DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

[cjacek]

Can anyone please explain a couple of things to me ?

(1) I've heard people say that dbx compressors have a particular "sound" or "colour" .. What exactly are they talking about ?

(2) I have an old, scratched up 163x dbx compressor and I track male vocals with it. Many say it's not good for that. Why ? I was able to do amazing things with it. Many times I have to do A/B comparisons to show that in fact compression was added. It's so smooth and natural sounding (when you're careful) that I have to ask ... why not for vocals ?

(3) Is "sound" and "colour" two seperate descriptions that differ from one dbx model to the next or do these pretty much stay the same ? Is "sound" & "colour", of a dbx compressor, one and the same ? If yes, then how does a 160 differ, both in sound and colour, to a 161, 163, 166, 266 and all the other dbx models ?

Put simply, what is the main difference, only in sound & colour mind you, between a 160 and 163 compressor for example ? One obviously has more features and sells for a lot more than the other but what about where it counts the most - sound ? What is the most distinguishable characteristic of one over the other that makes one spend more ? You mean to tell me that the average joe off the street can tell the difference between whether a 160 or 163 was used for a particular track or song ? Are we just splitting hairs here or are these units pretty close and can only be appreciated by the rather "anal" recording engineer, for the lack of a better term ?

Personally, I like the "sound/colour" of dbx compressors as they give it that certain "vintage" warm tone found only in older analog mixers but really need to understand about the DBX line of compressors.

Daniel

 

[Tom Cram]

(1) I've heard people say that dbx compressors have a particular "sound" or "colour" .. What exactly are they talking about ?

IMO the sound of a compresor is in the envelope of its attack. The inherent sound of a VCA also has a bit to do with it.

(2) I have an old, scratched up 163x dbx compressor and I track male vocals with it. Many say it's not good for that. Why ? I was able to do amazing things with it. Many times I have to do A/B comparisons to show that in fact compression was added. It's so smooth and natural sounding (when you're careful) that I have to ask ... why not for vocals ?

I know a lot of people who swear by the 163x. If it sounds good, it is good. Anything else can go hang.

(3) Is "sound" and "colour" two seperate descriptions that differ from one dbx model to the next or do these pretty much stay the same ? Is "sound" & "colour", of a dbx compressor, one and the same ? If yes, then how does a 160 differ, both in sound and colour, to a 161, 163, 166, 266 and all the other dbx models ?

Same same. The 161, 160 share the same VCA. so they are going to sound similar. The 163 and the 166 share the same VCA so they are going to sound similar. The 266 has it's own VCA design, so it is going to have its own sound.

Put simply, what is the main difference, only in sound & colour mind you, between a 160 and 163 compressor for example ? One obviously has more features and sells for a lot more than the other but what about where it counts the most - sound ? What is the most distinguishable characteristic of one over the other that makes one spend more ?

They have different VCA's and different input/output circuits, as well as different controls over VCA function. The 160VU and the 163 don't sound anything at all like each other. As for why you would spend more, I can't really answer that question its too subjective. Is red better than blue?

You mean to tell me that the average joe off the street can tell the difference between whether a 160 or 163 was used for a particular track or song ? Are we just splitting hairs here or are these units pretty close and can only be appreciated by the rather "anal" recording engineer, for the lack of a better term

The reason that AE's exist is to split hairs. It is our purpose in life. It is why we get up in the morning, it is why we scrimp and save, it is why we get divorced, it is why we get paid. What the average joe can discern has little to do with it.

 

[chessrock]

I'm having a problem with two of your statements. Help me, here. I mean, it's very early in the morning right now, Chicago time, so maybe I'm just a little tired . . . but can you read these two statements and feel / understand / empathise with my pain? ? ?

(1) I've heard people say that dbx compressors have a particular "sound" or "colour" .. What exactly are they talking about ?

Personally, I like the "sound/colour" of dbx compressors as they give it that certain "vintage" warm tone found only in older analog mixers but really need to understand about the DBX line of compressors.

