Recording With Compression........opinions please ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter jpb123
  • Start date Start date
I think most of this comes down to knowledge and preference. Pretty simple.

If ya know your compressor, the material and what you're looking for... compress it to your hearts content if that's your preference.

If ya don't, don't. You can't undo a track that's been compressed on the way in but you can add it later.

I personally don't comp on the way in. But that's just me.
 
Ethan Winer said:
I see no advantage to committing while recording since the end result when mixed will be identical.
--Ethan
Click to expand...

well, i know from years of experience, that committing to a sound based on PRE-convertor compressor usage, sounds completely different than the same compressor added after conversion has already been done.

i mean, any experienced mixer will tell you that.
 
GONZO-X said:
i know from years of experience, that committing to a sound based on PRE-convertor compressor usage, sounds completely different than the same compressor added after conversion has already been done. i mean, any experienced mixer will tell you that.
Click to expand...

Logically that makes no sense. As long as the recording medium has a flat response with low distortion, and virtually all sound cards these days meet that criteria, the results should be identical. I've been a professional recording engineer for more than 40 years, so that rules out lack of experience. :D But if you have a logical explanation for why compression after versus before would sound different, I'm glad to consider it.

--Ethan
 
i trust my ears, is all i can say.

when i listen to a track recorded straight mic>preamp>convertor, and then apply a compressor at mixdown...

versus

applying the compression going in, PRE convertor,

i hear a completely different color, different character, that i cannot get with a plugin.

it's a simple as that.


plus, typically i know what kind of sound i want when i'm recording...
versus figuring it out later.

it's a commitment to the track, and it moves things along nicely.
 
GONZO-X said:
i trust my ears, is all i can say.

when i listen to a track recorded straight mic>preamp>convertor, and then apply a compressor at mixdown...

versus

applying the compression going in, PRE convertor,

i hear a completely different color, different character, that i cannot get with a plugin.

it's a simple as that.


plus, typically i know what kind of sound i want when i'm recording...
versus figuring it out later.

it's a commitment to the track, and it moves things along nicely.
Click to expand...
Just noting here -as I read them, you seem to at least be switching gears here -from hardware comp at tracking vs at mix which I think Ethan is saying, to now vs a different comp (the 'plugin..) at mix.
 
This really is fascinating and believe it or not I am learning a great deal just from peoples opinions !!!
 
mixsit said:
Just noting here -as I read them, you seem to at least be switching gears here -from hardware comp at tracking vs at mix which I think Ethan is saying, to now vs a different comp (the 'plugin..) at mix.
Click to expand...

NO, i'm still talking about the same thing.

maybe i'm just not 'splainin it too well....


point is, the original poster asked for OPINIONs about recording with compression....

and it is of MY opinion, that using hardware compressors BEFORE hitting the convertor, is still a better way to do it.

that's not to say that you can't get good results with tracks with no compression, that you add compression to during mixdown.

but i'm saying the same thing now, that i've been saying all along..
because there are young guys just coming to mixing, who haven't had a chance to work with hardware compressors, and they wont have a clue unless someone clues them in.
 
GONZO-X said:
NO, i'm still talking about the same thing.

maybe i'm just not 'splainin it too well....
Click to expand...

First you say in post 23 that the same compressor will sound different on the live signal than it will on the same signal after it has been recorded (which doesn't make much sense to me), then in post 25 you switch to comparing a hardware compressor before conversion with a plugin after conversion which of course will sound at least a little different.
 
jimmys69 said:
There is also the tonal quality of using a good compressor while tracking, that hasn't been mentioned. I do not use compression to hold back peaks. I use it because of the character it can give a track. This is much harder to do later....
Click to expand...

Yes....me too.
There are some hardware comps that you can even run basically without any compression, and it will add some flavor to a signal passing through. And sometimes nipping at the peaks in smaller increments and at different stages of the tracking/mixing/mastering steps has a more benign effect than doing it all at once at a single step.
 
Okay...my typical fence-sitting answer:

For any any degree of compression that affects the dynamics with regard to the rest of the mix or in any way colours the sound, I leave this to ITB. I'm always recording for other people and want to leave myself the largest possible range of options later on for the moment the client decides he needs to add 30 cellos but wants the voice compressed to stand out above them. Or something equally outrageous.

However, I have at my disposal a range of very good hardware compressors and always record via these. "Huh?" you say--you just said you want to leave dynamics processing until later. Yup. I do. I set the parameters on my hardware compressors so they act purely as a limiter to protect my tracks from clipping. In the normal course of events, nothing I record ever hits the threshold so the limiter never kicks in. However, a couple of times per year that "magic" track happens and the vocalist belts out something really special--but which bears no relationship to my carefully preset levels and (left to its own devices) would clip badly. The compressor limiter protects this sort of take and leaves it usable.

