Why should you even pan?

[moses]

-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?

I recommend use the same monitors for both stereo and mono. Technically speaking, a third speaker only for mono purposes is perfectly fine. But it's more important to compare both versions with the speakers you are used to, you don't want to test your speakers, you want to compare both versions.

About "clashing instruments".. ..I never heard such a thing in my whole life. In fact, there is no reason why two different sounds should "clash" except missing harmony (i.e. not in tune, so that the composition doesn't make sense from the beginning). "Clashing" instruments is a myth. You can put 200 musician in one room and nothing clashes (as long they are "musicians"). I really can't wait to hear such a "clash", would love to hear an example once in my life.

[Khan88]

Oh yeah I got you on the monitor point, I just meant like are you supposed to listen out of literally one monitor? (like turn one off and only listen out of one side)



Very interesting point about clashing instruments being a myth.... maybe I used the wrong terminology, but by "clashing" instruments, I mean "frequency Masking" (if that is even the correct term)

Regardless:

example: a synth is playing a chord progression, and an electric piano is playing the same progression, but you can't hear the piano because the synth is dominating it (in the same frequency range i guess)

Here is another example that happens often:
the baseline and kick drum are "clashing" so you can barely hear the kick drum punching through.

Isn't that what a "muddy mix" is anyway? Instruments competing/clashing (whatever terminology) so that you can't hear one as well over another?

You really surprised me with that statement, so maybe my terminology is off. So by "clashing", just to clarify, I mean instruments dominating another.

[moses]

example: a synth is playing a chord progression, and an electric piano is playing the same progression, but you can't hear the piano because the synth is dominating it (in the same frequency range i guess)

Yes, this is the effect of masking (if someone's interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditory_masking). When two sounds appear at a similar frequency, only one will be audible, the other is masked.

But this is not "clashing" IMO, it's masking. And there's no technical problem with masking, it's a composition problem. That is, the musical idea behind maybe isn't really "one point". On the other hand, such "masking" effects are one of the reason why orchestras or layered synths sound so "deep" and exciting.

Here is another example that happens often:
the baseline and kick drum are "clashing" so you can barely hear the kick drum punching through.

Ok, this is something else IMO. Maybe the kick isn't really in tune with the bass-line? Or could it be possible that you talk about side-effects of a preceding compressor or limiter? Maybe the masking effect from above happens as well, in this case, just emphasize a different frequency region than the bass-line has (or select a better fitting kick).

Again, nothing "clashes". The musical ideas behind your actions can horribly fail/clash, but it's neither related to panning nor filtering nor compression. It's the "idea" behind that doesn't work.. ..the fact that you mix two signals doesn't create any extra "evil".

Isn't that what a "muddy mix" is anyway? Instruments competing/clashing (whatever terminology) so that you can't hear one as well over another?

yes, true. But if the sounds "clash" within one song, why did you compose it this way? There's no technical trick to fix two sounds that don't fit beside muting/removing one or the other.

You really surprised me with that statement, so maybe my terminology is off. So by "clashing", just to clarify, I mean instruments dominating another.

I get your point. Your terminology is fine. I'm just against the idea that technical tricks can correct artistic issues, the approach just doesn't work. Again, you can put 200 musicians into one room without one single EQ, pan pot or audio engineer: And it will sound more impressive and exciting that any studio could ever put on CD. Never forget this fact, this reality check alone is a good reason to visit such a concert once in a while - it's an "ear" opener.

[CoMpLeXx]

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

Not really, i mean not everything is designed music wise for mono compatibility. like some films stuff including the film music might sound absolutely awful in Mono because it wasn't designed for that system, remember its all depends on your demographic, if it is chill out music it is less likely to be played at a nightclub when mono compatibility is still an issue sometimes.

[Khan88]

Moses- Great points.
I guess masking isn't the worst thing in the world. I mean, if you layer more than one synth together for some nice chords, masking is inevitable to some degree anyways (try to layer a bunch of synths-chords, arpeggios, stabs etc and see if you can clearly hear every sound-you won't), but all the little sounds add up. So really, masking is somewhat acceptable (correct me if I'm wrong)

On one of my tracks, I have some nice chords being played and an arpeggiated piano played at the same time. You can't clearly hear every note perfectly of the arpeggio (synth is masking) but it adds to the sound a lot. Would this be an example of acceptable masking?

On a side note, to remedy masking, in my example above, with the synth masking the piano arpeggio, instead of choosing a completely different sound, can't you just move one of them up or down an octave(s) in the MIDI editor window?

Complexx-good point, kind of like Wiz Khalifa's mix tape that came out recently. sooo many stereo panning effects!

On a side note, my obsession with the topic of mono compatibility stems from my desire to produce dance tracks for use in clubs (hugeee mono speakers that can really make a bad mix sound horrible)

[bralecharlit]

panning gives each instrument it's own room to breathe...you may not actually hear where it's panned to but it's clearer when it's not played on top of 10 other sounds

[Khan88]

panning gives each instrument it's own room to breathe...you may not actually hear where it's panned to but it's clearer when it's not played on top of 10 other sounds

EXACTLY why I made this thread lol! So your saying to pan it to "give room to breathe" which means there is some masking going on....So you pan it over to get it out of the way.... But then when you switch to mono... then what? masking again

But regardless, I think this thread comes to another conclusion...make sure it sounds good in both mono/ stereo (if desired) and some masking is ok and inevitable when layering/adding instruments

[jezwells]

panning is also important for making it easier to hear individual instruments in a mix. A psychoacoustic phenomenon known as 'binaural release of masking' (= sounds do not obscure each other so much when they come from different locations) means that panning all instruments to the same position, or mono, makes it harder to hear each individual source, whether you're in the sweet spot or not.

[dzara]

I guess you could do everything in mono but then we wouldnt have things like binaural recording and that would just be a shame.

Go ahead, don't pan - no one said you have to.

. Have you heard the Beatles in mono?

Most people mix for stereo however it wasn't always like that. The Beatles just attended the mixing sessions that were done in mono.

This day and age I recommend panning however I also recommend checking your mix in mono.

[ENTITY361]

Mixing is 3D

1. Width (Hard Panning)
2. Depth (Clear Freq.) Keep instruments of the same freq. apart
3. Height (Dynamic Range)

Open it up!