Compression during tracking or when 'mastering'?

  • Thread starter Thread starter breeeeza
  • Start date Start date
breeeeza

breeeeza

Senior MemBREH
Whats the best? I have heard people say that the best way to do it is to record as raw sound as possible then add compression/noise gate etc.. afterwards.
But i have also heard people say that using inserts on your mixer you should compress whilst tracking?

Another Question;
I have a firewire mixer and it has 2 channels coming back from the PC aswell as 16 going in. I can assign the channels going out of the PC to the mixer to 'aux 1' where i can plug that into my hardware compressor ( :o alesis 3630)
i could plug it into my Aux return(s) but i cant assign them to go straight to the PC so they have to be assigned to a channel. Would it work if i plugged it into my aux return and then just turned up the knob/pot on one of the channels with nothing plugged into it, would the sound just go to that chanel or shall i just skip the aux return and just plug it straight into an empty channel?

Thanks alot
 
If you're very confident in what you're doing and trust your judgement, then I see nothing wrong with compression during tracking.

As long as you understand the risks, and that you can't undo it later. Personally, I like the idea of committing to something early on. Whether that be to a particular eq setting, a reverb, compression or what have you.

It's all about personality types. If you're the type who can't seem to make up his mind, and tends to second-guess himself, then I probably wouldn't advocate it. :D

.
 
chessrock said:
If you're very confident in what you're doing and trust your judgement, then I see nothing wrong with compression during tracking.

As long as you understand the risks, and that you can't undo it later. Personally, I like the idea of committing to something early on. Whether that be to a particular eq setting, a reverb, compression or what have you.

It's all about personality types. If you're the type who can't seem to make up his mind, and tends to second-guess himself, then I probably wouldn't advocate it. :D

.
Click to expand...
Yer, well for me its easier to compress after tracking because my 'studio' is directly behind me and i play the drums mostly so its kind of hard to hear the 'compressed' sound thats coming out of the monitors than whats just coming off the drum skin :D

I forgot to add before that using the 'assign to aux 1' method i may run into latency cause it has to come via friewire from PC > Mixer > compressor >mixer > PC. Do you think latency will be an issue. I have left all the drivers alone and havnt had any problems with pops or cracks and the latency is allmost inaudible but i mostly have my monitors coming out my AUX1 when tracking cause then it comes straight from the mixer and before it gets to the PC and buffers..
 
I usually do a little eq and compression on sources I have recorded before and "know" what they should sound like. If I'm recording a new guy or group I still compress (less) and hold off on the eq til later
 
Compression during tracking or when 'mastering'?
Click to expand...
You forgot about the entire mixing process - Generally, where compression would be used.

True - If you're tracking with compression and that compression is part of the sound you're trying to acheive, go for it. As mentioned, you're pretty much stuck with it though.

Do NOT compress for the sake of volume - If you need to compress to keep your levels from peaking, you're recording way, Way, WAAAAYYYY to hot in the first place ("Normal" levels being around 0dBVU which would translate to somewhere in the range of -22 to -16dBFS or so during tracking - Trying to get signals "hot" on the way in is generally a very, very bad idea).
 
Massive Master said:
Trying to get signals "hot" on the way in is generally a very, very bad idea).
Click to expand...

Why? I've always read record as hot as you can get away with. I'm still an analog guy myself but I always get better results really hitting the tape hard, especially with drums and distorted guitars.
 
EDAN said:
Why? I've always read record as hot as you can get away with. I'm still an analog guy myself but I always get better results really hitting the tape hard, especially with drums and distorted guitars.
Click to expand...
And that still holds true recording analog... where the old noise floor and dynamic range are still an issue... and overloading your recorder many times result in a pleasing harmonic distortion. The noise floor on correctly staged digital audio is so low as to be a minor consideration. And if you hit the input too hard the distortion from the digital clipping will destroy the track... there's no need to pound your digital recorder with signal, especially at 24 bit...
 
Yes and no - When you were hitting tape HARD, you were driving your preamp perhaps up to +6 or +7.

To get a signal around -0dBFS, you need to run that same preamp up to around +20 depending on how your converters are calibrated.

If you think that preamp is still going to sound good being overdriven 20dB into the headroom...

Digital is the way it is so you can get the same sounds with MORE headroom - Yet a lot of people for some odd reason try to use all of that headroom up and don't even realize that they're overdriving their preamps as if they were Marshall stacks.

0dBVU is still 0dBVU. Digital didn't change that - It was designed around it.
 
So do you suggest not slamming the tape all the time? Are certain instruments, like drums for instance, more suited to higher recording levels and others, like acoustic guitar, better off recorded leaving more room?
 
I would say that all depends more on the preamps and sound you are after rather than the medium you are recording to. There is truth though that with tape, recording at nominal levels makes a big difference on the noise floor. Like Massive said earlier... Slamming tape usually means pushing your preamp about 4 to 8 db hotter, which generally is an acceptable range on any decent preamp. With digital, people who track that hot constantly push that preamp 12 to 20 db too hot, which will usually "strain" the sound, or outright distort it to some extent. In my opinion, the clarity gained by using your analog front end as it was intended FAR outweighs the minor benefit received from using up another bit or two (that also needs to be lowered considerably come mixdown which many people say also has a negative effect on audio).
 
I'm still confused about headroom. Say I record 2 tracks, one of them at around -20dbFS and one at around -4dbFS. Once they hit the hard disc, aren't they just printed as they "sounded". Why do you lose headroom AFTERwards when you mix those tracks, because aren't they being summed onto the master track (2buss?...is this the right terminology?). Wouldn't you just turn the tracks down or up to where you need them just as long as you don't overload your master stereo mix track on the hard disc?

I guess I'm asking about what ability/quality you lose that would transfer from tracking too hot into the mixing phase. And why...

damn, did i make sense at all? :confused:
 
pretty much...just a little jarbled...

ill let someone else answer
 
Phosphene said:
I'm still confused about headroom. Say I record 2 tracks, one of them at around -20dbFS and one at around -4dbFS. Once they hit the hard disc, aren't they just printed as they "sounded". Why do you lose headroom AFTERwards when you mix those tracks, because aren't they being summed onto the master track (2buss?...is this the right terminology?). Wouldn't you just turn the tracks down or up to where you need them just as long as you don't overload your master stereo mix track on the hard disc?

I guess I'm asking about what ability/quality you lose that would transfer from tracking too hot into the mixing phase. And why...

damn, did i make sense at all? :confused:
Click to expand...

I believe they were talking about overloading your analog front end--such as your mic preamps--to achieve hot digital levels. In other words, you may have to overload your preamp to feed your digital convertor the -4dbFS signal (plus the fact that it is totally not worth it if you occassionally get unexpected stuff peaking above the digital zero ceiling). I'm not totally sold on this idea though, as most preamps I have used have little problem getting a decent signal to 0dbFS without overloading. Then again, most of the preamps I use nowdays have like +26db headroom...
 
I compress at both ends. Once during tracking & twice during mixing, (on the vocals usually & the main mix)
 
Just because a preamp has 22db of headroom does not mean that it sounds good at +16. If you want to maintain any sense of subtlety depth and imaging, try tracking at PROPER levels. I have a feeling it will be an ear opening experience if you do that come mixdown. This is especially true with your "budget" preamps.
 
So the loss of headroom in mixing is because you have overextended the good range of the preamps? .....and therefore you hear more of the strain you have put on the preamp if you turn the gain up on the tracks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top