|
Cool panning thing I saw today
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Looney4Clooney |
| I was watching an engineer today and the mix was very busy and full. To find place for certain elements, he would split the signal into bands and pan those bands. Allowed him to place a certain sound in a space that fits while not loosing the frequency content that makes things harsh and brittle. I asked him about it, he said the principle is based around how stereo is perceived ie below 1700 or so , by time difference, and over 3000. by amplitude. But basically , he was able to have sounds fit without cutting everything all the time. Sort of along the same line of thinking as m/s EQ but with more control. |
|
|
| tehlord |
This genuinely interests me.
I was watching some of the Fabfilter videos the other day and they were splitting frequencies by channel, although not for panning purposes.
One day i'll have the time to go and do a proper engineering course that I keep promising myself. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
i was impressed that he could just know in detail which where he could put a very specific frequency band. No spectrograms or visual aids, the guy must be approaching 50 so his hearing probably doesn't go past 10 but it was ridiculous watching him work. he mix we gave him was kinda ty. He shook his head , and just went to work. I brought him a latte so he didn't mind me being there despite being in a bad mood. I didn't want to disturb him but this is pretty much what he was doing.
what i did notice was that he was using that frequency range in the mid lows - mid high hat has a limited stereo image and using that concept to fake perspective while finding room. It really was pretty cool.
If you ever get the chance to watch a pro, it is a learning experience. This mix was really busy. About 124 racks. He took a listen. Shook his head. He didn't bother with the group stems. Started from scratch. Was riding more than one fader at a time recording the automation in real time without making a mistake. I mean one pass. thats it. Like this guy was on speed.
And how he was able to organize things so fast. After the first listen, granted everything was labelled right using a colour scheme that many are used to, full orchestra was panned and grouped in 10 minutes. He did 4 passes and managed to get all the level riding done. I'm sure he did some final tweaks later on but man this guy was ing sure of everything.
And it is a good feeling when your engineer appears to know what he is doing. Micromanaging is just a pain in the ass.
I asked about him and he used to record orchestras. Huge setups, MAin ORTF, omni flanks, house cardioids, ortf for winds, cardiods for harp percussion ..... And he would just invent he scheme in his head asking who the conductor was, and what orchestra and with he score. This guy could flip thru a conducor score and make decisions based on that . I mean most engineers can't reaad music, this guy could read a conductor score rather well.
now that is an engineer. I mean imagine watching Lang Lang on he piano and you wonder how the . Well here are engineers like that. Virtuosic in every sense of the word. And that oldschool way of doing it. Where you just do it, and thats it. No double takes because your mic spacing is wrong or your mics are at the wrong height. |
|
|
| TranceLover007 |
Great info man - you want to keep this guy as close as possible and suck out all his knowledge as much as you can (takes years to get to his level).
Cheers |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
oh we definatly aren't close enough to even be considered colleagues. I just happened to bring lattes because I had heard of his reputation. Everyone else was booted. And he was a ing grump. Every time something in the tracks did not agree with him, he looked at me and gave me evil eyes like i had anything to do with it. Never said anything, Just looked at me with that sort of you punk look. lol
I did not ask a question, I was a healthy distance away pretending to make adjustments to he score.
Bu ya, it was like watching a virtuosic piano player. No hesitation what so ever.
I would say the beast engineers usually have a classical background. That was where most advancements in sound quality happened. Recording an orchestra is very challenging. And when you do it every day as a living, you just develop these chops that make you go whuuaaat. |
|
|
| TranceLover007 |
Crazy and fascinating - level of knowledge of some people is just incredible. It is so motivating and exciting to watch people like him doing his daily task, the way they think, they act and analyze the problem which for us could look/sound massive but for them simple and routine - damn it, one day (when I'm 70 or 80) somebody will look at me the same way I'm looking at people like him (at least I think my son may???? lol).
Cheers |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Looney4Clooney
i was impressed that he could just know in detail which where he could put a very specific frequency band. No spectrograms or visual aids, the guy must be approaching 50 so his hearing probably doesn't go past 10 but it was ridiculous watching him work. he mix we gave him was kinda ty. He shook his head , and just went to work. I brought him a latte so he didn't mind me being there despite being in a bad mood. I didn't want to disturb him but this is pretty much what he was doing.
what i did notice was that he was using that frequency range in the mid lows - mid high hat has a limited stereo image and using that concept to fake perspective while finding room. It really was pretty cool.
If you ever get the chance to watch a pro, it is a learning experience. This mix was really busy. About 124 racks. He took a listen. Shook his head. He didn't bother with the group stems. Started from scratch. Was riding more than one fader at a time recording the automation in real time without making a mistake. I mean one pass. thats it. Like this guy was on speed.
And how he was able to organize things so fast. After the first listen, granted everything was labelled right using a colour scheme that many are used to, full orchestra was panned and grouped in 10 minutes. He did 4 passes and managed to get all the level riding done. I'm sure he did some final tweaks later on but man this guy was ing sure of everything.
And it is a good feeling when your engineer appears to know what he is doing. Micromanaging is just a pain in the ass.
