Why is hard panning not used anymore?

[AK Bass Guy]

Was listening to ‘Papa was a rolling stone’ while doing a quick component check, and noticed like other recordings from the era it was mixed hard panned.
The mix still sounded great and the hard panning of the tracks really gave the track good separation and feel.

So the question is why does it seem like no one hard pans anymore on recordings?
Phase issues when summed?
Loudness wars?

Just not cool by today’s standards?

 

[almost human]

I'm interested in this as well!

 

[ardgedee]

Most people listen on headphones now and that kind of separation can be pretty painful to listen to.

Not to mention that a lot of times, particularly on cheaper productions, the master wasn't even hard-panned in the ideal sense of the word. Instead the engineer would just stick instruments in the left or right channels and only mix the lead vocal or soloing instrument in the center, and not even bother to pretend all instruments are in the same space.

 

[sacreddog717]

Plus no one writes amazing songs like that anymore. lol. One of my favorites. Ignore me just having fun

 

[AK Bass Guy]

Here is copy of the track I referred to in top post.

It isn’t all left or right, some things are center.
Great mix.

 

[ardgedee]

Here is copy of the track I referred to in top post.

It isn’t all left or right, some things are center.
Great mix.

It's a decent mix. They make sure to keep the whole space filled even while some instrument at the far left or far right is highlighted. On stereo speakers it's going to sound like a fairly realistic acoustic space (i mean, aside from the mishmash of reverbs and all five singers having no distinct space in the middle). The problem is on headphones, where the acoustic space is cartoonishly exaggerated. The producers and engineers were not expecting that to matter when they made it in (checks...) 1972. Vast majority of music listeners used speakers, not headphones or earphones back then.

To be totally fair, when you're mixing a track you can aim for that cartoonishly exaggerated impression in a mix intended for headphone listening, it can be used creatively. But sticking with it gets fatiguing over a long listening session.

One of my favorite examples of creative panning is this Mel Brown track where the organ and guitar are floating all over the place. The engineer was feeling really good that day.

 

[_Obra_]

Jack White does it.

 

[JRA]

i question the assertion: "why does it seem like no one hard pans anymore on recordings?"

- which recordings?
- 'modern'/current recordings with hard panning in the mix isn't uncommon or rare.
- i use the technique regularly.
- there are often more tracks (these days), and more soundscape tricks --- so all kinds of panning are possible, including; 'more meaningful' hard pans.
- per above, the stereo spectrum is easily filled from hard pans to 'subtleties' in many contemporary works.

what am i missing?

 

[wompwomp]

'and THAT ain't right!'

i've heard this track so so many times but this is the first time on headphones. the wah guitar does some subtly insane chalking at 1:30. another crazy guitar moment at 4:55 with ghost bends.

one of my least favorite temptations tracks i'm not really a fan of this kind of songwriting I think the tempts were a doowop group at the bottom and this isn't really that... but, MUCH improved with phones.

I think the panning sounds good but then again it's a great studio ensemble with a lot of talent so there's sound to spare.

it also sounds tinnier and more sibilant than a lot of Motown records which can be sort of woolly

 

[Wasnex]

In general it doesn't sound natural IMHO. I believe it was most common perhaps from about the late 60s into the 70s....when stereo was new. Perhaps as people learned the medium perhaps they concluded hard panning was not the sound the wanted.


For IEMs it's not a good idea to use hard panning or remove one ear bud. Why? When you hear a sound source equally in both ears, you get a free 6dB of perceived loudness from binaural summation. As you increase panning your get progressively less benefit from binaural summation. With hard panning, there is no binaural summation. The consequence: For equal perceived loudness, a hard panned tone must be 6dB hotter than a tone panned to the center. The reason this is bad is because extended listening at high SPL results in hearing loss.

Using a stereo mix does make it easier to distinguish between individual sound sources in a complex mix. But as some level of panning, you start incurring negative consequences.

My advice is usually to pan in 3-5dB increments across the horizon. However, max panning for most sound sources is about +/- 15dB. You might go as far as +/- 20dB. Stereo mics may be panned a bit more, but a hole may open up in the center of the image if panned too far.

The one sound source that may work with hard panning is a quality stereo reverb. Reverb provides what I describe as directional cues that are essentially continuous across the entire horizon. Basically reverb sounds like it is coming equally from all directions. However if a hole opens up in the middle, you have panned the reverb too far....the max panning can vary from one reverb to the next.

 

[Sertsa]

When I was working as an audio engineer in the 90s, it was generally out of favor but still done, depending on the engineer, producer, artist, etc, as I believe is still the case. There are a few reasons.

One, I suspect, is more obvious hard panning was more often used in the early days of stereo and the transition from mono / dual mono to true stereo. And like with a lot of new technology, there was a tendency to exaggerate, sort of how some early digital recordings are extremely bright. (Because of this exaggeration, a lot of early stereo recordings, like John Coltrane's Giant Steps and his other Atlantic albums, sound better in mono, as Trane's sax is in one channel in the stereo version).

