Second Compressors

andrushkiwt

andrushkiwt

Well-known member
For those of you using a second compressor on things like a vocal bus, bass, or master channel, what is driving your decision to use it in the first place? Is it typically a slower reacting compressor, with less drastic reduction that's only there to smooth out the long-term gain, while the first is controlling transients? If so, does the second compressor ever have a different purpose in your mix for being there (other than straight up preferred color, perhaps)?

I usually have my vocal bus set up with 2 compressors; the second with the purpose above. Just curious what others use it for and seeing if I'm maximizing the potential with it. thanks
 
I stack two compressors in series on the vocal track, sometimes even three. I set them up the way you mentioned. It's all the same ReaComp compressor, so I'm not looking to add different textures. It just seems to sound more natural running multiple compressors at less extreme settings. Don't know why that is.
 
Robus said:
I stack two compressors in series on the vocal track, sometimes even three. I set them up the way you mentioned. It's all the same ReaComp compressor, so I'm not looking to add different textures. It just seems to sound more natural running multiple compressors at less extreme settings. Don't know why that is.
Click to expand...

But how do you set your A/R? If the seconds' attack is faster than the first, I'd imagine there'd be some nasty artifacts...if not set properly, you might have an A/R problem where they are stepping on each other and overlapping their respective time constraints.
 
It's like you said originally. The first is set for a quick attack and release to catch the transients, then the second for longer to smooth out the overall levels.

The other thing I do is adjust the output gain on the first compressor to control how much the second one gets triggered. That's a fine adjustment, as it makes a big difference in the overall result.
 
This has always seemed exactly backwards to me. It made sense when we were actually tracking as hot as we could that we'd want to compress transients first just keep them from distorting on the way to tape. By the time we're dropping on plugins, though, it's too late for that.

The thing is that usually when the sustain (of just about any source) gets quieter, the associated transients do too. Sing one word quiet. Then sing it loud. Now normalize them and the overall envelope should be about the same - the transients are about the same amount louder than the sustained parts in both cases.

Now if you go smashing down the transients before leveling, you're going to end up with each word about the same overall volume, but the ones that were quieter to begin with are going to have louder transients and in extreme cases, you're going to want to smash those down with yet another faster compressor.

There is something to be said for emulating the sounds that people got back when it was more important to protect the recording medium from overs, but that in my mind is a special effect.

For the most part I do the slow leveling compression first so that the faster "limiting" compressor acts more consistently overall. I do this with vox, bass guitars, drums, or really whatever I think needs both leveling and peak control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top