Panning

[earlwgreen]

Hey guys, hope you all had a safe 4th.

I've just gotten back to working with GOP and am trying to find out how to get Sonar to tell GOP to pan.

I've read the manual but it is for the the earlier Kontakt player and I'm using the Kontakt 2 player.

What I want to do is change the panning from the mixer in Sonar. There are many times I want to change where the instruments are coming from.

Thanks for any help!

[reberclark]

I believe it was audio guru and all-'round good guy DPDAN advised me, rightly so, to center all of the KP2 pan settings and then render the audio out that way (whether mono or stereo). THEN pan the resulting audio (not the MIDI) in SONAR.

Additionally I was talking to someone in the SONAR forum and they suggested using the surround panner in a 2 speaker mode (actually 2.1) They said it seemed like the pan was more accurate or something. I played with it a bit and really couldn't tell much difference but maybe I didn't mess with it enough.

I've had very good success with DPDAN's methods. Find him on these boards and ask him directly. He and Randy Bowser are my "go-to" guys when I have questions like this.

Good luck!

[Skysaw]

Panning works fine in Sonar with GPO and Kontakt 2. However, it is switched off by default in every instrument. You need to go into Kontakt and go to the instrument options (don't have my DAW in front of me to confirm the options name) for every loaded instance of an instrument. There is a page with check boxes that include "allow MIDI controlled panning" or something to that effect. Check the box, and Sonar's track panning settings (including pan envelopes) will work fine.

What I ended up doing was resaving every instrument after making this adjustment, so that when I load in new instances, the setting is already where I want it.

If you still have trouble, I'll look for the exact dialog box and wording when I'm in my studio this evening.

[rbowser-]

Thanks for the nod, Reegs - I do what I can!

Oh--Skysaw joined in right as I pushed the "Reply" button.

OK then you're getting good input, earlwgreen. I think maybe there's a basic part of your question that hasn't been addressed yet though.

To go over what's been said - in case there's any confusion:

Reegs is passing on DPDAN's good advice to pan instruments to center in KP2, then after recording your MIDI tracks to Audio, you have signals which can be panned wherever you want in your project.

I thought maybe you weren't sure where the panning controls are in Sonar. In the mixer, or the channel strip for each track which appears at the left in the Track View, for every Audio track is a panning control in the center. You can move that right to left as needed. If you ever have need for an instrument to move during a piece--(rare--but sometimes needed, especially in pop music) - like everything else on those audio channel strips, you can right click and choose the option to record automation for the control.

But what Skysaw is talking about is MIDI panning, which is different. He's one of the folks who like to do all that sort of control in the MIDI realm. So even though he's not at his DAW, he sketched in what he does - The options for KP2 instruments to be controlled by traditional cc7 for volume and cc10 for panning has to be turned on in KP2. Then the MIDI strips in Sonar will respond to the controls. That's certainly one way to do it - A bit more complicated perhaps, and the rendered audio will be limited by the settings already done in the MIDI realm.

I'm with Dan in finding it much more straight forward to keep panning and the various volume levels for mixing in the Audio realm. I routinely set my Sonar screen so that I don't even see the MIDI channels in my mixer, since they're doing nothing--It's the Audio channels I'm interested in, and those are the controls I use.

Oh my---I think I made things confusing. - This thread just jumped off into two different directions, talking about two different things--MIDI panning and Audio panning--I felt I needed to explain that there's a difference, since it was brought up.

----Check back with us if we've muddled it for you or not. :)

Randy

[Skysaw]

Both methods are perfectly valid, and I have complete respect for the audio panning camp.

One reason I do it in MIDI is that with some of my less traditional music, I use the pan in a more creative fashion, and like to use automated track envelopes to control spatial movement, since they are very easy to adjust while you are putting a piece together.

The other plus for me is due to my workflow. I like to do a little mixing during the composition process, though I am likely in a tiny minority in this respect. I like the freedom of being able to tweak anything I like instantly without freezing tracks or doing track renders in-between, but that also means you have to have a fairly powerful machine to run everything in real time.

To sum up, it's a matter of taste, but you have two viable options here.

[rbowser-]

Howdy, Jamie - Absolutely right, that both approaches are equally valid.

I used to do all my panning in MIDI, and that was when I was still working with hardware synths and the basic concept was to have "virtual tracks" playing along with analog tracks of vocals, guitars, live piano etc. None of my MIDI was recorded to audio in those days. All effects and mixing elements like volume control and panning were done strictly through MIDI and went straight to the master 2-track.

