Stereo separation

deefstes

Does anyone have some general comments or tips and tricks on stereo separation? With the recent monthly challenge I tried separating the different tracks to different sides. It certainly gave the song a bit more depth but I soon realised that I had no idea which tracks to put on different sides and by how much. I think the furthest separation I ended up using was 25% to the left or the right.

I'd be interested to hear what lessons more experienced recording gurus have learned as regards how to achieve the best results by playing around with stereo separation.

Keira-WitherKay

a common studio practise........ is to double all the parts ..........especially guitar ............and by double i don't mean copy the version you already recorded ? but play the part rwice when recording (the same part) and because they will always differ slightly pan it left and right ......... it has interesting results..of course we not talking solo's here .but the guitar tracks that do the chords ect ....... sure you get the idea ....... you can also put different time /modulation fx on each track to make em even more different but they still the same ...... hope i explained that correctly

deefstes

Thanks, that sounds like a great idea. I'm gonna give that a try some time. By how much are these tracks typically panned? Are the panned all the way to the left or right or only by a certain fraction? In other words, do the one ear hear only the one track or does it get 75% of the track while the other ear gets the remaining 25% (while getting 75% of the other track) or something like that?

Jacquesg4j

deefstes wrote Does anyone have some general comments or tips and tricks on stereo separation? With the recent monthly challenge I tried separating the different tracks to different sides. It certainly gave the song a bit more depth but I soon realised that I had no idea which tracks to put on different sides and by how much. I think the furthest separation I ended up using was 25% to the left or the right.

I'd be interested to hear what lessons more experienced recording gurus have learned as regards how to achieve the best results by playing around with stereo separation.

I've done some reading and it seems you have to create a stereo track and then work from there!!

deefstes

Jacquesg4j wrote I've done some reading and it seems you have to create a stereo track and then work from there!!

Nope, sorry, doesn't compute. Isn't what we're discussing here exactly that, creating a stereo track? Or am I missing something obvious?

ParadoximA

You have to keep in mind that panning 100% to either side can be quite irritating for people listening with headphones (it sounds unnatural), unless the two sides are almost identical (very tight rhythm). It can break the immersion and make you very aware that you're listening to a recording of instruments, rather than the instruments themselves.

Jacquesg4j

deefstes wrote
Jacquesg4j wrote I've done some reading and it seems you have to create a stereo track and then work from there!!
Nope, sorry, doesn't compute. Isn't what we're discussing here exactly that, creating a stereo track? Or am I missing something obvious?

Ohh yeah sorry I use PT so it works different to reaper. But when I create a track in a recording, you have the choice of either mono or stereo. With stereo you have 2 pan "buttons". In reaper you just copy your one track and pan them left or right.

Warren

Keira provides some good tips.

I'm no pro, but some ideas:

For solo guitar, I record to a dry track (so no effects etc.) but I send that track's output to other tracks, usually at least two other tracks. I can then choose different guitar rig tones for each receiving track, and can set up the effects differently etc. I'll then usually play around with the panning of each track, and 25%/30% is similar to what I use, just to give each sound a bit of its own space. This creates a (hopefully) fairly effective sonic "swirl" of sound which is the kind of sound I like.

For stuff like the rhythm guitar in the song I'm working on, I've done the same thing my my acoustic track, only this time I've panned each track 75% to one side. I then start the rhythm guitar on only one track, and fade the next track in at a certain point. So you initially hear the guitar mostly in one ear, but then the other side comes in and suddenly it all seems so much more full and powerful. To achieve that effect though, you need a fair whack of panning, in my case I liked the 75% point. I think panning 100% can have its uses, but it does sound a bit unnatural and uncomfortable in some cases.

For this current track (which I'll post this weekend hopefully), I've also set up delay slightly differently on both acoustic tracks. This gives each one a very slightly different character. You could also just copy and past the dry signal into another track and jazz it up, or even set it very slightly out of phase with the original track ("out of phase" is probably the wrong term, but I just stagger them very very slightly). What this does is create a very convincing stereo effect like you're listening to multiple guitar players, which in this case is exactly what I'm going for.