Another is that, when I was learning and working, there was a general avoidance of putting too much of a track in one channel and not the other as headphones were popular, and hard panning has mixed results with systems and radios. Similarly, many I worked with disliked drum kits and pianos that sounded 12-feet wide (I also avoided mixing that way).

An exception, though, and one I still hear, is that many of the more subtle instruments/voices are hard panned, but not the main ones. Percussion instruments, a low-mixed background vocal, and such.

 

[srayb]

I do like Pat Metheny's Bright Size Life album (with Jaco & Bob Moses). The bass is clearly filling one side with guitar on the other. Not really "hard panning", but it really helps to hear the intricacies of the playing (IMHO).

 

[DJ Bebop]

 

[Podgorny]

There isn't really a simple answer. Creatively, it begs the question of whether you're presenting the record as an immersive hyper-realistic experience, or one where you're an audience member. Or maybe something that exists completely outside the bounds of reality. Then in technical terms, hard-panning of disparate aspects of an arrangement risks the mix not being heard as intended, when systems are set up incorrectly (e.g., a restaurant sets up a speaker system to play music, but only sends one channel to the dining room and the other channel to the patio.) So most mixes choose to put the most important elements in the center, so they're coming out of both channels. In the case of bass and kick drum, this also offers the most impact, which we typically want.

That said, modern productions hard-pan things constantly. The difference being that the tools available have made it possible to fill every bit of space in a production. So instead of a mono guitar part being panned hard left and just living there, they'll play it a second time and pan it opposite - what we'd call a "double". Or we can afford the tracks to record EVERYTHING in stereo. Then we can add all manner of other parts and sounds, which will all compete for space and attention. I call this "kitchen sink" production, and it is easier to do this than choosing an arrangement with a few elements playing the right part with the right tone.

And as far as "amazing" songs not being written anymore, I'd have to disagree. I hear LOTS of amazing songs in my work. Whether they resonate with the zeitgeist is a whole 'nother thing.

 

[Pdaddy1978]

I like hard core stereo.
It just sorta went out of style.

 

[wompwomp]

a bass classic! not exactly hard panned but I think pretty typical for the day

 

[kesslari]

I had an interesting experience recording an album for Kavi Alexander, a brilliant engineer/producer, right after he did Meeting by the River with Ry Cooder and Vishnu Mohan Bhatt. He recorded everything live to 2 track - 2" two track! Talk about bandwidth, literally. All tube signal path, one stereo mic. It was an acoustic album, like everything he did, and at the time he recorded in cathedrals during their off-hours (the middle of the night). His idea of "mixing" was "hey Kesslari, move 6 inches to your right on the bench". I thought at the time that he was either crazy or had incredibly big ears. It was the latter. When he invited me to preview the album on his very, very good stereo, I was amazed - the stereo separation and placement of the musicians was crystal clear. I could hear exactly where everyone was, and that's where they were from both my memory and when I looked at a photo from the session.

It was an amazing experience and taught me a lot.

 

[monsterthompson]

I listen to a fair number of EDM mixing tutorials and whenever the subject of stereo width and panning comes up the advice seems to generally be to hard pan whatever you can. There’s a lot of “bass in mono” suggestions too, but I can’t say I recall much about being conservative with the panning on other sounds.

 

[MrAB4003]

Was listening to ‘Papa was a rolling stone’ while doing a quick component check, and noticed like other recordings from the era it was mixed hard panned.
The mix still sounded great and the hard panning of the tracks really gave the track good separation and feel.

So the question is why does it seem like no one hard pans anymore on recordings?
Phase issues when summed?
Loudness wars?

Just not cool by today’s standards?

It just doesn't sound good IMO! I prefer listening to most pre-1970 recordings in mono so I don't have to worry about the stereo hard panning used so long ago. It's a sensory quirk of mine.

 

[dmt]

I had an interesting experience recording an album for Kavi Alexander, a brilliant engineer/producer, right after he did Meeting by the River with Ry Cooder and Vishnu Mohan Bhatt. He recorded everything live to 2 track - 2" two track! Talk about bandwidth, literally. All tube signal path, one stereo mic. It was an acoustic album, like everything he did, and at the time he recorded in cathedrals during their off-hours (the middle of the night). His idea of "mixing" was "hey Kesslari, move 6 inches to your right on the bench". I thought at the time that he was either crazy or had incredibly big ears. It was the latter. When he invited me to preview the album on his very, very good stereo, I was amazed - the stereo separation and placement of the musicians was crystal clear. I could hear exactly where everyone was, and that's where they were from both my memory and when I looked at a photo from the session.

It was an amazing experience and taught me a lot.

I bought that album back in the day. Thanks for sharing your story