Panning Algorithm

[Murf]

Hi All, I am trying to work out what panning formula the 14:2 mixer uses, but I am not quite sure.
According to this guide: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/icm-onlin ... index.html
I would have expected it to be the "constant power" method, but I can't replicate it with that.
If anyone knows what algorithm Reason sues in that RE please share
Thanks,
Murf.

[Murf]

Ohhh i managed to fudge a linear algorithm with a strange gain factor that exactly mimics 14:2 mixer's panning curve:

Code: Select all

inline void getPanValues(TJBox_Float64 pan, TJBox_Float64* left, TJBox_Float64* right) { // -1.0 -> 1.0
	*left   = 1.3333333f * (1.0f - pan); // 2.66666f -> 0.0
	*right  = 1.3333333f * (1.0f + pan); // 0.0 -> 2.66666f
}

[selig]

I believe they use constant gain “balance” control, which is -6dB center and pretty much not used anywhere else I’m aware of outside of Reason. SSL uses -4.5dB center, many use -3dB center (constant power) and a few (like the Reason SSL) uses +3dB center.
I really never liked the pan law on the 14:2 etc. in Reason, and was one of the reasons I incorporated more preferable pan laws in Selig Gain!

[Murf]

I believe they use constant gain “balance” control, which is -6dB center and pretty much not used anywhere else I’m aware of outside of Reason. SSL uses -4.5dB center, many use -3dB center (constant power) and a few (like the Reason SSL) uses +3dB center.
I really never liked the pan law on the 14:2 etc. in Reason, and was one of the reasons I incorporated more preferable pan laws in Selig Gain!

Ok Thanks Selig, i might use a more realistic one as well. Probably constant power or something like SSL
Murf

[bitley]

Oh so in some of my more heavily panned arrangements I have then accentuated volumes on things by panning them out? I certainly noticed it at times and found it amusing so I lowered those after panning them but the arrangements came out nicely sounding to my ears with lots of presence for lack of a better word. A track I made called 1982 had lots of it.

[Murf]

Oh so in some of my more heavily panned arrangements I have then accentuated volumes on things by panning them out? I certainly noticed it at times and found it amusing so I lowered those after panning them but the arrangements came out nicely sounding to my ears with lots of presence for lack of a better word. A track I made called 1982 had lots of it.

Nice

[dioxide]

a few (like the Reason SSL) uses +3dB center.

This is pretty weird. Any insight into why they went with this?

Some interesting points here. I didn't know that there are reasons for choosing different settings depending on where your music might be heard:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advi ... should-use

[selig]

a few (like the Reason SSL) uses +3dB center.

This is pretty weird. Any insight into why they went with this?

Some interesting points here. I didn't know that there are reasons for choosing different settings depending on where your music might be heard:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advi ... should-use

Some other DAWs, like Logic, offer this “+3dB” pan law option as well, and as I’ve pointed out it can potentially lead to clipping the output if levels are normalized to 0dBFS (Which I never do, but still…) since there is positive gain applied (same as if you raised the fader above 0dB with a fully normalized signals).

This article doesn’t include Reason (of course, doh!), but covers the fact that there are MANY ways (some interesting ones, especially the “0dB” options) to create a panning circuit:
https://www.admiralbumblebee.com/music/ ... logic-1047

[Murf]

a few (like the Reason SSL) uses +3dB center.

This is pretty weird. Any insight into why they went with this?

Some interesting points here. I didn't know that there are reasons for choosing different settings depending on where your music might be heard:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advi ... should-use

Nice find, thanks!