I think the general idea is that simply panning tracks left and right has little stereo effect: you need to differentiate the tracks on some level, whether it's by adding extra delay or a phaser or a totally different guitar etc. doesn't matter, you just need to convince the listener that they're hearing something more than just one instrument, one sound.

I'm sure the gurus have got some better ideas too, but I find the above thinking serves me quite well and I keep discovering new little ideas that I can employ with each new recording I make.

deefstes

Thanks Warren. Guru or no guru, those are some excellent pointers. Exactly the kind of response I was hoping for.

Warren

One thing that I think is worth mentioning, which I forgot about, is:

Don't get too hung up about % settings etc. Trust your ears, and play around with the settings until you find what you're looking for. If a song you're recording sounds great to your ears with a 100% panned left and a 20% panned right track, then stick with that. But don't be afraid to experiment.

For example, when running two totally different Guitar Rig settings on two tracks, each one has its particular characteristic sound, and certain frequencies will be emphasized over others and the timbre of the notes will be different. That's kind of the point of blending them in the first place, but you can't then just set both tracks to pan left/right 25% respectively and forget about it. You might find that the right-panned track has too much treble in comparison to the left-panned track, or that the volume differences are uncomfortable. You might need to adjust the panning, or the fade of each track, or the actual settings on your amp/VST to get stuff that sounds full and sweeping in stereo, but still complimentary.

The great thing about VSTs like Guitar Rig is that I can re-amp my guitar at any time, and I sometimes find new sounds that are totally unexpected.

Recording your amp is obviously a bit different, since certain settings will be chosen up front in terms of how you set up your amp, but you still have a whole bunch of mix-level tools at your disposal to shake up the sound. Alternatively, like Keira said, you could actually physically play the parts over again, which will definitely sound different and very dynamic. I know Frusciante has favoured this technique on many of his recordings.

BMU

Some weird posts here. It's simple. You play the piece and record it. Onto a mono track in your DAW, whether that be Cubase, PT or Reaper. Pan hard left. You play the same piece again on a different track. Pan hard right. YES you have to play it exactly the same both times.

ParadoximA

Warren wrote I know Frusciante has favoured this technique on many of his recordings.

Frusciante is an excellent example, he actually doubles some of his leads too, with very strict timing on one side and very loose "emotive" playing on the other.

Warren

BMU wrote Some weird posts here. It's simple. You play the piece and record it. Onto a mono track in your DAW, whether that be Cubase, PT or Reaper. Pan hard left. You play the same piece again on a different track. Pan hard right. YES you have to play it exactly the same both times.

It depends on your goal, surely? For your type of highly accurate metal, double-tracked guitars played out of time will sound awful. But on a Chilli Peppers recording, it sounds like...well, the Chilli Peppers.

And if you're going to play it exactly the same, why would you go to all the hassle and not just copy and paste the data to the new track?

AlanRatcliffe

HUGE topic... should actually be called "stereo imaging" and panning is only a part of it. Also includes levels and ambience/reverb.

"Imaging" hints at the best way to do it too (at least as a good starting point):
Close your eyes and picture in your mind's eye a band on a stage in a good, decent sized room. Each instrument has its own place on that stage. Also imagine that the closer they are to you, the louder they are and the louder they are in respect to the room ambience/reverb. Also notice that, no-one is playing in a corner (unlike some clubs) or in another room entirely.

Now:
Move the instruments left and right with the panpots, until each has it's own space on the stage but no-one is in a corner. Move a player to the front of the stage by raising the volume and lowering the reverb/ambience, move them back by lowering the volume and raising the reverb. The only thing coming from the extreme sides is the room reverb. And of course, everyone has the same reverb because they are all in the same room.

That should also go some way to explaining why some of us call it the stereo "soundstage". ?

