Compression Vs. Fader Riding

  • Thread starter Thread starter elbandito
  • Start date Start date
elbandito

elbandito

potential lunch winner
Why do you use compression instead of "riding the fader" or, Volume Modulation?

I recently tried out Waves Vocal Rider (which is pretty awesome, btw) and after my trial period ended, I found myself playing around with parameter modulation in REAPER, using a gain/trim plug to try to emulate the functionality of the Waves plugin.

At one point, it occurred to me to try replacing every instance of compression that I had going on with my recent discovery of automated fader riding and found that the song really opened up, dynamically-speaking. Further, when it came time to stick a limiter on the master, the song didn't sound nearly as squashed as the first version that I had done.

Now, of course, one most likely wouldn't stop using compressors altogether in favour of fader riding but it seems to me that many of us are likely using compression to tame transients and keep all the levels in line... why not use automated fader riding instead?

So to sum it all up, when do you use faders/automation instead of compression and why? And conversely, when do you favour compression over fader riding/automation?
 
Sokath, his eyes opened!

I used vocal rider once because I thought it might save me a lot of time. As it happens, it did. :)


I do lay down a rule for myself on this.
If I need to control the volume of a performance, I automate the volume.

I'll try only to use a compressor if I wan't to manipulate the shape of transients or sounds over a short period.

Like, if tom is all thwack and the ring doesn't carry for long, I'd use a compressor to even the level in that respect, assuming I want to hear the ringing.
Say the toms in the chorus are too loud compared to the verse, then I'll volume automate.

Having said that, there are times when I squash stuff, but it's almost always backing vocals, and I kinda like that sound, so that's different! :p
 
Just "+1-ing" -- Volume controls volume of the signal -- Compression controls the dynamic range of the signal. It might seem like those are the same things, but they're not. Volume will control the level. Compression will change the character.
 
I use compression for the sonic changes. I pretty much never use it to tame transients.

Volume automation/virtual fader riding uses too much computer power on my old POS machine. I never do it. If I have something like a vocal passage that's too loud for the part of the song it's in, I just snip that section and manually draw in a volume drop for just that section.
 
I agree, fader riding preserves the dynamics whereas a compressor makes things sound unnatural. I do however use compressers quite often as an effect, ducking, and effecting transients.
 
+2
I always use fader automation and maybe throw in a touch of compressoin for flavour.
Thats how i got taught to use volume fader automation especially on vocals.
A compressor usually spoils the vocal because, most of the singers i record myself included have bad technique and the dynamic range is just too great to not just sqaush it too much at some point.
 
This goes hand in hand with live sound as well. I would ride the faders apposed to the use of compression any day.
Yet compression is fun when used right.
 
I don't use automation....but I do like to slice up my tracks and manually adjust the level of each section as needed (about the same effect).

Compression is for changing the flavor of the track, helping "glue" multiple tracks, doing some light taming of peaks during tracking....but I don't use it just for volume control.
 
Compression alters amplitude over a relatively short time. Editing/fader riding alters amplitude over a relatively long time. They are two very different things with very different sonic results.
 
I mean, I guess I see them as two completely different things and not at all interchangeable.

I'm still learning how best to use compression, but so far it's basically to get certain tracks to play nice with others. Kind of a tone shaping tool that is much more mysterious to me than EQ. If any track doesn't sound exactly as I want it in relation to the others, I try playing around with compression settings and often it helps. Sometimes not. I don't always know why.

Riding faders is a much more straightforward activity. You raise or lower the volume of a track without altering its tone, so not much mystery there...still, getting the levels right on all tracks throughout an entire piece can be more difficult than it might seem. Although that's a pretty basic mixing technique, I guess sometimes we all struggle with that as well.
 
I just sit there and sob "Why won't you sound good?"... that's not compression... it's depression... :thumbs up:

But seriously, I'm with heatmiser... fader riding/automation for controlling volume, compression for wedging its little ass into the mix... in need.

I track DI bass with compression however...
 
elbandito said:
...I recently tried out Waves Vocal Rider (which is pretty awesome, btw) and after my trial period ended, I found myself playing around with parameter modulation in REAPER, using a gain/trim plug to try to emulate the functionality of the Waves plugin. ..
Click to expand...
Love fader automation- pre and post track compression BTW, like the free VocRider occasionally (slightly glitchy in Sonar), but Reaper curious..
What is 'parameter modulation in Reaper? As in dynamics control?
 
I only use compression for the sound of the compression, never for volume management.
 
mixsit said:
Love fader automation- pre and post track compression BTW, like the free VocRider occasionally (slightly glitchy in Sonar), but Reaper curious..
What is 'parameter modulation in Reaper? As in dynamics control?
Click to expand...

I don't know about other DAWs but in REAPER, you can assign almost any plug to control almost any parameter. For example, I could use could use it with the mix knob of a reverb to make the room less static and more responsive to louder peaks, or I could use it with an EQ to duck out certain frequencies for clarity when needed, like when a Harmonica and a vocal part are playing together.

I'm not very good at explaining things like this, so here's how SoundonSound describes it:
Parameter modulation allows the normally static values of parameters within effects and processes to be varied in real time by sources such as the level of an audio track or an LFO. This is rather like the side-chaining feature found in most DAWs now, but goes much further in that it can be used to control almost anything, rather than just the dynamics processing for which side-chaining is most often employed.
Click to expand...
 
elbandito said:
I don't know about other DAWs but in REAPER, you can assign almost any plug to control almost any parameter. For example, I could use could use it with the mix knob of a reverb to make the room less static and more responsive to louder peaks, or I could use it with an EQ to duck out certain frequencies for clarity when needed, like when a Harmonica and a vocal part are playing together.

I'm not very good at explaining things like this, so here's how SoundonSound describes it:
Click to expand...
Ok. That makes sense.
 
For anybody that would like to try using something like the Waves Vocal Rider but can't afford to buy it, I've found this freeware VST called "Steady". It was developed by a REAPER user named Terry West but as it's a VST, I'm sure it would work for anybody that's using a windows machine.

Check it out HERE. I haven't yet tested it out but I've read some good reviews by other REAPER users.
 
mjbphotos said:
I don't track DI bass with compression (why track it rather than add it later?), but usually add it. Maybe because I'm not a bass player!
Click to expand...

Two reasons, I particularly like the sound of the MindPrint Envoice that I DI it through, on bass, and also I was, until recently, working on a Yamaha AW4416 standalone and they're a bitch to do volume automation on thinks like bass... I can never quite get it right - plus I could never quite get the compressor on it to control my bass playing.... it was the best result with what I had.

Now I've consigned the AW4416 to the Old Recorders Home, I'll try automation through Reaper's envelopes and see how I go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top