I asked about him and he used to record orchestras. Huge setups, MAin ORTF, omni flanks, house cardioids, ortf for winds, cardiods for harp percussion ..... And he would just invent he scheme in his head asking who the conductor was, and what orchestra and with he score. This guy could flip thru a conducor score and make decisions based on that . I mean most engineers can't reaad music, this guy could read a conductor score rather well.
now that is an engineer. I mean imagine watching Lang Lang on he piano and you wonder how the . Well here are engineers like that. Virtuosic in every sense of the word. And that oldschool way of doing it. Where you just do it, and thats it. No double takes because your mic spacing is wrong or your mics are at the wrong height. |
this sounds exactly like one of the main engineers at work.
I mean I think it IS him.
Was his name Alan by any chance?
I can't tell you how much i learned in the first month just sitting there with my mouth shut just watching them. It was stuff I couldn't even understand from a technical point, even though I could see the processes and had been an engineer for close to 10 years.
To be honest, all but one of the truly great engineers I've been lucky enough to work with have that exact demeanor. Gruff, borderline pissed with everyone, like to work in silence but so ing damn good at what looks like instinctive on the fly decision making....
....but the truth is, that in most situations, it's simply the vast experience of having done it a thousand times before.
Going back to the orchestra aspect: all of the great score mixing engineers I know are active and current live orchestra recording engineers.
Now if you put that in to context; that they create the mic list and mic arrangement based on the composition, orchestra and conductor, then they have to mix that on the other end when the recording is done, it becomes second nature to know where everything is.
In fact, I know one major score engineer that asks to be the recording engineer whenever he's asked to mix a film project for that very reason - it's the control of recording it exactly the way you want to mix it and takes 99% of the guess work out of how to mix it all.
Finally, on the actual subject of panning, what you're talking about is frequency based stereo image separation. Score engineers often do this based on a LCRLsRsLFE (i.e. 5.1 setup) then just bounce those down to stereo with a preset mix ration for the channels involved.
Therefore with a 5.1 setup you're panning different things automatically based on their frequency band, and ultimately, this comes from knowing the instruments invloved.
So for instance we were working on a large 2008 super hero blockbuster
film. We were recording cello overdubs, which doesn't go low enough as an instrument (under normal conditions) to be in the LFE channel, so we set up four mics: L, R, Ls & Rs, two in front, two above and behind.
You now know you have the channels to be panned. From here you can place the balance of those channels anywhere you want in the image field, but (and there's the whole secret to it) the way they do it is based on frequency as you'll also have many other instruments all using 4 mics, 3 mics, 2 mics or 1 mono mic.
The basic principles goes that the higher the frequency the wider you can go with your panning but your can essentially "trick" the listener in to hearing a wider space by exponentially (rather than linear) increasing the width as you go up the spectrum.
The real pros do this however based on the score itself, not just the potential range of a given instrument.
It's actually incredible how much more you can do when you have this down. In that same film, we had one cue that maxed out at over 500 tracks, from a 48 piece orchestra and hours of studio overdubs and the engineer found space for all of them. He was riding 8 faders at once for most of the mix, on a 264 channel (96 physical) and that was linked, controlling another 264 channel desk in the other mix room.
The main thing that bugs me about guys like this is the lack of second guessing and them just ing knowing they get it right first time. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| i did a quick search and he has worked with one of the sound heads for that project you worked on, the big one. don't want to name him but , hmmm his name is also a stage at he radford. The guy he has worked with that you know is known as the King. Unless you are on a first name basis. lol i will just pm you. |
|
|
| lenieNt Force |
"what i did notice was that he was using that frequency range in the mid lows - mid high hat has a limited stereo image and using that concept to fake perspective while finding room. It really was pretty cool."
Could you describe in more detail what this technique is and how it works? I can't fully grasp it yet.. |
|
|
| lenieNt Force |
| For instance I don't get how stereo can be percieved over 3000 hz by amplitude alone, cause the haas effect etc still majorly applies.. I don't quite get the concept I think.. :/ |
|
|
| Lunar Phase 7 |
| Very interesting. Also check your "t" key. It's appears to be a bit shy. |
|
|
| Looney4Clooney |
| quote: | Originally posted by lenieNt Force
For instance I don't get how stereo can be percieved over 3000 hz by amplitude alone, cause the haas effect etc still majorly applies.. I don't quite get the concept I think.. :/ |
3000 is about the fundamental tone of he highest G on a 88 piano. What you think is 3000 hz is harmonic material based on fundamental that is much lower. It is a matter of science. Your ear cannot use inter aural time difference for hz above 1500 which is the maximum value generally given for ITD
i should add that i am simplifying the matter. Although this is true , the brain does seem to able to use spectral grouping and come to think of it, i'm starting to doubt whether ITD and IAD matters when you have a stereo output. The Hass effect makes 2 signals seem like 1 if they are lower than 20 ms in delay. So although the brain cannot use ITD from a single sound source, a stereo source could. But I think this is more related to perhaps how first order reflections can impact the localization. To be honest, i am not quite so sure now.
ps: was curious so i just did a pure tone at 3000 hz. added a delay to the right speaker of 30 ms, couldn't tell the difference. But as you lower it , at about 1500 you start to be able to notice the emerging tone. Did the same for 10 ms, at 3000 no change in localization, as you lower , the sound in the left speaker seems to get louder.
I imagine it gets a little more complicated for complex noises. |
|
|
|
|
