Old 09-16-2014, 07:59 AM   #1
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default Pan Law

I'm using either -3db or -3db compensated (when using a lot of folders). No biggie, but still I gotta ask: Why is dual pan the only mode that is always +3 db (comparing to all others, especially comparing to stereo pan which follows other modes)? Your thoughts - can this be considered a mistake or a bad solution or something (I know it's not a bug)? Tnx.

Cheers,
Alex
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 09:56 AM   #2
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1073 View Post
I'm using either -3db or -3db compensated (when using a lot of folders). No biggie, but still I gotta ask: Why is dual pan the only mode that is always +3 db (comparing to all others, especially comparing to stereo pan which follows other modes)? Your thoughts - can this be considered a mistake or a bad solution or something (I know it's not a bug)? Tnx.

Cheers,
Alex
-3dB seems to be the most common and "one size fits all" pan mode, so it would seem to make sense to use the -3dB mode for its default setting. Dual-pan will alays be 0dB at its extremes (which is where it is "un-panned", laying straight stereo, ie -left, hard-left; right, hard-right).

-3dB does not really make sense for a single "balance" pot on a stereo signal as in its "un-panned" position, it drops the gain of the signal by 3dB (half power).


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 11:23 AM   #3
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
-3dB seems to be the most common and "one size fits all" pan mode, so it would seem to make sense to use the -3dB mode for its default setting. Dual-pan will alays be 0dB at its extremes (which is where it is "un-panned", laying straight stereo, ie -left, hard-left; right, hard-right).

-3dB does not really make sense for a single "balance" pot on a stereo signal as in its "un-panned" position, it drops the gain of the signal by 3dB (half power).


>
Tnx for your answer. Maybe I haven't explained what I see as a problem. Let's say that pan law is -3 db and I make a folder that contains two mono tracks - in that case stereo pan doesn't make sense because it's -3db and dual pan is 0db which is O.K.. If I do this, but pan low is -3 compensated, stereo pan is O.K. (0), but now dual pan doesn't make sense because it's +3db. Actually, what I'm trying to say is that they both should behave equally (I would like that when the pan law is - 3db compensated the volume doesn't change for those two tracks when I put them in the folder, IOW, that it's zero, don't matter if it's stereo or dual pan. As I said, it's no biggie, just another click, but somehow doesn't make sense (I often work with mono tracks even if I get stereo files (I make mono tracks out of them and then bus them or not) and use dual (stereo) pan more as a sign that I'm dealing with a stereo track because REAPER doesn't have the real mono tracks and sometimes it's hard to see the difference by watching the meters only, especially in a busy mix, and in addition, once I get to MCP, there's no turning back for me (that way I could see the tracks and know what is what, but I hate to mix in TCP). Generally, I leave the busses be default color and that's clear (I still change the pan law to dual pan there, but actually don't have to do it (unless I really want to use it)), but if I have, say, my green drums and I bounced a bunch of samples to a stereo file, I like it to remain green but have two pan knobs). It's actually the absence of "real" mono tracks (which I generally don't mind) causing some problems again.

Cheers,
Alex

[edited to add]

What makes things even more complicated for me is that I send to busses rather than using folders. In that case all the tracks are of the same height and everything can become messy really fast.

Last edited by alex1073; 09-16-2014 at 02:27 PM.
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:12 PM   #4
whiteaxxxe
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: United States of Europe, Germany, Mönchengladbach
Posts: 2,047
Default

that confused me at times too. so I decided that I will always and ever use pan law of 0db, means no pan law.

I mean, serious, no matter what pan law you use, you will always mix accordingly. so if there is no such thing - in stonage times, when there were tape machines and cassette recorder I never heard of pan law, that is an invention of academic overthinkers I believe - as a pan law you will mix accordingly and everything is fine.

the one and only thing is when a sound pan from left to right and back and so forth, moves in the stereo-field, there is a slight change in volume if this sound crosses the center. but if that occurs and it bothers you you can use for example MSED from Voxengo and turn the center a bit down. no pan law needed, that will in all other cases confuse the things to the point where you ask yourself, what you are doing. making music or doing logical mathematically stereo experiments.

no pan law is a good pan law. at least for me. :-)
whiteaxxxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:27 PM   #5
Bristol Posse
Human being with feelings
 
