Automation and Compression...

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnypraze
  • Start date Start date
johnnypraze

johnnypraze

Hip Hop Head
Automate then compress or compress then automate...?

Whats the consensus say?
 
yes

The real answer is 42.

I guess the real question ought to be: what are you automating?
 
But what process are you automating? Levels? FX? Pan?

If you're talking about automating levels, then you'll more often than not want to compress first. Then you're automating the compressed instrument. If you automate your levels first, the you'll be applying compression to the automated signal with can wind up modifying some of the automation.

If you're automating FX, then you want to treat it like a normal signal chain. Do you want to compress the EQ or EQ the compression? That's your choice.

If you're automating pan, the order doesn't directly matter that much.

G.
 
You may want to check out this article Tips and Tricks on Getting the Best Mix

I found this very interesting ...Here is an excerpt from it

"...Here's one of the secrets of the mixing engineers
To avoid squashing, if it doesn't sound loud enough to your ears, turn up the monitor! If you find that you've been forced to apply limiting or compression just to keep the meters from overloading, then you've been going about this backwards. Instead, turn down your individual mix levels several dB, then get rid of any compression you were using to "protect" the 2-mix. Now your mix is at a lowered meter level, so turn up your monitor gain to arrive at the same loudness--only this time it won't sound squashed. Leave the monitor at that position as you continue to mix (mark it so you can get back to it).

In 24-bit recording you can make a perfectly good mix that peaks between -3 and -10 dBFS with no loss of quality, in fact, with improved quality. So if the mix gets too loud by your ears, then turn down the elements that are too hot in the mix instead of turning down the monitor again, with no fear of mixing "too low". In other words, a high monitor gain gives you less temptation to overcompress. High monitor gain does not necessarily mean high monitor output from the speakers--it means that the mix level had to be lower. For example, visit the CD Honor Roll and check out the great-sounding Lyle Lovett selection, which is close to the dynamics of a raw mix. Notice that in order to listen to it, you have to turn up your monitor gain. That's approximately where your monitor control for a dynamic raw mix should be sitting (within 4-6 dB) before mastering. Obviously, a lot of today's hypercompressed masters would require turning down the monitor, but we're trying to show you how not to ruin the record in the mix stage (and hopefully not in the mastering, either!)..."


The other aricles about compression during mixing are very interesting to.

Here is another excerpt that i found very interesting...

"...How can you tell when you have enough compression?

* Discussing sound in print is like describing colors to a blind person, but let me try. Here's a simplistic example... supposing there are two sonic qualities of music, one called punchy, the other smooth... Let's say that some music sounds better punchy, other music sounds better smooth. Let's also assume for this example that you can achieve punchy or smooth sound through different amounts and types of compression, or not using compression at all.
* In general, try to avoid overall compression in the mix stage if:
o you're mixing punchy music (the type of music that needs punch), perhaps using some individual compression on certain instruments or singers--and the mix already sounds punchy (good) to you.
o you're mixing smooth music, and your mix already sounds smooth.
o you play a well-recorded CD of similar music, and your CD in the making already sounds good (or better than) the CD in the player.
o your music already seems to accomplish the sound you are looking for..."

 
Back
Top