Acustica Audio FIRE The Pan. Add New Dimension to Your Mixes.

[jamcat]

Alright... I installed the demo and used it to pan some percussions sounds over a drum loop. Also to pan some vocals over said drum loop. I didn't notice anything horrible. Then I auditioned it using vocals but with the output sent to mono so I could better hear any effect of panning. So far I am only hearing minimal changes to the source audio, when panning. I haven't broken out the Intense Listening Session protocols yet, just doing a quick audition. I am not hearing any major issues.

Perhaps those of you who seemed to immediately hear something bad could point us in the right direction? What specifically were you hearing that sounded bad? I'd like to identifiy these issues too.

That's cool. Some people can hear subtle details and some, like plexuss, can't. You can only work with what you can hear so if you can't hear the subtlies you can't work with them.

[plexuss]

Alright... I installed the demo and used it to pan some percussions sounds over a drum loop. Also to pan some vocals over said drum loop. I didn't notice anything horrible. Then I auditioned it using vocals but with the output sent to mono so I could better hear any effect of panning. So far I am only hearing minimal changes to the source audio, when panning. I haven't broken out the Intense Listening Session protocols yet, just doing a quick audition. I am not hearing any major issues.

Perhaps those of you who seemed to immediately hear something bad could point us in the right direction? What specifically were you hearing that sounded bad? I'd like to identifiy these issues too.

That's cool. Some people can hear subtle details and some, like plexuss, can't. You can only work with what you can hear so if you can't hear the subtlies you can't work with them.

So now, tell me what you hear so I can work to identifiy it. Because if there is some specific bad sound you should be able to identify it, explain it and then others, like me should be able to hear it. If not, you may be experiencing the reverse placebo effect, where you think you hear something bad but in reality what you claim you hear is not real. So please, enlighten us with your wisdom.

[jamcat]

That's not my wisdom. I was quoting a wise man.

[plexuss]

That's not my wisdom. I was quoting a wise man.

Troll

[jamcat]

Yeah, that was some troll wisdom, wasn't it?
what is going on? are these bots posting on KVR?

[dionenoid]

Perhaps those of you who seemed to immediately hear something bad could point us in the right direction? What specifically were you hearing that sounded bad? I'd like to identifiy these issues too.

Weird artifacts with many of the 'emulations'. Some have artifical highs/high-mids added, others become muffled. Check out the "3D" emu's, these are particularly bad and you can hear it without even panning anything.

Test mix sounded worse with Fire Pan than with normal daw panning. Less separation and depth, sometimes even mp3-like veil over the mix. Drum sounds panned with the emu's loose punch compared to normal daw panning (mono checked).

[plexuss]

Perhaps those of you who seemed to immediately hear something bad could point us in the right direction? What specifically were you hearing that sounded bad? I'd like to identifiy these issues too.

Weird artifacts with many of the 'emulations'. Some have artifical highs/high-mids added, others become muffled. Check out the "3D" emu's, these are particularly bad and you can hear it without even panning anything.

Test mix sounded worse with Fire Pan than with normal daw panning. Less separation and depth, sometimes even mp3-like veil over the mix. Drum sounds panned with the emu's loose punch compared to normal daw panning (mono checked).

Thanks! I can hear those issues in the mono-null test I did - higher frequencies not nulling out. Good idea to do a project with tracks panned using the DAW vs this plugin, thanks for the idea. I will do that listen for the artifacts you mentioned.

[dionenoid]

I wonder tho. Since many daw's use different pan laws, wouldn't this plugin sound different across different daw's ?

Anyway, even if it would sound good, it would be too big a hassle to insert a plugin, change model and volume compensation (btw, weird that they didn't link these), just to achieve a small difference in panned sounds.

[Ploki]

I wonder tho. Since many daw's use different pan laws, wouldn't this plugin sound different across different daw's ?

Anyway, even if it would sound good, it would be too big a hassle to insert a plugin, change model and volume compensation (btw, weird that they didn't link these), just to achieve a small difference in panned sounds.

PAN laws are applied to panners. If panner is centered there’s nothing applied by daw side on the stereo channel, L=R.

So i’m not sure how DAW pan laws could affect it.


Since most of my mixes are stereo tracks and mono tracks, i have zero use for this, aside the fact that i think an analog modelled pan is the last thing i need

[Teksonik]

Perhaps those of you who seemed to immediately hear something bad could point us in the right direction? What specifically were you hearing that sounded bad? I'd like to identifiy these issues too.

As I said before it makes my source audio sound muddy and muted. Like some EQ was applied and not in a pleasant way. It's not subtle at all and is easily heard. I advise using quality headphones for the test.

I simply don't like the sound of the plugin and that's just my personal opinion. I'm sure others will disagree and that's fine. There is no right or wrong only personal preference.