So, compressor used as a limiter, yup. Compressor making irrevocable changes to your sound, nope--at least for me. If you're just recording yourself and know what you want--maybe, but even in that situation surely having the most flexibility while mixing is always the best idea.
 
There are great arguments to be made for both sides of this issue.

One that hasn't been brought up: Limiting your options can be an artistically freeing experience. DAWs have given people unlimited options, allowing decisions to be put off indefinitely, or at least until you eventually forget what the option was. My thinking is that this can kill the groove. At times it is useful to commit to a sound from the beginning and run with it before the artistic urges are buried in the technology.

A lot depends on the hardware you have available too. If you have low-end gear, you might be better off using ITB compression. If you have a great compressor, give it a try & see if it works! Ultimately that is the very best way to see if it works for you and your gear and your client (or your music).

As a number of people mentioned, you can always mult the signal into 2 tracks and only compress one of them, keeping the uncompressed one as a safety copy.
 
philbo said:
One that hasn't been brought up: Limiting your options can be an artistically freeing experience. DAWs have given people unlimited options, allowing decisions to be put off indefinitely, or at least until you eventually forget what the option was.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that you are actually saying the reverse. Limiting the options constrains you to a particular course of action which can result in getting things done, rather than indulging in an endless spiral of option-exploring. Limiting your options doesn't offer an artistically freeing experience. It makes you work with what you have, which is more an artistic challenging experience.

Putting decisions off indefinitely is a function of a person's character. Because you have unlimited options doesn't necessarily mean you will explore them all.
 
My concern about limiting options is that, for the most part, processes like compression are there to determine how one track sits in relation to to the rest of the mix. Until you have the other tracks to make up that mix, any decision taken is far from informed.

Reading threads in here, I gather there are people for whom compression is a specific effect rather than a way to make a track sit nicely. I don't work that way but I guess that sort of thinking makes compression while tracking more logical--but not for me. My goal is always to make the compression itself as nearly inaudible as possible while helping a particular track to "sit nicely" or "stand out a bit" on a mix.
 
Yep, I use compression to make a track's dynamics fit a mix. During tracking I often don't have enough of a mix as a reference to set the compressor.
 
Bobbsy said:
Until you have the other tracks to make up that mix, any decision taken is far from informed.
Click to expand...

bouldersoundguy said:
During tracking I often don't have enough of a mix as a reference to set the compressor.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Further, there's no reason to record both compressed and not compressed versions onto two tracks. As I already explained, if you patch the compressor into the playback path rather than the recording path, you hear exactly the same sound and get exactly the same result, but you still have a chance to change things later if needed.

--Ethan
 
I almost never compress in order to reel in the dynamic range. I always compress to get to get the sound of compression. I choose the compressor type for the sound it makes and the character it gives.

There is no reason to compress on the during recording as a way of avoiding clipping. If you are in danger of clipping, you are recording too hot in the first place.

That said, I always compress vocals and bass on the way in because that is the sound I'm generally going for.
 
Farview said:
I almost never compress in order to reel in the dynamic range. I always compress to get to get the sound of compression. I choose the compressor type for the sound it makes and the character it gives.

There is no reason to compress on the during recording as a way of avoiding clipping. If you are in danger of clipping, you are recording too hot in the first place.

That said, I always compress vocals and bass on the way in because that is the sound I'm generally going for.
Click to expand...

I have to agree here. There is just a quality that the input signal gains by going through an analog compressor, before the AD conversion. Though I have not actually tried to send a raw signal out, and do it later, I know what I am after when I track it. Never for controlling signal levels. That would be stupid. The quality that the compression, not to mention the preamp that precedes it, is what I am using on the way in.

Would you track with a stock preamp, then send out to a good preamp to get it's effect? No. It just does not work that way. Not for me anyway.

Best recommendation to those who do not have experience with this, (or something worthy to use) is to record directly, with nothing on the input chain. But you gotta learn somehow....Oh, and buy something worth using. :)
 
personally i tend to shy away from compressing (even subtle) before recording. i was never taught it and currently don't need to use it. please don't think i am saying its bad but i just don't.

every studio i have recorded at refuse to process the signal AT ALL before it is recorded. as everybody knows tape has a 'natural compression' aka saturation but this is COMPLETELY different to a compressor, although it may seem similar. compression and saturation are different things, although you can achieve similar results.
 
And that is just it, different strokes for different folks. Nothing is better, unless it works for you. Then it is just your choice. Arguing about it is like telling someone to like lima beans. I like them, they taste good to me. Will someone else like them? I don't know, and don't really care. Eat veggies that you like. It all makes a poop in the end right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top