Compressor for Acoustic Guitar and Male Vocals

[JTC111]

Once again I'm seeking an education from all you fine upstanding citizens...

I just ordered a Demeter VTMP-2C pre that should arrive within the next couple of weeks. The only dual channel compressor I have is a Focusrite Compounder. My primary applications are acoustic guitar and male vocals.

So my question is this: what can I expect from a better compressor should I decide to upgrade down the road?

Thanks

[Daisy]

Originally Posted by JTC111

what can I expect from a better compressor should I decide to upgrade down the road?

Something that compresses stuff.

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by Daisy

Something that compresses stuff.

I'm usually a non-violent person, but....

Oops, sorry, I was daydreaming for a minute. What I guess I'm asking is to know the differences between low-end and high-end compressors. I really haven't had much experience with the high-end stuff.

And don't tell me the difference is the price.

[Daisy]

They usually sound better.

And that's about it.

[bigtoe]

true.

"What I guess I'm asking is to know the differences between low-end and high-end compressors. I really haven't had much experience with the high-end stuff."

they make the job easier controlling dynamics, usually they're more invisible in the gain riding and they add something nice to the sound as well as a bonus due to the transformers/tubes/ circuitry...

what are you hearing with the focusrite that makes you want something different? start there.

i collected compressors i wanted over a 7 year period...they make my life easier but it took a while due to the cost and my goal is still to not use them. that's when stuff sounds best to me.

good luck.

Mike

[XLR]

I'd avoid compressing ac gtr while tracking, but if you must do it, try an RNC in supernice mode. It controls dynamcis but leaves the highs sounding pretty natural. On acoustic though you're way better off doing any processing after the fact, and a multiband used well always sounds better to me than a broadband comp on acoustic.

Of course live sound would be a different thing.

[Booda]

Originally Posted by XLR

I'd avoid compressing ac gtr while tracking

I read this type of statement often... the thing is everything is so compressed these days. Even the "natural" sounding stuff. So I don't see why Compressing on the way in is such a bad thing. Just enough to control the track. The main reason I hear is for No Comp is your then stuck with that sound but For me it makes mixing (ITB) much easier and I like the sound of my outboard Comps better than my Software (waves RCL, c1, Timeworks).

For me I have found doing it this way, then putting the RCL across the whole mix works pretty well. You have to know what your going for though... after a while you get to know how much is the right amount.

BTW- My comps are the ProVla, a couple RNCs, and a dbx163x (that I rarely use... I like it but it has a white noise that I can't get rid of). I think my next Comp would be a Distressor or a Joe Meek just for the color.

B.

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by bigtoe

what are you hearing with the focusrite that makes you want something different? start there.
Mike

Having no high end compressors to compare the focusrite to, I have no idea as to what the differences might be. I'm assuming there must be some fairly significant difference otherwise why would someone pay $3000 for a compressor as opposed to $300.

When my new preamp arrives, I'm going to have to do some tracks with and without the compressor to see if i'm losing much off the high end. If I am, then maybe I'll give the RNC a shot.

As for recording my acoustic tracks without compression, it's not a great option for me. I don't play with picks and on songs where there is some alternating between fingerpicking and strumming, I get too much differentiation on volumn because my fingerpicking leans to the delicate side too often. I'd rather add some compression on the initial recording than sacrifice style and nuance.

[XLR]

Originally Posted by Booda

I read this type of statement often... the thing is everything is so compressed these days. Even the "natural" sounding stuff. So I don't see why Compressing on the way in is such a bad thing.

I decided to avoid compression during tracking by painful exprience. A great take that you can never remove compression-you-eventually-hate from is a frustrating thing.

Compression on ac gtr is not bad. Broadband compression, IME, usually is though. Of course, this is just my own opinion. YMMV.

[NL5]

Originally Posted by Booda

Just enough to control the track.

Please explain what this means?

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by XLR

I decided to avoid compression during tracking by painful exprience. A great take that you can never remove compression-you-eventually-hate from is a frustrating thing.

Compression on ac gtr is not bad. Broadband compression, IME, usually is though. Of course, this is just my own opinion. YMMV.

No doubt you have to be careful and use only just enough. And by "just enough," I mean enough to make the softer played passages audible when the volume is normal for the strummed passages. There's probably a more sophisticated way to say that but I think you know what I mean.

[XLR]

Originally Posted by JTC111

No doubt you have to be careful and use only just enough. And by "just enough," I mean enough to make the softer played passages audible when the volume is normal for the strummed passages. There's probably a more sophisticated way to say that but I think you know what I mean.

Or you can use volume automation when mixing, which is a better solution for that than compression, as long as you can get good separation of the parts.

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by XLR

Or you can use volume automation when mixing, which is a better solution for that than compression, as long as you can get good separation of the parts.

