Compressor for Acoustic Guitar and Male Vocals

[JTC111]

But, I do understand the hardware thing. Good analog outboard is an asset that will tend to rise in value over time - software, not so much.

Exactly my point. Anytime I purchase software, somewhere in my head it always occurs to me that this is money I'm basically going to throw away someday with no real chance of recouping any of it. But hardware is resellable. If I buy a piece of hardware and I don't like it, I can resell it with very little loss. Hell, if I buy it used, I might even be able to sell it at a slight profit.

 

[NL5]

Exactly my point. Anytime I purchase software, somewhere in my head it always occurs to me that this is money I'm basically going to throw away someday with no real chance of recouping any of it. But hardware is resellable. If I buy a piece of hardware and I don't like it, I can resell it with very little loss. Hell, if I buy it used, I might even be able to sell it at a slight profit.

That is audio logic that actually makes sense! Whoo Hoo!

It's hard to beat 14 channels of 1176 for 300 bucks though. I think my UAD cards would be the last thing to go besides the computer - and I LOVE hardware. At over $1500 a channel for even a UA reissue 1176, that would be $21,000 worth of hardware emulated for $300 (and the emulations are damn close - so close, that if a session is spread out over more than a few days, I don't even fire up the MC77 or Distressors - so much easier to have all the channels on 100% re-call)

Anyway, it sounds like you have it figured out, now you just need to pick a compressor and try it!

 

[MOFO Pro]

A compressor does not have to ruin the dynamics of the performance by surpressing the physical dynamics of the source...

In some cases compressors can actually improve the performance dynamics by bringing the gentle nuaces of the softer performance up to more listenable level.

More important to the actual levels, is capturing the attack and tone of the instrument played at different velocity... A hard chop against the strings, or a light strum, both impart a distinctive sound that is vastly different in both amplitude and tone and may not sit well side by side in a performance, if one is startlingly louder then the other.

A good compressor, well used, can handle these transients equally as well as a fast hand on the board... sometimes even more naturally...

 

[JTC111]

A compressor does not have to ruin the dynamics of the performance by surpressing the physical dynamics of the source...

In some cases compressors can actually improve the performance dynamics by bringing the gentle nuaces of the softer performance up to more listenable level.

More important to the actual levels, is capturing the attack and tone of the instrument played at different velocity... A hard chop against the strings, or a light strum, both impart a distinctive sound that is vastly different in both amplitude and tone and may not sit well side by side in a performance, if one is startlingly louder then the other.

A good compressor, well used, can handle these transients equally as well as a fast hand on the board... sometimes even more naturally...

Now that's what I thought until some people starting telling me the opposite. I guess we're all going to have our opinions, but I have to say that my chin hit my chest and I just starting shaking my head when someone posted this,

"In fact the ideal solution is for the OP to strengthen his fingerpicking technique to get a bigger sound, then mic it the same take for both strumming and fingerstyle sections."

Yeah, let's do that... let's sacrifice artistic expression and creative musical nuance to make the engineer's job a little easier. I guess it would be "ideal" from the engineer's perspective, but I doubt many good guitar players would see that as "ideal." I certainly wouldn't. My head is still shaking from side to side.

 

[NL5]

Yeah, let's do that... let's sacrifice artistic expression and creative musical nuance to make the engineer's job a little easier. I guess it would be "ideal" from the engineer's perspective, but I doubt many good guitar players would see that as "ideal." I certainly wouldn't. My head is still shaking from side to side.

I think you are contradicting yourself. You are saying to leave the original dynamics in the playing, but changing them with a compressor. I don't quite understand how these two "jive". If you want to sound the way it was played dynamically, why would you bring up the level in spots? Seems you would be changing the "artistic expression". Maybe I am just confused?

The conversation certainly veered off of your original question, but hopefully at least someone is gleaning some useful information here. MOFO is right, and compressors can work magic on tracks, but I still think "controlling the track" while tracking is not one of them. If you are sure that the sound will be right while tracking thru one, I'm sure it would be fine to do so. I know a lot of people do that. I have never met a pro engineer that does it to "control the track" though. Also, if you have noise issues, a compressor is sure to make that worse, unless it's in your converters - if your converters are that noisy, you have much bigger problems than what compressor to buy.

