I recently had a discussion with a few friends (who have varying degrees of understanding of mixing and mastering - amateurs all) re. mixing and mastering. One of my friends said that he had read somewhere that to achieve the best mix prior to mastering was to record all tracks - whether instruments or soft synths - in MONO mode and then using pans to seat the tracks in the image - whatever that means. Is recording tracks in MONO really the best way to go when mixing?

mono sources should be recorded in mono.
 
stereo sources are invented by use of microphones, typically.
 
electronic stereo signals, should be recorded in stereo.
 
 

There's an argument for saying some stereo sources - e.g. hardware synths playing pads - should be recoded in mono (unless there's something ging onin the synth's stereo field you want to keep) so you can pan them later ("pan" on a stereo track is really a balance control so if the sides of a stereo track are different trying to shift it's location by panning may not get you what you want).
 
My approach is to generally record stereo synths stereo, then if I want to mix them like a mono track either swith the track to mono so Sonar inerleaves the stereo to mono there or route the track to a mono bus. That way I keep my options open.
 
Bear in mind that anything below 250Hz tends to be heard as if it's mono anyway, so by the time you get to bass frequencies it's pretty pointless recording in stereo for that reason.

Unless your friends mean record stereo sources onto two mono tracks. Then you do have a little more control over how each side of the stereo image may be panned.
 
Stereo sources such as virtual instruments or hardware instruments should definitely be recorded in stereo though. To kill some of the beautiful stereo images that some synths go to a lot of trouble to create would be silly IMO.

Thanks all ! - Jeff Evans :- He did mention recording a stereo source on two mono tracks - how does that work? Thanks for your help!!
 

You can create a stereo track (interleaved) and you will be able to select the input sources that feed that track say Inputs 1&2. That will give you one track to deal with from then on and in that sense it is easier.
 
But you can create two mono tracks instead and select Input 1 to feed one mono track and Input 2 to feed the other mono track. The main reason for doing this though is the ability to pan around the left and right channels anywhere into your stereo field. But Cakewalk make a great plugin called Channel Tools and it can do all of those things on one stereo track only.
 
If you do use two mono tracks it is a bit of a pain because if you insert a plugin on them you will have to insert two plugins. One for each track. Then you will have to copy the setting from one plug to the adjacent one too. Same goes for dynamics processing or anything really.
 
Whereas a stereo track only needs one plug in on it and it is using the stereo version of the plug automatically but you only have to think one thing though.
 
Channel Tools lets you pan the left and right channels anywhere which is very handy. Normally they hard left and hard right but sometimes it is nice to narrow and move the stereo image around a bit to suit your mix.

"If you do use two mono tracks it is a bit of a pain because if you insert a plugin on them you will have to insert two plugins. One for each track. Then you will have to copy the setting from one plug to the adjacent one too. Same goes for dynamics processing or anything really."
 
 
Bus

There are plenty of times when I may send a track straight to the main stereo buss without going to a bus first. Bass is a good example. It often does not require a bus of its own and can go staright from track to main stereo out. Why create a buss when you don't need one. You are only creating more confusion to the buses part of your program. I actually keep the total number of buses even in a complex final mix down to quite a small number.
 
Two mono tracks and a bus requires the creation of three new things whereas a stereo track going straight out is only one.
 
Buses are good when you are sending multiple sources to the same bus.
 
 

Jeff Evans
There are plenty of times when I may send a track straight to the main stereo buss without going to a bus first. Bass is a good example. It often does not require a bus of its own and can go staright from track to main stereo out.

 
That's a good example
 

Why create a buss when you don't need one.

 
Why not? There are no technical downsides... just emotional.
 

You are only creating more confusion to the buses part of your program.

 
I don't think people are that easily confused. I assume people can do anything I can do.
 

I actually keep the total number of buses even in a complex final mix down to quite a small number.

 
I rarely count buses in a DAW. I just use them.
 

Two mono tracks and a bus requires the creation of three new things whereas a stereo track going straight out is only one.

 
That's a fact!
 

Buses are good when you are sending multiple sources to the same bus.

 
Which is exactly why I recommended using one as a solution to the painful dilemma you were describing.
 
 
best regards,
mike
 

One can actually have a lot of buses in a complex mix, so many that it rivals the number of tracks you may have. Then I think it is only adding to the confusion. You then have to spend the same amount of time searching for the correct bus as you would a track. I like keeping the number of buses down to a minimum. Although they are easy to create and use I prefer to think of them as being in the lesser number category.
 
I have never suggested a painful dilemma to anyone in my life. When you bring emotion into the situation and you are hinting at talking about others, other than ideas, you are of poor mind. Read my signature. I am only interested in ideas and good ones at that.
 
Back to the OT. Stereo track or two mono tracks. That is the idea. I see a need for both sometimes but generally these days especially since Pro Tools have moved away from the split files concept, it seems to be happening less and less. Cakewalk's Channels Tools does a great job of handling panning of left/right signals very conveniently.