C-12 Pro: Reasonable/Safe Setting for StereoEnhancer

I’m aware that over-using StereoEnhancer on instrument tracks leads to muddy and phase problems. but since I tend to compose orchestral/prog rock (early Genesis/Pink Floyd stuff, I need width and presence.

My guess… no more than a 100 setting?

And/or other in-Cubase equivalent approach/plugins?

(BTW I also have Ozone 11 Standard that has helped on my master bus to cut down on some phasing but I use it more for more or less EQ stuff.)

Thanks.

Hi,

100 (depending on the fx) is usually if you keep everything as is. < 100 turns the signal more into a mono signal and > 100 widens the stereo image. I would be very careful above 110 and usually leave the low mids and low end untouched.
In order to turn this question into a Cubase question:
Too much stereo enhancing causes all sorts of problems and you can easily lose too much energy in the center - your mix falls apart. Now, here comes the Cubase part :wink: Try out Quadrafuzz. This way you can restrict stereo enhancing to the top bands (use the width controller) and leave the low end untouched. Same applies here - you don´t want to overdo it. There are other techniques and it´s also worth looking for alternatives on the arrangement level to achieve what you´re looking for.
You´ll get there!

1 Like

@Reco29 - Thanks for reply and info. Will give Quadrafuzz a shot too.

What is your source material like? Is it all mono or is there stuff that isn’t stereo enough? Audio recordings, VSTi’s or a mix of both

I’d also recommend caution and make sure to check what happens when you collapse it to Mono where the most damage should happen. And it will end up mono more than we’d like.

Personally I never use StereoEnhancers and rely on a variety of other techniques to get width into a mix.

One thing that will make it sound ‘not wide’ is to make everything wide. It’s a bit like instruments with overlapping frequencies that mask each other. If everything is wide your Panorama becomes mush. Where if only a couple of Tracks are wide then they’ll stand out relative to the other Tracks.

I almost always set my Panners to Stereo Combined Panner instead of the default Stereo Balance Panner. These let you control each Track’s individual Panorama.

image

2 Likes

If the production allows it that´s one of my favourite techniques, too. Sometimes it´s enough to have one or two signals panned hard left/right and to leave the rest more or less in the center (I´m not a fan of strict LCR mixing). However, watch out for masking as @raino pointed out. It´s still important to keep the center tight. If you want to avoid masking issues in the first place take a look at your arrangement. If you are arranging instruments/voices in a way that they don´t have to fight over their place in space and time within a song your life becomes so much easier in the mixing process!

1 Like

This really is the foundation that lets you build what you need/want.

@raino & @Reco29 - Thanks for further discussion and clarifications. Can’t reply right now and have a couple of follow up questions, so I will return within a day or so.

@raino & @Reco29

Alright, back for follow up. Pardon posting length but I’m eager to learn from you and so might as well get granular. Reply at your leisure.

First, I’m including screenshots further down below of a current excerpt of the loudest part of an in-progress composition - as well as a 45 sec. video showing the Mixconsole’s behavior during it that is here:

Cubase Pro MixConsole - Current Project Excerpt - 0:45 min.

Second, a general issue I have:

My mixes just sound too mid screechy as well as muddy to my ears - I have difficulty with mixing low end and bass. I only have an entry level Samsung smartphone (earbuds) to test the exported mixes. No car or home stereo.

Something that may or may not be affecting this:

I’m turning 70 in January and I have had some hearing loss in the 4-8K range along with tinnitus. I don’t notice this as hearing impairment, but it may be slightly skewing what my ears perceive.

So the 45 seconds excerpt probably won’t sound professional to you, but that’s why I’m following up here. To hopefully improve.

On to the issues brought up:

@raino:

“What is your source material like? Is it all mono or is there stuff that isn’t stereo enough? Audio recordings, VSTi’s or a mix of both.”

===== All stereo, all VSTi. I don’t separate my drums, I use EZ Drummer 3 for doing so is a bit overwhelming, but spend a lot of time editing and tweaking in MIDI.

“I almost always set my Panners to Stereo Combined Panner instead of the default Stereo Balance Panner. These let you control each Track’s individual Panorama.”

I followed your lead and set everything to Stereo Combined Panner. Below here are still screenshots of both instruments and group tracks in Cubase 12.

Here are a couple of things written by both of you respectively on this topic of giving instruments breathing room and avoid masking:

@raino: “One thing that will make it sound ‘not wide’ is to make everything wide. It’s a bit like instruments with overlapping frequencies that mask each other. If everything is wide your Panorama becomes mush. Where if only a couple of Tracks are wide then they’ll stand out relative to the other Tracks.”

