Do hardware upward compressors exist?

N

nononsense!

New member
Do ANALOG hardware 'upward compressors' exist?

I have tried some plug-in demo's and it works so unconvenient being used to a simple analog compressor. Have tried the Neodynium plug which is very complicated and no preset called upward compressor.

Are there any analog hardware compressors doing upward compression?

I do not mean parallel compression which is very similar but less easier because you have to make an extra compressed channel next to the original. And the compressed signal leaks some compressed transients.

Look to the photo for what is meant by upward compressor.

compressiemethoden.jpg
 
Last edited:
Many compressor plugins can do upward compression. They generally have graphic displays and would be set something like this:

upwardcompressioncorrected.JPG
 
Do you have a budget? It's not a very common request for that kind of hardware so will be tricky to find = expensive
If not, go the plugin route, much more likely to find something there. Do some Google-ing research on upward compressor plugin and you'll get options.
Maybe try having a look at the tech specs of plugs like Flux Syrah.
 
I don't really understand your insistence on upwards compression. I can understand you wanting to try out new stuff, but it really doesn't sound very different to parallel comp in practise, which you can do with any compressor you like the sound of.
 
cobaltaudio said:
I don't really understand your insistence on upwards compression. I can understand you wanting to try out new stuff, but it really doesn't sound very different to parallel comp in practise, which you can do with any compressor you like the sound of.
Click to expand...

By the way I noticed now that for the second time I titled a thread wrong. How hard can it be for me to name it right in one time, sorry for that. The title should be: Do ANALOG hardware 'upward compressors' exist?


I tried that with an analog downward compressor but when doing so I still heard the flattened upper volumes (peaks) of the parallel track.

It seems to me that with a normal downward compressor the peaks of the original are very vulnerable, there is always some little processing of those peaks. Peaks get damaged easily.
But with a compressor that makes soft volumes louder, the softer volumes are vulnerable and could get damaged. It just feels that those softer volumes are less vulnerable. Because those lower volumes are a less prominent part of the overall music.


I mean a way to make softer volumes below a certain treshold louder, while NOT making the louder volumes softer above that treshold. No gain reduction but gain addition.
When doing parallel compression (= normal signal + heavy compressed signal) then at least the compressed signal would be compressed in the ordinary way so some hard parts were being smashed.

I tried various upward DIGITAL compressors and it doesn't sound so good. So I was wondering if there were any ANALOG.
 
In short I think the fact that nobody has been able to give you an analogue solution should indirectly answer your question.

If you haven't ever heard an analogue upwards compressor, why do you think that's going to be better than a digital one?
I really don't see any immediate reason that it should, analogue doesn't just equal better.
If you really are convinced that a digital upward compressor won't work then is it possible it's never going to work anyway?

If you are literally just wanting to reduce the dynamic range of the track so you don't hear the loud parts "being smashed" (which is what you seem to say) then the way the pros do it is to set a really really low threshold, like right down to zero, with a regular downward compressor and use something like a 2:1 ratio. That way you halve the dynamic range, and because the compression is applied across the complete dynamic range the characteristic sound of the highs being compressed is lost, which as I understand it is what you're trying to achieve?

Really hope this helps. By all means have a look for an analogue compressor, but it's probable anyone here will have to do the same amount of research and google-ing as you would to find one that fits your spec.
 
"It seems to me that with a normal downward compressor the peaks of the original are very vulnerable, there is always some little processing of those peaks. Peaks get damaged easily."

I do have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. Of all the professional engineers I know, I haven't come across a single one who uses upwards compression. Even at places such as Abbey Road Studios, I know for a fact that engineers there would argue that peaks are actually incredibly versatile. Don't forget that a 'peak' that's double the amplitude of the rest of a waveform is only 3dB louder, so sonically their perceived 'loudness' is not even mostly due to their amplitude.
 
Last edited:
nononsense! said:
.. I mean a way to make softer volumes below a certain treshold louder, while NOT making the louder volumes softer above that treshold. No gain reduction but gain addition. ..
Click to expand...

This didn't occur to me in the other thread.. That was theory / tech mode. :D

But you are right that going to a compressor to bring up low passages is sort of ass backwards use, not the best move. (This is a just a point of reference thing isn't it.

There are some exceptions- AGC, 'Gain Riders, very slow attack release sometimes.
But what you may really ought to be doing.. perhaps.. is pre insert gain automation leveling.. (..or go post' leveling at the fader as well- depending on whether you want it to play into some compressor there.)

IMHO this is about number two or three in the sequence of things to do to get a mix dialed in. 99% of the mixes.

Automation (or just plain fader moves ..old school :) does what compressors don't, and that is fix on broader strokes -not micro inter-phrase wave shaping.
This is IMO the natural sounding way to go (..can be) and you pick when/where/how much... Very often you can get into even the slopes between phrases, within the 'words', into detail impossible otherwise.

Personally, upward comp, expansion, I do once in a while to get a boring bass to stand up, stuff like that. And that's back to wave shaping.
I would suspect doing leveling 'up on a time based setting could be nearly as problematic as 'top down.
 
cobaltaudio said:
..If you are literally just wanting to reduce the dynamic range of the track so you don't hear the loud parts "being smashed" (which is what you seem to say) then the way the pros do it is to set a really really low threshold, like right down to zero, with a regular downward compressor and use something like a 2:1 ratio. That way you halve the dynamic range, and because the compression is applied across the complete dynamic range the characteristic sound of the highs being compressed is lost, which as I understand it is what you're trying to achieve?..
Click to expand...
Interesting I was trying an approach like that.. (Actually I was looking to get around the whole compressor time based downsides and just 'scale everything with zero' attack and release.. Uh, that was epic fail. ;)
But two things came out of it; a) Even very (very) low ratio from the bottom up is a lot of compression, and b) you (probably) don't want to bring up what's all the way down there.
:)
 
yes of course it means putting compression in, but the audible characteristic is different. Entirely different to the sound of compressing more with a higher threshold. But, yes I take your point a 2:1 is probably a bit too much in this case, I was just using it as an example for simplicity. 1:1.3 is probably more appropriate depending on the source material. If you "don't want to bring up what's all the way down there." then don't use an upwards compressor because it will do exactly that anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top