Bristol Posse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe View Post
I mean, serious, no matter what pan law you use, you will always mix accordingly. so if there is no such thing - in stonage times, when there were tape machines and cassette recorder I never heard of pan law, that is an invention of academic overthinkers I believe - as a pan law you will mix accordingly and everything is fine.
Actually in stone age times when you mixed though a console and tape pretty much every console out there had a pan law of -3 or -4.5dB center, to avoid hard panned sounds from appearing to get quieter or center panned sounds from seeming louder. It was hard wired into the console and it was fixed and there was nothing you could do about it

It's only with the coming of DAWs and once again too many/unlimited choices that pan law becomes an issue.

If it were fixed and not user definable to multiple choices people would, as you say, just mix to whatever the sound was coming out of the speaker (like they used to in stone age times) rather than adding pan laws to the list of unnecessary things to worry about. Such as recording engine architectures, 32 vs 64 bit plugins, which emulation of the same piece of hardware is the "best " one and so on

Unlimited choice leads to analysis paralysis

YMMV
Matt
Bristol Posse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 02:08 PM   #6
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
Default

I admit, I never change anything to do with the "pan law". Mainly because, I really do not inderstand it.

Stereo pans sounds like something to be gained (Oh, did I just make a funny?), but I really don't know why.

Exactly what difference does it make?
__________________
"F" off.
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 02:25 PM   #7
Bristol Posse
Human being with feelings
 
Bristol Posse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
I admit, I never change anything to do with the "pan law". Mainly because, I really do not inderstand it.

Stereo pans sounds like something to be gained (Oh, did I just make a funny?), but I really don't know why.

Exactly what difference does it make?
Here you go

A mono signal in a stereo setup = Left and right speaker play the same thing at the same level
When you Sum those signals to mono you add the two channels together. Add any two identical signals together you get a +6dB increase

or when you look at it the other way the information that is only present on 1 channel (ie panned hard let or right) becomes 6dB quieter relative to the center

This is why most consoles have a -3 to -4.5 dB pan law to stop things from appearing to get louder or softer as they are panned around

It's a compromise always with pan laws

a -3db pan law works better to keep things apparently at the same volume in a stereo setup as you pan around. A signal panned center with a 0dB pan law will have double power in the physical world as it is the two speakers playing the same thing. So for a very simple example of 0dB pan law, if you have a two 10 watt speakers, a full signal panned hard left will have 10 watts (1 speaker), a full signal panned center will have 20 watts (2 x 10 watt speaker). Double power = +3dB in perceived level. so plug in a -3dB pan law and the signal will have the same power and apparent volume in the speakers wherever it is panned.
However this -3dB law does not work as well with mono summation since when you hit the mono button, anything that is panned center will be summed noticeably louder than hard panned signals. It will still be 3dB louder at the center

a -6dB pan law would work perfectly for mono summation but in a stereo setup would make things appear 3dB quieter in the center panned position vs. hard panned signals as you reduce relative power in the speakers to the center panned signals by half

all of this will only effect mono signals within a stereo speaker set up as you pan them around.
A Stereo track is effectively one channel panned hard left and the other panned hard right and the pan law would not affect it unless you reduce the width to less than 100% or the dual panners to less than 100% L & R. In the case of the master fader you would also be impacted if you hit the Mono button, based on the pan law

The thing to remember with REAPER is that the metering is post fader. The pan law will always effect your metering even if you have nothing in the FX chain. If you need certain levels for say emulation VSTs or to feed hardware outs in their sweet spot, you need to remember that what the meters in REAPER show are not the true level of the signal entering the signal chain if you don't have a 0dB pan law. This is why some would like the ability to have meters that you can switch to pre fader I guess, I know it's very useful on my desk
Bristol Posse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 02:33 PM   #8
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristol Posse View Post
Here you go

A mono signal in a stereo setup = Left and right speaker play the same thing at the same level
When you Sum those signals to mono you add the two channels together. Add any two identical signals together you get a +6dB increase
O.K..

Hold it right there.

I thought all tracks in Reaper were stereo tracks, by default? Is this true? Even when you choose a mono input (or output)?
__________________
"F" off.

