Compression before or after Reverb?

[Quagmire02]

I am going to do a submix of my entire recorded kit, already EQd and mixed, compress the submix A LOT and then mix it into everything minus about 15-20db. My question is: should I wait until after I add reverb to the drums before doing the submix, or add reverb then do the submix and compress it???

[Cloneboy Studio]

I wouldn't add reverb to the submix at ALL. The idea behind that is to make things sound weightier and more in-yo-face--putting reverb on it will detract from that and possibly muddy things up.

Make a reverb aux buss and send the parts to it individually. Keep your 'thickener' buss dry. There will be verb on the drums from the buss and it should all gel.

[Quagmire02]

Originally Posted by Cloneboy Studio

I wouldn't add reverb to the submix at ALL. The idea behind that is to make things sound weightier and more in-yo-face--putting reverb on it will detract from that and possibly muddy things up.

Make a reverb aux buss and send the parts to it individually. Keep your 'thickener' buss dry. There will be verb on the drums from the buss and it should all gel.

So basically the only thing I wanna do before I make the submix is EQ?

If that is the case, after I make the submix, I just compress it a lot and put it back in alongside the true mix at about -15/-20db or so? Then I add reverb and compression to the true original mix of the kit? (which brings me back to the first question...which first? reverb or comp..)

Thanks in advance...

[Cylkk]

dynamics before effects, but whatever sounds best to you is the key.

[chessrock]

A lot of times, compression is used to draw out the natural reverb of a track. Perfect example is snare or a drum room mic. You might have heard the term: "Smashing the room mic." That's kind of the idea. You take a more distant track that naturally picks up some of the room reflections ... and then you heavily compress that track in order to even further emphasise the room effect/ This will, in essence, give you your "reverb" track, so to speak. Which you then mix in to the close-mic'ed tracks in order to give you the desired amount of "room."

If you're tracking in a live room to begin with, then reverb probably isn't necessary, and can oftentimes only serve to cloud things up. And compression will only draw out and emphasize any natural room sound that already might be there.

Alright ... with that out of the way, if you've got a mostly dry track to begin with ... you can do either. But keep in mind that any compression will emphasize / multiply any reverb you apply. So don't use as much.

On the other hand, if you compress before you add the verb, it isn't going to sound as natural. Reason being that when dealing with natural room ambience, it always goes: room ambience > then compression. Think about it.

You get where I'm coming from? I'll re-phrase: When dealing with a situation where you're using real, genuine room ambience ... the "room" always comes before the compression. There's no other way it could occur in the natural world.

I guess where I'm getting at is that, if you want it to sound natural, then use the reverb first ... but make sure to use less of it than you might otherwise like.

[NYMorningstar]

Originally Posted by chessrock

When dealing with a situation where you're using real, genuine room ambience ... the "room" always comes before the compression.

Is good one. Do not put cart before horse

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by chessrock

On the other hand, if you compress before you add the verb, it isn't going to sound as natural. Reason being that when dealing with natural room ambience, it always goes: room ambience > then compression. Think about it.

You get where I'm coming from? I'll re-phrase: When dealing with a situation where you're using real, genuine room ambience ... the "room" always comes before the compression. There's no other way it could occur in the natural world.

I guess where I'm getting at is that, if you want it to sound natural, then use the reverb first ... but make sure to use less of it than you might otherwise like.

Chess, you are absolutely correct in the analysis that *by definition*, the room has to come before compression. But - far be it for me to disagree with another Chicagoan on anything other than baseball teams - stretching that natural situation to how to effect a dry recording is not always true, IMHO. A couple of examples...

Say you're recording bass direct. If you verb it before pressing it, there's a better than even chance of over-accentuating the verb. If you do it's going to sound like molasses. In that kind of case, the reason for the compression is to even out the instrument level; i.e. to make the instrument "play differently". Once you have it playing like a theoretically perfect bass, then you inject it into the room by adding verb to it. The effect is to have a perfect sounding bass playing in a room rather than trying to get a bass playing in a room to sound perfect.

