Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter statecap
  • Start date Start date
I also beleive that a mono instrument on its own but moving from left to right is stereo. Like when I do foley audio recording. A single track of nothing but footsteps that goes from left to right of screen is to me a stereo mix.
All by simply panning. And going from reverbing to dry to simulate walking towards the listener but thats another thing altogether.
 
Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

ds21 said:
OK let me thow in my two cents, take one mono mic, one voice, one track, record it, play it back with no effects( remember "simply by use of "panning"") no matter where you pan this one single track it's still mono. Tell me otherwise.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't, if you are able to pan it. Because then, what you hear is stereo.

It used to be mono, and it can be returned to its pristine state of mono by panning it hard left or right, but anyplace else it's stereo. It turned stereo when you chose to listen to it through two channels.

:)

Slabrock
 
Re: Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

slabrock said:
No, it isn't, if you are able to pan it. Because then, what you hear is stereo.

It used to be mono, and it can be returned to its pristine state of mono by panning it hard left or right, but anyplace else it's stereo. It turned stereo when you chose to listen to it through two channels.

:)

Slabrock
Click to expand...
Sorry - I disagree completely......... the sound itself doesn't suddenly "turn stereo".... it may become one of the stereo elements in a 2-track mix, but the track itself doesn't magically become stereo - it's still a mono recording of the original source.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

Blue Bear Sound said:
Sorry - I disagree completely......... the sound itself doesn't suddenly "turn stereo".... it may become one of the stereo elements in a 2-track mix, but the track itself doesn't magically become stereo - it's still a mono recording of the original source.
Click to expand...

No, but as the monitoring is stereo, what we hear is stereo. The original track is still mono, but to hear it as mono, we have to pan it hard and shut down the other speaker.

Philosophical? Yes.

But fun,

Slabrock

PS. Of course you are right BBS, but it does'n mean we can't both be.
 
Not sure I'm getting the differences (still a noob in so many ways)...

...so let me ask this:

CDEx (freeware CD ripping / mp3 encoding software) offers 3 stereo modes: "Stereo", "J-stereo", and "Forced Stereo". I also have another piece of software (Cubase? SoundForge? Acid?), that offers stereo options like "interleaved" and "L/R" (I think).

Is this related to what you're talking about? Are some kinds of stereo more "stereo" than others?

TIA,

Daf:confused:
 
dafduc said:
Are some kinds of stereo more "stereo" than others?
Click to expand...

Definately! It says on the Roky Erickson 'Gremlins Have Pictures' album cover, that "Never has your Stereo been more Stereo than with Pink Dust 4-Dimensional Stereo"

So there's got to be a difference. They can't be just alike. :)

But, concerning your question, i don't know. I have to figure that out.
:)

Best,

Slabrock
 
dafduc said:
CDEx (freeware CD ripping / mp3 encoding software) offers 3 stereo modes: "Stereo", "J-stereo", and "Forced Stereo". I also have another piece of software (Cubase? SoundForge? Acid?), that offers stereo options like "interleaved" and "L/R" (I think).

Is this related to what you're talking about? Are some kinds of stereo more "stereo" than others?
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what they are talking in that mp3 software. The option for Interleaved or L/R are just two different ways of saving the data. Most CD burning programs use Interleaved and most DAW's prefer L/R but can use both. Interleaved is a common format for the master and L/R is a common format when a 'stereo' file is part of a multitrack project. Stereo is just stereo but some programs may use processing to widen the stereo image. Usually you would want to avoid that unless you are doing some type of ambient music or sound effects.

I would agree with slabrock that the mix is stereo when the mono track is actively being panned but it is still a mono track unless some type of processing is done to make it different on one side then the other. It does become a stereo mix when you mix and pan two or more mono sources.
 
Well...I finally spoke to my doubting friend and he too was quoting statements from Blue Bear and Tex. Evidently he is on this forum somewhere but will not give me his screename. He was just too embarrassed to ask the question.
The knowledge around here keeps spreading doesn't it?

Thanks to all for their comments.

Denver
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

slabrock said:
No, but as the monitoring is stereo, what we hear is stereo. The original track is still mono, but to hear it as mono, we have to pan it hard and shut down the other speaker.