One thing that's important to know is that the lower bass frequencies are by their very nature omnidirectional - it doesn't matter where you place the bass amp (or kick drum) in the room, it always seems to come from the middle of the room. While the attack (the plectrum or drum beater "click") has a high frequency component, this is not the basis of the sound. Also, remember that bass frequencies take up most of the power in a system, so it is something best shared by both amp channels and both speakers. In other words, always place your bass guitar and kick drum in the middle.

Now, as any listening to Pink Floyd will quickly reveal, this is not the only way to approach it and there is plenty scope to get creative. But it serves as an easy starting point and will introduce a few of the basic concepts in a way that you can build on them. The basic ideas actually extend a lot further and help you when you start doing things like taking stereo room delays and reverb predelays into account too.

ParadoximA

Warren wrote And if you're going to play it exactly the same, why would you go to all the hassle and not just copy and paste the data to the new track?

It doesn't work, if left and right are identical there's no audible difference between that and a mono track. If you're in a hurry to hear what adding a second guitar would sound like you can delay one side slightly but this has it's own problems with phasing etc.

No matter how technically advanced your playing is, there will always be tiny differences between two takes (we're talking about milliseconds here, not about timing being off), and these differences are what makes two takes sound beefier.

I've even tried using the same direct input recording and using different virtual amps for left and right, but in my experience it's always sounded better when it's a completely different take.

--

Something I've found works well for me when I'm recording something with reverb and delay, is to move the instrument itself quite far to the side, but then put the reverb and delay on a different track and bring that track closer to the centre.

--
While we're on the topic:
Does anyone know of any good plugins for creating virtual binaural recordings? What I'd really like is something where you can specify a room size and then place the instrument somewhere in that room. I know it can be done, I just don't know of any easy to use plugins that do it.

deefstes

Thanks Alan, I love this bit:

Alan Ratcliffe wrote"Imaging" hints at the best way to do it too (at least as a good starting point):
Close your eyes and picture in your mind's eye a band on a stage in a good, decent sized room. Each instrument has its own place on that stage. Also imagine that the closer they are to you, the louder they are and the louder they are in respect to the room ambience/reverb. Also notice that, no-one is playing in a corner (unlike some clubs) or in another room entirely.

The principle is so simple and it's certainly something I'll bear in mind in future.

Warren

ParadoximA wrote

It doesn't work, if left and right are identical there's no audible difference between that and a mono track.

This is what I was getting at though. You will never get it EXACTLY the same. The whole reason you would double-track a guitar (actually playing it a second time) is to take advantage of all the minute differences you mentioned.

I'm quite liking the sounds I'm getting with different amps left and right, but I'm sure I'd be even happier with re-takes. I'm not always that fussed about it though, once I've found a sound I like I'm keen to move onto the next bits that need doing.

AlanRatcliffe

ParadoximA wrote While we're on the topic:
Does anyone know of any good plugins for creating virtual binaural recordings? What I'd really like is something where you can specify a room size and then place the instrument somewhere in that room. I know it can be done, I just don't know of any easy to use plugins that do it.

Not offhand. That would be awesome - particularly when working in 5.1. If you find something, be sure to share... ?

ParadoximA

Tada!

Panorama 5
http://wavearts.com/products/plugins/panorama/

I last searched over a year ago and didn't find anything that I really liked - this time round I got this out of the first page of Google results.

What it does: Rather than just panning an instrument to the side and assigning arbitrary reverb and delay, with this plugin you specify a room size, wall material and a whole lot more, then place your instrument somewhere inside the room. It allows you to quickly make a natural sounding mix. You can specify whether the track is destined for headphones or stereo speakers (no 5.1 at this stage, sorry Alan...).

I've only played with it for 5 minutes, and so far I'm impressed! I have no idea what the demo limitations are. [Edit - I see it's a fully functional 30 day trial]

AlanRatcliffe

Interesting. Seems aimed more at the guys mixing for iPods. The "making it sound wider than the speakers" thing brings back bad memories of ghetto blasters in the late 80's that had a stereo widening effect - complete with masses of phase artefacts. ?