Also, lets say you've gone into the mixdown polishing stage and you need to either; a) add a little reverb to the overall mix to glue the tracks together, or b) add a reverb tail at to the hard edit at the end of the song, or c) both of the above. In each of those cases, if you apply the verb ebfore the compression, you have the same problem you had with the bass situation above, the decay of the reverb can be artificially enhanced by the compression and you'll sound like you're in an oil drum. Like the bass situation, these situations are cases where you need to get the right sound first, and then apply the verb to it to give it that ambience and not vice versa.

This same situation can apply to drums if there's a lot of close miking and very little "room" in the recording. In that case, you need to make it sound like a good drum kit in a natural room. So you need to get the good drum kit sound (with compression) first, then put it in the room with some verb. if you go the other way, verbing it first, as you said yourself, you have the compression boosting the reverb and it won't sound right.

If, of course, you're not close miking or have a heavy dose of overheads with a lot of the room in them, then you're right, you already have the room to deal with before you apply anything, so verb is already there by definition.

Does that make any sense?

G.

[Cloneboy Studio]

Originally Posted by Quagmire02

So basically the only thing I wanna do before I make the submix is EQ?

If that is the case, after I make the submix, I just compress it a lot and put it back in alongside the true mix at about -15/-20db or so? Then I add reverb and compression to the true original mix of the kit? (which brings me back to the first question...which first? reverb or comp..)

Maybe there's a misunderstanding here.

My advice would be:

1.) Process your drums normally w/ EQ and compression

2.) Make 2 auxillary busses--REVERB and DRUM COMPRESSOR

3.) Buss individual drums in amount wanted to the DCOMPRESSOR buss, slam them to amount necessary and raise into mix to levels desired.

4.) Buss individual drums in amount wanted to the REVERB buss (which should be 100% wet). Set the REVERB buss to the amount needed.

For my productions I run the reverb buss for all the instruments together--so they get 'verbed as a group to sound the most natural (and transparently, I'm not big into a lot of 'verb).

The drum compressor buss will go to the main mix, but **NOT** to the reverb.

So the answer to your question is that NEITHER is getting sent to the compressor or reverb first--in a roundabout way they are hitting both simultaneously as parallel effects. In my FX chain the individual drum compressor is hitting first, then EQ and then they are simultaneously going to 2 seperate busses before hitting the main buss.

Hope this helps!

[chessrock]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

This same situation can apply to drums if there's a lot of close miking and very little "room" in the recording. In that case, you need to make it sound like a good drum kit in a natural room. So you need to get the good drum kit sound (with compression) first, then put it in the room with some verb.

In a real world recording situation, your drums aren't already compressed when they're in the room. It would be cool if that were physically possible.

In the real world, it goes reverb, then compression. When drums are tracked in a live room, that's the way you hear it, eventually. It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by chessrock

In a real world recording situation, your drums aren't already compressed when they're in the room. It would be cool if that were physically possible.

You're right, they're not. I'm talking about applying compression. And you are right, in a live room with overhead or distance miking, you're going to get the room reverb at the microphone before any compression even has a chance to be applied.

However, on close-miked tracks or in a deadened drum booth, where there is no appreciable "room" hitting the mics, then the engineer has the choice. In those cases, more often than not, you're better off applying compression before adding "room" with reverb.

G.

[Quagmire02]

Originally Posted by Cloneboy Studio

Maybe there's a misunderstanding here.

My advice would be:

1.) Process your drums normally w/ EQ and compression

2.) Make 2 auxillary busses--REVERB and DRUM COMPRESSOR

3.) Buss individual drums in amount wanted to the DCOMPRESSOR buss, slam them to amount necessary and raise into mix to levels desired.

4.) Buss individual drums in amount wanted to the REVERB buss (which should be 100% wet). Set the REVERB buss to the amount needed.

For my productions I run the reverb buss for all the instruments together--so they get 'verbed as a group to sound the most natural (and transparently, I'm not big into a lot of 'verb).

The drum compressor buss will go to the main mix, but **NOT** to the reverb.