Last edited by dea-man; 09-16-2014 at 05:15 PM.
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 02:56 PM   #9
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

I'm struggling to follow everything you say here Alex, but you've got to decide how your two mono tracks are going to be applied to a stereo buss. Dual-pan on the folder with hard left and right settings is effectively transparent, so I would not think of that as "wrong" in any sense.

As for the mono tracks, if you ever do quick response mixing like live reinforcement, a -3 or -4.5dB pan law just feels "right" as you haul it across the stereo field -you don't want your signal full-on in left and right if you're sitting it in the middle. You don't want greater than 0dB at the extremes or you are making positive gain on the PFL levels you set beforehand (this can contribute towards losing control), so +3dB laws don't make sense live. You don't really notice any "dip" in level at centre (esp with -3), it sounds natural from left to centre to right, and TBH the central 3dB attenuation probably actually helps correct against multi-channel "gain-creep" as you stack up the channel-count. If it's good enough for live then it's pretty well road-tested.

Stop worrying about the maths and use your ears. The pan law helps control the levels as you tweak the stereo position -that's its job so you don't have to. Crank up your monitor system so you're making 70-75dB SPL at -18dB RMS, and then you can forget about hitting your head on the ceiling and just mix -your drums will pretty much always be in the "green". Remember that the best mixes are often made intuitively and quickly once the setting up and editing is all out of the way -levels after pans and headroom or the lack of should not have to be considered during this stage -it's an un-needed distraction.

I hope this helps some...



>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 03:08 PM   #10
whiteaxxxe
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: United States of Europe, Germany, Mönchengladbach
Posts: 2,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristol Posse View Post
Actually in stone age times when you mixed though a console and tape pretty much every console out there had a pan law of -3 or -4.5dB center, to avoid hard panned sounds from appearing to get quieter or center panned sounds from seeming louder. It was hard wired into the console and it was fixed and there was nothing you could do about it
really? ok, I didnt know that. I have never thought about that. I have heard the term pan law the first time around 2000. ok, so that problem was solved back in the days hardwired. hm.

but it stays only a problem, when a sound moves, if it is a problem at all. if the sound doesnt move, you mix the hard panned louder. you do this automatically, so I cant see there any problem at all.

with the moving sounds, as I said, you can can solve the problem with a MS-plugin.
whiteaxxxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 03:33 PM   #11
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
I'm struggling to follow everything you say here Alex, but you've got to decide how your two mono tracks are going to be applied to a stereo buss. Dual-pan on the folder with hard left and right settings is effectively transparent, so I would not think of that as "wrong" in any sense.

As for the mono tracks, if you ever do quick response mixing like live reinforcement, a -3 or -4.5dB pan law just feels "right" as you haul it across the stereo field -you don't want your signal full-on in left and right if you're sitting it in the middle. You don't want greater than 0dB at the extremes or you are making positive gain on the PFL levels you set beforehand (this can contribute towards losing control), so +3dB laws don't make sense live. You don't really notice any "dip" in level at centre (esp with -3), it sounds natural from left to centre to right, and TBH the central 3dB attenuation probably actually helps correct against multi-channel "gain-creep" as you stack up the channel-count. If it's good enough for live then it's pretty well road-tested.

Stop worrying about the maths and use your ears. The pan law helps control the levels as you tweak the stereo position -that's its job so you don't have to. Crank up your monitor system so you're making 70-75dB SPL at -18dB RMS, and then you can forget about hitting your head on the ceiling and just mix -your drums will pretty much always be in the "green". Remember that the best mixes are often made intuitively and quickly once the setting up and editing is all out of the way -levels after pans and headroom or the lack of should not have to be considered during this stage -it's an un-needed distraction.

I hope this helps some...



>
Actually you're following very good I made it to complicated. It's not about maths or how the tracks are panned. I would simply expect two stereo modes to be equally loud when using any pan law which they're not. That's all. Tnx

Cheers,
Alex
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 03:36 PM   #12
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1073 View Post
Actually you're following very good I made it to complicated. It's not about maths or how the tracks are panned. I would simply expect two stereo modes to be equally loud when using any pan law which they're not. That's all. Tnx

Cheers,
Alex

Yup, that's why they're options


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 03:40 PM   #13
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
Yup, that's why they're options


>

Well, that makes sense. Never thought of it that way
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 03:46 PM   #14
Bristol Posse
Human being with feelings
 