 

[JTC111]

I think you are contradicting yourself. You are saying to leave the original dynamics in the playing, but changing them with a compressor. I don't quite understand how these two "jive". If you want to sound the way it was played dynamically, why would you bring up the level in spots? Seems you would be changing the "artistic expression". Maybe I am just confused?

I don't see any contradiction at all. My original question dealt strictly with the difference between high end and low end compressors. After I explained for what purpose I wanted compression on the tracks (and really it was just about volume levels for me), the topic veered off into ways of obtaining that.

Back to your assertion of contradiction... there's a huge difference between using compression and/or automated volume to make a softly played part audible (and by audible, I mean minimizing the volume differences between the louder and softer guitar parts so people don't have to reach for the volume knob on the stereo) and telling the guitarist to play it louder. Playing it louder changes the texture and feeling of the piece. It's really the worst solution I can imagine.

It's very possible we're all misinterpreting each other phrases here. But you're right; I'm sure people can learn something from this thread... or at least get a bunch of different ideas as to how to achieve a result.

As for me, I think I was on the right track in my experimenting with this: record the acoustic guitar with a bit of compression; add some more in the mixing stage if needed, but not so much that it sounds compressed and unnatural, then use volume automation to fine tune it. I'm going to start recording my new cd this summer and that's going to be my method.

 

[XLR]

...I wind up with thin and noisy soft passages or clipping on the loud stuff.

Thin and noisy while fingerpicking? That makes me suspect that your fingerpicking technique is less than ideal. Strengthening the right hand technique doesn't mean losing expression or nuance. It means getting more resonance and consistency. An expressive player with a strong technique will generally come across with more expression than one playing with a weak sound.

I have to say that my chin hit my chest and I just starting shaking my head when someone posted this,

"In fact the ideal solution is for the OP to strengthen his fingerpicking technique to get a bigger sound, then mic it the same take for both strumming and fingerstyle sections."

Yeah, let's do that... let's sacrifice artistic expression and creative musical nuance to make the engineer's job a little easier.

Put a mic a couple feet from an acoustic guitarist. Have then strum loudly, then fingerpick. If their fingerpicking sounds thin and the track noisy the fingerpicking technique is weak (or you're using the recording gear wrong) and the ideal solution would be to strengthen it. Weak fingerpicking is a very common thing with guitarists who mainly use a flatpick. Also common is the attitude, "That's my fingerpicking sound and I like it the way it is." Of course it can be dealt with by close mic'ing and compression. Only a delusional engineer would think that the guitarist would actually go and work on their playing skills to get a solid resonance from their instrument when they fingerpick, then come back and record after. But it would, in fact, be the ideal thing for the best possible end result.

A stronger technique has nothing to do with lowering artistic sensitivity. In fact it's the opposite. The end result would be a better and more lifelike recorded performance, not ease for the engineer. But by all means use a compressor if you like its sound.

 

[JTC111]

Thin and noisy while fingerpicking? That makes me suspect that your fingerpicking technique is less than ideal. Strengthening the right hand technique doesn't mean losing expression or nuance. It means getting more resonance and consistency. An expressive player with a strong technique will generally come across with more expression than one playing with a weak sound.

When I said I get "thin and noisy" results, I was referring to attemtps to record without any front end compression and setting the gain to get the best sound on the louder passages.

Put a mic a couple feet from an acoustic guitarist. Have then strum loudly, then fingerpick. If their fingerpicking sounds thin and the track noisy the fingerpicking technique is weak (or you're using the recording gear wrong) and the ideal solution would be to strengthen it. Weak fingerpicking is a very common thing with guitarists who mainly use a flatpick.

Several times you've implied that the issue could be weak technique. My technique is fine and I never use a flatpick.

