Principles of Multitrack Mixing: The Phantom Image

batsbrew


my question is, 


on LCR, and DAW Panning laws, since panning anything left or right makes the DAW impose extra gain on that track, does it make more SENSE to make the panning law be "Zero" gain, and you simply raise and lower the faders to suit the mix you want?

amiller


So, what's the technique to introduce a prescribed amout of delay in a track?

amiller

batsbrew



amiller-
ok, so now MY reply's not good enough for you!!

LOL

just kiddin

Sorry man, your stuff just doesn't cut it. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

amiller


I'm just starting to dig into the concept of LCR mixing.  I have a noob question.  How do you deal with overhead drum mic's in an LCR mix?  For instance, from what I've read about LCR the kick, bass, snare and vocal (or solo instrument) go up the center.  Well, overhead drum mics pick up some of the kick and snare info correct?  So, if you pan the overheads hard right and left aren't you pulling some of the kick and snare away from the center?
 
What do you guys do about that?

amiller


Danny,
 
Thanks for the info and I never thought you were bashing LCR.  In fact, I would say you know the ins and outs of LCR and are simply giving your take on the method...good stuff.  I'm learning about recording and mixing on a daily basis and I'm not married to any one method.  I tend to use what works FOR ME.  So, anything you can share is very valuable to me ... thanks again.
 
As for LCR, the OP of this thread provided a link to someone else's take on LCR.  I've included below a excerpt from that link.  I would love to hear your take on what this guy wrote:
 
"I got into some loudspeaker research, and found myself called upon one day to make a research recording, wherein I recorded a batch of clicks with very carefully documented changes in level between the stereo channels. This was one of those cases where I figured I knew what was going to happen before I started. Given my golden ears, there just wasn’t much doubt that I could hear the image move as soon as I tweaked the pan-pot even a little, so I decided to calibrate the changes to 1/10th of a decibel, so that I’d be able to really pick out the subtle differences in localization that were going to happen when the levels between channels changed. However, I was very startled to discover that the phantom image didn’t seem to move at all even when the levels between channels changed a whole decibel! I was so startled that I became positive I had made a mistake when preparing the tape! A little investigation (well, about three hours, including chasing down all the wiring in the monitoring system!) showed me that I hadn’t made a mistake, and when the dust finally settled I had found out something quite interesting: that as long as the difference between channels is less than 3 decibels, the phantom image hovers pretty much in the middle point between the two speakers. I promptly ran this down to my buddies at the local loudspeaker factory and we tried it in the anechoic chamber with blindfolds and people pointing at the imaginary phantom, and it still remained true: with up to 3 dB difference between channels (that’s half-power, remember!) the image didn’t move much, maybe five degrees. With between 3 and 6 decibels difference in levels, the phantom quickly and without much stability migrated to the louder speaker, hovering just inboard of that speaker, and once the difference was greater than 7 decibels, the phantom was for all intents and purposes coming from the louder speaker.

So, once again, I’d fooled myself, and had some new stuff to learn and think about. The principle of mixing I’ve evolved from this (not very profound, I’m sorry to say) is that there are only three panning positions: Left, Center and Right. Within those zones, the pan-pot yields a little sense of localization shift, but mostly it isn’t stable and moving my head by an inch or so screws it up. It isn’t very reliable and I can’t count on that localization detail being there in playback away from the studio."