Dumbest question about compression and eq but plz I could never understand..plz help

[DevD]

Dumbest question about compression and eq but plz I could never understand..plz help


1) People say compression makes sound tight , is the inconsistency in dynamic range understood or audible ...... ?
I don't hear that much of difference in lower and higher volumes of voices or instruments sometimes , and even if I hear that softness and loudness of singing or sounds I love it ,it's what we call "feel"....so I compress only because I read and see that it has to be done .... sometimes rather than being able to make some anticipated change in dynamic tightness, all I can hear is change in the tone or volume ....but till date the question lingers,....do we really need to compress everything ......
a)should a sound be compressed even if the need to compress it is not audible ?
b)What will go wrong if we keep it as it is ?
c)Should a difference after compression audible in a very obvious way or we should just be happy that it is ultimately compressed ?

2) we take sounds from several sources and choose the best samples now a days, most have eq and compression and effects applied too sometimes ..... and then I am suggested to eq sounds.....I liked the tone that is why I selected it , then why do I have to eq it again .....? unless I want to cut down some muffled bass or hiss..... why is it customary to improve the already best sound ....all I can see is that you can sharpen a sound or make it clearer, but
a)How do I know what is that bench mark of clarity or sharpness or tonal optimization .....??

3)Sometimes after mixing my raw instruments the only thing that I feel the need to do is overall compression and increase in loudness and still it's fun to hear, but after trying all these compressions and this and that I lose all my analog and real feel .....so if I avoid that , do you think it would not be of professional standard.......
Plz help.

 

[Farview]

First of all, you listen to it to dtletermine if you need eq and compression. If it doesn't sound like you need it, you don't.

Here are the questions you need to ask yourself while mixing:

1. Does this track sound like I want it to?
If the answer is yes, you are done. Move on to the next track
If the answer is no...

2. Is it a tone problem, or is the volume all over the place?
If it's a tone problem, use eq
If the volume is all over the place, use compression.

3. Does this track sit in the mix the way it should?
If yes, you are done. Move on.
If no...

4. Why doesn't it sit well?
If it's a tone problem, use eq
If the volume is all over the place, use compression

That is pretty much it. Never do anything because you read somewhere that you have to do it. Especially if you are using samples which are already pre-processed.

 

[garww]

Processing follows the FAD of the day. So, if everyone thinks a recording should sound more like this, or, that, you kinda' have to follows those constraints.

Oh, I use some sets of samples as benchmarks. Just because no one ever hears acoustic instruments sound like samples doesn't mean you can't use it as guide

 

[snow lizard]

The need for compression should be based on the sound you want. It's very common advice to use output or makeup gain to match levels to the same apparent volume if the compressor is active or bypassed to have a fair shot at deciding if you like the sound. Sometimes the best compressor setting is "bypass".

If there's a specific thing you want to add to the mix, fair enough. Maybe you want the drums to be wider and thicker, maybe you want the snare to crack in a certain way that a certain type of compression can achieve (while other types may be unsuitable), maybe you want the lead vocal to be more "steady state" in nature to help it cut through a dense mix with lots of distorted guitar or something. Or maybe you want to clamp the low end or glue the mix. Or deliberately force it to pump. There should be a goal in mind for the sound and it should be carefully auditioned.

If you're reaching for a compressor just to even out a few dynamic issues, you might also consider volume automation. Compression will change the dynamic envelope of the signal while automation only changes volume. It's like sliding the faders around. It can sound a lot more natural.

For EQ, I can see a high pass filter on a lot of sources being useful if the signal doesn't really rely on the bottom end. It can help to give the mix more power where it's needed and more space for the bass instruments.

Ultimately any processing you do should be based strictly on what you hear. Not because you read that you have to. The main thing you need to do to the mix is provide balance. Most of that is done with faders.

 

[ashcat_lt]

Compression will change the dynamic envelope of the signal while automation only changes volume.

I really do agree with everything you said, but this sentence is funny to me. Change in volume IS the dynamic envelope. With most DAWs you really can do everything that a compressor might do via volume automation. The compressor is basically just a way to automate that process based on mathematical rules rather than eyes and ears and mouse clicks. The big difference is that you CAN actually listen and adjust the automation as you see fit - you're able to make decisions and adapt the behavior based on more abstract parameters like "feel" and "groove" that the little robots inside the compressor don't understand.

Course, nobody really wants to manually draw envelopes around every single snare hit on the record. Likewise, most compressors don't do really long, slow leveling like between phrases very well. So we use the more appropriate tools for the job.

To the OP I would say that no sound on its own is perfect unless it perfectly fits into the mix you're building around it. If you get lucky, and the sample you've chosen actually does fit perfectly, then there's no reason to mess it with it. Much more often, though, when you start mixing a bunch of things that sound perfect on their own, you find that they don't sound perfect together. They will get in each other's way and push each other around. One sound might mask everything that's interesting about another so that all you hear from either one is basically noise.