Been there, done that, don't like it. I wind up with thin and noisy soft passages or clipping on the loud stuff.

[NL5]

Originally Posted by JTC111

Been there, done that, don't like it. I wind up with thin and noisy soft passages or clipping on the loud stuff.

If you get clipping due to volume automation, then you are doing it wrong. Where is the noise coming from? Compression generally will make background noise much louder in comparison to the audio in the track - it changes the signal to noise ratio. Automation does not. So, from a fundamental audio standpoint, the two premises above make no sense. Please explain further.

[Booda]

Originally Posted by NL5

Please explain what this means?

Taming the peaks...

tr.v. tamed, tam·ing, tames
1. To make tractable; domesticate.
2. To subdue or curb.
***3. To tone down; soften.

peak 1 (pk)
n.
1. A tapering, projecting point; a pointed extremity: the peak of a cap; the peak of a roof.
2. Abbr. Pk. a. The pointed summit of a mountain. b. The mountain itself.
3. a. The point of a beard. b. A widow's peak.
4. The point of greatest development, value, or intensity: a novel written at the peak of the writer's career. See Synonyms at summit.
***5. Physics The highest value attained by a varying quantity: a peak in current.

NL5, I'm pretty sure your just trying to see if I have a Clue... I doubt your trying to grasp a new concept. I've read your posts and your a knowledgeable dude. I understand. I'm sure you have a ton more experience than I so if you can tell me why I should go about it another way... or I should say, help me get better results by trying a new technique please do. That's why I posted my Comment/Question. I'm seriously.

I have many more "techniques" that I also question and that's why I come here and read and try learn. I have read so many times people saying they Compress hardly at all and EQ very little... I'd like to hear those tracks (mixes). Otherwise who would need a mixing engineer? Track, set the levels, add a little verb and Bam your Rick Rubin ( minus the verb).

Feel free to PM me as I don't want to hijack this thread.
B.

[XLR]

Originally Posted by JTC111

Been there, done that, don't like it. I wind up with thin and noisy soft passages or clipping on the loud stuff.

You might get a better end result by doing different takes for the soft and loud ac gtr passages - changing mic positioning for each.

[Ironklad Audio]

I don't play with picks and on songs where there is some alternating between fingerpicking and strumming, I get too much differentiation on volumn because my fingerpicking leans to the delicate side too often. I'd rather add some compression on the initial recording than sacrifice style and nuance.

push the fader up during the quiet parts

it's that easy...and a hell of a lot cheaper than buying another piece of hardware

personally, the only time i'll compress acoustic guitars is when they're going to be tucked into the background of a dense mix...but if it's the primary instrument, i leave the dynamics alone - unless there's some sort of glaring issue that needs to be resolved

[NL5]

Originally Posted by Booda

Feel free to PM me as I don't want to hijack this thread.

This concept of "controlling the track" is very much on the topic of this thread, or at least the original poster is in on the same discussion, so I would think it's cool.

I still am curious as to why one would need to tame peaks with a compressor. Most preamps come with a handy gain knob that works pretty good for that. I was sorda being a smartass, but at the same time, would still like to hear a valid reason of WHY you are doing that?

Originally Posted by Booda

I have read so many times people saying they Compress hardly at all and EQ very little... I'd like to hear those tracks (mixes). Otherwise who would need a mixing engineer? Track, set the levels, add a little verb and Bam your Rick Rubin ( minus the verb).
.

I think way more often than not, the misuse of compression and EQ is more prevalent than most people on this BBS think. I have seen in mix contests time and time again where a good 1/3 of the mixes are actually WORSE than a simple push mix. A good arrangement and recording really shouldn't need wild EQ and compression. I use VERY little EQ myself, but I also get the sound as right as I can in the first place. If a guitar sounds like a guitar, why would you need to wildly EQ it? Now, for special effects, I EQ the crap out of stuff. I also LOVE to misuse the compressor FOR EFFECT, not for "controlling the track" - that's what automation is for (or better, musicianship). Gone are the days of having the whole band on the mixer for mixdown. EVERY DAW can do amazing automation.

I am certainly no expert, but when I see claims being made that go against the very fundamentals of audio production, and people can't even explain how their "technique" is supposed to be better, I have to question it. This is not directed at you specifically, just a general observation on my part. I am hoping the OP answered my question above while I typed this......

[Daisy]

So, um, in answer to your original question ...


The more expensive comps generally sound better.



You're welcome.

.

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by NL5

If you get clipping due to volume automation, then you are doing it wrong. Where is the noise coming from? Compression generally will make background noise much louder in comparison to the audio in the track - it changes the signal to noise ratio. Automation does not. So, from a fundamental audio standpoint, the two premises above make no sense. Please explain further.

