This Video is about building one, but the explanations of what it is, at the beginning, are the best I have ever seen on the net.
Last edited:
Best explanation of a compressor ever.
- Thread starter Manslick
- Start date
keith.rogers
Well-known member
He left out "knee" though. JK. It was really good. (But, I'm assuming you meant the actual first 4'16'', not the part starting 18+min. in where your link points to?)
Hmm. I edited the link but it still starts off zero. IDK.
Starts at 1:41 now for me.
And did you see this comment?
"Brilliant stuff, expertly explained. The attack pot in the feedback path seems to change it to a hard knee compressor. I'd make this switchable for when soft knee compression is required."
I don't know what knee is about but I thought I'd let you know in case you were curious.
Last edited:
rob aylestone
Moderator
If you draw a graph of what happens inside a compressor with what you stick in on one axis and what comes out on the other, it's a straight line - and the steepness is how much compression is happening - 'knee' lets you set the compressor to do nothing, up to the point where the level hits th settings on your controls, when the compression suddenly starts - so a steeply climing line suddenly going more horizontal - a sharp change is a hard knee, and a gentler change to the new line is a soft knee - mainly, because the display on the screen looks like a leg - with the knee joint.
Yeah my 2488 has this graphic.
But I think I'd understand it more if I could see the affect on a wave form. Like the guy in the video does.
rob aylestone
Moderator
OK - what I've done is create a kick/snare track and a hats and cymbal track. Compressor set to 1:1 as in no compression, then same clip but with 2:1 compression of everything, then the final one with no compression up to a loudness value then a compressed section above it. Hard knee - you can see the sharp angle.
the mp3 is 2 bars uncompressed (1:1) 2 bars 2:1 then 2 final bars with a knee All three sound different. I deliberately exagerated the loudness of each drum hit on all sources and you can see where the big peaks are and the small ones and then maybe hear what happens. Each 2 bar section is identical.
the mp3 is 2 bars uncompressed (1:1) 2 bars 2:1 then 2 final bars with a knee All three sound different. I deliberately exagerated the loudness of each drum hit on all sources and you can see where the big peaks are and the small ones and then maybe hear what happens. Each 2 bar section is identical.
Attachments
keith.rogers
Well-known member
Knee and attack are not the same thing. Never having used an analog compressor (save a guitar one I experimented with), I've kind of assumed it's only in the digital world that you get complete control over knee (or ms.-level control over attack, even).
rob aylestone
Moderator
I think (going back to when I was teaching in college) that compressors really are things some people cannot hear UNTIL they turn the knobs and hear the changes. I don't think my clip is at all trouble free - but sitting here turning the knobs - the attack and release and the compression rate all interact in a way you can hear but not describe. Any attempt in words will be misunderstood - but that video does do a good job compared to some of the dire ones on youtube.
Smithers XKR
Well-known member
For a musician person like me who is a complete muppet with technical stuff... doesnt a good compressor just smooth down the dynamic range while still staying true to the original waveform? I.e it does not abruptly cut off the peaks like a limiter. It reduces the dynamic gradually over the dynamic range, so the higher dynamic is reduced more and the lower dynamic is reduced less, therefore maintaining the overall feel of the natural sound of the vocal?
Smithers XKR
Well-known member
And de essing Rob. I am not familiar but I am guessing the process removes the high percussive nuances of consonants like S an T on a vocal recording?
Thanks
60's guy
Well-known member
That's a great description of the role of compressors.
I remember when (1980s - 1990s) recording acoustic guitar and vocals to two track or four track tape recorders. On playback, without fail, volume levels weren't consistent because I never remained in one sitting position and because I hit the strings too hard or sang too loud.
I remember reading (prior to the internet) an article about a DBX compressor unit that could keep volume levels steady and even keeled.
I couldn't afford spending the $$$.
Interesting read:
Use of compressor on early records - Music And Technology
www.music-tech.com
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
I was the same. I read about compression from about 1992 until I eventually bought the dbx266 in 2000.
I was able to afford it because a friend gave me almost 100 LPs and that same day, I went and sold them and made an absolute fortune. I was parked outside the record and tape exchange for so long, I ended up getting a ticket and a £60 {{$158 in today's cash} fine but I didn't care because I made so much money !
But that compressor barely aided my understanding of compression. I could hardly hear what it did and when mixing, just used to guess and assume that it was having an effect. Then months later, I'd notice bits of words chopped off or esses {SSS} sounding anaemic, if they could be heard at all.
I've long had a fractious relationship with compression, but I use it now to shape sound and tone, if I'm going to use it at all, which is rare. A year or so ago, I wanted to see what would happen if I used the compressor going in and so I used it on the snare and on my laps where my laps were playing a percussive role. The sounds were more than interesting and it was like the compressor came alive and had an effect {detrimental until I got the setting to a pleasing one} that surpassed anything over the previous 21 years.
Smithers XKR
Well-known member
Thanks, I am a musician who understands a litle bit. But not much
dogooder
Well-known member
I built my own, I just don't use it.
dogooder
Well-known member
I have one of these, it is in a box somewhere in the basement lol.I was the same. I read about compression from about 1992 until I eventually bought the dbx266 in 2000.
I was able to afford it because a friend gave me almost 100 LPs and that same day, I went and sold them and made an absolute fortune. I was parked outside the record and tape exchange for so long, I ended up getting a ticket and a £60 {{$158 in today's cash} fine but I didn't care because I made so much money !
But that compressor barely aided my understanding of compression. I could hardly hear what it did and when mixing, just used to guess and assume that it was having an effect. Then months later, I'd notice bits of words chopped off or esses {SSS} sounding anaemic, if they could be heard at all.
I've long had a fractious relationship with compression, but I use it now to shape sound and tone, if I'm going to use it at all, which is rare. A year or so ago, I wanted to see what would happen if I used the compressor going in and so I used it on the snare and on my laps where my laps were playing a percussive role. The sounds were more than interesting and it was like the compressor came alive and had an effect {detrimental until I got the setting to a pleasing one} that surpassed anything over the previous 21 years.
spantini
COO of me, inc.
Ok. I'm convinced you have everything. Twenty years from now we'll find you have been hoarding all the eggs from this era (some 114,000,000,000) - the real reason behind their current high prices.
dogooder
Well-known member
Bought it and never used it. We used the built in compressor on the Yamaha boards.
LazerBeakShiek
Rad Racing Team
Good call Grim, DBX makes a nice channel set.. I'd get a DBX286-2 then a pair of DBX 160XT rack limiters..that go all negative ratios and shit.. Thats it. Clean as all hell and late 80's fantastic. SM57/58's or venture towards a MD421I was the same. I read about compression from about 1992 until I eventually bought the dbx266 in 2000.
I