Compression

So there is a right and wrong way now?:rolleyes:
I just tweak until it sounds good.

PaulBrewer wrote: »

'If the gain reduction doesn’t return to zero several times per bar, you’re compressing too much'

Discuss ?


http://www.homestudiocorner.com/2011/06/13/over-compression/?awt_l=5Jfpw&awt_m=IgyLFggPqqazuu

Hmm.....depends on whether you re talking about peak or RMS compression on a track.
If its for peaks, then I agree, the track should return to zero once the peak have been caught. That said, if you are peaking a lot within a small range that its more an average dynamic range, then I say that you are tracking too hot and to turn the input down a bit. So your range that was once between -2db and +2db, is now between -9db and -5db.

If its RMS value, then surely the compressor will likely have a state of "always on", with variation in the reduction gain characterizing the sound.

The article does have a point though....compression is overused. If you have an inconistant player thats tying your hands, then thats one thing, but knowingly compressing the **** out of things that dont need it is madness!

I mean, would you compress a distorted guitar signal seeing as how its so compressed anyways coming out from the amp?
(I'm actually curious about this one and other peoples thoughs....even though it comes across a bit "matter of fact"-ish! )

Paolo_M wrote: »

dumdrum, I'd use multi-band compression to catch any cab resonances present. It's a trick I picked over at the Sneap forums and I find it works very well, streets ahead of anything I was ever able to get with EQ. It's like a de-esser for the lows/low midz.

Yeah I saw something like that mentioned in a few places on the net. Havent tried it myself yet though...

So how would you set your frequency bands, and how much would you recommend setting the threshold and ratio at? (obviously this varies from person to person, but any ballpark figures?)

Is the idea just to get the lows and low mids to be brought forth a bit more?
I tend to high pass anywhere from around 100 - 150Hz to give room for the kick drum and bass, so my lows are already fairly altered to start with. I low pass usually from about 8.5KHz to 10kHz to leave the top end for the cymbals...
Lately I've been parallel compressing them to decent results.

Compression with vocals can be amazing though, especially if your vocalists mic technique is a bit ....well....crap!

Article is very wrong. It uses the example of 10dB constant gain reduction but the effect of a compressor is a ratio of peak input over threshold to peak output over threshold. The amount of gain reduction is constantly changing based on the peak input signal over threshold.

If you have hard knee, absolute (not RMS) peak level detection and 0ms attack/release then this is the fastest you can make auto gain reduction track the input signal. It will produce artifacts if there is a sudden, large amount of gain reduction in a short space of time. This may or may not be desirable depending on what you want to do.

If you want less sensitive tracking to avoid artifacts there are loads of ways to do that - use an RMS compressor (and increase RMS window size accordingly), use an attack or release envelope to delay the onset and relaxation of gain reduction and/or use soft knee (gain reduction is a sliding scale that begins x dB below threshold and reaches maximum when the input signal exceeds the threshold).

In the case of hard knee compression, nothing is affected below threshold, so the idea that 10dB of gain reduction from a compressor is equivalent to turning down the output by 10dB is flat wrong. It isn't even true for a soft knee compressor.

If gain reduction is constantly happening then you are constantly transforming the signal (above the threshold).

Not to detract from the man's formidable achievements but the GS thread where that quote comes from is a rambling mess. I think he may have been drunk when he posted it.

Compression is a black art if ever there was one. The hours I've lost!...

....The hours I loose, I should say.

Jagle wrote: »

statement does not compute
a limiter is a compressor

Limiting is a type of compression. They're not the same.

Plus a limiter has very fast attack and automatic release time. So it's only kind of a compressor. If it's just a reduction of dynamic range you need, then a limiter is the way to go. Compressors usually give you a lot more control so you can shape the "envelope".

Hayte, right, gotcha, that's much clearer. But what about using the GR meter?

Hayte wrote: »

it instantly applies massive and indiscriminate gain reduction if the input goes over threshold.

Not sure what you mean by indiscriminate- the "discrimination", such as it is, depends on where you set the threshold.

Jagle is correct.

A compressor essentially becomes a limiter at very high compression ratios and very short attack/release times.

Its not like you even need to be specific about attack times since some compressors do stupid attack times. Crane Song STC-8 claims less than 1 microsecond attack which is hilarious because oh the distortion. You can also have soft limiting and some limiters don't have compression ratios as high as some compressors even. So theres a load of overlap and theres no clear boundary where a compressor ends and a limiter begins. If you are using a compressor to catch transients with a fast envelope, high threshold and high ratio then you are limiting. Plain and simple.

johnnylakes wrote: »

He said it in a video interview with Dave Pensado (Pensados Place) . I was just messing anyway! Easy for him to say with the gear and musicians etc he had at his disposal! Compression is a can of worms anyway. Lately I have been trying to use it as sparingly as possible, if you can get the source right really is the big thing. I think everyone goes through a phase of slapping it on everything when starting off. Less is more and all that.

I wonder where it came from first? My favourite Bruce quote is when he said that a chimpanzie could record Michael (Jackson). He was literally that good at performing that he makes other people feel good about their work even though they pretty much have to do jack s**t.

Really puts things into perspective when you consider all of this is just shop talk really. I still don't like shovelling bulls**t into people's heads because theres nothing more saddening on the internet than someone asking a technical question, and someone else giving them a technically wrong answer. Then they go off and get insane ideas in their head. Years later you see them on Gearslutz or some other fringe internet society. Not even grade 1 standard with their first instrument but with 50k worth of gear. Not even my enemies deserve that.

krd wrote: »

And then you think of the compressor to lift quieter sounds to a higher level.

Aargh! You might want to revise that, especially in light of hayte's last post...

Yes you're right (except that "average RMS" is a contradiction) but that's not what he said!

If nothing else, all this shows that compression is a minefield.

Never saw the point of multiband myself. If a mix "needs" it, then what's needed is a remix. And it makes no sense on individual instruments. No wonder you find it harder, it's using an elephant gun to shoot a mouse. Those things were originally designed for US radio stations to create a "signature" sound in an effort to be both louder and different on the crowded FM wavelength. Then there was a craze for them in mastering. Now the myth has been established. Although they do have some creative uses alright.

I think it's important to note that "being able to raise the level of previously quite sound" is a side effect. The actual compression is done on the peaks. And that's where it can hurt the sound the most.

I make most of my own music electronically, and never had a need for a multiband. I would think that appropriate choice of sound/ good programming and good arranging would be a better solution.

Going through each control one by one, by setting the others at extremes, is the best way to learn what the compressor is doing. So for example, starting at the beginning- set attack in the middle, release on fast or auto, threshold very low and ratio very high. Then move the attack control and get a feel for it. It's an old technique, but Stav describes it well in Mixing with your Mind.