Compression: While Recording, Mixing, Or Mastering??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike Freze
  • Start date Start date
M

Mike Freze

New member
Hi! Just a quick question. In some of my recording books, everyone seems to have a different opinion about when to use compression. Some say to use it in real time while you record so you don't have to screw around with each track later on for balances. Others say to save it until mixdown and add compression where it's needed. Yet others say wait until you master your final songs for an "overall balance" and to jack up the final volume for each song. Any adevice??

Thanks! Mike Freze
 
I tend not to use compression or limiting during the recording stage unless there is just cause - ie: a vocalist with extreme range of expression that will peak levels, etc. I use compression to balance out individual tracks in mix down stage as needed, and limiting in the mastering stage to help match overall volume with the other songs in the collection.
 
The only thing I use compression on while recording is Bass guitar. Everything else waits until mixing. I have goofed around with throwing a compressor on the whole mix while I mix but that seems to make the mix gigantic where it may not need to be. Depends on the song I guess.
 
Simple answer - yes! If you know what you want, use it at all stages of recording.
 
Sometimes I do it for all three stages...sometimes two...sometimes one....
...and sometimes none.

:)

If you are going to compress multiple times...it's best to keep it very light per stage, especially on the earlier stages.
Then again...maybe it's a nasty (bad-ass) guitar part and you want to just mangle the crap out it throughout the whole process. :cool:

Let your ears be your guide....
 
+1 "Sometimes I do it for all three stages...sometimes two...sometimes one....
...and sometimes none."
 
There is no right answer. Learn how and why a compressor works, learn how to use it, and then use it whenever you need it. Compression and reverb are probably the most overused and abused tools in the box. Don't think you have to use it just because it's there and you can.
 
There isn't really a correct answer, but there are things to consider. If you don't know how or why you would want a compressor while printing, don't use one. Once you're more comfortable with compression in general from playing with plugins or whatever, it might be time to experiment with select outboard units to try to create sounds. A compressor can really screw up sounds when you're printing if you don't have the right box or settings. On the other hand, if you know how to get the sounds you want and squashing on the way in helps you to get there, by all means.

Technically, everyone knows what compressors do. They control dynamics. Especially in the earlier stages of the recording process, it isn't always the most beneficial thing to think of it that way. They're musical instruments.

Same thing with guitar. Leaving acoustic guitar and clean electric out of the picture for a second, you can get distorted guitar sounds via a number of ways. Tube Screamer pedal. Big Muff Pi. Fender Hot Rod Deluxe. Marshall Plexi. Compression controls dynamics. Distortion clips the guitar signal. "When and how much would I want to clip the output of a guitar signal?" is an interesting question. From a technical standpoint it describes what guitar distortion is, but find a guitar player that thinks about it that way. Distortion creates specific guitar sounds. Each one of the devices I mentioned handles the task a bit differently and they all have their place. The technical description doesn't serve the aesthetic value of what the device can be used to create.

It's also pretty hard to describe the differences in a way that has any meaning if you haven't heard each one of these things.

Volume rides are often used instead of, or in conjunction with compression to "control dynamics". And if your end goal is to simply jack up the volume of the final product, all of your gain staging and compression usage should stay on the conservative side of line level until the last step if you want the biggest gain in RMS level before the sonics fall apart.

Compression and reverb are like glue. Very useful, but too much can be messy.
 
Mike Freze said:
Hi! Just a quick question. In some of my recording books, everyone seems to have a different opinion about when to use compression. Some say to use it in real time while you record so you don't have to screw around with each track later on for balances. Others say to save it until mixdown and add compression where it's needed. Yet others say wait until you master your final songs for an "overall balance" and to jack up the final volume for each song. Any adevice??

Thanks! Mike Freze
Click to expand...


Let's set aside the idea of leaving compression to the mastering engineer for a moment, and start with the compression during recording v. mixdown.

As you've pointed out, there are two basic schools of thought on this. Record aggressively, and in a manner that allows you the ability to pull up an exceptionally good faders up mix. Or, record passively, in a manner that requires all processing decisions to be saved until mixing. Of course, there's also middle ground, but typically people end up in one camp or the other.

In many ways, circumstance dictates how you choose to go about this. If you're tracking in a big studio, and you're mixing at home, aggressive recording is probably the best choice. If you're tracking at home, and mixing in a big studio with lots of outboard, then you might want to record passively, and mix aggressively. That said, I almost always record aggressively, and there's a very good reason for this: I want to KNOW where I'm at, at all times in the production. The best way to accomplish this, is to record aggressively.

The problem with recording aggressively, is you can no longer MIX aggressively.

From Zen and the Art of Mixing (Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved):

"An aggressive recordist will print the tracks exactly as they expect them to be mixed. This means all processing is performed as if the track is actually being mixed. I call this technique “tying the hands”of the mixer, and if you are the mixer, you just tied your own hands. I’m not arguing against this methodology; I’m all for it. But if you record in this manner, you have no option but to capitulate to your recording decisions come mix time. You will not be able to manhandle your tracks again. If you’re used to mixing aggressively, you could very well find yourself out of your usual element. This can be overcome, but there’s definitely a learning curve.

