Realistic audio maps - preserving stereo best practice

[FL K]

Hi F53 and Sound Designers,

I have a production coming up where I want to take advantage of object audio, mainly for a realistic speaker map, but I do have a question:

In Chris' entertaining training videos on the topic, he works with a single object - thus (correct me if I'm wrong) mixing down the original stereo file down to mono and then pan it around the room; while that can be fine for some sounds that may have been inherently recorded as mono anyway, I wondered what the best approach is to preserve stereo;

I assume you'd make a second object I guess one for left, one for right), put them on opposite ends of the maps (depending on where you want your stereo "axis" to start?) and use a fade cue to move both of them around the room as needed...

Or am I overthinking this? Underthinking?

Is there/can there be ever (value in) a concept such as balance vs just panning in Object audio?

Anyway, very excited to have a decent excuse (both a surround setup as well as a production that really calls for it) to give object audio a good whirl (literally).

I just hope QLab won't chose violence ;). Thanks in advance for indulging me!

All the best,

Freddy

[Sam Kusnetz]

On May 6, 2026 at 9:41:46 AM, FL K <busy...@gmail.com> wrote:

In Chris' entertaining training videos on the topic, he works with a single object - thus (correct me if I'm wrong) mixing down the original stereo file down to mono and then pan it around the room; while that can be fine for some sounds that may have been inherently recorded as mono anyway, I wondered what the best approach is to preserve stereo;

I assume you'd make a second object I guess one for left, one for right), put them on opposite ends of the maps (depending on where you want your stereo "axis" to start?) and use a fade cue to move both of them around the room as needed...

Hi Freddy

The answer to your question depends on your goals.

If your hope is to preserve the actual stereo spatial image of the recording, using object audio at all is sort of across purposes. After all, the original recording was holding still!

If your hope is simply to play back both tracks with some width between them, the attached screenshot 1 is how I’d do it. My steps to get here were:

1. Create an Audio cue and assign a stereo audio file as its file target.
2. In the Objects tab of the Audio cue, select a map, then create two objects and position them to taste.
3. Name the first object “Left” and route the first input to it.
4. Name the second object “Right” and route the second input to it.
5. Create a Fade cue targeting the Audio cue.
6. In the Objects tab of the Fade cue, select the first object and create a fade path. Then, select that path and copy it.
7. Now select the second object and paste the fade path. Drag the pasted path so that its start point aligns with the position of the second object.

If you want a more noticeable effect, start with the two objects farther apart.

It’s really important to understand that this will only sound good if the actual layout of speakers in the theater supports it. If I just have two speakers on the extreme left and right sides of my room, the apparent width of the two objects will be almost impossible to notice. The show I have currently running that uses spatialization of this kind has five main speakers across the proscenium: left, left-center, center, right-center, right.

Is there/can there be ever (value in) a concept such as balance vs just panning in Object audio?

“Balance” can mean different things to different people. For me, balance usually means “when I mix a stereo source down to a mono result, what percentage of each channel should end up in the final mix? 50/50? 75/25?” If balance means this to you, then it’s really easy to do that in QLab! Just dial in the input levels according to your desired ratio (see attached screenshot 2.)

Something I always tell my students: there is no such thing as panning! Panning is just a quick shorthand way to say “make it louder over here at the same time as you make it quieter over there.”

I hope this helps!

Best

Sam

—

Sam Kusnetz (he/him) | Figure 53

s...@figure53.com

[FL K]

Thanks Sam for taking the time!

Weirdly, while I usually receive emails about topic notifications when I authored the original post, this time it did not happen and so I did not think anyone had replied :)!

OK, that validates part of my approach - individual objects for L and R channels was what I came up with :)! I guess my worry is that not all stereo sounds take kindly to being mixed down to mono, with phase cancellation etc; And yes, I was asking for a spatial setup (traverse show, with a long catwalk stage, and arrays of speakers above each audience side to allow sounds travelling mainly along the catwalk; To me, stereo does not have to mean strictly left and right, rather having different/complementary sounds coming from 2 different speakers in a space;

Balance in my case was tied to a mixer's stereo channel's balance knob - in effect just controlling amount of left through left channel and amount of right through right channel, as opposed to a stereo panner that uses pan law.

Do tell me if this is crazy, but I guess I am wondering/considering if extending object audio with a "2-headed' (or n-headed?) Object might be useful? Imagine a circle cut into 2 or n regular pieces - each slice represents the one channel of a file; obviously, one would need to be able to adjust the angle of the splits, but the idea would be that the object ITSELF has filters that begin in its centre and radiate out through infinity, and these filters move with the object; in a two-channel setup with a stereo file, this would mean that left channel sound would only radiate towards marks within that 180 degree around the object, right channel only towards the other 180 degree of that object;

Does this make any sense? If nothing else it would save moving 2 objects around instead of one, while preserving its stereo width through automatically targeting opposing speakers as the object would move through the map.