 

[HangDawg]

Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) I've heard people say that dbx compressors have a particular "sound" or "colour" .. What exactly are they talking about ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I like the "sound/colour" of dbx compressors as they give it that certain "vintage" warm tone found only in older analog mixers but really need to understand about the DBX line of compressors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[/B]

That does hurt a little doesn't it.

 

[cjacek]

IMO the sound of a compresor is in the envelope of its attack. The inherent sound of a VCA also has a bit to do with it.



I know a lot of people who swear by the 163x. If it sounds good, it is good. Anything else can go hang.



Same same. The 161, 160 share the same VCA. so they are going to sound similar. The 163 and the 166 share the same VCA so they are going to sound similar. The 266 has it's own VCA design, so it is going to have its own sound.



They have different VCA's and different input/output circuits, as well as different controls over VCA function. The 160VU and the 163 don't sound anything at all like each other. As for why you would spend more, I can't really answer that question its too subjective. Is red better than blue?



The reason that AE's exist is to split hairs. It is our purpose in life. It is why we get up in the morning, it is why we scrimp and save, it is why we get divorced, it is why we get paid. What the average joe can discern has little to do with it.

Thanks for the prompt reply Tom!

One more thing I meant to ask about the 160 comps which seem to have a "classic" status and still are sought after. Am I missing something or do these not have any attack or release knobs ? Still, these sell quite well used, despite all that. The newer models, however, which have these controls are not necessarily the most popular. Why is that and why did the earlier comps not have attack/release paramaters ? Were these missing on the dbx comps or are we talkin' here about all "vintage" compressors ?

Thanks,

Daniel

 

[cjacek]

Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

I'm having a problem with two of your statements. Help me, here. I mean, it's very early in the morning right now, Chicago time, so maybe I'm just a little tired . . . but can you read these two statements and feel / understand / empathise with my pain? ? ?

[/B]

See, now I am having a hard time understanding what you mean ..

~Daniel

 

[cjacek]

Re: Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

That does hurt a little doesn't it.

Is this an inside "thang" that I'm not in on ? Please help me out, will ya ?

~Daniel

 

[Son of Mixerman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

Is this an inside "thang" that I'm not in on ? Please help me out, will ya ?

~Daniel

Its because you asked a question and then answered it yourself farther down in the same post.

But I know what you mean anyhow... its not always easy to put for finger on something you like, but you know that you like it anyhow.
SoMm

 

[Son of Mixerman]

Re: Re: Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

Is this an inside "thang" that I'm not in on ? Please help me out, will ya ?

~Daniel

Its because you asked a question and then answered it yourself farther down in the same post.

But I know what you mean anyhow... its not always easy to put for finger on something you like, but you know that you like it anyhow.
SoMm

 

[chessrock]

I was just messin' with ya, Cjacek. I like to do that early in the morning when I'm grumpy.

 

[cjacek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: DBX Compressors - Tom Cram, guys .. anyone ???

Its because you asked a question and then answered it yourself farther down in the same post.

But I know what you mean anyhow... its not always easy to put for finger on something you like, but you know that you like it anyhow.
SoMm

Ok, thanks .. 'cause I was beginning to think I was senile or something .. . Yeah, looking back now, I did answer my own question, didn't I ? I guess what I was asking is a tech explanation of what I was hearing (ie: frequencies, etc ...).

Thanks,

Daniel

 

[cjacek]

I was just messin' with ya, Cjacek. I like to do that early in the morning when I'm grumpy.

No problem Chris (is it "Chris" ?). If not, sorry ..

Daniel

 

[chessrock]

Keith. You might have me confused with Chessparov. Isn't he Chris?

Anyway, I think what you might be hearing is what is called the "knee." And the dbx 160 has what's basically a pretty classic hard-knee response to how it behaves when the volume of the material approaches and goes above the compressor's threshold setting.

It's very hard to explain, but there are sources out there where you can learn more about it. Interestingly enough the hard-knee and the opto-compressor are both very different from one another -- at least as far as I know -- but both are very much associated with music from the past (although both are still pretty widely used today).

 

[Tom Cram]

Am I missing something or do these not have any attack or release knobs ? Still, these sell quite well used, despite all that. The newer models, however, which have these controls are not necessarily the most popular. Why is that and why did the earlier comps not have attack/release paramaters ? Were these missing on the dbx comps or are we talkin' here about all "vintage" compressors ?