Bristol Posse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe View Post
really? ok, I didnt know that. I have never thought about that. I have heard the term pan law the first time around 2000. ok, so that problem was solved back in the days hardwired. hm.

but it stays only a problem, when a sound moves, if it is a problem at all. if the sound doesnt move, you mix the hard panned louder. you do this automatically, so I cant see there any problem at all.

with the moving sounds, as I said, you can can solve the problem with a MS-plugin.
The main benefit with a -3 or -4.5dB center pan law is you do not have to constantly reset and remix levels if you move things around

For example: I set up an overall mix with no panning just to get a good static balance.
With a 0dB pan law as soon as I pan anything I have to re tweak the levels to get back to the balance I had before panning

Also as planetnine mentioned above, when your working in a live scenario with a desk running usualy a -3dB law it helps from things getting too loud too fast and it's one less parameter to have to worry about once you've got your basic levels set
Bristol Posse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 04:03 PM   #15
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 112
Default

This does seem like a rather strange thing.

"Dual pan" mode hard panned L/R is 3db louder than the other modes:
"stereo balance/mono pan" mode with the knob centered
"stereo pan" mode centered and 100W
"Reaper 3.x balance …" mode centered
(Works like this no matter if it's mono or stereo source, no matter what pan law is used)

WHY…?
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 04:16 PM   #16
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Because the others are centred?

Don't use dual-pan on mono signals


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 05:18 PM   #17
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
Don't use dual-pan on mono signals
Thank you, for some plain, simple sense.
__________________
"F" off.
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 01:08 AM   #18
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 112
Default

The bug is still there with (hard panned) stereo signals. Using dual pan mode increases volume 3 dB :/
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 06:18 AM   #19
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

I'm not seeing this, Tim.

I recorded a stereo sine wav at -12dB peak each channel (12dB RMS AES), and played back through dual pans set at 100% left and 100% right, fader gain at 0dB, I'm reading peak and RMS at -12dB.

Yes it is 3dB louder than the other pan methods because they all attenuate the level by 3dB at centre-pan. The others are reducing the level, dual-pan doesn't reduce the level.

Might this explain what you are seeing?

Dual-pan won't be affected by overriding the pan law to 0dB, because its pans are hard left and right and therefore at 0dB anyway. Setting the default pan to 0dB brings the level from -15 to -12dB at centre as expected.

Using a mono -12dB sine wave also, I've been through the types using different pan laws and I've not seen anything unexpected at all, except not really seeing the difference between REAPER 3.x balance and the default "Stereo balance/mono pan" (which I think is down to routing and wouldn't show up in my simple test).

By all means give me a specific combination and I'll test it and explain what I think is/should be happening.



Confusion over pans, and what to use is one problem introduced by using the same track type, with dual channels and -3dB pan for mono and stereo signals -you really need a different pan-control for mono and stereo signals, -3dB (or similar) for mono to stereo pan and 0dB balance pot for stereo (or -3dB dual pans).

Personally I'd like to see the single channel option allowed for REAPER tracks, along with pin matrix settings for the pan control -users could store archetypal mono or stereo track types as track templates, and connect the source channels to the pans however they sought fit (inc surround pans). Options for what routing is offered to auto-configuring plugins would be useful here too, but this is really another subject...





Edit: do you mean hard panning dual pans, both to the same side of stereo? ie both 100% right? There, of course you will get boost, as with dual pans you are given the raw controls to both channels.




>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.

Last edited by planetnine; 09-17-2014 at 06:22 AM. Reason: another idea...
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 06:44 AM   #20
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1073 View Post
...Generally, I leave the busses be default color and that's clear (I still change the pan law to dual pan there, but actually don't have to do it (unless I really want to use it)), but if I have, say, my green drums and I bounced a bunch of samples to a stereo file, I like it to remain green but have two pan knobs). It's actually the absence of "real" mono tracks (which I generally don't mind) causing some problems again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
...The pan law helps control the levels as you tweak the stereo position -that's its job so you don't have to. Crank up your monitor system so you're making 70-75dB SPL at -18dB RMS, and then you can forget about hitting your head on the ceiling and just mix -your drums will pretty much always be in the "green".