It was when I finally transitioned into using computers that I realized I was interested in developing audio tracks from my MIDI players, so that I end up with audio tracks just like any engineer would who has recorded an ensemble of live musicians. And so, following that model, my approach has been to record dry, bare bones tracks via MIDI input, and then do all the other things, panning included, in the Audio realm.

BUT---oh man, I hope this isn't confusing things for you, earlwgreen, - Jamie, I'm not sure you realize that the things you listed as reasons you like to do it in MIDI can also be done via Audio before any tracks are actually rendered to wave files.

"...like to use automated track envelopes to control spatial movement, since they are very easy to adjust while you are putting a piece together..."

That can be done on the "empty" audio tracks which are providing the audio outs for the soft synths. I prefer to do envelope work on a wave file where I can actually See all the hills and valleys of the sound, but a lot of people do Audio automation right there on the blank soft synth audio track before they bounce to wave files.

Get this - I hadn't ever used MIDI envelopes in the way you're describing, Jamie, until super recently when someone was talking about them here.

But anyway, - I just wanted to point out that actually what you're doing with the envelopes can be done in audio before rendering!

A bit of "pre-mixing," as you described, can also be done the same way in real time without working only with the MIDI data. Interesting hm?

As you can see, Earl - as with everything in the home studio world, there are always several ways to accomplish things. Hope you got the basics about panning though, since that was your question?

Randy

[Skysaw]

That can be done on the "empty" audio tracks which are providing the audio outs for the soft synths. I prefer to do envelope work on a wave file where I can actually See all the hills and valleys of the sound, but a lot of people do Audio automation right there on the blank soft synth audio track before they bounce to wave files.

It's a good point, but this still puts a damper on my workflow, since I like to group a few instruments together in one instance and pan them individually. I would need a separate instance for every single instrument for that level of control, and I find that bothersome. For example, I always use only one instance for flutes and piccolo, but pan each slightly differently. I sometimes will even group all flutes and clarinets into one instance, putting all oboes and bassoons into another.

Or maybe I'm missing something?

[reberclark]

Thanks for the nod, Reegs - I do what I can!

Well, I can accept the new name, but I think someone's already using it!:)

[Hippie]

As you can see, Earl - as with everything in the home studio world, there are always several ways to accomplish things.

Randy

and then there is how I do it :p :D which I will not go into at this time just because. ~|

[rbowser-]

Well, I can accept the new name, but I think someone's already using it!:)
LOL! ARrrrgh--Sorry Reber--Reebs, Reegs - I KNEw who I was talking to, my typing fingers didn't connect with what I meant. Don't you hate when that happens? ~|

And hello again, Jamie--oh man, did I get THat name right? I think so!

You ended your last post with, "...or maybe I'm missing something?..."

Yeah, - I see you are, but I'm not sure what it is you're missing. Let me quote the rest and try to answer:

"...It's a good point, but this still puts a damper on my workflow, since I like to group a few instruments together in one instance and pan them individually. I would need a separate instance for every single instrument for that level of control, and I find that bothersome. For example, I always use only one instance for flutes and piccolo, but pan each slightly differently. I sometimes will even group all flutes and clarinets into one instance, putting all oboes and bassoons into another..."

Working with audio the way I've been talking about--either the audio tracks carrying the soft synth signals, or audio tracks holding rendered wave forms - that doesn't effect anything you're talking about there.

I load my KP2 instances up to 16 and then add more as needed. Separate control for every instrument. I understand you want to group instruments of a group into one KP2--OK--I group them inside the Sonar mixer to accomplish the same thing.

But this isn't correct at all that you would need to use a separate KP2 for each instrument - !

OOOOKAY---I think we're back into the KP2 confusion which has been covered on a number of threads recently. It sounds like you're having your instruments in KP2 all squeezing into one audio out--when there are 16 stereo channels available. The way you're working, you're unable to change the balance of your groups in Sonar, because they're all on one audio channel! Oh no.

Each instrument is assigned its own stereo out--and then those KP2 channels have individual matching channels in Sonar. ANd as I hope you can see, that would mean you have total control over everything.

I could go on--But if I'm correct, and you don't have your KP2 configured correctly, I'll look for the in-depth thread about all this that came up in the last month.

Randy

[Skysaw]

Thanks for the clarification, Randy.

