a question about panning

[hollywood_steve]

I understand that there is no "correct" way of doing things like panning, but I am curious about how others approach this task. Lets take a jazz trio where everybody sings. We'll put the leader in the center and his two bandmates on either side. So we've got three instruments to locate and three voices to place as well. Now one easy solution would be to place each instrument and it's related voice in the same position, for example: musician on left, voice and instrument at 10 o'clock; bandleader, voice and instrument at noon, musician on right, voice and instrument at 2 o'clock.

And while this would work, it's not they way I would normally pan the parts. I might place the voices at 10, noon and 2, but then place the instruments a little wider, maybe at 9, 1 and 3. But I'm interested to hear how others might handle this situation? Would you place each instrument and related voice in the same position, or would you spread them separately? And if you panned the voices and instruments separately, which would typically be a wider spread; instruments or voices?

[joeysimms]

MONO!

Try it, it might work beautifully. I've never mixed a project like that, but based on what you've said, I think keeping each person's voice and intsrument together is a good place to start.

[Devlars]

I recorded a song that has quite a few pan moves within the song depending on what other instruments or vocals came in and where. Main vocals were in the middle harmonies were both off to the left (one at 9 the other at 7). later in the song those tracks have piano and shaker on them so the panning moves drastically so that everything has it's place. Rather than boosting fader levels I simply moved the pan pots to give everything it's place.
As far as how you should go about doing it. There are no real rules per se. Try to make it pleasing to your ears, try to make it sound natural (if that's what you're going for) and yes, by all means, see if you can have it sit well all together in mono if for no other reason than to get a better grasp of depth of field in your mixes.

[JohnSuitcase]

I would be inclined to pan them in such a way as to get an even balance of frequencies, so that you don't have an upper register voice in the same spot as an upper register instrument. Of course, this may change depending of the arrangement. Also, if you're doing vocals with three part harmonies, I would try putting the two backing vocals very close together, and running them through the same reverb, compression and eq, so they sound like one unit.

Another thing you can try is to group the instruments tightly in the center, then run them through a wide stereo reverb, so that the verb fills the space outside the instruments and voices. This would be more like a traditional jazz recording, I would think.

Good luck!

[thereminman]

John.....wouldn't having an upper register instrument in the same speaker as a lower one be good?...I mean for clarity.....?
I'm just askin'.
Wouldn't putting all the low things on one side make it all mucky on side?
---I could be way wrong----if someone has had intersting experience in this area inclucing you John, I'm ready to listen.

[JohnSuitcase]

Sorry if I was confusing, I meant just that. If you have a lower register instrument and a higher register instrument on one side, it'll sound better, so if your high register vocalist is playing standup bass, it might be nice to line them up in the same spot.

On the other hand, sometimes grouping instruments into one tight area works well, too. A section of clarinets could be grouped together to get a sort of Benny Goodman effect. And putting two female backing vocals together might sound better than spreading them hard left and hard right.

Of course, your ears are the final judge, if it sounds good, go for it!

[Devlars]

Of course, your ears are the final judge, if it sounds good, go for it!

And with that you have summed up any further advice that could be offered.

[Rigsby]

Of course, your ears are the final judge, if it sounds good, go for it!

And with that you have summed up any further advice that could be offered.

Agreed, and your ears may also want to listen to other recordings to check out how other people have been/ are going about it. Conventions on panning have changed dramatically over the years, on headphones check out something to your taste that's recent and then go and listen to something by the Beatles, generally these days people seem to be going for a central picture with embellishment, whereas back then it was way different, but your ears will tell you that anyway.

[Devlars]

Point well made Rigsby. Listen to Moonlight Mile by the Rolling Stones or Flying from MMT (The Beatles) panning all over the place where as now a days hard panning isn't necessarily the norm for "primary" intruments or sounds. But as I said before I am a big advocate of using panning to place things instead of reaching for the reverb/ compressor/ fader first.

"Putting an entire drum kit off to the left ear, oh shocking!"

[Rigsby]

I am a big advocate of using panning to place things instead of reaching for the reverb/ compressor/ fader first.

I'd agree with that. I like a lot of detail, and panning's really useful with that, you can nicely tuck things away to one side without conflicting with more prominent frequencies. I generally start from the central image and move outwards (that's to my taste - at one point i was doing pretty much mono mixes) and like to spread it out pretty wide, especially when there's a fair bit of percussion. I tend to think of mixing as creating a room wherever possible, a fairly wide room with a fair bit of depth.

[Devlars]

I tend to think of mixing as creating a room wherever possible, a fairly wide room with a fair bit of depth.

[Fieryjack]

This is an interesting question. I think on hearing something, people can pick out different frequencies of instruments/voices and you can place them in the stereo field according to the frequency and what you are driving at in the song.

Take voices for example: in a recent mix, I had a soft acoustic song with a falsetto-ish lead vocal. I placed that at 12:00. Then, in the chorus, a four part harmony came in. I placed the basses (there were 2 of each 4 parts) at 9 and 3, baritone at 10 and 2 and tenor at 11 and 1. By splitting the basses this way, it made for a very dramatic entrance and impacted the emotional strength of the chorus.

It worked well, because each vocal pitch range had its place.

[Devlars]

It worked well, because each vocal pitch range had its place.

Therein lies the purpose of any mix, making the sounds work well together as a whole by giving each sound it's place.

[JohnSuitcase]

Another technique that I've used a bit, and that I've read about in various interviews is to listen to the mix in mono, then pan the channel you're trying to place until it comes through. Then, once you switch back to stereo, you'll hear that instrument more clearly. I'm not sure why this happens, I gather it has to do with the phase relationships of the different instruments, but it seems to work.

Of course, if you're mixing a drumset from the drummer's perspective (for instance), you're not going to want to push the toms all over the place, but just moving them the slightest bit can help line them up with the overheads.

[logancircle]

I was not a believer in mixing in mono for a while because once you pan the stuff out of mono, it seems like you could've been less drastic in your sonic treatment of tracks, maybe this could be a bit quieter now. Then you're on a date and you're cooking Boca Burgers and you're listening to Sgt Peppers and you walk way off into the kitchen to flip your Boca Burgers and you're not hearing stereo anymore, that will convince you that mono matters.