The question I would like to pose to T & J about this: How you you approach the compression vs. noise floor angle on this? By that I mean, because the dynamics are so wide, I'd think there'd be an increased issue with dealing with the noise floor. I know it's different from recording to recording, but what would be your plan of attack going into it?
(@ thread) It depends on the client... With one "regular" just saying the word "compressor" means "compromise" and he doesn't want to hear it. A lot of classical & jazz clients are like that. They don't mind cranking it up - and the recordings sound better because of it.
With some others, they consider it realistic to use a little light compression - Hard to listen to a wide choral or symphonic piece in a car going 60MPH on the expressway... But they don't want to
notice it... So, parallel work with A&R times measured in seconds instead of milliseconds, volume curves on individual timpani, glockenspiel and triangle hits, etc., etc.
(@ SSG) Rough one again -- Some want it to be exactly as heard. Others definitely want it cleaned up. I still do a lot of (stereo) tracking for classical (symphonic, choral, operatic, chamber, ensembles, etc.) in a few particular rooms - Some are live concerts in a theatre with a bit of mechanical noise. That's where maul-the-band compressors can be my best friend -
as frequency-conscious expanders -- Of course, that's why getting a noise print on the room is so unbelievably important (hint to those that send in recordings that don't send in some "silence") - Empty and with audience - so those settings can be tweaked later.
If it means anything, UAD's Precision Maul-the-band (heh...) is probably the best thing I've used for such work.
But the "plan of attack" -- With most recordings (pop, rock, etc.) the plan is to enhance the good. With a lot of classical, it's to reduce the bad - as transparently as possible.