Panning sends to aux input trax

[Wango]

I've been setting up all my reverbs as stereo aux input tracks with a bus input (say BUS 1-2.)

For each track on which I want reverb, I put a send to BUS 1-2.

Now in some cases, I want to adjust the pan on the send.
E.G. if a guitar track is 50% right, I want to send to the reverb 60% right.

However, I've discovered that the pan on the send actually is not working as I had thought.

No matter how much I adjust the pan on the send, it goes 100% to both left and right into the reverb aux track.

I've tried making the send both pre and post fader but I get the same result.

As a workaround, I've created two separate, mono reverb aux input tracks, one for left and one for right. This works, but the pan amount is set by the aux track. Is there another way of doing what I want to do?

[albee1952]

If you're thinking that by panning the send to one side, you will only get reverb on that side, that's not the way it works. If you want that, you should use a mono aux with a mono reverb and pan the aux track. Panning the input signal on the way into a stereo reverb(at least every one I have used, both hardware and software) just creates a slight offset. Consider what happens in a reverberant space and your original signal is a snare drum. If you move the snare drum all the way to the right, it still excites the entire space, just from a different point. Does that make sense? Or am I not clear on your question?

[Wango]

Originally Posted by albee1952

If you're thinking that by panning the send to one side, you will only get reverb on that side, that's not the way it works. If you want that, you should use a mono aux with a mono reverb and pan the aux track. Panning the input signal on the way into a stereo reverb(at least every one I have used, both hardware and software) just creates a slight offset. Consider what happens in a reverberant space and your original signal is a snare drum. If you move the snare drum all the way to the right, it still excites the entire space, just from a different point. Does that make sense? Or am I not clear on your question?

Thanks, Albee - that makes sense and you answered my question. To do what I want, I have created mono aux tracks with mono reverbs. I haven't been able to figure out a different way of doing it. Your post jibes exactly with what I've found.

[albee1952]

That can be a cool retro effect as it harkens back the some early Zep recordings with the guitar panned to one side and what sounds like a mono verb panned the other side(probably a chamber or plate which were mono in there early days).

[TOM@METRO]

In those earlier days (as is put here) it was not uncommon to use completely separate mono reverbs, chambers, coils or plates to create a stereo return. It would often be a blend of two completely unrelated returns. We used a thing called a cooper time cube with up to 30ms of analog delay to add pre delay to the verbs of choice. If you approach things with a little of that in mind while playing with modern plug-ins you can come up with some pretty interesting stuff.

[Wango]

Originally Posted by albee1952

That can be a cool retro effect as it harkens back the some early Zep recordings with the guitar panned to one side and what sounds like a mono verb panned the other side(probably a chamber or plate which were mono in there early days).

That's cool to know regarding the old use of mono reverb. Those early Zep recordings are great.

What I'm really after is greater clarity in the mix.
I like reverb, but I don't like how it muddies up the mix, so I've been looking for a way to get more verb and less mud.

What I've found is that using mono reverb tracks enables you to create a greater separation between the dry and reverb tracks. Since they don't overlap much (or at all in mt current experiment), you can put much more reverb on without creating mud.

I'm doing old school, manual rhythm guitar double tracking (I physically play the same track twice like the old days.)

I then send the right reverb 100% left and the left reverb 100% right.
The result is the each dry guitar track wades in a pool of the other guitar reverb.

The result is that I can use more reverb and it stays clean, and not muddy.

Still perfecting it but I like the results so far.

Thanks for the input!

[sw rec]

Eddie Van Halen did that once or twice too. Dry guitar left, reverb return right.....