LCR Mixing - The Art of Mixing Without Mixing?

[hardtoe]

Now that I have a Bruce Lee like title to draw you all in, I am wondering you thoughts on this subject - I am aware that certain mixers live by this rule while others could seem to care less and a third moderate school of "most things ya, but not always" heads up the middle (kind of like politics:D).

I have only really started thinking about this recently when a mix I had mastered came back with an totally crap sound in the "big" chorus due to masking and the effect the limiting had on mix - it sounded ok really dynamic like the intital mix, but did not like getting manhandled at all, and the flaws became much more obvious after mastering (not the ME's fault at all).

So, I discovered a thread on the womb where many big name mixers were talking about LCR mixing - "what's this?" I though, having never really given this style of working much thought. I had begun my panning, like a lot of newer engineers, trying to fill all the cracks with my fabulous, nuanced horn, lines, bg vox, stacked guitars, etc.

Anyway, I listened to "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun" followed by various Radiohead, Spoon, Micheal Jackson, etc. and low and behold - this shite is everywhere - "did that guitar solo just come totally out of the left speaker" kind of action. The thing is, when it is really well done, you dont even notice - it just sounds huge, clear and present.

So I remixed my crap Chorus, being much more aware of using mainly three positions and guess what - bigger, clearer more fidelity (new version sent off for mastering). I am still have trouble totally committing though - not sure if this is because this is a zen disciplined approach - easy in concept, but difficult to master in practice. It seems like everything has to be just right to balance things and keep the listener undistracted by what is happening (particularly with todays headphone majority).

So (long winded I know...) any tips or insights on making this work - is it all in the pre-production/tracking (to get the equal power balances right) or can you fake it after the fact. I read the Bruce Swedien records a great deal of stuff with spaced pairs / blumlein to get natural depth, so the LCR stuff would be almost automatic during mixing (I noticed trace reverbs opposite of some main elements on the Thriller Album - ie Guit hard L, Tiny Guit Verb on R).

I have been tracking drums using the Recorder man method which is way to wide if hard panned, so I think I may have to try x/y or spaced pairs to make this start to work from the ground up.

Thanks for your thoughts.

[CaptainHook]

I'm LCR 95%->99% of the time. (Stereo micing etc generally being the times where the
perceived placement prob falls inbetween those and is down to mic placement)

Pre-pro/tracking is of course important to every aspect upstream, so yeah i prob do
consider LCR during tracking as i build the monitor balance. I like things to sit during
tracking where the will most likely end up in mix. So making those panning/level
decisions during tracking allows me to make even more informed decisions
that affect what happens later on.
(i'm being subtle about how i prefer to make decisions and commit early on rather
than the 'lets throw everything in and sort it at mix' approach :p)

I definitely place a huge emphasis on getting things to sound right at tracking so that mixing
is a relatively quick/simple process. If i did my job right in tracking, mixing is easy.
If the artist/band do their job right, tracking is easy. :D

[jdubdrums]

I will humbly disagree with the idea that recorderman panned hard left and right is too wide. When I get my placement together, I pan the mic's out to each side, then use a goniometer to put the snare in the center. The kick drum leans to the right, but the close mic on that drum corrects this.

The floor Tom is in the right side, the middle tom leans a bit towards the right, and the high Tom leans toward the left or the center, providing a bit of stereo movement as one moves around the drumkit.

I can post an example if you are getting different results.

[hardtoe]

Please do - could be my technique needs improvement...

[jdubdrums]

OK...here's a clip...24/44.1 stereo wav...sounds like a drunk falling down stairs, but you get to hear the stereo imaging for the purpose of the discussion.

go to:

http://public.me.com/jdubdrums

and grab "overheads.wav"

since the max file size for a wav is 1.91 megs (LMBO)

[hardtoe]

Thanks a lot - I seem to be getting similar results to you, but it seems too wide for me (all those wide toms seem kind of distracting for a mix) - am I just an LCR pussy? (where's the kitty emoticon). I am throwing up some drums I tracked which I DID NOT hard pan in the mix (though they are hard panned here for you pleasure). Should I change my ways??? Anyone else care to chime in???

