Why should you even pan?

[Khan88]

That's right FP. I said it. What is the point of panning?

Think about it, sure there is the population who will listen to your song in front of two perfectly placed monitors or on headphones (even so the other ear might be shared by a friend)... But most people are listening in:

-cars, (and your not seated dead center)
-clubs (which play in mono)
-out of one headphone
-on the TV
-out of iPod speakers,
etc


...So if so many people are listening under these mono circumstances, why pan? Why even risk phase issues/lost instruments?

If its to "get an instrument out of the way of another"....... Don't they just end up colliding under mono circumstances?

Fill me in on panning FP, I just don't understand it.. mono compatibility is important.

Hopefully I don't get shut down too hard with a perfect answer about something I am missing haha

[moses]

The point is, panning does not create mono compatibility issues. It's fully mono compatible.

Note every music fan shares earplugs with his friends, in fact, most listeners have more or less OK positioned speakers. Most TVs are stereo, I pod speakers are stereo too. Also, do not underestimate the fact that most music fans who actually buy music are known to care about such things. This detail is very relevant nowadays.

Beside that, stereo simply sounds much more exciting than mono, even if you're not sitting in the center.

[Khan88]

The point is, panning does not create mono compatibility issues. It's fully mono compatible.

Note every music fan shares earplugs with his friends, in fact, most listeners have more or less OK positioned speakers. Most TVs are stereo, I pod speakers are stereo too. Also, do not underestimate the fact that most music fans who actually buy music are known to care about such things. This detail is very relevant nowadays.

Beside that, stereo simply sounds much more exciting than mono, even if you're not sitting in the center.

Good point, but when the panned elements are played back in mono, the result is a loss in volume. What ways are there to compensate?

[CPhoenix]

Is there really a loss in volume?

I'm imagining panning a sound 100% R in stereo and mixing it down. It'll come out regular volume on one side. Then I'm imagining playing that file on a mono setup.... i don't see how the sound's volume would be lowered since the L + R are just being merged.

I could be wrong.

[CoMpLeXx]

to create more depth, space, idea's and to help mixing you can fit more stuff into a stereo mix with out it sounding over full. plus some thing just work in stereo and just sound terrible in mono.

[moses]

Good point, but when the panned elements are played back in mono, the result is a loss in volume. What ways are there to compensate?

Well, that's the art of making great mixes

But in case the level loss is really too high: Maybe the idea to pan that specific sound wasn't really good?

I personally constantly check the mono during mixing and mastering. It's very useful to have that switch directly in front of you.

[Khan88]

to create more depth, space, idea's and to help mixing you can fit more stuff into a stereo mix with out it sounding over full. plus some thing just work in stereo and just sound terrible in mono.

Good point, but if it sounds terrible in mono, wasn't it a bad mix?

---------- Post added at 10:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------

Well, that's the art of making great mixes

But in case the level loss is really too high: Maybe the idea to pan that specific sound wasn't really good?

I personally constantly check the mono during mixing and mastering. It's very useful to have that switch directly in front of you.

I am just worried that some speakers will exaggerate the loss in volume more than others.

I really really want to know about your techniques of checking in mono... (I use PT9, so anything specific for that DAW?)
I have read numerous techniques, and I don't even know where to begin, like:

select all tracks, pan dead center.
switch (somehow) the master channel to mono.
Listen out of one speaker.etc...


What is the CORRECT way?

[moses]

Your master channel most probably comes with a mono switch (Reaper has it for example).

That's all you really need. I personally use the "mono" function of my headphone amp, but this is equivalent to any "mono" switch on the master channel. Something's wrong with the mix if the degradation is too big, typically related to wrong use of stereo effect processors.

[makéman]

I find proper panning can really broaden the track and make it much more impactful. Although your questions about switching to mono are interesting.. I look forward to reading more responses. I just stick to stereo myself though.

[Khan88]

-Alright thanks for all the awesome advice. Ill check my master fader for the mono check. one more quick question on mono, do you have to listen out of only one monitor? (have read this numerous times).


-as far as panning, the main reason I made this thread is because most people say to pan to "Get clashing instruments away from each other"

...but what I am saying is, if you pan two clashing instruments, they will clash together in mono!

I see your points on how its more interesting/audience likes it, which definitely is a reason to pan, but doesn't it not make sense to pan clashing instruments? You mention that panning is mono-compatible, but how would it be if the clashing elements are brought back together in mono?

heres an analogy; you have two people fighting in the same room, so you separate them into two different rooms (panning). when it comes time to switch to a house with only one room (playing in mono), they end up fighting again.

see my point?