Compressor VS EQ?

P

penfloor95

New member
Ok,

I'm finally getting everything together. I usually record from my QS6.1 into my Tascam Multitracker.
I do have a CD recorder, and I am thinking about going into that from my multitracker. But before I go into CD recorder, I was thinking of either a compressor or EQ. Which One?
I am looking to add a little detail and umph to my music. It sounds great but my multitracker is limiting because of the Lack of EQ.
I usually create funky laid back grooves with a lot of Bass. So I ask, which one should I consider?
 
Hey Pen
Ide go for the compressor/ limiter.
Its a great recording tool,especially on vocals and acoustic guitar.
The eq is limited on the 424 with no mid range sweep.But I used to do alot of external bouncing witch allowed me to eq the sound on the way back in.

Youll more n likly end up with both, eq and compressor.there both very good tools.

jimimac
 
How's this answer:
In my personal 24 trk studio, I have 2 rack EQs. I have 7 compressors. The logic here is that you get it to sound as good as you possibly can before going to tape/HD... whatever. The compressor can add the punch. Although, I don't know (maybe you weren't meaning this, sorry if I misunderstood)of I would compress before the whole mix before going to the CD burner. Maybe light compression just for the choruses. But digital seems to free you a little from always needing a compressor... but you'll have to watch going into the digital "red"... maybe make sure your compressor can also act as a limiter- to set a threshold against the volume level going past digital 0 before going to CD. Good luck.
 
Okay, let's put the question slightly differently:

What does compression do to the signal, and how/why is it used?

My understanding is that compression makes peaks lower, thereby enabling you to boost the volume/gain on the track overall. And all this for no reason other than being able to match the volume of your CD with commercial CDs. In other words, if you didn't use compression, you'd have the same result if you just turned up the volume on the CD player. In other words yet again, compression is pretty stupid - you're screwing with the original signal just so you can sound as loud as the next guy.

(dobro lays back and waits for the feedback to come sweeping in...)
 
Okay dobro, then how do I set it so that all my tracks sound as loud as Tool's mixes do? I want to the Tool sound on my tracks.

Ed
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MT400:
Hey what is a compressor anyway?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

COMPRESSORS ARE USED TO ADJUST AND CONTROL PURE AUDIO SIGNALS GOING TO A TAPE SO THAT UNWANTED NOISE CAN BE ELIMINATED AND TO
COMPRESS AUDIO SIGNALS SO THAT THEY MAY "FIT"
ON A TAPE SINCE TAPES HAVE LIMITATION AS TO HOW MUCH AUDIO THAT CAN HOLD.
 
Hey all,

Thanx for the advice and info. Like jimimac said, I would probably end up with both, I did end up with both.
Now......, figuring out how to correctly apply compression, so that I can control the bass and drums. Hmmmmmmmm.....
I like to have a lot of Fat and thick bass in my music.
I guess I'll just have to experiment and find out.
 
This site is kind of anti Compression. :)
No offense to anyone.

I'ts kind of a fad today to be anti compression, But I find it to be a great tool that can save a track.

It seems that People are so afraid to use one so that they don't so called "kill the life and depth of the original soumd".

Forget about my opinion - what do I know. But I have seen over 20-30 engineers work in pro studios over several years. some of them with 25 years of experience and credit's that would make any jaw drop, use compression with out cringing or apologizing.

So Bob Katz said to be carefull.... so now compression sucks ?

My humble opinion - it is one of the tools that can add life and depth to your tracks and help it be heard and understood in your mix.

To all the guys that think they can do with out it and it works for them? great, I've got respect for that.

Anybody want to buy a car sticker from me saying
" I use compression and I'm Damm proud " ?.





[This message has been edited by Shailat (edited 04-04-2000).]
 
Shailat: I'm not arguing against the use of compression - I'm being the devil's advocate here to try to tease out an understanding of it - what it does to the signal and why people, pros included, use it.

My initial approach to anything I don't understand is caution, even if everybody's doing it, in fact, especially if everybody's doing it - I don't trust something just because everyone uses or does it. I've tried applying compression to a couple of CDs I've burnt, and what I hear is a louder CD. If that's it, if that's the whole story, then what's the big deal? Why not just turn up the volume control on the CD player?

Ed: dunno what Tool sound is. Duh.
 
Dobro,
Your'e right.
In doubt ? -drop it.
Also You are talking about compression after the mix is finished and you have a valid point. I'm talking about during recording and during the process of mixing.

Many mastering engineers use a multiband compressor and so the work is more like the knife of a Doc's operation then a butcher. Not to mention the quality compressors they use.

There does seem to be some craze of "My Cd is the loudest"
but don't forget that in many home systems if you pick up the volume you add noise.
 
I've found that using compression during recording for Vocals, bass & acoustic guitars helps even out the signal . . . no peaks and valleys in volume. This helps !
For PC multitracking, I get better volume consistency by normalizing my final mix's stereo tracks rather than using compression. Normalizing doesn't add any color, it just raises the Db range of each track to a maximum without clipping.

It works for me.

Regards,
PAPicker
 
Shailat, PAPicker: Thanks, that was useful - I've got some ideas to experiment with now, and that's when I really learn. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top