[hardtoe]

Here is how I actually panned them (about 35% of the wide way)

This sounds better to me?

[Sandyrb]

I definitely place a huge emphasis on getting things to sound right at tracking

Man, I am SO with you on this (as my rants in other threads will doubtless confirm :) ).

Cheers,

[hardtoe]

Me too - am I tracking my overheads well for LCR? Give me some Sasktatoon sound love Sandy:D

[Sandyrb]

Me too - am I tracking my overheads well for LCR? Give me some Saskatoon sound love Sandy :D

K, I listened to the sample and I liked the sound. It thought it was very 'brash' and in-ya-face but without being unpleasant. A lot of bands would like that approach.

From a technical perspective I noticed that the snare drum was quite right-side precedent / dominant. Well, let's say a little more than I would be comfortable with. In the second sample this isn't as obvious but of course the trade-off is a loss of stereo width.

Can you please explain how you're tracking your overheads? I nearly always use the Glyn Johns methodology although I guess last year I went through a phase of trying single-point overheads with an AKG C426B. It sounded okay but was a PITA to get right and the stereo was nowhere near spacious enough for me. I'm a fan of big stereo so my panning is usually pretty wide.

I have to say that the C426B doesn't sound as nice as the old C34 I used to work with years ago, but whatcha gonna do? In the perfect world the house across the street would be a public one, right? ;)

In the words, if memory serves and with which I do not necessarily agree, of Shelly Yakus; "Listen kid, there's left, right and center. Everything else is crap." :)

Cheers,

[jdubdrums]

Thanks a lot - I seem to be getting similar results to you, but it seems too wide for me (all those wide toms seem kind of distracting for a mix) - am I just an LCR pussy? (where's the kitty emoticon). I am throwing up some drums I tracked which I DID NOT hard pan in the mix (though they are hard panned here for you pleasure). Should I change my ways??? Anyone else care to chime in???

What records are you listening to? Wide panning and stereo placement is pretty commonplace...

[hardtoe]

My opinion of my drum panning isn't coming from any analysis of other mixes, just what seems right to me.

I have been using the "Glyn Johns" with a Rode NT2-A (large diaphragm condenser) over the snare in cardioid (about 3.5 feet up give or take) and a Rode NT3 (Hypercardioid - medium diaphragm condenser) pointing in from the right side, a few inches above the floor tom, pointing at the hi-hat across the centre of the snare (same distance as Left OH from center of snare). Fairly typical tech, unless I am off somewhere? (except for the slightly unusual mic choices)

I also have some Josephson C42's (small diaphragm condensers) that I have not used much yet for drums, but I could also do the Glyn or x/y with these.

My other option is to use a spaced pair of Fatheads (fairly middy ribbons) or a mono ShinyBox 46MXL (long diaphragm ribbon - with a Lundahl transformer) which sounds more balanced and open then the Fatheads.

I haven't had much chance to experiment with these alternate methods yet, so I am just trying to figure out what most people are using in prep for LCR mixing.

For Example - does a mono OH = to much interference for the Vocals???

I may just have to get in a drummer who feels like spending a day trying stuff out!

Cheers

Orion

[Sandyrb]

I also have some Josephson C42's (small diaphragm condensers) that I have not used much yet for drums, but I could also do the Glyn or x/y with these.

I've tried the C42s for drum overheads and they worked out pretty well. They're very directional mics, though, so some of the elements of the kit that aren't in their direct path can sound a bit strange. Very wide stereo when using the Glyn Johns method. They have a really smooth top end that I love, but are somewhat lacking in the lower mids and bottom - which one probably expects from a small cap like that.

Give 'em a try. :)

Cheers,

[jdubdrums]

Mono drums are cool, too...very punchy and solid sounding.

[hardtoe]

Ya, I like mono drums, but I am a little chicken to track only mono as I might hate myself later (what engineer hasn't screwed themself over??? I think that I would do this as well as a stereo set-up (I have used lots of mono drums in mixes before just by only using the Left of my Glyn John set-up.)

