Topic: Pan or convert to dual mono

[yousef]

If you're using a pair of mics with a few dBs' difference in sensitivity are there any drawbacks in simply using a pan control in post to make things more balanced?

I've always converted the files to dual mono and then adjusted once or the other to match but I'm wondering if this is a lot of unneeded fussing. I suppose it might depend on how a particular DAW has its pan pot configured...

Any thoughts or real world experience?

[Sloan Simpson]

I use the pan pot in Reaper, no problems.

[yousef]

I'm fairly certain that one of the mics is just 4-6dBs less sensitive that the other.

My question is to whether there is any difference in using the pan function or adding gain to an individual channel, the latter requiring a couple of extra and slightly time consuming steps.

If "pan" just involves dropping the level of one of the pair of channel down while increasing the other, then fine but if there is something else going on (that, for instance, might introduce a phase issue) then 'd like to be aware of it.

[Gutbucket]

No difference using a "stereo balance" control on a two-channel stereo file, verses splitting the file into two mono-files and adjusting the level on one relative to the other, then re-combining them into a stereo file again.

"Pan" typically refers to panoramic placement of a monophonic across a two channel stereo bus.   The monophonic source is mult'd (sent to both channels) and the relative levels of the two are adjusted using the pan control.  "Stereo balance" is different in that it adjusts the relative levels of two "separate-but-associated" sources (the left and right channels of the stereo source) instead of a single monophonic source.

Modern DAWs offer a choice of various "panning-laws", which varies the shape of the attenuation curves and the levels of each channel where they cross in the center as the source is "faded" from left to right or vice-versa.  That shouldn't matter with regards to stereo balance.

Some unusual and uncommon panning-laws introduce a slight delay in addition to a pure level change as the mono-phonic source is panned across the image.  Such a panning law will introduce a frequency dependant phase difference between channels which may present mono-compatibility issues or phase-interactions if the stereo source is recombined to mono again.  They are analogous to recording using near-spaced microphone configurations verses coincident microphone configs.  But those panning laws are not common, you probably won't come across them unless you try to find them, and they address monophonic source panning, rather than stereo-balance anyway.  I mention them only as a technical disclaimer to explain that panning in certain unusual setups can introduce phase differences, but normally does not.

I always adjust the stereo balance of all my recordings by ear for best subjective effect anyway, so a close sensitivity match between mics is nice to have, but not a deal-breaker.  But if the frequency responses between mics are not well matched, that is a deal-breaker since it is far more difficult to correct.

[yousef]

Many thanks for the excellent reply.

I find it very interesting that you mention the possibility (albeit a rare one) of introducing a slight delay as the prompt to asking this question was noticing that a stereo file that I had "corrected" using the pan pot appeared to have a very slight delay between left and right channels when zoomed right in.

This was a couple of years ago and I can no longer remember what the recording was or which DAW I was using at the time. It's just one of those things that has hummed away at the back of my mind ever since.

I appreciate the detailed response.

[Gutbucket]

Delay panning would only be an option in DAW (where delay is easy to do), but a rather unusual one and certainly wouldn't be the default setting.  It would probably never be seen in an analog mixing console, except for some odd experimental ones.

The shift in timing between waveforms you see when zoomed in closely may be due to the physical spacing between microphones if they were setup as a near-spaced pair or a pair of spaced omnis.  Any sources which weren't in the center will be delayed slightly in reaching the opposite microphone. You shouldn't see that kind of slight waveform time-shift using a coincident microphone configuration or with normally panned (not delayed) mono sources.

[yousef]

The shift in timing between waveforms you see when zoomed in closely may be due to the physical spacing between microphones if they were setup as a near-spaced pair or a pair of spaced omnis.

 

Of course. Simplest solution = most likely = least likely to occur to me.

I'm sure my over-thinking will pay dividends somewhere down the line.

[Gutbucket]

Where?
No worries.
I don't know if any DAWs have that option built-in or not.  I'm sure plugins offer it.  Or do it 'manually' with delays.