>

Just to make everything perfectly clear. What made a lot of confusion is actually "green drums". There I thought of tracks' color not levels (I always make drums green, bass yellow, guits blue, vox red etc ). So once I have my levels set I keep them that way to the end and actually that's how I noticed what dual pan does.

You're absolutely right about -3db being ideal for live mixing, but I find -3 compensated good for not loosing too much of the volume if a lot of folders and subfolders etc are involved and you're mixing in a studio, of course. Compensated -3db, if I remember correctly is kinda compromise that some digital consoles introduced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
...Crank up your monitor system so you're making 70-75dB SPL at -18dB RMS...


>

That's exactly what I do

Cheers,
Alex

Just an afterthought (and OT) - I think it would be cool to have an option to have the switch for left and right instead of the knob
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 07:05 AM   #21
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alex1073 View Post
Just to make everything perfectly clear. What made a lot of confusion is actually "green drums". There I thought of tracks' color not levels (I always make drums green, bass yellow, guits blue, vox red etc ). So once I have my levels set I keep them that way to the end and actually that's how I noticed what dual pan does.

You're absolutely right about -3db being ideal for live mixing, but I find -3 compensated good for not loosing too much of the volume if a lot of folders and subfolders etc are involved and you're mixing in a studio, of course. Compensated -3db, if I remember correctly is kinda compromise that some digital consoles introduced.

That's exactly what I do

Cheers,
Alex

Just an afterthought (and OT) - I think it would be cool to have an option to have the switch for left and right instead of the knob



Well that's where you're going wrong then, it's pale yellow for drums, orange for backline, violet for vocals, turquoise for crowd mics

I think a "hard connection" could be an option in my italicised ramble in the last post -certainly what some live consoles offer on their subgroups.


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 03:27 PM   #22
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
By all means give me a specific combination and I'll test it and explain what I think is/should be happening.
Thanks for listening

I made this quick gif animation with a small bit of a random picked stereo track.
Just switching through stereo balance, stereo pan, Reaper 3.x balance and finally dual pan. Watch the meters.

(playing a small bit of Miles Davis' Live Evil: Sivad imported from cd to 192 kbit mp3 - but any kind of stereo track will do. I'm on Reaper 4.611 on mac)

https://stash.reaper.fm/21828/dual%20pan%201.gif
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 04:09 PM   #23
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Ragnur View Post
Thanks for listening

I made this quick gif animation with a small bit of a random picked stereo track.
Just switching through stereo balance, stereo pan, Reaper 3.x balance and finally dual pan. Watch the meters.

(playing a small bit of Miles Davis' Live Evil: Sivad imported from cd to 192 kbit mp3 - but any kind of stereo track will do. I'm on Reaper 4.611 on mac)

https://stash.reaper.fm/21828/dual%20pan%201.gif

That's not a bug, Tim. That's how it's supposed to happen.

The "-3dB" bit of the pan law is the attenuation of the pan pot at centre position. As you had all of those pan law options set at the default -3dB, the ones that had their pot at centre position duly attenuated the stereo signal by 3dB.

The last option you tried was the "dual pan" one. There each side of the stereo signal passes through its own pan pot which here was set hard left or right corresponding to its channel. As the pots are at one of their "extremes of travel", the -3dB attenuation doesn't apply (just like other pan pots if you rotated them to full left or full right. The attenuation gradually applies from 0dB at left extreme to -3dB at centre and back to 0dB at right).

This is normal and expected. In fact I have my go-to "stereo" track type using dual pan, saved to a track template for this reason. Mono has a "normal", default, stereo balance/mono pan setting with -3dB pan law, saved as my "mono" track type as a template.

It would be pointless having different pan types if they didn't behave differently. In the case of dual pan, each of those pan pots behaves in a -3dB pan law manner, but won't attenuate the signal (as shown) in hard left and right positions because for normal left-to-left and right-to-right stereo assignation, you don't want each half of the stereo signal attenuating by 3dB on its way to the stereo buss. Here, quite effectively you've show that it isn't attenuated like the other pan law options.

The alternate way of panning stereo would be to override the pan law and use 0dB or a compensated law. I use dual pan because it's obvious that it's a stereo track, something not always easy to tell in REAPER


I hope this makes sense to you Tim, I assure you this is as designed


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 01:59 AM   #24
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 112
Default

Ok thanks for clarifying things about how this works
So the pan law you use in Reaper affects how much a track gets turned down centre position in other modes than dual pan.