Also common is the attitude, "That's my fingerpicking sound and I like it the way it is." Of course it can be dealt with by close mic'ing and compression. Only a delusional engineer would think that the guitarist would actually go and work on their playing skills to get a solid resonance from their instrument when they fingerpick, then come back and record after. But it would, in fact, be the ideal thing for the best possible end result.

A stronger technique has nothing to do with lowering artistic sensitivity. In fact it's the opposite. The end result would be a better and more lifelike recorded performance, not ease for the engineer. But by all means use a compressor if you like its sound.

Well it's obvious that you and I are coming from completely different schools of thought on this because we're in disagreement on a lot of things. That's probably due to the fact that our musical leanings are very different. For instance, you use the term "stronger technique" and you hold that out as a solution to volume concerns across a track. I can play something louder if I choose to, but sometimes I want the guitar to whisper, however the whisper needs to be audible, and minimizing the volume swings within a track so as to make the "whisper" audible doesn't eliminate the implication of a whispering guitar to the listener.

In other words, raising the volume of a "whispering" guitar doesn't change the dynamic. The listener can still here it as it was intended because there'e more to it than just volume. I disagree completely with the idea that this is a technique issue whereby it can be played louder and still be perceived as "whispering."

I gave a listen to the tracks on your site and very much appreciate your guitar chops. What I'm performing is probably best described as contemporary folk music. There are a few songs on my site that you can listen to if you're interested (www.jimcaputo.com) although I don't think there are any fingerpicking examples there. Applying solutions that might work well in your genre aren't always going to translate well into others, and I think that's what we have here.

So I think at this point it's best to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[Daisy]

What you need isn't a compressor ...

.. But a leveler.


And Aphex makes a really good and transparent one called the "Compellor."

You should check it out. That's what you want. It's been used in radio broadcast now for a number of years to help even out the levels between the announcer, the music, as well as any studio guests, etc. etc. The idea being that, in broadcast, one could easily shift from a whisper to a holler at any time, and a leveler is used to sort of intelligently automate the differences in volume, while compressing / limiting at the same time, if you choose.

 

[JTC111]

What you need isn't a compressor ...

.. But a leveler.


And Aphex makes a really good and transparent one called the "Compellor."

You should check it out. That's what you want. It's been used in radio broadcast now for a number of years to help even out the levels between the announcer, the music, as well as any studio guests, etc. etc. The idea being that, in broadcast, one could easily shift from a whisper to a holler at any time, and a leveler is used to sort of intelligently automate the differences in volume, while compressing / limiting at the same time, if you choose.

Daisy, you're a genius! I take back all those nasty things I've said about you in other posts. Is a "leveler" the same as a limiter?

 

[Daisy]

No, not at all.

It's more like an automated volume envelope or fader-riding.

Although a lot of levelers have limiters built-in as well, it's still a separate function.

.

 

[MOFO Pro]

Good suggestion... but same warnings apply... this particular device can suck the life out of any source material... gently now...

 

[Daisy]

Good suggestion... but same warnings apply... this particular device can suck the life out of any source material...

So can just about anything else ... if not used tastefully or in moderation.

.

 

[JTC111]

Good suggestion... but same warnings apply... this particular device can suck the life out of any source material... gently now...

I'm always gentle.

 

[XLR]

this particular device can suck the life out of any source material...

So can just about anything else ... if not used tastefully or in moderation..

Therein lies the real challenge in recording.

Well, besides playing the fingerpicked acoustic guitar with a strong clear technique.

 

[JTC111]

Well, besides playing the fingerpicked acoustic guitar with a strong clear technique.

A kick in the nuts would be absolutely justified right about now. No jury in the world would convict me. They'd probably make you pay to have my shoe polished afterwards.

 

[MOFO Pro]

A kick in the nuts would be absolutely justified right about now. No jury in the world would convict me. They'd probably make you pay to have my shoe polished afterwards.

