It looks my mix has no enough distribution by panorama. It looks too concentrated near vertical line

[AMusicPlayerPlus]

Friends,

It looks my mix has no enough distribution by panorama. It looks too concentrated near vertical line, as illustrated in screenshot below:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fRlJzDrw9s06oNJKWRL74wmOwOcVAFbY?usp=sharing

Also I place there actually the mix, so you can understand more precisely my question.

This mix has a few tracks.

Some of them are mono, and placed in different position of pan, for example, L30, R30, L14, R7, etc.

Some of tracks are stereo.

Why it happens that the total mix is too concentrated and not spread on panorama?

Which plug-in (Cubase 10 Pro) should I use to make a wider distribution by panorama?

Please advise.

Thank you!

[DanDan]

Mixing on Headphones or Speakers that are too far apart will cause this

[Drew Stephenson]

30L to 30R is not a very wide spread. I typically go from 90 to 90, others here suggest a full 100-100.
Crank those pan pots out wider and see what happens.

[Wonks]

Pan wider for the mono tracks and the stereo spread will definitely be wider. A stereo track doesn't mean that the content will automatically spread wide across the stereo field, it all depends on how it was recorded or the contents created. And then sometimes a stereo track is too wide and it needs narrowing.

But listen with your ears, not the stereo meter. If the sounds are in the right place for the music, then don't worry. Sometimes having everything fairly central is just what's needed. And sometimes big and wide is what you need.

But if you want wide, then you need to pan wide, it's what the pan pots are there for.

[Wonks]

People should note that the MultiScope picture the OP linked to is from the Steinberg help page for the plug-in and is not an example from the actual recording.

[The Elf]

This isn't a problem to be cured with a plug-in - just get busy with the pan controls!

You have an entire L/R playing field provided for you between the speakers - I say use it, rather than arbitrarily deciding that the last few percent of pan are somehow off-limits.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Why it happens that the total mix is too concentrated and not spread on panorama?

It certainly is narrow.

Here's a screen-grab from an RME vectorscope showing the actual track, and it never gets any wider than this:

If you listen to the stereo difference signal (which reveals the stuff extending to the sides of the stereo image) the loudest thing in it is the weedy synth string bed, and that's not faded up far anyway. The slightly panned harpsichord-like twiddles appear in there too, but not very high because they're not panned very wide.

If you want a wider, more impactful stereo image you are going to need to get a lot braver and deliberate with the panning of those occasional sources that pop up occasionally in the mix.

So I'd push the harsichord-ish sounds out much wider, and you could make much more of the marimba-like elements too, leaving the centre clear for the flute lead, bass and drums -- although the cymbals could also go much wider.

I'd also be tempted to spread out the pseudo-brass parts with different parts on each side (try recording individual lines and pan them, rather than just whole block chords, for example).

You could also place a mono reverb of widely panned sources on the opposite side to the source itself to aid the impression of width. And spatially spread the parts which are playing musically against each other out to opposite sides. Don't be afraid to pan 100% left/right.

[soundproofed bob]

I typically go from 90 to 90, others here suggest a full 100-100.

100 is too wide, 90 seems more like a good choice. Of course if a song really needs it, one can pan 100/100. But that's more rare case I think. If you pan mono source like that, you'll get to the edge indeed, too far.

[The Elf]

I genuinely don't understand why people are squeamish about that last 10% of panning!

I've never had a mix rejected, or even questioned, for sounding 'too wide'.

[CS70]

Use the full range, Luke!

[Hugh Robjohns]

100 is too wide, 90 seems more like a good choice. Of course if a song really needs it, one can pan 100/100. But that's more rare case I think. If you pan mono source like that, you'll get to the edge indeed, too far.

It all depends on the musical context and personal preferences, obviously, but 'cardinal panning' where most sources are panned fully left/right or centred is a very common and much-used technique amongst a lot of highly regarded and very successful mix engineers.

[Drew Stephenson]

It just sounds a bit funny to me on headphones. Almost like that part is being played in another room off to the side with the door open rather than in the same room.
And since so much of my listening is done on headphones, and it really costs nothing to pan at 90/95, then that's what I do.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I don't disagree with you... Cardinal panning doesn't suit every situation -- at least, it doesn't for me. And the compatibility issue between headphone and speaker replay is certainly a factor to consider...

But a lot depends on the context, the musical arrangement, the number and type of sources and much more besides.

[Luke W]

I genuinely don't understand why people are squeamish about that last 10% of panning!

Agreed. I can understand trying it, deciding against it and pulling it back in a bit, but I'm not sure why anyone would want to avoid it as a rule. It's not like the sound is going to fall out of the speaker!

[The Elf]

I have no problem with anyone using their ears and deciding what works for them. It's this idea that there's something implicity wrong with hard panning that puzzles me.

[ManFromGlass]

I like to put doubled or closely doubled instruments at 100% and the occasional barely heard ear candy. I think I read in these pages that it can be effective to hard pan a track and have it’s reverb hard panned on the other side. For parts that repeat like shakers I like to slowly pan them from side to side if the piece is long enough.