The thing is, with "stereo balance" mode centre position, this is still just a stereo signal/track hard panned L/R - one track goes left, the other goes right.
The logic behind pan law is to compensate for things getting twice as loud when playing through both speakers. But here on a stereo track, the pan knob (centre position) is actually moving nothing towards the center, i.e. nothing is getting played through both speakers.
So in my perspective the decrease in volume vs dual pan mode doesn't really serve the purpose of pan law.

The pan knob thinks it's mono even when it's stereo...
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 04:37 AM   #25
alex1073
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Ragnur View Post
Ok thanks for clarifying things about how this works
So the pan law you use in Reaper affects how much a track gets turned down centre position in other modes than dual pan.

The thing is, with "stereo balance" mode centre position, this is still just a stereo signal/track hard panned L/R - one track goes left, the other goes right.
The logic behind pan law is to compensate for things getting twice as loud when playing through both speakers. But here on a stereo track, the pan knob (centre position) is actually moving nothing towards the center, i.e. nothing is getting played through both speakers.
So in my perspective the decrease in volume vs dual pan mode doesn't really serve the purpose of pan law.

The pan knob thinks it's mono even when it's stereo...
I've noticed that you're searching for some general information about pan law. So, here you have it (it's explained rather nicely, especially if you ever asked yourself how they came up with -3, -4.5, compensated or not etc).

Cheers,
Alex

Last edited by alex1073; 09-18-2014 at 05:53 AM.
alex1073 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 05:00 AM   #26
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Ragnur View Post
Ok thanks for clarifying things about how this works
So the pan law you use in Reaper affects how much a track gets turned down centre position in other modes than dual pan.
It affects how each pan control works across its travel.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Ragnur View Post
The thing is, with "stereo balance" mode centre position, this is still just a stereo signal/track hard panned L/R - one track goes left, the other goes right.
Nope, not like this for stereo signals. The left goes to the left, the right goes to the right, but both with -3dB gain. As you move the pan control right, the left attenuates further (eventually hitting -inf) and the right gain inreases until it is 0dB at full travel. The same happens conversely for centre to left travel. (I think the old REAPER3.x pan worked slightly differently in the taper or even cross-routing, but I can't remember, I'd have to investigate).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Ragnur View Post
The logic behind pan law is to compensate for things getting twice as loud when playing through both speakers. But here on a stereo track, the pan knob (centre position) is actually moving nothing towards the center, i.e. nothing is getting played through both speakers.
So in my perspective the decrease in volume vs dual pan mode doesn't really serve the purpose of pan law.

The pan knob thinks it's mono even when it's stereo...

The purpose of a pan control (here) is to distribute a mono signal between two output busses, here left and right, and you're correct about the purpose of the pan law used, in that it regulates the level to make the control a more useful and user-friendly device for mixing.


here's an example of a -3dB pan law, output to left and right...




For a stereo signal you need two pan pots, to place each of the two signals across the stereo buss. Commonly thats directly left to left and right to right without gain loss and so the dual pan option is great for this. Alternatively you need a balance control to again, distribute the two channels of signal to the stereo buss, and here the desireable "pan law" for the control would not attenuate either signal at centre position.

This is where using only one kind of track with a minimum of two channels causes misunderstanding. The default pan pot is a balance control which operates as a pan pot if the mono signal is fed into both channels. Obviously it cannot be both pan law 0dB (for stereo balance) and -3dB (for mono pan) unless you tell it you're using stereo as opposed to mono and it switches for you (which doesn't happen). So, as default it works as a -3dB pan law mono pan pot on mono signals and as a -3dB "pan law" stereo balance control on stereo signal.

Quote:
The pan knob thinks it's mono even when it's stereo...
It's actually trying to be both so that you don't have to have a different track type for mono and stereo sources. But you have, here, nailed the only real drawback of that methodogy...


