Binaural Panning tutorials?

[sadicus]

Does CBB have a built in Binaural Panning? If not I'm curious how Cakewalk could be used to make a Binaural mix.

[Craig Anderton]

If you're talking about using panning to increase width, you can do it with Channel Tools. Basically you want to take advantage of its mid/side talents. Here are a couple of articles about this I wrote for Sound on Sound:

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/sonar-stereo-tools

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mid-sides-eqing-sonar this one is mostly about mid/side EQ, but includes Channel Tools info.

 

[Colin Nicholls]

Not to detract from what Craig has said, I'm going to say that Binaural recordings have a lot more to do with the "recording" than the "mixing" stage. The panning is just hard L-R if you've recorded a stereo track using binaural microphones.

[John]

46 minutes ago, Colin Nicholls said:

Not to detract from what Craig has said, I'm going to say that Binaural recordings have a lot more to do with the "recording" than the "mixing" stage. The panning is just hard L-R if you've recorded a stereo track using binaural microphones.

Absolutely right, Panning defeats the whole idea of binaural.  I think Graig is answering to what is the underlying question. 

[Craig Anderton]

I think Colin is referring to the binaural "dummy head" recordings, which position mics and an artificial head in a way that more closely simulates how we hear sound. When played back on headphones, properly recorded binaural sounds very three-dimensional. It does not reproduce over speakers.

The principles behind binaural recording are complex, because they take into account the time differences between audio hitting the right and left ears, and well as the "head shadow" that affects audio. I did an FX Chain called the Monitorizer that emulates these in a basic way.

However the OP mentioned binaural panning (maybe because Studio One has a Binaural Pan plug-in with the same name?), and the term "binaural" has been used in a variety of contexts over the years. When mixing, mid/side processing can manipulate a stereo signal's perceived width, and in some cases, can change the spatial relationship  of signals to create more of a "3D" effect. M/S processing is the basis for the Studio One plug-in, and Channel Tools is a comprehensive M/S plug-in (the twin delays are particularly helpful) that can alter width and other elements of the stereo placement...so I think that will come closest to what you want to do during the mixing process.

 

[John]

14 minutes ago, Craig Anderton said:

I think Colin is referring to the binaural "dummy head" recordings, which position mics and an artificial head in a way that more closely simulates how we hear sound. When played back on headphones, properly recorded binaural sounds very three-dimensional. It does not reproduce over speakers.

The principles behind binaural recording are complex, because they take into account the time differences between audio hitting the right and left ears, and well as the "head shadow" that affects audio. I did an FX Chain called the Monitorizer that emulates these in a basic way.

However the OP mentioned binaural panning (maybe because Studio One has a Binaural Pan plug-in with the same name?), and the term "binaural" has been used in a variety of contexts over the years. When mixing, mid/side processing can manipulate a stereo signal's perceived width, and in some cases, can change the spatial relationship  of signals to create more of a "3D" effect. M/S processing is the basis for the Studio One plug-in, and Channel Tools is a comprehensive M/S plug-in (the twin delays are particularly helpful) that can alter width and other elements of the stereo placement...so I think that will come closest to what you want to do during the mixing process.

 

Just as I said  he was getting to the meaning of the question.

 

[sadicus]

Thanks for the info!
Craig, I'm reading your SOS about M/S and will check out the Monitorizer.

...also got The Huge Book of Cakewalk By BandLab Tips by Craig Anderton!

[dr.hash]

There are two types of binaural panning - the first requires an encoder and for the listener to have a decoder. This is referred to as ambisonic b format I think.

There is another way to add binaural sound to your sonic works and this is to use a 360 degree planner, which maybe the OP is referring too. Whereas ambisonic b format could be thought of as a 'true' surround sound format for headphones because you use a 360 degree panner to position sounds in a more traditional surround type fashion...the other type of binaural sound, and is much more useful for music production uses a binaural panner like the one I use from Noiseworks (binauralizer) in a more static fashion and does not require an encoder or decoder. This is because it uses phase tricks to create the illusion of 360 degree. 

There aren't too many tutorials on this topic, even though binaural type recordings have been possible since about 1890...some geezer tested a binaural type device using telephony technology. The way I use binaural sound is I place the Binauralizer (which can use SOFA files) on any delay or verb I believe would benefit from having static 360 degree sound...it can help open a mix up. I use Wave's Brauer fx for fancy non-static 360 sfxs pans. 

My technique doesn't require the encoders and decoders and as I said is probably better suited for music...because in surround mixing theory...you don't have the roto tom flying in a 360 degree fashion. Music doesn't work like this.  That's why a static panner used to better position verbs and delays is a much better use of said technology. 

If the OP is talking about sound for VR or even 360 videos...then we're talking about a whole different kettle of fish. This requires the encoders and decoders because you want the sound to follow the head so to speak. 

 

Ben 

[astaub]

i'am actual using Precedence from 2caudio, very good stereo embeded results without other tools. 

https://2caudio.com/products/precedence#_Overview

The same developer also has a matching reverb named Breeze 2.1