Thanks for the tips on the C-42's Sandy, I will try with your comments on the direct focus of them in mind - I hadn't actually noticed that yet, but I did get an awesome electric guitar sound from across the room with one, so I guess it was mostly getting the direct sound of the amp! That's actually pretty handy as they can act a little more like a directional dynamic with the sound of a condenser. The balance issue for my overhead may have to do with the fact that I am tracking in a fairly unusually shaped, smaller room, which doesn't allow for much experimentation with the kit placement - I guess I just need to work it until it becomes "my" drum sound. (or I could think of it like a big drum booth :D)

[Sandyrb]

Thanks for the tips on the C-42's

You're very welcome. Actually I was wondering what else you have available for mics? I mean, what choices you have in terms of drum overheads. Does your studio have a website / gear list?

Cheers,

[seaneldon]

I've tried the C42s for drum overheads and they worked out pretty well. They're very directional mics, though, so some of the elements of the kit that aren't in their direct path can sound a bit strange. Very wide stereo when using the Glyn Johns method.

Point them dead over the left and right of the drums, one mic "somewhere between" the floor and the ride, the other mic "somewhere between" the rack tom and hats. Big difference.

I don't like them in X/Y because their off-axis response is rather colored and weird (this can WORK, too, especially on bright acoustic guitars...Taylors, Ta-kaka-mine), as Sandy notes. You'll have to move the mics a bit more to get the kick and snare in the phantom center with the "dead over" method, but it's well worth the work.

I do not find they lack low-end. Compared to a lot of small diaphragm condensers, I find they have a little more, actually! Depends on where you point them. btheadbtheadbthead

[Ryan Slowey]

I've only started [mostly] adhering to LCR mixing in the past year or so, and I'm finding that it yields good results. The interesting thing, in my case, is that I'm panning things less now than I had in the past, and spending more time really thinking about what gets panned.

I love mixes that are mostly in mono, with just a few choice elements wide-panned.

The only things that I occassionally pan less than hard L-R, are toms, and OHs when using a Glynn Johns type set up. GJ OHs sound unnaturally wide to me, so I usually bring them back towards the middle a bit, until I hear the kick/snare focus.

Also, I agree with Sean, RE: C42s. Outstanding mics. I've had exceptional results with mine, in both coincident and spaced pair OH setups.

[Benny Grotto]

I got into mixing LCR working on older desks whose pan pots sounded like ass (namely, a Neve 8024 and an old Tweed console).

These desks both have 8 groups: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and L-R (or 7-8 on the Neve, which goes to the stereo buss). Groups 1-6 are normalized to feed the stereo buss, and are often used for sub mixes or parallel processing.

Anyway, the fella that showed me the LCR ropes would send pretty much everything to L-R (ie - 7-8), either hard-panned or up the middle. He would also send things to the groups, but if he needed something panned in a bit, it'd get sent to just group 3, which would pull it a bit to the left, or group 4, which would pull it a bit to the right. In other words, let's say the guitar solo wasn't working center, or hard right. To stick it in-between, it'd get assigned to 7-8 (or L-R), which would put it dead center, then get assigned to Group 4, which would pull it a bit to the right.

Anyway, that approach is (in my brain at least) LCR as well, and it offers a functional means of working around the inherent limitations of more strict LCR.

Since most of my day-to-day work takes place on a desk with pan knobs that cannot be disengaged, I don't adhere strictly to LCR, nor even to the LCR variation I noted above, but tend towards rhythm section in LCR, most vocals in LCR, but with a few occasional bits here and there panned in-between.

Yow...I've got way more thoughts on this topic (it's one I'm quite fond of!), but the pizza just showed up, and i just got poured a shot of Knob Creek...so it'll hafta wait.

[hardtoe]

Hey guys, thanks for the input - I will try out Sean's placements for the C42's & see what I get. I also enjoyed Benny's overview of the technical reasons that many boards made engineers mix LCR - even thought these limitations aren't the same ITB (where I mix), the way that mixers overcame these issues and even made them a virtue is quite inspiring.