Actually it works quite well, and I can see why Cockos chose the single track-type ethos, but it does mean you need to be aware of the 3dB centre-position attenuation on stereo signals, and this is why the pan/balance control and pan law options are made available to users, so you can make it behave as you need for your particular use. At least its default behaviour is to reduce stereo sources by 3dB, and as such it can't catch you out with unintentional gain increases that might cause unexpected clipping




I like the single track type, and I also like the plethora of routing options that you can acheive with REAPER tracks. I would, however, like to see the option to make a track 1-channel. We can make a track anywhere from 2 to 64 channels in (mostly) two channel increments and this facilitates amazing flexibility and allows endless possibilities. Despite all of this, REAPER always has hard-wired to channels 1 & 2, it's (user selectible) pan pot. I'd like this as default, but I'd like (via pin-matrix would be fine) the ability to place a pan control of my choice between the track channels of my choice and the output busses of my choice. This would allow me (eg) to lift the stereo balance control from track channels 1&2 and place them from 3&4 to L&R. I could also use a mono pan from channel 1 to L&R, or to facilitate some crazy routing, from 2 to L&R (1 could be sidechain, going no further), or even output busses 3&4.

The channels that aren't used with panning/balancing controls could be directly connected to the output busses, or connected via a user mapping, or even dead-ended, sidechains don't need to go to output busses (pin-matrix again) -or they could even go to monitoring busses (dedicated solo buss anyone?

This user configurabillity would allow full control of panning from any track channel to any output buss, permitting (amongst other ideas) the use of the dual pan into LCR control using three output busses, or a native joystick 4-way or full 5.1 surround panner to be connected to full choice of track channels and output busses.

The design paradigm could be extended to source media-to-track-channel connections, and which channels go through the fader even. Lots of area to brainstorm here...

It's a bit of a pipe-dream, but it fits Cockos' design ethos beautifully, and it would shut the mono-track-type pundits up while taking the routing abilities to the next level.




>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2014, 11:58 PM   #27
4x4uk
Human being with feelings
 
4x4uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Newcastle UK
Posts: 474
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post

I like the single track type, and I also like the plethora of routing options that you can acheive with REAPER tracks. I would, however, like to see the option to make a track 1-channel. We can make a track anywhere from 2 to 64 channels in (mostly) two channel increments and this facilitates amazing flexibility and allows endless possibilities. Despite all of this, REAPER always has hard-wired to channels 1 & 2, it's (user selectible) pan pot. I'd like this as default, but I'd like (via pin-matrix would be fine) the ability to place a pan control of my choice between the track channels of my choice and the output busses of my choice. This would allow me (eg) to lift the stereo balance control from track channels 1&2 and place them from 3&4 to L&R. I could also use a mono pan from channel 1 to L&R, or to facilitate some crazy routing, from 2 to L&R (1 could be sidechain, going no further), or even output busses 3&4.

The channels that aren't used with panning/balancing controls could be directly connected to the output busses, or connected via a user mapping, or even dead-ended, sidechains don't need to go to output busses (pin-matrix again) -or they could even go to monitoring busses (dedicated solo buss anyone?

This user configurabillity would allow full control of panning from any track channel to any output buss, permitting (amongst other ideas) the use of the dual pan into LCR control using three output busses, or a native joystick 4-way or full 5.1 surround panner to be connected to full choice of track channels and output busses.

The design paradigm could be extended to source media-to-track-channel connections, and which channels go through the fader even. Lots of area to brainstorm here...

It's a bit of a pipe-dream, but it fits Cockos' design ethos beautifully, and it would shut the mono-track-type pundits up while taking the routing abilities to the next level.




>
I like your thinking the additional flexibility would be awesome
4x4uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 01:50 AM   #28
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

If it was done with careful choice of defaults, most users wouldn't notice the differences or be troubled by them.

I would be good to be able to control what channels were offered to those plugins that automatically decide whether to be mono or stereo too


Edit: if it could be done, Free Item Positioning could get a boost with this too


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 11:39 AM   #29
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe View Post
that confused me at times too. so I decided that I will always and ever use pan law of 0db, means no pan law.

I mean, serious, no matter what pan law you use, you will always mix accordingly. so if there is no such thing - in stonage times, when there were tape machines and cassette recorder I never heard of pan law, that is an invention of academic overthinkers I believe - as a pan law you will mix accordingly and everything is fine.

the one and only thing is when a sound pan from left to right and back and so forth, moves in the stereo-field, there is a slight change in volume if this sound crosses the center. but if that occurs and it bothers you you can use for example MSED from Voxengo and turn the center a bit down. no pan law needed, that will in all other cases confuse the things to the point where you ask yourself, what you are doing. making music or doing logical mathematically stereo experiments.

no pan law is a good pan law. at least for me. :-)
I have come to the same conclusion. I was actually having issues using the -3db pan law where things sounded audibly different in mono and stereo. Switching to 0 pan law seemed to make everything sound right.