@Reco29: "However, watch out for masking as @raino pointed out. It´s still important to keep the center tight. If you want to avoid masking issues in the first place take a look at your arrangement. If you are arranging instruments/voices in a way that they don´t have to fight over their place in space and time within a song your life becomes so much easier in the mixing process!"


Instrument Tracks


Group/FX Tracks

===== So given what you can see now on my instrument and group tracks and what you hear in the 45 seconds excerpt in terms of Stereo Combined Panner, what should I do to get a clearer yet also fuller sounding mix (i.e. low end presence)?

Frankly, I don’t quite understand what the console’s Stereo Combined Panner GUI bar means (before I changed it, just went by the numeric R and L there). Most of the instrument tracks span full left to full right; the Group (actually FX) tracks all fully span left to right.

Maybe that’s the problem and where I should make spatial/frequency improvements. But don’t know how to do so for it’s easy to get info overload watching YT videos that can also offer contradictory viewpoints.

One instrument that is more or less a signature sound for many of my compositions is an NI (Gibson) Session Guitarist Sunburst Deluxe I use for lead guitar with an NI GuitarRig 6 rack as shown below. As it’s initial preset “Spacious” and use of NI Raum suggest, it’s ambient-ish.

That setup is essentially non-negotiable.

So it is other instrument tracks that need to be adjusted.

Thanks.


PS: FYI while I have a decent system - Windows 10, Ryzen 9 5950X with 64 Gb DRAM, as the photo below shows, I have a very simple setup: 5" Presonus near-field speakers through Behringer U-Phoria UMC204HD I/O and I use my ancient Korg Trinity as MIDI keyboard.

That makes things easier as there’s no recording issues to crop up.

For Groups & FX (a bit less so) you’ll almost always want them full out Left & Right.

Individual Instruments on the other hand often benefit from a narrower Panorama. It’s like an orchestra - the violins aren’t spread out from 9AM to 3PM, more like 9-10:30AM. VSTi presets often are too wide - manufactures know that a big wide sound really sells when auditioning Presets. Problem is they don’t play well with other big wide Presets.

Your mixes will be cleaner and more transparent if the majority of the voices in your piece sound like they are coming from a specific location rather than a nebulous everywhere.

image

1 Like

Hello Philip!

One can hear that you are really passionate about music - that is really cool!

Let´s adress your isssues:

The first thing that comes to my attention is that your levels on your individual channels, groups and fx are really hot and sometimes way over 0dB. This is usually not a problem within your DAW but there are a number of reasons to keep them beyond 0dB, preferrably between -18 and -6db. Have a look at this tutorial.

Chris made a bunch of tutorials about this topic, so you might as well pick a shorter one and not the complete package. They are all spot on.

The low end and the low mids are usually the most difficult areas to mix. It would be good, if you had another pair of headphones - ear buds are not ideal for that task. You don´t have to spend a million on a decent pair of headphones - make sure they are over ear and open. You could also have a look at Sonarworks SoundID for Headphones (around 70€) . This is a software that flattens the frequency curve on headphones and it works quite well especially on budget headphones. This software also provides you with a number of presets which simulate different environments like cars, various studio monitors, headphones and so on. This might really help to check whether your mixes translate on other systems. They sure have a trial version to check if this is something that floats the boat for you. There is also a version that includes speaker calibration which is way more pricy. It will not give you more low end on your 5" woofers or adress possible issues with acoustic room treatment, though.

Don´t worry, many of the best mixing engineers suffer from some sort of hearing loss. Just make sure that you always listen to references that you are familiar with. Your ears - no matter how yound/old - will adapt to any mix after a certain amount of time. That is why it is so important to re-adjust your senses by comparing your mix to references.

@raino already adressed the issue of instrument placement in the stereo field. If you want to learn more about the concept of combined stereo panners here is a very useful video:

Even though it is non-negotiable: Maybe try to deactivate the reverbs and replace them by a send reverb of your choice which is heavily low- and highpassed. That will give you a clearer midrange as well. Try to play around with the panning of the reverb, too. Delays are a really good choice for guitars as well to add ambience and fullness. Maybe just a little reverb and more delay? Rule of thumb: Always check these things in the mix! It doesn´t make sense to have a perfectly good sounding guitar signal if it doesn´t sit in the mix. Same goes for the low end of your guitar - do you need the low lows in the mix? Probably not… Guitar Rig tends to make presets that sound impressive if you play them solo - not so much in the mix. That was once the other way round. Again: always check how it adds to the mix.

