SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Does no one else get to play?
G.
G.
masteringhouse
www.masteringhouse.com
No soup for you!
I left it up to the OP in my PM (how's that for acronyms). Will post a public link if he gives the OK.
philbagg
Just Killing Time
I've uploaded the files to Mastering Houses site, PM him if you want to have a play with it.
philbagg
Just Killing Time
Hey! Masteringhouse! What's the friggin deal huh? 
I keeeed, I keeeed
Thought you guys would be interested in hearing about a recent Waves plug-in, the MV2. It has three controls (I think): Low level compresson, high level compression, and output gain.
From the manual:
...whereas the high level compressor does the opposite.
Sounds really cool.
I keeeed, I keeeed Thought you guys would be interested in hearing about a recent Waves plug-in, the MV2. It has three controls (I think): Low level compresson, high level compression, and output gain.
From the manual:
...whereas the high level compressor does the opposite.
Sounds really cool.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
It sounds like they are describing true upward compression. It's very nice that someone else offers that now
. At the same time it's a bit of a shame that they had to come up with their own colloquial name for it; it's not as if the subject isn't confusing enough already 
.What is it with audio people needing to always create new names and new definitions for already established concepts? Now when a "producer" wants to add either "low-level compression" or "upward compression" to the "beat", my head may just possibly explode form the number of different levels of confusion involved there.
G.
philbagg
Just Killing Time
It sounds like they are describing true upward compression. It's very nice that someone else offers that now
What is it with audio people needing to always create new names and new definitions for already established concepts? Now when a "producer" wants to add either "low-level compression" or "upward compression" to the "beat", my head may just possibly explode form the number of different levels of confusion involved there.
G.
I agree
The thing that bothers me about that plug-in is that it's just one plug-in. Fair enough, it's great that there's a plug-in that actually does upward compression, but what if you want some of the other usual parameters such as knee, ratio, attack, release etc?Edit: "that it's just one parameter"
Last edited:
M
mixsit
Well-known member
Reread most of the thread this morning –every time I dip into subjects like this it gets clearer, and easier.
-when you factor in the amount of lift you'll get down in the lower range even at very low ratios, it's hard to see where this would be much use as a stand-alone process.
Without a lower range limit point -like Glen's example back on post 48 http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/file_xfer/compression_up_down.jpg
-when you factor in the amount of lift you'll get down in the lower range even at very low ratios, it's hard to see where this would be much use as a stand-alone process.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Yeah, kinda sucks that it doesn't have that. If I'm going to dive that deep into a wave, I'd like to know that I could be as surgical as need be. That's some of what's great about the Neodynum plug I use for this kind of stuff; it goes above and beyond in the amount of signal control you have. Not only does it allow you to set up for different amplitude zones with seperate A/R and gain for each zone (also gangable), both input and output gain with full metering for both, three different styles of optional output limiter, and a "key EQ" on input - which is essentially a 3-band parametric acts kind of like an EQ sidechain to the compressors. That kind of flexibility and surgical ability combined with a very neutral, uncolored character is what makes this one of my go-to plugs that I take with me on every project:
you'e right; without a "bottom limit" (anti-theshold?
) to the range you gotta worry about maybe pulling up the noise floor and other very low level stuff that you don't want to hear into audible range. Of course if you're downward expanding, that's a different story, as that'll push that bad stuff even further down and out of the way. But upward compression is a different story.Frankly I have a hard time thinking of a decent reason why someone would want to upward compress any stuff more than a couple of dozen dB below RMS anyway. Maybe someone else has a reason I haven't thought of?
G.
masteringhouse
www.masteringhouse.com
Hey! Masteringhouse! What's the friggin deal huh?
Sorry, I thought that most lost interest in this thread.
I did play around with the concept of of mixing a gated track out of polarity with your source track and summing that with the original. When listening to the process it's very interesting. It sounds similar to someone using a volume pedal; smacking it down whenever a transient hits. Almost sounds like playing the track in reverse, except it's forward.
If it's cool with you I'll post samples of the processed track, the mix of the processed track with the original (pseudo upward compression or whatever you want to call it), and the original for comparison.
My impression overall is that it gives the track a more saturated sound without affecting the transients.
BTW nicely recorded!
Best,
Tom
philbagg
Just Killing Time
Sorry, I thought that most lost interest in this thread.
I did play around with the concept of of mixing a gated track out of polarity with your source track and summing that with the original. When listening to the process it's very interesting. It sounds similar to someone using a volume pedal; smacking it down whenever a transient hits. Almost sounds like playing the track in reverse, except it's forward.
If it's cool with you I'll post samples of the processed track, the mix of the processed track with the original (pseudo upward compression or whatever you want to call it), and the original for comparison.
My impression overall is that it gives the track a more saturated sound without affecting the transients.
BTW nicely recorded!
Best,
Tom
No problem Tom, be my guest.