Is anyone else completely confused by the stereo pan options in reaper? I have noticed that stereo delays for instance seem to react differently depending on the pan mode.
Magicbuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 11:46 AM   #30
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
Because the others are centred?

Don't use dual-pan on mono signals


>
D'oh! i think this was/is my problem. Dual pan is on by default for every track in my setup. But it should only be for stereo tracks right? How about stereo buss/folders and stereo FX?
Magicbuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 11:56 AM   #31
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
Is anyone else completely confused by the stereo pan options in reaper? I have noticed that stereo delays for instance seem to react differently depending on the pan mode.
I would love if someone would lay out, in like three sentences, what you gain or lose, by having dual pan on, or off.
__________________
"F" off.
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 11:59 AM   #32
Tim Ragnur
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 112
Default

Thanks Planetnine, for patiently explaining and discussing this!
I think the Reaper panning design has some "interesting" aspects to it, but it's not all that crazy
Knowledge is power.
Tim Ragnur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 12:14 PM   #33
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
I would love if someone would lay out, in like three sentences, what you gain or lose, by having dual pan on, or off.
The only benefit I see to dual pan is that it allows you to pan a stereo signal across the stereo spectrum and make it as wide as you want.

For example lets say i have a stereo piano. If you put it in the the center at 100% width you now have a 20ft wide piano in the center of your mix. In most cases thats probably not what you want. Lets say you also have a mono guitar panned 100% right and you want to balance the piano against that. What dual pan would allow you to do is pan one side of the piano 100% left and the other side 50% left so you end up with a piano that is on the left but still has some stereo width to it.
Magicbuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2014, 12:50 PM   #34
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
D'oh! i think this was/is my problem. Dual pan is on by default for every track in my setup. But it should only be for stereo tracks right? How about stereo buss/folders and stereo FX?
Does that make them a different colour or sumfunk?

Stereo is stereo, ie a pair of related channels, it shouldn't matter. I use dual pan because I can set each side individually, but mostly fx will be both channels evenly unless you're using true stereo stuff (post) or tweaking.


Take a step back and think what your signal is and what you want to do with it. I think true balance controls (stereo) only alter the level of L in L and R in R, but dual pan allows amounts of L in R and vice versa. I think the original v3x REAPER pan/balance control may have done this too.

Anyway, you have a mono signal or a pair or stereo signals and you want to apply them to a L and R buss -decide how you want the signals to vary and connect. Actually, I think I know why some users struggle; if you don't know what a potentiometer is and how it works then many of my explanations might seem a but flippant and "but you should know this..."

's why soundies need to be engineers I guess, helps you know how equipment works. That diagram I posted should help you. Audio pan pots work well with an attenuation at centre position so that a signal (singular) is applied to the two outputs at a level which combined again in a soundfield is "about as loud" as when it is panned to one side or the other-ONLY.

A lot depends on room acoustics and -3dB and the "equal-power" curve/taper aren't the only designs used. The "dip in the middle" (actually just the level where both side's output are equal, where they cross-over) is just designed to make a centre-panned signal sound ball-park equal to when it is panned throughout the rest of it's "travel" to its extremes.

If you don't have a dip, ie pan law 0dB, it'll just seem relatively louder in the centre, the pan attenuation's only happening in one half of the output from centre outwards. You swing the pan knob across the stereo field and it'll jump out at you a bit at centre. No biggie if you know it'll do it, and of course with "compensated" pan law, it is boosted at the extremities rather than dipped in the middle.

With stereo signals you're not distributing one signal to stereo, but two, so the game changes and it's up to you how those signals are distributed. Seriously, there are suggestions and conventions, but it's your mix -balance them like two faders to left and right or pan each individually with the choice of level and routing.

You got me monologueing again. Hope this ramble makes sense to someone, keep asking the questions if it doesn't -although most of the answer is a blank project with your signals and some virtual pan-pots and your ears. Whatever sounds best -if it sounds right -it is right (except where you forget to roll-off with the high-pass)



>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.