Cheers,

Freddy

[Sam Kusnetz]

OK, that validates part of my approach - individual objects for L and R channels was what I came up with :)! I guess my worry is that not all stereo sounds take kindly to being mixed down to mono, with phase cancellation etc

Yes, that is exactly why nothing happens automatically in this area for QLab. Only you know whether you have a mono-compatible stereo recording!

To me, stereo does not have to mean strictly left and right, rather having different/complementary sounds coming from 2 different speakers in a space;

Well, I’m sorry to be pushy but “stereo” in fact means strictly left and right. If you’re playing different sounds from different speakers that do not attempt to reproduce or simulate a spatial relationship, then you are just playing two sounds out of two speakers and the word “stereo” does not apply any more than the word “subwoofer” applies to “any speaker that plays a low pitched sound.”

Do tell me if this is crazy, but I guess I am wondering/considering if extending object audio with a "2-headed' (or n-headed?) Object might be useful? 

While I think your exact description sounds a little funny to me, I certainly agree that it would be useful for us to build tools that allow you to link or lock objects together so that they can move in parallel or perhaps with mirror/opposite motion.

the idea would be that the object ITSELF has filters that begin in its centre and radiate out through infinity, and these filters move with the object

That’s fascinating to me, but I suspect possibly only useful in a very narrow circumstance.

Ultimately, “object audio” systems are about synthesizing the apparent position and simulated movement of sound in a space filled with (hopefully) many speakers. There are a lot of ways that we can support better use of multichannel audio files (stereo and otherwise) and I agree we should explore that! Let’s keep talking about it!

[FL K]

Hi Sam

On Friday, 15 May 2026 at 02:24:54 UTC+10 sam wrote:

To me, stereo does not have to mean strictly left and right, rather having different/complementary sounds coming from 2 different speakers in a space;

Well, I’m sorry to be pushy but “stereo” in fact means strictly left and right. If you’re playing different sounds from different speakers that do not attempt to reproduce or simulate a spatial relationship, then you are just playing two sounds out of two speakers and the word “stereo” does not apply any more than the word “subwoofer” applies to “any speaker that plays a low pitched sound.”

No offence taken :) - in the same vein, "pushing" back - While functionally, we use our left and right ears to perceive sound and direction, stereo in its strictest form only means a 2-channel sound, to be reproduced by 2 different speakers in a space - depending on where people are in the space will determine for them where that sound is coming from, by use of their 2 ears and their brain, but, certainly highlighted by a traverse theatre situation, left and right as an absolute construct in a space to describe a speaker's job or position relative to the variety of audience member's positions and orientation becomes pretty useless pretty fast :).

What a sound design is pushing through what speaker, and what relationship the sounds have, how say a common stereo/multi-channel reverb bounces around the space - all these decisions will still always simulate (designed) or reproduce ("true" stereo) a stereophonic image that is perceived depending on the audience's position in the space; I guess my point was merely that outside of a traditional 2.1 setup with a stage or a screen, in anything with 2 or more speakers in promenade theatre, thrust, in the round etc, left and right as lables lose their meaning, while still and no matter what you play through these speakers create a spatial sound design (that will alter depending on where you are in the space, and which way you face).

Do tell me if this is crazy, but I guess I am wondering/considering if extending object audio with a "2-headed' (or n-headed?) Object might be useful? 

While I think your exact description sounds a little funny to me, I certainly agree that it would be useful for us to build tools that allow you to link or lock objects together so that they can move in parallel or perhaps with mirror/opposite motion.

Also a cool solution to the problem, I guess as long as you can control their connecting axis's orientation, and control the pair from a calculated centre (maybe with a distance parameter to such centre, so that you can control and fade the width of the objects?) when you move them - I think that would help more than say one of the objects being the "leader" and the other the follower? 

the idea would be that the object ITSELF has filters that begin in its centre and radiate out through infinity, and these filters move with the object

That’s fascinating to me, but I suspect possibly only useful in a very narrow circumstance.

Ultimately, “object audio” systems are about synthesizing the apparent position and simulated movement of sound in a space filled with (hopefully) many speakers. There are a lot of ways that we can support better use of multichannel audio files (stereo and otherwise) and I agree we should explore that! Let’s keep talking about it!

Count me in :).

All the best,

Freddy

 

Best

Sam

[Sam Kusnetz]

No offence taken :) - in the same vein, "pushing" back - While functionally, we use our left and right ears to perceive sound and direction, stereo in its strictest form only means a 2-channel sound, to be reproduced by 2 different speakers in a space

I don’t think I agree with that!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereophonic_sound

I guess my point was merely that outside of a traditional 2.1 setup with a stage or a screen, in anything with 2 or more speakers in promenade theatre, thrust, in the round etc, left and right as lables lose their meaning

That was in fact my original point too… while most professional theatrical speaker systems today could reproduce stereophonic sound for some or occasionally all of the audience, mostly they are neither designed nor used for exactly that purpose, so the fundamental question of “stereo object audio” is already somewhat vague and blurry.

sk