Anyway as luck would have it Rob Papen just released a free panner. I don't think it has all the magic snake oil "3D Panning" stuff the Acustica plugin claims to have but I haven't tried it yet. Will do later today. It's free, doesn't require the installation of another program just to install it, and likely will not take up hundreds of megs of drive space so there is that going for it....

https://ymlp.com/z2s5tg?fbclid=IwAR2rx5 ... SLWI#rppan

EDIT: I tried Rob Papen's panner and it's nice. Does what it says on the tin, auto pans etc. Doesn't have any negative effect on the source audio here. Nothing spectacular but the Doppler and Spring Back effects are interesting.

[plexuss]

I tried The Pan on a 14 track rock piece with no vocals. I hear what you are referring to. It's not subtle. I'ts like some strange bad EQ/comb filter or something. I did a mix with the 14 tracks, completely dry, but with panning and level set in the DAW (Reaper). Did a bounce. Then, I put The Pan on each track and carefully set each to close to the same pan position on the DAW. I then centred the DAW pan and rendered. I used 053-3D ANALOG NmKM100 Raw on each.

Strange... it doen't seem right to me.

UPDATE: After Zaphod explained I changed the pan model on all tracks to 025 Navy and it sound more like the DAW panned version. I have yet to AB but the differences seems subtle. I didnt realize there were models in The Pan that would sound bad with normal stereo use. I didn't RTFM. : (

[jamcat]

All convolution has that comb filter veil. That's why I prefer algorithmic effects whenever possible. Convolution should only be used when you need a very complex sonic fingerprint, like a speaker cone. Even then, it's a compromise with a pretty bad trade off.

[plexuss]

All convolution has that comb filter veil. That's why I prefer algorithmic effects whenever possible. Convolution should only be used when you need a very complex sonic fingerprint, like a speaker cone. Even then, it's a compromise with a pretty bad trade off.

I generally agree with you. But AA's Acqua plugins don't have that poor sound character that The Pan has. That's why its confusing to me why it sounds so poor.

[Zaphod (giancarlo)]

Demoed. And uninstalled (you have to use the updates page for this).

Sounds awful. I cannot understand how something that ruins your signal so bad can be sold like this.

Forgive me for saying it this way, but I think it's a superficial comment for a specific reason: we have sampled virtually all the digital and analog panners of all the competitors in addition to adding our own. The digital panners then have no impact on frequency or phase, and there are 66 of them. To dismiss the panner by saying that it "sounds bad" is something that can have no bearing on any real data. Things would have been different if we had proposed "only" a panner created by us with one specific sound.

[Zaphod (giancarlo)]

I tried The Pan on a 14 track rock piece with no vocals. I hear what you are referring to. It's not subtle. I'ts like some strange bad EQ/comb filter or something. I did a mix with the 14 tracks, completely dry, but with panning and level set in the DAW (Reaper). Did a bounce. Then, I put The Pan on each track and carefully set each to close to the same pan position on the DAW. I then centred the DAW pan and rendered. I used 053-3D ANALOG NmKM100 Raw on each.

Strange... it doen't seem right to me.

Then the "raw" version of the dummy head is the worst choice you could make. It is basically the KU100 head sampled raw in an anaechoic chamber, and we left this option in the plugin to allow you to simulate the "raw" use of a dummy head in the way it was intended.
I have an anecdote: I had lent this head to a friend to record a piano and he had brought it back to me immediately afterwards telling me that the sound of the piano was getting worse instead of better.
I know some mixing enginners who record some sources using this head and then manage to make it usable with heavy amounts of EQ.

But I would advise against her. For the same reason I would advise against the "RAW" version of the ZM1 mic (still in the same preset group). He is a multi-capsule microphone widely used in gaming production, but he does not have a "flat" frequency response and obviously on complex sources he can sound strange.

Instead, we created "linearized" versions of the head and they tend to sound "flat" in the starting position. In the field of 3d digital we sampled a famous plugin and "improved" it. That plugin, however, is based on ambisonic.
For a natural result though, I recommend ultrapanners. They are often based on dummy head but have tricks that make dummy head technology usable even in the stems of a mastering stem mix (we have had feedbacks on this).
- The dummy head is linearized to the central starting position
- a mix slider allows you to dose the equalization
- the panning law is derived from software or even consoles such as SAND, PINK and so on

Again, dummy head based panners are a part of the possible panners (we have sampled consoles keeping the transformer sound without harmonic distortion, or made digital by making the impulse response perfect), or relatively to panner 3d if you scroll through the digital presets you will find practically all the plugins sampled. There are lots of options, you just need a lot of patience. Some panners sound "flat" on all frequencies, some change the phase, some create a true psychoacoustic EQ curve, in a great many cases the effect can be dosed, or mixed with other techniques.
Finally we have the mid-side panners that I find incredibly useful and easy to use, and also the panners of sampled daws that allow you to pan another daw into your own. For example, the panning law 3dB of protoools is different from that of Cubase, sometimes it is useful to have a translation tool.