I tried some more LCR mixing yesterday, and I added some hard panned verbs in the opposite channel from the instrument (ie - guit hard left, guit verb hard right). I have noticed that many classic hard panned recordings have just a hint of the ghost if what is happening with the other side, which helps to gel things a lot. It helped with clarity and depth, so I will dig into this some more. Not sure if the classics are hard panned verb or real stereo ambience - probably a mix of both).

Sandy - I dont have an official website as I have still never really officially opened. For the last year and an half I have had enough business from bands I know to keep me busy. I figure I will start to advertise when things slow down. You can see my studio to get a sense of what I am working with in a thread about my acoustic treatment at (dare I link to GS!):

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/435079-diffusion-final-step.html

(my studio is called SoulSound)

I have a small, but very useable collections of mics, which can be pressed into service on the kit. These Include:

Rode NT2-A, K2, NT3

Shure SM57, Beta57, SM58, SM7

Josephson C42 (2)

Fatheads (2)

ShinyBox 46MXL


Preamps:

Thermionic Culture Rooster
EH 12ay7
RNP
Ensemble with Motu 8-pre for more channels

Cheers

Orion

[Benny Grotto]

A few months ago, I started an LCR thread in Gearslutz that got rolling pretty good. It's (oddly enough) in the Hip Hop Forum, but there's lotsa non-genre-specific ideas kickin' around. It'd definitely be worth checkin out.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/rap-hip-hop-engineering-production/411989-lcr-mixing.html

[hardtoe]

Thanks Benny, I have seen the GS one as well - just trying to dig up as much as possible - there is lots of great info there (just wait for a new wave of LCR Hip Hop!).

[hardtoe]

Oh, and on the somewhat off topic question of OH's, do you guys think I should be aiming for using my RNP's for the OH's and the Rooster for Kik & snare or the other way around?

I was getting very usable drum sounds with my lower end NT2-A / NT3 / RNP recorderman set-up - I actually though that my most recent recording was worse using the C42's as OH's with the Rooster on a medium pentode setting in the recorderman setup again. I think this is just a growing pain, and I am hoping Sean's "two straight down" method will sort me out. I do wonder if a solid state preamp will be a little "snappier" while the tube pre might be a little smooth in terms of quick transients???

I also am starting to appreciate the cleaner sound of the Rooster's "triode/mild attitude" setting. At first I went balls out Pentode crunch on everytrack for a song and it turned out pretty good, but just REALLY bright - It is defiantely better to have the contrast with only a few elements with poke.

ohhh the problems of using a new toy when tracking.....

[Mixwell]

Oh, and on the somewhat off topic question of OH's, do you guys think I should be aiming for using my RNP's for the OH's and the Rooster for Kik & snare or the other way around?

I was getting very usable drum sounds with my lower end NT2-A / NT3 / RNP recorderman set-up - I actually though that my most recent recording was worse using the C42's as OH's with the Rooster on a medium pentode setting in the recorderman setup again. I think this is just a growing pain, and I am hoping Sean's "two straight down" method will sort me out. I do wonder if a solid state preamp will be a little "snappier" while the tube pre might be a little smooth in terms of quick transients???

I also am starting to appreciate the cleaner sound of the Rooster's "triode/mild attitude" setting. At first I went balls out Pentode crunch on everytrack for a song and it turned out pretty good, but just REALLY bright - It is defiantely better to have the contrast with only a few elements with poke.

ohhh the problems of using a new toy when tracking.....

Kick - Left side of Rooster
Snare - Left Side of RNP
Snare OH-Right Side of Rooster
Ride Side OH-Right Side of RNP.

Now, Don't listen to me, and trust your gut.

[hardtoe]

Thanks for the smartass answer Adam.

I will, or course, listen for myself - I was just hoping for some for some input from someone with more experience than me, as my "upgrade" seems to currently be a "downgrade" for drum OH's, which does not seem right - I dont actually have a kit in my studio, so I have to get it right when I am doing a recording for a client which doesn't always leave a lot of room to experiment.