Yes, I suppose I could use the multiple outs more effectively, but with sometimes 60+ MIDI tracks, I hate having to also worry about controls set on another 60 audio tracks. The point being that if you have volume and/or panning envelopes, they are placed in screen real estate that is already in use. As it is, I am already expanding and contracting tracks way too often for my taste.


The way you're working, you're unable to change the balance of your groups in Sonar, because they're all on one audio channel!

I'm starting to think that our setups are so different we are both misunderstanding how the other is using Sonar and Kontakt. I don't ever use more than small groups of instruments (flutes+clar max) for a stereo output pair, and balancing is never an issue. All of my instrument levels are at my fingertips to control using the track view. I can do this because I set the instruments to accept volume control!

[reberclark]

Hi Jamie, hope you don't mind if I butt in, but Randy clued me in to archiving MIDI tracks (or synth or audio) in SONAR so that only the tracks you are working on are visible, but all info is retained in the file. It was a fantastic insight into working with all those tracks and has made my job much easier.

Randy's and DPDAN's multi-out approach also provides amazing clarity and flexibility in the stereo field.

[Skysaw]

...so that only the tracks you are working on are visible, but all info is retained in the file.

Thanks Reberclark,

I'm aware of this, but the concept of "only the tracks I am working on" doesn't apply to me. I am usually working on all of my tracks simultaneously. I only freeze a track if I am critically low on RAM, which doesn't come up much on my machine.

[rbowser-]

Hello again everybody--What a fun thread.

Reber's last post is about the Track Manger, accessed through either a tool bar icon or "M" on the computer keyboard - You select the tracks you don't need to see.

You said that didn't apply to you, Jamie, but since you're not doing anything with the audio tracks linked to soft synth outs--You could make 60 tracks disappear and leave you a much easier screen to work with - In case you don't already do that.

But I get what you're saying, Jamie. The way you're working makes sense--I understand not wanting yet More on the screen etc. For me, I just have to have each track in Sonar dedicated to a single instrument. Grouping instruments so they share a channel works when you're doing all the MIDI controlling you're doing - But I would go bonkers not being able to separate out each instrument when it comes down to my final mix. At that point I'm dealing only with Audio, all MIDI tracks are both archived and removed from view - and so it's with the Audio controls that I'm working on the balances etc, opposite of what you're doing since you're doing that work via MIDI. I've worked out a theoretical mix via MIDI, but always find there's much room for improvement working with the audio tracks.

And so on!

The point is that either way of working, either primarily in MIDI or primarily in Audio doesn't take more or less screen real estate. Since I don't care so much about the MIDI tracks (Piano Roll View editing can be done even with the track itself hidden)--I can clear those from view and concentrate on Audio. And in your case, you can clear the Audio tracks so you can focus on the MIDI.

I would say the majority of my MIDI work is done via keyboard, volume control via CC1, all the Garritan controls, and editing in PRV - but I do that leaving all relative volumes at default, and setting pans as needed in KP2.

Anyway, I Do understand what you're describing about your work flow, Jamie. Obviously it works great, and sounds good to me.

Poor Earl who started this thread - we've left him behind! Hope to hear from you again, Earl.

Randy

[Skysaw]

Definitely some food for thought here. I may just re-examine my workflow, thanks Randy.

I understand about track view, and in fact, that's my main view, since I don't like the console view. I do have each track dedicated to a single instrument, as you say you do. But what I mean by track is just the MIDI track.


And in your case, you can clear the Audio tracks so you can focus on the MIDI.

Can you explain what you mean by "clear the tracks?" I don't see an easy way to hide/show specific tracks in track view. I can minimize them, but that's all. I suppose I could take all the vst tracks, dump them into one folder, and minimize that folder. Is there a better way?

[rbowser-]

Helllooooo again!

You know, one reason the Audio paradigm appeals to me is I just like being the old engineers when I get to mixing. I feel there are advantages of getting the most out of both MIDI and Audio, but as this and other recent threads make clear, there are many ways of working, and we gravitate towards a work flow that just appeals to us for whatever reason.


Definitely some food for thought here. I may just re-examine my workflow, thanks Randy.

I understand about track view, and in fact, that's my main view, since I don't like the console view. I do have each track dedicated to a single instrument, as you say you do. But what I mean by track is just the MIDI track.
GOOD clarification--Yes, of course separate MIDI tracks for each instrument. The difference in the way we work is I also have an Audio track dedicate to each instrument.

