compressor

  • Thread starter Thread starter speaker
  • Start date Start date
Shadowdog said:
Do I just run individual tracks thru the external compressor and back to the recorder on to a different track to retain the origional?
Yes.


___________________________
 
Ahhh, its all starting to come together. I can't wait for my soundcard to get here so I can start doing this.
 
Shadowdog said:
Ahhh, its all starting to come together. I can't wait for my soundcard to get here so I can start doing this.
Good luck and enjoy!
 
Re: Compressor

I recently purchased a DBX 266XL Compressor Gate that I only want to use for my vocals on my recordings. So far, I am very pleased with the results. I know that some people use compressors for their final mix, but I've found that that's not neccesary for me. The only part of my recording that I've been unhappy with as far as the change in dynamics is the vocals. I either had to get too close to the mic or back off to get the recording to even it out, and it never worked anyway. I've only had a chance to use it on two recordings so far, but it looks like it's solved my problems with the vocals.

Tunes68.
 
I'd use an outboard compresser to keep from clipping the converters on the way into the box.

Then compress in the box with a plugin after tracking.
 
JazzMang said:
Well its just that outboard compressors usually give you a little more of a non-digital sound when compressing. The waves compressor plugin (from what i heard) works pretty well, but it wont give you some of the sonic coloring that the some of the outboard compressors do. A lot of digital compressors (plugins) tend sound a little more antiseptic... and thats the kind of sound you should try and stay away from most of the time.

Antiseptic perhaps, but they do have their own sound. Unfortunately, the "sound" most of them have is not particularily good in my opinion. At least if what you are looking for is a pure tone. With most of them, if you run the track through uncompressed and then with the compressor, but without compression, you'll hear it doing something to the sound. For lack of better term, I call it the "processing" sound. There are a few good ones, like the Sonalksis SV-315, but in general I prefer outboard compression not only for the coloration that you can use to your advantage, but also the different ways each compressor box reacts to the track.

The other issue with plugin compressors is that I think there is a tendency to use too much of it, and to use too many of them. Like, it's very common for people to put compressors on every track or almost every track. Of course, in the old hardware days that would have been impossible unless you had tons and tons of hardware compressors. I do think plugin compressors work a little better when they are treated as if they were hardware.

In other words, set up 8 busses (for example) with plugin compressors, and then assign tracks to to those busses, as you would with a hardware mixer. It's easy to set up a 16 or 24 buss virtual mixer this way as well. That's a truly a luxury of DAW software mixing. Doing the same thing with reverb is also good in my opinion. It not only conserves computer CPU resources, but it sounds better than putting compression and reverb plugs on every track.

Also, I've done plugin/hardware comparisons, and for some reason you have to set the plugin to do a lot more compression before you hear it as much as with hardware. I don't know why this is.

The other thing is, it seems to me that a mix comes together faster using hardware compressors than with plugs. Also not quite sure why this is, but the tracks just seem to sit together better with hardware, or at least sit together better easier.
 
I agree with that.
Hardware compressors are just easier to get an agreeable sound out of. When i use the plugins, I personally think that I am fighting with something antiseptic and the sound ends up uncolored, but with audible compression... even when you are aiming for inaudible compression.
 
Back
Top