Personally, I can’t stand recording in a non-aggressive manner. As a producer, I like tying my hands, as I trust my early instincts. But this means I’ve had to adapt to mixing less aggressively on projects that I’ve recorded and produced. Both methodologies are valid—you just have to choose which works best for you."

Now, as to leaving compression to the ME...

The Internet is a great place to get bad advice where your stereo compressor is concerned. The number-one myth is the notion that stereo compression should be left in the hands of the mastering engineer. While there’s no doubt that mixing with a stereo compressor takes practice, and while it’s quite possible that you’ll fuck up several mixes in the process (can you say overcompression?), it’s essential that you as the mixer—and only you—compress
your mix."

<SNIP happens>

"So why not leave compression up to the mastering engineer? Simple: your balances will change far too drastically for this to be a reasonable option. Balance is your main weapon for manipulating the listener’s emotions and focus. If you’re going to spend hours upon hours getting those balance relationships just right, why would you find it acceptable for them to completely change come mastering time? If you don’t compress the stereo bus while you mix, you’re not delivering a mix. You’re delivering some weird approximation of a mix, and it’s not even that, since you can’t predict precisely how the mix is going to change—and it will change."

Now brick wall limiting can be left to the Mastering Stage, because limiting overall doesn't throw your balances out of whack, and you don't want to tie the hands of your client later by delivering a pancake of a song.

Enjoy,

Mixerman
 
Compression is just a tool, just like a screwdriver or a hammer is a tool. You use it when you need or want to use it, and when you don't, you keep it in your toolbelt, safely away from the action, but handy for if/when you do need it. If you want to use it for a specific purpose in any given stage of the process, use it for that purpose. If the purpose is not there, don't use it. Any more debate about whether it should be used here or there is superfluous.

G.
 
Experiment and see what works best for the different types of music you record. I tend to mostly use light compression during tracking and then add it again during mixing if it improves the sound of the track. Dont do much mastering, so no opinion on that.
 
I usually leave compression until the mastering stage. As has been indicated in other postings, compression enhances dynamics giving the final mix a feeling of excitement and power. Having said this, trust your ears, if it sounds good with compression, use it. If it doesn't enhance the track, ditch it.
 
"Compression: While Recording, Mixing, Or Mastering??"


yes, all of the above.
 
Yeah, all three. Less so on the mastering end these days. Although, these days I'm not mastering much any more.

I'll compress mostly vocals and bass on input and then compress whatever needs it during mix.

Cheers :)
 
Mike Stangroom said:
I usually leave compression until the mastering stage. As has been indicated in other postings, compression enhances dynamics giving the final mix a feeling of excitement and power. Having said this, trust your ears, if it sounds good with compression, use it. If it doesn't enhance the track, ditch it.
Click to expand...

Just wondering then if you are relying on automation a lot (what ever 'a lot might mean
Guess it could depend a bit on what we're recording.
I do all 3, well four or five if you want to count two layers of riding that's almost always there.
But that sort of means a little less compression going on at the track level.
I'm a bit of a fanboy for slow attack on the master bus. 'Yummy movement :D
 
NL5 said:
Simple answer - yes! If you know what you want, use it at all stages of recording.
Click to expand...

^^^ This! Except I might word it, "Yes! If you know what you're doing, use it in all stages of recording."

Bass, vocals, and acoustic guitar usually benefit from moderate compression when tracking.
 
I think a key point here should be said. Using a compressor that is worth using is very important.

If this is about using an ITB compressor on the input track, then don't bother. Nothing different than using it later.
 
Personal preference is NOT to compress while tracking. Even if I want to add some later for effect (rather than dynamics control) I still prefer to be able to judge that and vary it as I listen to the whole mix, not just the single track. That said, I DO insert a limiter across each mic while tracking (via my digital mixer) but try to keep my gain structure such that I never actually hit the limiter. I just use it as a last ditch protection if somebody really belts it during the recording--just occasionally it's saved the best take from clipping and becoming unusable.

However, in both the mixing and mastering process I'll use compression as required. However, just a note that compression is often best used as a starting point with the use of automation or volume envelopes...adjusted by ear...being the final adjustment of dynamics.
 
Bobbsy said:
... However, just a note that compression is often best used as a starting point with the use of automation or volume envelopes...adjusted by ear...being the final adjustment of dynamics.
Click to expand...
Bobbsy I'm intrigued but not quite sure what you mean by starting point, regarding compression ?
 
Ah, okay.

What I meant was that for general compression (as opposed to looking for an audible effect) I will use light compression (and some make up gain) to even things out and tame any dramatic peaks--but then I'll actually use automation (or, more usually Audition's volume envelopes) to ride levels by ear which, if you think about it, is basically a human-controlled form of compression. Sometimes it's only a few changes in a whole track but, with some vocalists, I end up moving things up or down even for single syllables.

Doing it this way I can control exactly which bits are raised or lowered to best fit the mix...and don't run the risk of pumping if there's a lot of "psuedo compression" needed.

Hope this makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top