Reaper: VST track to mono?

[geroyannis]

it would be best if we just had a switch on the track to make it mono or stereo like in Cubase.

Cubase has a switch like that? Where?
One of the things I hate in Cubase is that whenever I want to change a mono track to stereo I have to create a new stereo track and copy the audio and settings from the old mono track, then delete the mono. Too much hassle.

[LawrenceF]

VST 3 plugs channelize automatically. If you switch a track to mono, inserted plugs and their metering switch to mono, and vice versa. I suppose it's another one of those things that VST 2.x can already do (as the saying goes) that nobody actually does with it, dunno.

The irony is that Cubase's tracks don't switch mono / stereo.

[jancivil]

In REAPER the default pan mode is "Stereo Balance/Mono Pan" - and in the manual is written that "the track is treated as mono, even if it contains stereo media".

So the default pan mode is mono, isn't it?:roll:

The behavior of the pan control does not make the channel 'mono by default'.
what that [panning as mono] means is the stereo relationships will not be preserved by mere panning. they will be changed (acc'ding to pan law). mono tracks/instruments etc Do_Not_Contain stereo information, ie., they're per se different than stereo.

width-to-zero narrows the stereo field of a stereo object. it does NOT make stereo into mono. you don't really need width-to-zero if the track is in fact mono. If you do not pan it, it may as well be mono in effect, depending, but panning a stereo track as mono is not mono, per se. In fact there are things to know about it.

There is 'power panning', for instance in Cubase, and VSL makes a more elaborate one for Vienna Suite, to preserve the stereo relationships in panning. Don't know if REAPER has that but this is a difference for real.

[Tricky-Loops]

In REAPER the default pan mode is "Stereo Balance/Mono Pan" - and in the manual is written that "the track is treated as mono, even if it contains stereo media".

So the default pan mode is mono, isn't it?:roll:

The behavior of the pan control does not make the channel 'mono by default'.
what that [panning as mono] means is the stereo relationships will not be preserved by mere panning. they will be changed (acc'ding to pan law). mono tracks/instruments etc Do_Not_Contain stereo information, ie., they're per se different than stereo.

width-to-zero only narrows the stereo field. of a stereo object. it does NOT make stereo into mono. you do not need width-to-zero if the track is in fact mono (although perhaps you can obtain benefit from making that more focused, ie., it will tend to stand out more). If you do not pan it, it may as well be mono in effect, depending, but panning a stereo track as mono is not mono, per se. There is 'power panning', for instance in Cubase and VSL makes a more elaborate one for Vienna Suite, to preserve the stereo relationships in panning. Don't know if REAPER has that but this is a difference for real.

But if I choose "Stereo Balance/Mono Pan" AND set the Wide to zero (via the I/O switch), then I perceive it as mono, because it's only one channel...

[Tricky-Loops]

BTW, if I have the width in the I/O-window set to 100 % or to -100 % - does it make any difference?? I can't hear one...

[jancivil]

granted, at no width it would be pretty much perceived as mono. I treat stereo drums by narrowing the field with a power panner and I don't know it isn't mono.

apparently the default *behavior* is 'mono channel', since you have to find a setting to get width conrol.
if it is a mono source you don't so much need it. I'm not sure what happens when you pan a zero-width stereo source as mono. I know from things with full width and it's... interesting. it might not bother you in any case. it seems to me like there would be little problem with 'zero-width', but I just don't know. the point is, panning as though mono when the object is stereo is dodgy if there is enough stereo.

not all things are equal, some instruments really use stereo, some just output as stereo and wobn't exploit it as much.
it just depends.

stereo and binaural are not automatically the same thing, stereo has differences and sums and a psychoacoustic effect.

[jancivil]

BTW, if I have the width in the I/O-window set to 100 % or to -100 % - does it make any difference??

in principle, with a true stereo source there's all the difference in the world.

in mixing the width can be crucial, you can use narrowing to get focus and get rid of clutter in a mix. if everything is 100% width, not such a good idea, honestly. this is why people prefer mono for things.

but some things exploit that sums/differences to capture the effect, or create the illusion of a real space. there are ways to manipulate pre and post volume along with pan law to obtain 'back to front', depth...

[Tricky-Loops]

BTW, if I have the width in the I/O-window set to 100 % or to -100 % - does it make any difference??

in principle, with a true stereo source there's all the difference in the world.

in mixing the width can be crucial, you can use narrowing to get focus and get rid of clutter in a mix. if everything is 100% width, not such a good idea, honestly. this is why people prefer mono for things.

but some things exploit that sums/differences to capture the effect, or create the illusion of a real space. there are ways to manipulate pre and post volume along with pan law to obtain 'back to front', depth...

Of course the width can be crucial, but if I have the setting "Stereo Balance/Mono Pan" and set the width to 100 % and then to EXACTLY -100 %, then I don't hear any difference.

[jancivil]

donno. could be a mono source or a putatively stereo source that for all intents and purposes seems like it's mono.
if it's not an acoustically captured stereo source, or if it's a synth that has nothing in its design to manipulate the stereo effects, it may not be doing anything worthy of the term stereo.

the thing I notice with stereo and power panning is narrowing the field makes it appear as louder in the mix, using its pan law. I don't reckon something by itself is going to be as easily noticed, which is why I brought in 'mixing'...

[memyselfandus]

What is mono? Baby don't hurt me. No more.