At the Methlab, you guys seem to have put in a lot of time "trying shit out" which could trickle down to the rest of us.

I know what has sounded good here in the past - I am not looking for you to replace my ears, just give me some tips bthead

[Tomasz]

Oh, and on the somewhat off topic question of OH's, do you guys think I should be aiming for using my RNP's for the OH's and the Rooster for Kik & snare or the other way around?

As Adam points out, Only your ears can answer that, however I'd first try the rooster on the OH's and the RNP's on kick and snare. While I don't have a rooster to testify about, I frequently use MP-2NV's on kick and snare and Avalon 737's on the OH's and dig the smooth sounds on the OH's and punch on kick and snare. since your OH's I presume are to capture the magic of the "kit" as a whole the rooster would seem to have more "tweakability". But again my opinion is just that: an opinion, and I'd experiment with either direction.

[hardtoe]

Ya, this was kind've my first instinct as well - I have done it this way once already (so I could eq the OH's), but I think I can tweak it to get better results - thanks for the insight...

I am just looking for another engineer's perspective, not some kind of formula. Much like what would have happened in a real "mentor" type of studio setting - the more experienced guy tells you how he would do it and then you can you this info to help you decide what works as your own method. I would hope that a basic tenet on this site is that people who contribute are not just posers looking for some non-existent "magic" technique, but working recordists who already know about "using their ears". Surely this is what this site is all about???

[Mixwell]

Kick - Left side of Rooster
Snare - Left Side of RNP
Snare OH-Right Side of Rooster
Ride Side OH-Right Side of RNP.

I wasn't kidding! Try it!!! You maybe missing some interesting tonality somewhere, so taking some "risk during flight" is a good call. I only suggested something no one else did, because it could be cool and worth a shot. If its sucks I will take full responsibility for the suckage.

[hardtoe]

Ok, maybe it's not so out there...I was already getting my best sounds out of a weirdo setup (left oh:large diaphragm cardioid condenser / right oh:medium diaphragm hyper-cardioid condenser), so I guess that nothing should be ruled out.

Sorry for taking home the oversensitive engineer of the year award, I should have looked deeper into you post - but I'm just so damn artistic that I cant help myself...

(Trying to find a good emoticon, but they're just so fruity - how about this one)

btheadbtheadbtheadbtheadbtheadbtheadbtheadbtheadbt headbtheadbthead

Now that has some class!

[ears2thesky]

Using M/S for overheads I get L,C,and R. I pan toms across the center, but not all the way to the sides. In my home studio I use one mic splitting two rack toms panned midway left and the floor tom panned midway right so I have decent spread but plenty of energy in the center.

[blackdirt]

i've been glyn'n it up for most of this year... i find it works best with drummers who don't lean on the cymbals so much... otherwise i feel handcuffed when i want to collapse the width a bit - it gets a little phasey in an ouch! way, not a rolling thunder review way... y'know?

it is nice to not have to "position" the drums artificially... although sometimes that is fun as well...
__________________________________________________ _______tom
_______________________________________________tom
________________________________snare
______________________tom
______!!!!!!!!!!crash

but i have to say... i'm damn impressed with the sound of those drums that lanois got on that, uggghhh, dub thing (that is not dub... :confused:)... a ribbon in front, 57 off the snare, some other guy firing across the kit towards the floor tom...

anyway... shhh... here are some very quick instrumental mixes of a band i had up recently - 16 songs demoed in 3 days, live... some of this stuff will eventually be recut / refined for release... but it is an example of some washy sounds cymbal sounds... at least to my ears...

one (http://www.blackdirtstudio.com/squish/teenagequickmix.wav)
two (http://www.blackdirtstudio.com/squish/hookersinstr.wav)
three (http://www.blackdirtstudio.com/squish/stereolim.mp3) (an mp3, this one)

[phrenology]

simple solution: stereo overhead single mic. i use an SF12. killer sound, totally natural stereo imaging, mono compatable.