I understand you wouldn't care for the Console view so much, since that's primarily the sound mixer in Sonar.

BUT, even working the way you do, you could make only the MIDI tracks visible (see below) and see all the controls for all of your tracks at the same time, instead of seeing the control strips just one at a time as in the Track View.




Can you explain what you mean by "clear the tracks?" I don't see an easy way to hide/show specific tracks in track view. I can minimize them, but that's all. I suppose I could take all the vst tracks, dump them into one folder, and minimize that folder. Is there a better way?
Ah! That's what Reber and I have been talking about in the last few posts. When you push "M" on your computer keyboard, or find and use the Track Manager icon on a tool bar -a list of all your tracks come up, MIDI and Audio. You check or un-check tracks so they show up on your screen or not. SO I'm saying if you're not really working with the Audio tracks, you may as well make them disappear!

Randy

[Styxx]

Geeezzzzzz and here I thought it was another gold rush happening. :D

[Skysaw]

When you push "M" on your computer keyboard, or find and use the Track Manager icon on a tool bar -a list of all your tracks come up, MIDI and Audio. You check or un-check tracks so they show up on your screen or not. SO I'm saying if you're not really working with the Audio tracks, you may as well make them disappear!

NOW we're getting somewhere! I'm not sure how it is that after many years of using Sonar day in and day out, I missed something this simple. I'll try this tonight, as it could definitely make my screen less cluttered. Still sticking with the MIDI mix for now, but you've got me thinking.

I guess that just goes to show how deep a product like Sonar can be. I have hundreds of memorized shortcuts, preferences, custom .cal scripts, etc, and just when I think I have the thing mastered, there's more to be found. I used to randomly flip through the manual, just looking for things I didn't know. I think I may start that habit back up.

Many thanks!

[rbowser-]

Cool, Jamie! - Glad you caught something new. You'll quickly see how helpful it is. So easy to make tracks disappear and reappear, you can constantly be changing what's displayed if you want. You'll be cutting way down on the amount of vertical scrolling.

Look for the Track Manager icon, it's part of one of the tool bars. Or the short cut may work best for you, since you're into short cuts - Just "M." You'll see what the scoop is once you open it. You can select large groups of tracks at a time and change their status with the space bar. That's explained in the pop-up.

Sorry, Styxx - No gold here--Except the Golden treasure of good conversation. :)

Randy

[Skysaw]

Holy moly, it works! Thanks again.

And sorry for hijacking the thread.

[rbowser-]

Ain't that cool? Yaaaah, - thanks for letting us know you got that going.

EARL---lol, oh man--was your question ever answered?

Randy

[earlwgreen]

YOU GUYS ARE CRAZY!!! LOL

I love it when you get into a forum like this. I've learned soooo much just reading these reply...both about midi and all of your personalities!

Yes...you all gave me quick and good answers. I did find the instrument place to turn on automation.

For me, I'm arranging as I'm going. Also I've noticed that in quite a few Contemporary Christian arrangements, the normal placement for the brass is not always the same. Sometimes you want to echo from left to right and them back to a more traditional orchestral layout. I like doing this as I key the notes into Sonar. I can hear the effects and the blending before I even save the audio to tracks.

It's just the way I work best I guess. But, I will start trying the other methods too.

Thanks again for all of you help and I'm sure I'll be back with more questions!


Ain't that cool? Yaaaah, - thanks for letting us know you got that going.

EARL---lol, oh man--was your question ever answered?

Randy

[rbowser-]

"...YOU GUYS ARE CRAZY!!!..."

Who, Us??!!

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_-sFohRgxOBI/Rt09aGSB9qI/AAAAAAAAA8E/TJdmmYVy528/s320/3+stooges.jpg

But Seriously Folks:

Good to hear from you, Earl. I was hoping you hadn't run off screaming into the ethers of the internet, never to be heard from again!

Thanks for the reply, glad you figured out what you needed, and thanks also for a glimpse into how you work. I think a lot of people like to set things up so they can get a good preview of what their projects will sound like As they put them together. It's like when a singer is laying down a track, most prefer hearing some reverb on their headphones - not as inspiring and maybe even intimidating to hear the a dry and drab direct signal.

I take it that at some point we'll get to hear some music from you? Hope so - Just drop an MP3 off in The Listening Room.

Later!

Randy