Some folks don't like fiddling with attack and release controls all day long. They want "ON" and "MORE" controls and thats it. Also since the 160VU one of the first VCA based comps I don't think anyone knew what people would need. As time passed people wanted more control over the functions of the VCA and so more controls appeared. Our current 160a does not have attack and release controls, so it's not really exclusively a "vintage" issue per se, it's more of a preference issue.

 

[cjacek]

Keith. You might have me confused with Chessparov. Isn't he Chris?

Anyway, I think what you might be hearing is what is called the "knee." And the dbx 160 has what's basically a pretty classic hard-knee response to how it behaves when the volume of the material approaches and goes above the compressor's threshold setting.

It's very hard to explain, but there are sources out there where you can learn more about it. Interestingly enough the hard-knee and the opto-compressor are both very different from one another -- at least as far as I know -- but both are very much associated with music from the past (although both are still pretty widely used today).

Yes, I did confuse you with Chessparov! Thanks Keith

~Daniel

 

[cjacek]

Some folks don't like fiddling with attack and release controls all day long. They want "ON" and "MORE" controls and thats it. Also since the 160VU one of the first VCA based comps I don't think anyone knew what people would need. As time passed people wanted more control over the functions of the VCA and so more controls appeared. Our current 160a does not have attack and release controls, so it's not really exclusively a "vintage" issue per se, it's more of a preference issue.

Ok, so I understand that the 160VU was a "hard knee" compressor, and so is the 118, 119 etc .. ? Personally I don't get it how studios could make good use of them if they just suddenly squashed the signal when you passed the threshold .. "Hard knee" to me means almost "limiting" rather than compressing. I thought "overeasy" or "soft knee" was in line with good recording results .. Am I understanding this correct ?

Thanks again for your input, Tom.

Daniel

 

[Strange Leaf]

Hard and soft knee got nothing to do about the amount of compression if the signal isn't very near the theshold.
The softknee compressor start earlier to make a smoother transition from uncompressed to compressed sound, which means that softknee actually compresses more than hardknee, even though hardknee is easier to hear when it kicks in.

None of them are specific for a compressor or a limiter.

 

[chessrock]

Ok, so I understand that the 160VU was a "hard knee" compressor, and so is the 118, 119 etc .. ? Personally I don't get it how studios could make good use of them if they just suddenly squashed the signal when you passed the threshold .. "Hard knee" to me means almost "limiting" rather than compressing. I thought "overeasy" or "soft knee" was in line with good recording results .. Am I understanding this correct ?

Not Tom (sorry), but . . . what you're basically saying is pretty valid, for the most part. You at least got the basic jist of it -- hard knee is just a more abrupt or obvious way of compressing . . . and the reason soft-knee was introduced in the first place was for the very reasons you state. Someone basically thought of a more subtle and polite way of compressing a signal, and it's obviously caught on pretty well.

But there are a lot of imperfections about older recordings that we now consider to be "warm" or "vintage." It kind of defies conventional logic to think of tape saturation or tube distortion as being desirable things, but a lot of us seem to prefer that sound nonetheless. Whoever would have thought, initially, that purposely overdriving tubes in an amplifier with a guitar or a keyboard would produce a desirable effect? I mean it would make the most sense to have the cleanest signal possible, wouldn't it?

Anyway, I'm sure you see where I'm going with this. On certain things, more obvious compression can be kinda' cool. I mean what good is it if you can't hear it? We are talking about Rock & Roll here, right?

 

[mixsit]

.. ? Personally I don't get it how studios could make good use of them if they just suddenly squashed the signal when you passed the threshold .. "Hard knee" to me means almost "limiting" rather than compressing...

There's a few other factors in there though, attack time being a big one. At all but the fastest settings, something always slips through regardless of the knee. Time vs amplitude.
Then, at lower ratios, you might use a lot lower threshold, compacting a large portion of the signal, 'knee' might not matter at all.
Wayne

 

[cjacek]

Ok, great stuff! Thanks again guys!

Daniel