That looks lovely :slight_smile: The keyboard will do just fine and the most important player in the field by far is your skillset. Of course, it really helps to have the perfect listening environment and monitors. But nothing wrong to check certain things with headphones. So don´t worry about that - at the end of the day it is all about what you make out of it that matters the most!

You said that there are numerous youtube channels out there which makes it difficult to get a grip on what really matters and what not. So true. It´s sometimes painful to watch what these self-proclaimed experts claim as universal truth or 10 step programmes that will make your mixes sound professional and whatnot… :nauseated_face:. Even on forums which once had a very good reputation.
However, if you want to up your game I would recommend two channels. If you like them or not - that is of course a question of personal preference.
The first one is MixdownOnline with Chris Selim, a nice French-Canadian bloke with clear and well cut tutorials on all aspects around Cubase, mixing and recording. My number one recommendation by far in this area:

My second tip is a podcast that ended around 2021 . You can still hear all episodes from 2014 till the last one. I would go for a chronological order. It´s called Happy Funtime Hour and it´s a really entertaing podcast on nerdy stuff related to mixing, music production and all sorts of other stuff (e.g. hearing loss and mixing). Gregory Scott and Nathan Daniels have a very unique chemistry which makes the podcast hilarious and educational at the same time. But again, a matter of personal taste. I remember bursting from laughter on a regular basis.

Alright, that´s all!

Enjoy your music and keep on!

1 Like

@Reco29 - Wow, OK, now that was some impressive feedback and suggestions. Much appreciated. I need some time to digest it though I am familiar and do watch Selim’s videos.

I know my instrument tracks violate normal gain staging and but do what I can to avoid clipping. The group/fx tracks are more normal. But that doesn’t erase the potential problems in the origin instrument tracks.

I do have a basic set of headphones - AKG 240 Studio, but can’t use them for too long for not good for tinnitus. Same goes with phone earbuds.

But back to improving mixes:

I constantly struggle with this for the deeper I go into a composition, the gain creep always happens. I can’t really change my current projects much but will try to start out saner in future ones.

Another reason I have difficulty implementing stuff is that I’ve had a chronic anxiety/depressive condition which is why my income for the last 33 years is Social Security/disability.

Point: I can get panicky and lose confidence - I get thrown off when I try to fix an imperfect mix and the whole thing starts sounding too different.

A bit TMI, but that’s the facts.

So I have to digest and apply things in baby steps. I’ve made progress - including the current project for which I posted this OP, and learned from questions I’ve posed here and also from some how-to-videos.

I just wish I wasn’t so freakin’ slow at getting it right. Or right enough.

'Nuf said. :sunglasses:

1 Like

@raino - Thanks for reply. I’m familiar with the classical instruments positions - I’ve been kind of going by Spitfire’s free BBC Orchestra diagram. My guess is that orchestras vary a bit in this regard.

But in the end a combination of using such layouts + just using one’s ears should improve/optimize the spread

I’ve made some progress in separating instruments, but have run into some odd panning glitches on a couple of tracks whereby the in-track panning automation lane has no effect even when I set instruments to C center.

So far I’ve always used Standard Panner - Left-Right automation lane. Maybe I should use a different automation panner?

Cubase 12 still has the Project Browser and I can’t find anything in there that is causing these situations - even when deleting any panning points that could be present so that the automation line is “virgin”.

So I’ll have to come back after I’ve created some documentation on what is going on to hopefully resolve it.

I´m with you. Not downplaying your condition - but unless someone is born with a superblown ego - we all feel more or less the same.
And yes, it takes ages (literally) to get better at what you do. This won´t change - ever… no magic button in sight. The good news, though: If you keep on learning you WILL get better. Although you can´t cheat time - it´s on your side at the end of the day :+1:
Questions like: Do I leave the mix as is or am I starting all over? When is a mix done? How to deal with insecurities? Well these and much more issues are adressed in the podcast I mentioned. I really think you gonna like it!

Automation can be tricky. Try to wrap your head around the concept that there is automation on the project level (very handy tools in the automation editor (key command F6) btw) and on the level of MIDI-CC/PC-“automation” within a vst instrument. They play on different levels depending on the actual instrument.

“Nuf said.” > I might borrow this one from time to time if you don´t mind :wink:

1 Like

Another common source of mixing frustration is having unrealistic expectations about what’s possible. And I’m not referring to the normal progression that your mixes will improve as you gain experience.

