune off that album from like 68? is like that

sing a simple song

[nowaysj]

In order to increase stereo width, you should pan, and not use stereo widening effects on individual elements. If you increase each element's width, you have less room to pan them, and consequently a narrower stereo field. The reverse is true if you decrease the stereo width of individual mix elements.

There is something to this. If you work with mono sounds and place them all around the stereo field you will have great separation and clarity, too much stereo sound and you will be in oatmeal land right quick (without brown sugar).