Done properly, the kick and shine are simultanious... it's all in the technique... and "Therein lies the real challenge"

 

[JTC111]

Done properly, the kick and shine are simultanious... it's all in the technique... and "Therein lies the real challenge"

This is why I love this board! That's genius!!! It never would've occured to me but I totally see how it could be done. You turn your foot inward and try to hold it through the motion only releasing it at the very end. Sort of like letting go of a spring-action doorknob.

 

[MOFO Pro]

This is why I love this board! That's genius!!! It never would've occured to me but I totally see how it could be done. You turn your foot inward and try to hold it through the motion only releasing it at the very end. Sort of like letting go of a spring-action doorknob.

A simple as Attack> Threshold> Release

 

[bigtoe]

Now that's what I thought until some people starting telling me the opposite. I guess we're all going to have our opinions, but I have to say that my chin hit my chest and I just starting shaking my head when someone posted this,

"In fact the ideal solution is for the OP to strengthen his fingerpicking technique to get a bigger sound, then mic it the same take for both strumming and fingerstyle sections."

Yeah, let's do that... let's sacrifice artistic expression and creative musical nuance to make the engineer's job a little easier. I guess it would be "ideal" from the engineer's perspective, but I doubt many good guitar players would see that as "ideal." I certainly wouldn't. My head is still shaking from side to side.

well...i can for sure see that as in my world the musician is always right...and to me as a recording dude, asking someone to change something pre microphone is insulting until i develop a rapport with them and they understand what I am saying without them taking offense and playing the 'artist card.'

You're asking a question and you basically want a Guitar Center answer of "DUDE…this compressor rocks…it will take care of you. Your problems will be solved and your tracks will sound like a warmer creamier Jimmy Page." it's not that easy.

look at how you are approaching the problem you have described:

1) You aren't telling the board how you are using the compressor you have now to try to fix your dilemna. As such, you don't explain the results you are getting and why they are not working. How can we say what will help you as far as a compressor goes? you haven't even tried helping yourself.

2) You skip answering the functional and fundamental questions and immediately ask about spending more money on a piece of gear thinking that it will solve your problems. It most likely won't.

3) Your technique is what is being recorded…it is certainly a part of the equation, until they develop a sample to sample acoustic guitar replacer for pro tools like they did with drums, which will probably not sound very good anyway. The musicians who I work with who get the best results either listen to the speakers and correct themselves OR they ask my advice and follow my suggestions on playing…as I've encountered the problem before and can tell them what can work and what doesn’t…not that I'm not open to learn new tricks…but I have plenty of chops to throw at your problem. You want it to sound it's best? Adapt to the microphone like the world's best musicians do.

Recording requires certain level of maturity in as far as you have to be able to somewhat accept your results as a mirror of your playing technique. Use this mirror to learn and grow as a player. It really has nothing to do with making the engineering job easier on the fat guy with the ponytail behind the board…it has to do with getting what you want. You want a compressor to thicken up or de-noise your acoustic guitar sound if it's played quietly? If you find something - let me know. I could tell you that you can buy a nice compressor for 3.5 K and you'll be set. You won't. How do I know? I have 12K worth of them.

All that said - if I had a know it all guitarist to deal with in real life - and I have had plenty which I serves with a smile thank you very much- the Compellor does sound like a good idea to try. I believe the idea in that box is to have 3 different compressors chained together…same as the super nice mode in the RNC which i used. The RNC will cost you 175. the noises in your playing will certainly be brought up with the rest of the low level stuff. If you want to get rid of those noises in your playing I highly recommend a deesser ala the dbx 263…which can be had for 50 dollars. stick that after the compressor to get rid of your finger noise as much as you’d like...provided you know how to use it. Then stick a limiter after everything else to control your peaks. One of the best limiters I've found for this stuff is the RNC as you can fine tune the attack and release …another 175. If the Compellor appeals to you - check out the Dominator…it is the brickwall limiter in the aphex world. If you want to spend more money on your problem you might get better results due to the signal path…but functionally, this stuff is as good as anything else out there outside of the box...provided of course you know how to use it.

Laters,

Mike