Rather it’s pretty easy to have an unachievable goal in mind. We are constantly surrounded by commercial music which forms a kind of generic sense of how good recordings should sound - using comps as you work also contributes. But the thing is all those recordings have been mastered, and that’s where the final professional sheen is often created. And while it’s great to aim for mixes that sound like a finished master, more often than not you won’t get there. And that’s true for almost everybody.

2 Likes

Today was one of those where I started to get more and more irritable in Cubase and had to go Save/Ctrl Q. I don’t mind hard work, but if the somewhat obsessive in-the-zone becomes !!%@@@!!?, time to take a break.

So I’ll follow up here to both of your posts once I’ve chilled out. :sunglasses:

@Reco29 - OK, so I went to the F6/Automation Panel and using it, I discovered the creation of some StandardPanner Left-Right2 automation lanes that had contradictory settings - i.e. such as the original panner set hard L, the other hard R and the like.

So I deleted the “2” and readjusted things and I seem to have more control over panning now. Though sometimes even the Track panner won’t do its job so have to do the panning in the VSTi.

If needed I could create a VST specific panner automation lane and leaving the Track panner at C. But I don’t tend to change an instrument’s panning unless it’s for a bridge or such section.

Not related to the overall issue, more of a slight pet peeve…:

One thing that I don’t like on automation lanes is that if one shows all used in tracks is that there is the creation of lanes I didn’t manually create, such MIDI CC’s and so on.

They are usually set to 0 and the like, but it’s kind of workflow nuisance whereby I have to hide or nuke them.

I like to keep my automation lanes simple and streamlined - Volume, Input Filter - PreGain (where I do my volume stuff so to keep track Volume slider available in the MixConsole), and as-needed VSTi or FX specific lanes like Bypass, etc.

Anyway, for now I’m plodding along, slowly but surely improving the mix so we can consider this OP done.

One thing I DO need to learn to do is sidechain, but that’s a whole other subject I just need to dig into and figure it out. One step at a time.

@raino - Thanks. Perspective matters. And being somewhat of a perfectionist can be a never-ending saga. Stepping back from a project for a while - days or more, has shown me that while improvements are needed, the mix I was becoming furious about not-getting-it-right wasn’t actually that terrible.

But knowing when to call it done and finished still isn’t easy because I always want to learn how I can get-it-righter - lol. :sunglasses:

Hi Philip!

This panner refers to the Stereo Combined Panner. And yes, there is much room for confusion here. The automation is sometimes tricky to say the least when it comes to the Stereo Combined Panner, too. Especially with a midi remote involved. But I think it´s the better choice on stereo signals in most cases.

If you have trouble in this area, feel free to send some screenshots that show the issues.

Have you checked the “Used Only” box in the F6 automation panel under “Show”? You can also handpick specific automation lanes in this column.

That´s good to hear! :+1:

It is not as complicated as you think. Once you grasp the concept it is actually quite easy and it is really useful, too. But as you said - one step at a time.

Quoting you one last time with your permission:

Nuf said :innocent:

1 Like

@Reco29 - Thanks. Well, I changed my tracks back to Stereo Balance Panner for it makes thing simpler for me. As to mixing, I get too much in the weeds tweaking and re-tweaking that feels circular (I know that’s not unique to me…).

So I took a break and played with something I’ve been wanting to do. (a 2:24 min. Concept Sketch) and posted it as good-enough as a draft. Unlike spending weeks on one composition, I did this essentially in a day or so.

The background strings and some percussion are not mine (but used legally and very similar to my own compositions); however the guitar/lead, drum enhancement and arrangement tweaks are mine.

As is creating the A.I. voice-over reminiscent of concept rock from the 70s (namely Vangelis and Pink Floyd). The text of the voice-over is also a rough draft of my updated version of a favorite section of the Heart Sutra, an ancient Buddhist text.

Point: curious if this roughy sounds good-enough to you - and or anyone else. It’s got some flaws - and if you want to point them out, go for it. But maybe I need to pull back on obsessing…

Lemme know.

(As far as the “'Nuf said” thing, I stole that from someone years ago whether heard or read. It’s public domain as far as I’m concerned - lol)

"Love & Truth" (Working Title of Draft Project) - 2:24 min.

Hi Philip,
I’m on the road and get back to you when I can hear your roughy over decent speakers/headphones. Not sure though, if this is still related to the original topic so I might write you a PM.

1 Like