Scoring Central
Auburn Sounds Panagement - Printable Version

+- Scoring Central (
+-- Forum: Technology (
+--- Forum: Plugins (
+--- Thread: Auburn Sounds Panagement (/showthread.php?tid=225)

Auburn Sounds Panagement - Mattias Westlund - 05-20-2017

Has anyone here tried this one? I played around with the free edition a bit and while I haven't come to any real conclusions (that would require using it project-wide for an extended period of time, experimenting and going back and forth) it does feel a bit more user friendly than Proximity while doing the same type of job, sound wise. Its Z-depth displacement is more noticeable while Proximity is more subtle, which can be either good or bad. I feel it might be a little too easy overdoing it with Panagement.

Let me know what you think if you give it a try.

RE: Auburn Sounds Panagement - Paul Battersby - 05-24-2017

I took a quick look at a demo video. The plugin looks interesting. I like the idea that I can position an instrument in 2D space on a stage just by dragging a cursor. I'll probably try messing around with it as I work on some new music.

The only obvious draw back is that it's necessary to add this plugin to each track rather just sending more or less of the signal to a single reverb plugin to get more or less reverb.

RE: Auburn Sounds Panagement - Mattias Westlund - 05-24-2017

(05-24-2017, 12:45 PM)Paul Battersby Wrote: The only obvious draw back is that it's necessary to add this plugin to each track rather just sending more or less of the signal to a single reverb plugin to get more or less reverb.

Yeah, true. It's the same thing with Proximity as well. OTOH, I don't think you would need this on each and every audio channel in your project, one instance for each instrument family submix is probably enough.

RE: Auburn Sounds Panagement - Nayrb - 11-26-2018

I just got around to trying both Proximity and Panagement today. I've been trying to stick with the basic tools (EQ, reverb amount, panning, and so forth) but I felt I needed some more general training in figuring out what I was listening for in the first place. No real conclusions yet, but my goal is at least to figure out how best to get some of my drier / more up-close samples to fit better with all the more spacious ones I have. So far these tools are proving to be educational.

Anyone getting any good use out of Panagement (or even Proximity)?

RE: Auburn Sounds Panagement - Mattias Westlund - 11-27-2018

I must say I prefer Proximity. It might be extremely subtle not to mention enigmatic in terms of parameters, but its more reined-in approach is more fitting for orchestral scenarios. Panagement is not bad at all, it just strikes me as too easy to overdo. To be clear I haven't done any scientific A/B comparisons between the two (nor have I any interest in doing one) and I guess the usefulness of either boils down to what samples you're going to apply them to. FWIW, on my latest project (i.e. Lore) I didn't feel the need for using any plugins of that kind. Everything just seemed to fit nicely into the mix with just plain ol' levels, panning and reverb.

Edit: ...but I have used Proximity quite successfully on older projects. Takes a bit of trial and error and a lot of exaggerating distances to hear what the plugin is actually doing, but it does its job if you need it. Only downside is the fixed latency, so I usually bypass it when I'm recording.

RE: Auburn Sounds Panagement - Nayrb - 11-28-2018

I've been experimenting with both, but at this time I'm still sticking with basic EQ where tweaking of proximity frequencies is needed. Interesting tools to have handy, though. If nothing else, these plugins can be used as educational tools to learn what to listen for.

I agree that Proximity seems a bit more subtle, and pleasantly so. It seems like it's doings less hacking away of the original sound whereas Panagement is very noticeably cutting stuff out, though easier to understand over all. It could be applied in interesting ways outside of orchestral environments, though, I'm sure.