Panning rhythm and lead guitar tracks

[SpareMePoseidon]

I have an application where I am concerned about the stereo field and it's balance with the guitar tracks.

The problem is that I have one guitar doing primarily rhythm tracks and the other doing primarily lead parts. when the thirds kick in on the lead parts they come from the guitar that was doing the rhythm tracks to begin with, which makes the mix hefty on the left side.

Would it be wrong to pan the rhythm track to both sides and then center the lead parts? It won't mix the same as the rest of the tracks on the EP. What does everyone else do in a situation like this? Because...

I....IS....CONFUSED....

 

[ahjteam]

try.

 

[Backe]

Yeah, just try! And always track rythm guitars separate from leads, so perhaps 2-4 tracks of rythm and 1-2 tracks of lead and additional guitars for melody. So you don't end up there, when the guys are basicly recording a "live" version of the song.

 

[SpareMePoseidon]

Yeah thats a good point. I'm dumb.

 

[gabriel g.]

Rythm L
Rythm R
kead C

done

 

[DanLights]

Rythm L
Rythm R
kead C

done

Basically that´s it, you could play with the lead panning if you want, but rhythms should always be panned to the sides, at least two rhythm takes. It doesn´t matter how the band does it live, you´re not doing a live recording.

 

[donimoines]

experiment with what you think sounds good & works
i generally go with Rhythm L, Rhythm R, all leads centre aswell

 

[pikachu69]

I have just been listening to the Beatles White album and I tell you if they can have doubled LEAD vocals panned hard right and left and BV's in the center, or drums panned hard right with an extra snare track panned hard left, guitars are panned wildly different for every song etc then there should be no rules for you either.

I agree, try it ALL out!

Why does it have to be L R C? I thought there where no rules in engineering?
This is a rhetorical question, please don't insult me for saying that but it just seems that (in metal at least) that there are too many RULES and if we don't do it like the last guy did then its wrong. I have stopped enjoying mixing metal as much as I did as it is more about formula than creativity now. I feel limited going into a mix thinking ok, I have 3 amp choices or it won't sound metal. Must make everything un humanly tight, drum samples and lots of them, tons of distortion on everything, oh and don't forget to KILL the Dynamics, Transients are fuckers!

I am over exaggerating to make a point so again don't slam me for that comment. I just feel I spend more time looking at a screen in silence (editing etc) than I do actually mixing the track. Whereas if I am mixing a blues/jazz or even rock piece there is almost no time spent in silence, just listening and mixing what is there to come up with something unique each and every time.

Don't be afraid to try something different just to avoid being told off by some of the bullies round here

Just my 2 cents.
Cheers.

 

[guitarguru777]

whats a kead?

 

[jimwilbourne]

^ well said

Do what sounds right to you.

 

[SpareMePoseidon]

whats a kead?

+1

 

[ahjteam]

I have just been listening to the Beatles White album

...but the difference is that this back in the days when they didn't know what the fuck to do with stereo. now we know.

 

[AerialThesis]

...but the difference is that this back in the days when they didn't know what the fuck to do with stereo. now we know.

They panned stuff in what you believe is an awkward setting, but they did it so they didn't have to EQ much out of the tracks.

(everything was simply panned first to make it fit somewhere where it would cause less threat to the mix before using any EQ)

In Metal tought, it would be hard to have the drums on the right, the bass on the left and the guitars in middle and still sound punchy and full.

 

[pikachu69]

"...but the difference is that this back in the days when they didn't know what the fuck to do with stereo. now we know."

@ ahjteam: I really have to disagree with you. It may have been relatively new but they knew how to use it. Hendrix also took advantage of stereo and was not afraid to break away from the norm.

I am finding it hard to say this as I respect you and what you do very much and my recordings pail in comparison to yours, but thats also why I was some what shocked to hear you say that.

The recordings of those times may not have been as HI FI as ours today, but there were valid reasons for that, the average playback system of the time being one of them. Maintaining mono compatibility being another.

Music was treated more like art for a time where there were no rules, so panning was on open playing field. Now, pick almost any metal record and you can almost list what gear was used and where it was placed in the mix and even maybe who created the samples! it happens on this very forum.
Where is the fun in painting by numbers?

Don't get me wrong I LOVE METAL, and I enjoy mixing metal, but all the editing, sampling and whatnot seems so UN creative to me and I find it hard to move past that point and I run out of enthusiasm for the process.
I don't have this trouble with other styles.

This is very much my own opinion of coarse, and I fully appreciate and admire the work of metal engineers, but I think it would be more fun if there were less 'rules' to follow. To be told a certain type of panning is simply wrong...

 

[DanLights]

Pikachu, I understand you're point, but when someone says it isn't right to do a certain panning configuration, it's because it doesn't sound right. If you're mixing metal and you have drums 50% to the right and the bass on the left, it will sound bad, unbalanced, untight, shit, etc. It all depends on the song/genre/band, but if you're doing metal, the heaviness is always a super important factor, and you will never sound heavy with bass on one side and drums on the other. Or any other configuration.

 

[pikachu69]

@Danlights:
Thanks for the reply and what you say makes alot of sense.
I was not necessarily suggesting that we should change the way its done as it is tried and true in metal and it does help define the sound of the style, I was just commenting on the fact that ahjteam's comment sounded a little to me like he was saying they simply didn't know what they were doing back in the day as apposed to pioneering the art form for us today and the process we now take seems less like art and more like hard work.
Metal seems to be one of the few styles where any experimentation outside the norm isn't that acceptable to its listeners.
Hope this clears it up.
Cheers.