I'm not a tech-head, so perhaps my attempts at articulating this are falling short. Let me start over...

On tracks where the acoustic guitar alternates between softer fingerpicked passages and louder strummed passages, it's impossible to find a set volume level that works on both ends. If I set the gain high enough to make the softer parts come through well, it's too hot for the louder parts, and vice versa.

Because the guitar on my music is not just out in front but will often be the only instrument, I worry that playing with the faders from the get go will give me a less natural sounding track than if I apply a minimum, but sufficient, amount of compression during the initial recording and then use volume automation during mixing.

As for the 'noise' I referred to, I mean this: imagine recording something at a very low volume and then gaining it up to a sufficient level. Along with the music, you also get the noise from the equipment (mics, pres, convertors, etc.).

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by Daisy

So, um, in answer to your original question ...
The more expensive comps generally sound better.

You're welcome.
.

My kingdom for a smartass filter!

[NL5]

Originally Posted by JTC111

I'm not a tech-head, so perhaps my attempts at articulating this are falling short. Let me start over...

On tracks where the acoustic guitar alternates between softer fingerpicked passages and louder strummed passages, it's impossible to find a set volume level that works on both ends. If I set the gain high enough to make the softer parts come through well, it's too hot for the louder parts, and vice versa.

Because the guitar on my music is not just out in front but will often be the only instrument, I worry that playing with the faders from the get go will give me a less natural sounding track than if I apply a minimum, but sufficient, amount of compression during the initial recording and then use volume automation during mixing.

As for the 'noise' I referred to, I mean this: imagine recording something at a very low volume and then gaining it up to a sufficient level. Along with the music, you also get the noise from the equipment (mics, pres, convertors, etc.).

Again, I think you are not really understanding the fundamentals of what a compressor does. I understand what you think you are using it for, and yes, it will work to accomplish what you are doing, but it will also cause the issues you are citing as reasons to not automate, to worsen, not be better. A comp will bring the noise up, and the actual guitar sound down, no? Automation will bring the noise AND the guitar sound up. Automation will be heard far less than compression, unless you do it wildly - but wild compression is pretty obvious as well. I am not trying t rail you, I just want to understand how a compressor is better in this situation. In fact, I would love to be shown to be wrong, and learn a new trick. I love new tricks!

Originally Posted by Daisy

So, um, in answer to your original question ...


The more expensive comps generally sound better.



You're welcome.

.

Compressors demystified!

[Daisy]

Although I should have added:

so long as you know what the heck you're doing.


Ouch!!

[JTC111]

Originally Posted by NL5

Again, I think you are not really understanding the fundamentals of what a compressor does. I understand what you think you are using it for, and yes, it will work to accomplish what you are doing, but it will also cause the issues you are citing as reasons to not automate, to worsen, not be better. A comp will bring the noise up, and the actual guitar sound down, no? Automation will bring the noise AND the guitar sound up. Automation will be heard far less than compression, unless you do it wildly - but wild compression is pretty obvious as well. I am not trying t rail you, I just want to understand how a compressor is better in this situation. In fact, I would love to be shown to be wrong, and learn a new trick. I love new tricks!

I'll try to do it your way as well and compare, but I'm not even sure how to do it with only one set of hands which will be busy on the guitar. It bears repeating... I'm not a tech-head. I'll have to give it some thought.

Originally Posted by NL5

Compressors demystified!

Don't encourage her.

[Booda]

I don't really EQ much either... No "Wild" Eq at least. I usually just Eq the Bottom and low mids with a Cut and if I touch the upper mids or Highs it might be a bit of a boost to bring a instrument out in the mix. In general I don't do much more than -5 or +5 depending. Even a +1.5 can help bring something out. IMO. i.e. on my last project there was a banjo in one of the tunes and the guy wanted it a little louder... too me it had enough weight (body) in the mix and didn't really need to be Louder... so I EQ'd +2 (somewhere, can't remember 3k-5k ?) and it came out and he say's that's perfect.

As far as Compression... personally I do like more of a Live sound (Dynamics). But if your comparing to Commercial releases... the only way for me to get close is by Compressing. Personally I think Compression is the Secret for great Mixes. & it's the hardest thing to get to Know. 10 years ago I told a Engineer friend of mine Compression is something I just don't quite get... and it's only really been in the last 3 or 4 that I feel I'm getting it. I think your right about Too Much Comp on Home recordings. I think too many people want to or need to Hear It and that is usually too much. That's why I call it a Secret. The whole pumping and breathing with Kick and snare is something I'm still working on.

I also look at it like this...
When your recording a Good Song none of this really matters.
But when you record a Bad song and someone says "Man that sounds Good!" You know your doing something right.

B.

Daisy... You been Blowing Chessrock?