Folks that are obsessed with symmetry in stereo

losthighway · Post by **losthighway** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:41 pm

I have been working with a fun band (duo, guitar, drums, both guys sing). We double tracked the guitar for fullness, and there is no bass guitar.

We just ran through all the sounds for the first rough mix and I discovered a new OCD, I'll call it symetraphelia. There are moments where for arrangement sake we decided to cut out the second guitar track so the more rocking moments have better impact. Some of these sections are less than fifteen seconds long. The guitarist refused to let a guitar sit to one side for a moment, without the other guitar. So I ended up with a lot of editing- solo guitar gets bumped to the middle until guitar 2 comes in again and then it gets shot out to the side again.

I off-set a couple back up vocals, panning maybe 20%. He didn't like that either.

Maybe they should release it in mono. I have been pushing for a stronger center to my recordings, and trying to avoid more gimmicky panning tricks, but at this point the only width in the image is the overheads. Who knows, maybe I'll end up thinking it's a stronger mix than I usually do- but I have a feeling it will be one of those times where I liked the final product less, only because of customer requests.

Anyone else run into this kind of dilemma?

JGriffin · Post by **JGriffin** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:56 pm

Absolutely. I mixed a couple of albums with a guy who would sit behind me, and then point to a spot in the stereo field and say, "I hear a hole, RIGHT THERE. Put something there." Drove me fucking nuts.

ubertar · Post by **ubertar** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 6:13 pm

Play them some Beatles.

RefD · Post by **RefD** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:52 pm

dwlb wrote:Absolutely. I mixed a couple of albums with a guy who would sit behind me, and then point to a spot in the stereo field and say, "I hear a hole, RIGHT THERE. Put something there." Drove me fucking nuts.

did your head nearly explode from suppressing a mom zing?

emrr · Post by **emrr** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:47 pm

wow, and I make people do pure mono lo-fi sections hard-panned to one speaker....

bedbug · Post by **bedbug** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:12 am

ubertar wrote:Play them some Beatles.

+1

Taxman is like a conversation between the two stereo speakers.

vvv · Post by **vvv** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:35 am

The Stooge's The Weirdness is awesome with the guitars coming in and out on one side, the other full on.

At first it felt a little un-balanced.

It still does, but that's consistent with what I love about Iggy.

JGriffin · Post by **JGriffin** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:51 am

RefD wrote:
dwlb wrote:Absolutely. I mixed a couple of albums with a guy who would sit behind me, and then point to a spot in the stereo field and say, "I hear a hole, RIGHT THERE. Put something there." Drove me fucking nuts.
did your head nearly explode from suppressing a mom zing?

Not at that time in my life, no. Plus I knew his mom, and even the abstract notion of such a zing would have caused my head to explode had I entertained it.

RefD · Post by **RefD** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:53 am

dwlb wrote:
RefD wrote:
dwlb wrote:Absolutely. I mixed a couple of albums with a guy who would sit behind me, and then point to a spot in the stereo field and say, "I hear a hole, RIGHT THERE. Put something there." Drove me fucking nuts.
did your head nearly explode from suppressing a mom zing?

Not at that time in my life, no. Plus I knew his mom, and even the abstract notion of such a zing would have caused my head to explode had I entertained it.

ah.

TBH, i pretty much never zing in person...or at all anymore, really.

*is a broken spirit*

vorian · Post by **vorian** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:05 pm

Was just listening to Spoon's Gimme Fiction last night. Play them THAT.

Gentleman Jim · Post by **Gentleman Jim** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 2:44 pm

I'd toss this onto the pile of (usually) negative side effects of DAW recording. Along with vocal tracks comped from 71 takes, guitar parts that get played once well and then copied/pasted rather than having any variation from verse to verse, or drums that get Beat Detective'd and Drumagog'ed to death: these are all things that used to be insanely labor-intensive and therefore were financially out of reach for 98% of bands before DAW's were around.

In the past I've ranted a bit about the tyranny of false perfection that comes from Autotune, and I think the stereo symmetry is kind of the same thing. Why would you have a 'mistake' in the mix if you could make it 'correct?' There's a song on the Harder They Come soundtrack where the lead and backing vocals apparently are on the same track, but they get panned pretty hard during the mix. I think it's Rivers of Babylon by The Melodians. Anyway, there's one point in the song where the pan doesn't quite make it in time because the lead vocal goes past the point where the pan can be done quickly before the backing vocals come in. But that wouldn't happen with a DAW, because the automation can happen near instantaneously. Now we are able to make all these little, (and not so little), tweaks that weren't possible for most people even 15 years ago.

Consequently, there's a current generation of bands who listen primarily to music that has been recorded in the time where the goal has been perfection rather than expression. It makes me think about how many times I've probably over-automated or hyper-micro-edited. (I may have been 'guilty' just the other night, in fact. I guess I'll never get that Tape Op Purity & Honesty In Recordings Certification. $5,000 down the toilet!)

I can understand how it would be hard to avoid if that's what you grew up with, but I think it might be a good idea to ask the band members in this particular case to name a few songs they really like - not direct influences, just favorite songs - and then listening to those songs with them. If everything's symmetrical you may be dealing with an overall aesthetic that won't be easy for them to change, lest they be 'weird,' but if there's a certain amount of stereo action going on you can point that out and suggest that maybe their material could also benefit from some separation.

Or you could just do it in mono and start a movement.

tdbajus · Post by **tdbajus** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:16 pm

maybe they were just scarred by the first few Van Halen records- I always wondered why someone would put Eddie's guitar panned hard left (?) with the reverb panned hard right.

JGriffin · Post by **JGriffin** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:20 pm

Gentleman Jim wrote:I'd toss this onto the pile of (usually) negative side effects of DAW recording.

My example above was a 2" 24-track project (or two), however. So: not always.

Gentleman Jim · Post by **Gentleman Jim** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:40 pm

Well yeah, not always. There are always exceptions to the rule. Except when there aren't.

But my babbling wasn't just about what people can do, it was also about what their influences are. Even if you're recording to an 8 track portastudio, if you want it to sound just like [Generic Big Rock Band's] last cd you're going to try to do things to make it sound pretty squashed and 'perfect.'

And after reading my post I realized it may be misconstrued that I'm anti-DAW; nothing could be further from the truth. There are definitely some positive side effects to DAW recording as well: increased attention to consistent tempo for all levels of bands is one of them.

JGriffin · Post by **JGriffin** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:47 pm

Plus I'd think with DAW automation it'd be even easier to do crazy, all-over-the-place panning.

Message Board

Folks that are obsessed with symmetry in stereo

Folks that are obsessed with symmetry in stereo

Who is online