So the answer to your question is that NEITHER is getting sent to the compressor or reverb first--in a roundabout way they are hitting both simultaneously as parallel effects. In my FX chain the individual drum compressor is hitting first, then EQ and then they are simultaneously going to 2 seperate busses before hitting the main buss.

Hope this helps!

Would it be too newb of me to ask how to make an auxillary buss, and exactly what it is? Is it a separate track you run everything through that contains a certain effect?

[chessrock]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

However, on close-miked tracks or in a deadened drum booth, where there is no appreciable "room" hitting the mics, then the engineer has the choice. In those cases, more often than not, you're better off applying compression before adding "room" with reverb.

Unless you like it better the other way ... in which case you should do it the other way around.

This shit's totally subjective, South.

[xfinsterx]

There arent any rules to the question.

Try both, which ever one sounds better will be your answer.

-Finster

[Cloneboy Studio]

Originally Posted by Quagmire02

Would it be too newb of me to ask how to make an auxillary buss, and exactly what it is? Is it a separate track you run everything through that contains a certain effect?

Making one depends on what program you are using. In ProTools you: FILE>ADD NEW TRACKS: Select mono or stereo aux buss and create.

A buss is just a track that you route (buss) other tracks to where they will be combined. You can add insert FX on the busses so everything on the buss gets effected together.

Very effective for reverb. I run a master reverb buss and send everything except vocals to it. Main vocals get their own seperate reverb, however backing vocals will get a seperate reverb buss of their own (all backing vox go to that).

I often make a "drum compression" submix as described above for added oomph. Depends on the music though--I did a blues band the Sunday that this technique was not needed nor desirable.

[Quagmire02]

Originally Posted by Cloneboy Studio

Making one depends on what program you are using. In ProTools you: FILE>ADD NEW TRACKS: Select mono or stereo aux buss and create.

A buss is just a track that you route (buss) other tracks to where they will be combined. You can add insert FX on the busses so everything on the buss gets effected together.

Very effective for reverb. I run a master reverb buss and send everything except vocals to it. Main vocals get their own seperate reverb, however backing vocals will get a seperate reverb buss of their own (all backing vox go to that).

I often make a "drum compression" submix as described above for added oomph. Depends on the music though--I did a blues band the Sunday that this technique was not needed nor desirable.

Cool, can the same method be used for bouncing tracks?

[firby]

In my very humble opinion, a better question would be:

"Do I eq before or after compression".

I really think that is perhaps a good question for you to ask.

[Cloneboy Studio]

Originally Posted by Quagmire02

Cool, can the same method be used for bouncing tracks?

I wouldn't do it that way. I'd solo what I want bounced to disk and bounce the suckers. I rarely have to do that though because the PT rig I'm on is vaguely ridiculous (HD 4 Accel).

[Quagmire02]

Clone - thanks for all your help.

I'm still a tad confused about two things...

1) I have several tracks for my drums...a hat track, snare track, individual tom tracks, kick track, and one overhead track.

Now, when I make the sumbix, do I want to duplicate thes tracks and then add compression to all of them at once, or do I want to combine them all onto another single track and add compression to that?

If it's the latter, that brings me to #2

2) I don't know how to combine several track into one track (without deleting or overwriting the originals) in Cubase SX (not SX3). I read the bouncing section of my manual, and when I follow its instructions, nothing seem to happen. My only other guess would be to export just the drums to a single wave file and then import them again on a new, single track within the project.

Is this correct?

[Cloneboy Studio]

Originally Posted by Quagmire02

1)Now, when I make the sumbix, do I want to duplicate thes tracks and then add compression to all of them at once, or do I want to combine them all onto another single track and add compression to that?

Add your normal EQ/compression to the original tracks and BUSS them to the aux buss for additional compression as a group.

No need to duplicate anything.

Originally Posted by Quagmire02

2) I don't know how to combine several track into one track (without deleting or overwriting the originals) in Cubase SX (not SX3). I read the bouncing section of my manual, and when I follow its instructions, nothing seem to happen. My only other guess would be to export just the drums to a single wave file and then import them again on a new, single track within the project.

You could do that, but I'd buss them instead. Crack the manual and figure out how to buss in Cubase.