That's where you get in and start carving. A little squish here or a dip there until everything comes together to play nice.

 

[snow lizard]

I really do agree with everything you said, but this sentence is funny to me. Change in volume IS the dynamic envelope. With most DAWs you really can do everything that a compressor might do via volume automation. The compressor is basically just a way to automate that process based on mathematical rules rather than eyes and ears and mouse clicks.

Sort of. Compression will change the crest factor of a signal, similar to the foot in the Monty Python's Flying Circus title sequence. Riding volume just slides the whole thing up or down. Same crest factor, no squish. Add any harmonic distortion you might be getting from the compressor, plus the charactersitics of the knee, attack and release, and these things are what gives compression a sound of its own. I'll use a compressor if I want that sound.

 

[andrushkiwt]

I liked the tone that is why I selected it , then why do I have to eq it again .....?

Things sound different in solo than they do within the mix. That guitar solo might sound heavy and thick on its own, but once in the middle of panned guitars and bass, it can sound thin. Just one of the few reasons why EQ is used after selecting tones... just to make it fit within the mix a little better.

 

[DevD]

Things sound different in solo than they do within the mix. That guitar solo might sound heavy and thick on its own, but once in the middle of panned guitars and bass, it can sound thin. Just one of the few reasons why EQ is used after selecting tones... just to make it fit within the mix a little better.

What you are saying makes sense but no matter how sharp or big a sound is you can always make it sharper or bigger in the impression of making it better.....If I give an equed and compressed kick to another programmer he will again cut and boost it ..... so how big and how sharp.... how would you define an apt and adequate sound ? Where is the end ? is it personal taste ? or you compare it with other songs .....?

 

[Farview]

You eq the sound until it fits in the mix with the other instruments. The sound of an individual instrument doesn't matter. How it fits in the mix with the other instruments is what matters.

No, there is no standard for what a kick (or anything) is supposed to sound like. If there was, someone could write a computer program to mix songs, and there would be no need for mix engineers.

This is an art form, so the artist (you) are the only one that can decide what anything you create is supposed to sound like.

 

[ashcat_lt]

But there are standards whether we like it or not. Different genres and styles have different expectations and orthodoxys. Depending on what you're mixing and who your intended audience is, it really may be more about comparing to "known good" mixes and doing your best to match them.

@snow lizard - Anything a compressor might do really can be done with volume automation if you've got the time and patience to get in there and do it. Automation definitely can and often will change the overall crest factor of a track. I'm honestly just splitting hairs with this, though. I dig what you're saying and I think most people attack these things the way you describe. I personally tend not to use compression to change the dynamic envelope the way you're talking about, but I do exploit RMS time and look ahead to do a lot of the "leveling" that most folks would do via automation.

 

[Nola]

I think of the compressor like this: do i have a stable fader? If yes, no compression. If no, compress as little as possible to get it stable. If impossible to get it stable, then automate.

I dunno if that's a smart way to look at it, but I feel like it works well and keeps things organic for the most part. If you want to use it as an effect that's another story.

With EQ, things should be more obvious -- if a frequency offends the ear go and find it then remove it, and visa versa, if something is missing try to boost it. Again, you can use it as an effect like a telephone effect, etc.

Another good tip is that your ear has a built in compression, so if you feel that kicking in something is wrong with the EQ or the volume of your mix.

But anyway, OP, your ear will develop the more you mix and you'll be able to make better calls. Not everything needs compression or EQ just remember that. Only if you hear a problem or want an effect.

 

[DevD]

Thank you everyone for replying.

 

[iqi616]

Everyone covered most of it but going back to the original question I have one comment about compressors. They are actually very versatile tools so any advice to "use a compressor" can mean different things to different people under different circumstances.

You can use a compressor to: smooth the average signal level, reduce the microdynamics, enhance the microdynamics, soft-limit, bring down the louder parts of the signal, lift up the quieter parts of the signal, enhance the beat, tighten the sound, open it up, duck, pump, and more uses I can't think of right now.

Taking sampled sounds as an example, they have often been compressed (especially early sample-based drum machines). I generally add a compressor but not to crush the signal further, I use a slowish attack to make fake transients to make the drums more dynamic and realistic.

 

[42low]

I go with iqi616.
Compression is quickly overdone. And then it will ruin the original sound.

And there are more way's to give a song more body than compression only. If the project is right for it i like to experiment with this.
Now for instance i'm trying to get in a recording of someone to give the accoustic guitar which sounds a bit dull some more body. While experimenting. found chorus nice for this particular sound and although i'm not there, were i'm now suits me so i have to play some more with the fine tuning. Until now the accoustic guitar is grown at least 100% in catchy bulky sound.
So IMHO compression ain't alway's needed.