Philosophical? Yes.

But fun,

Slabrock

PS. Of course you are right BBS, but it does'n mean we can't both be.
Click to expand...

If it's that kind of thinking... then everything is stereo if you can hear it with both ears, even out of one speaker.

I can't believe this is still being discussed.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

ds21 said:
If it's that kind of thinking... then everything is stereo if you can hear it with both ears, even out of one speaker.
Click to expand...

No, you missed the point, which was: it's stereo, if it comes out divided between two sources which represent L and R.

And no, reflections don't count. Neither your ears.

:)

Slabrock
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is "Stereo" just "panning"?

slabrock said:
No, you missed the point, which was: it's stereo, if it comes out divided between two sources which represent L and R.

And no, reflections don't count. Neither your ears.

:)

Slabrock
Click to expand...

If you heard it evenly out of both speakers with no reflections (anechoic chamber), you'd hear it mono, If you had said including reflections then I might have agreed with you.
 
Stereo is an illusional technique and is usually a unique preference of the engineer driving.

Dry guitar mix just shy of hard left - effects full right. Just enough dry mix to keep it from being completely washed.

others would go hard left and hard right.

Drums panned left - center- right...others would pan hard left and off center.

recording a mono source with two mics going to two separate tracks.

It's all relevant to one point:

What one calls stereo isn't to another and so forth. They all have different sounds left to right and center, yet some of them are simply mono that's been panned.

You use stereo to create a listening enviroment. terminologies vary just as the techniques and tricks used. Botytom line is that stereo is an element of creativity - not a tangible thing at all. Defining stereo is like defining "God". The definitions will all be right, but all be wrong. Different preceptions of stereo will lead to different practices and so on :)
 
alien said:
Stereo is an illusional technique and is usually a unique preference of the engineer driving.

Dry guitar mix just shy of hard left - effects full right. Just enough dry mix to keep it from being completely washed.

others would go hard left and hard right.

Drums panned left - center- right...others would pan hard left and off center.

recording a mono source with two mics going to two separate tracks.

It's all relevant to one point:

What one calls stereo isn't to another and so forth. They all have different sounds left to right and center, yet some of them are simply mono that's been panned.

You use stereo to create a listening enviroment. terminologies vary just as the techniques and tricks used. Botytom line is that stereo is an element of creativity - not a tangible thing at all. Defining stereo is like defining "God". The definitions will all be right, but all be wrong. Different preceptions of stereo will lead to different practices and so on :)
Click to expand...

I agree with this as long as it pertains to the recording enviroment and the techniques used. But not any formal definition.
 
that's exactly how I meant it.

In recording, stereo is relative to technique used proportional to the finished product.
 
:) Thanks.

Although you know I must play the role of the modest one now ;)

I wouldn't say smart, just stubbornly & creatively persistant. After two weeks, I finally got a single kick, 7 pc drumset dialed in last night lol.
 
hey statecap,

would you throw a snicker bar into a circle of kids at a fat camp and then walk away?

would you take your girl cousin to an all-boy school and then leave?

nice of you to ask such a philosophical and open ended question and then say... "thank guys".

my opinion is that there are mono recordings, stereo recordings, mono mixes, stereo mixes, and surround sound mixes.

you were talking about stereo mixes. your friend was talking about stereo recording... or was it vice-versa?
 
well, i'm not sure that it makes much of a difference anymore, but here's my input.

a panned mono image doesn't magically become a stereo image. it becomes a mono image that has been placed into a virtual soundfield with the use of equipment.

a stereo image consists of many interdependent elements sharing portions of both sides of a stereo system in such a way that simply cannot be virtualized. a stereo image is a firsthand stereo take of a source. a mono image is not.

if you take many panned mono images and create a recording using them, you are using a stereo soundstage to make use of placement. this is still not the same as making a stereo recording.

i hope i didn't leave too many hairs to split. i almost got into rambling.
 
yea, yea. So we've basically concluded that there's a difference between a stereo recording and a stereo mix. I think we've established this, so let's move on already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top