How do I know when to use compression?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BBlack
  • Start date Start date
Richard Monroe said:
Posted by Chibi Nappa:
I have to respectfully disagree. Lots of people, including professionals, use compression just to prevent clipping on very dynamic sources. What else is a limiter, but a compressor with a very fast attack and a ratio of 20:1 or so? Where else would the concept of a hard or soft "ceiling" come from?
Click to expand...
Limiting is a totally different beast than compression even though the only real difference is the ratio.

Yes, people can and do use limiters to catch peaks when recording. In that situation, you are not coloring the sound because hopefully the limiter is only reducing gain a few times through the course of a song rather than bouncing along constantly like a compressor might.


And even after recording with the limiter, a dynamic performance will probably need to be automated to fit correctly, so it's not like the limiter totally evened it out. And that is the main point of what I was saying. Level out your balance with faders.
 
philbagg said:
When evening out levels, I'd use fader automation for large words or phrases where the volume is too low/high, but I'm not going to waste hours doing that to most of the tracks.
Click to expand...

If the dynamics are so chaotic that automation would take hours, you probably have to re-record with a more controlled performance from the musician.

The the musician is not skilled enough to give that performance and refuses to be replaced, then just buckle down and get to that automation. A major tonal choice like a compressor set to "flatten" should be made because it helps the sound, not because you don't want to put in the work to do it another way.
 
Chibi Nappa said:
If the dynamics are so chaotic that automation would take hours, you probably have to re-record with a more controlled performance from the musician.

The the musician is not skilled enough to give that performance and refuses to be replaced, then just buckle down and get to that automation. A major tonal choice like a compressor set to "flatten" should be made because it helps the sound, not because you don't want to put in the work to do it another way.
Click to expand...

I simply disagree that compression is FOR tonal effect just because compressors do have tonal characteristics. A compressor IS level automation that preexisted the kind of automation that's now available to everyone. The fact that it can have tonal effects on the signal was a byproduct of the processing which was then exploited by engineers and then touted by equipment manufacturers after the fact.

You are treating an artistic preference as if it's an objective technical fact. There's nothing wrong with altering the dynamic envelope of a signal with a dynamics processor. If that's what gets the sound you want then it's the right tool. A performance can never be "right" when the definition of "right" changes over time, from writing to arranging to tracking to mixing of a song and through the years as styles change. Yes, you should try to get the performance as close as possible to your vision of the final product as early in the process as possible, but a dogmatic approach to creativity is an oxymoron. If it sounds good it is good.
 
I think Boulder and Richard have hit the nail on the head... I wish I could explain myself as technically
 
I only use compression if I can't achieve the evenness I require of a track with level automation. In other words I try not to use it but sometimes I snooker myself & have to use it to deal with level problems (usually vocals & bass) - I can't help being an uneven bassist as time, timing & arthritis take their course.
SOMETIMES I'll use BLOCKFISH for one of its preset "effects", (usually vintage vocals for an old timey, confessional feel), rather than for compression per se & I usually wind the preset'sgain back as much as I can without undoing it's component within the "effect"- then again the effect I'd use is one that is recognisable as a change in tonality, volume, saturation etc etc as a result of a variety of ways of applying compression.
Now, that begs the question doesn't it?
I went through a stage, as many do I think, of using compression as a matter of course to increase level rather than dealing with the actual issues or simply turning up the track. I then went through a period of removing the compression I had. Now I try to track better, deal with problems in the best way I can & use compression when I NEED to.
So far....so far...I'm still learning.
 
In my mind if something sounds like mousse and I want it to sound like pudding, time to bring in the compressor. Compressors take the "fluffy air pockets" out of the middle of a sound.[/QUOTE]

WELL SAID!!! This is the best metaphoric description of a compressor I heard.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
I simply disagree that compression is FOR tonal effect just because compressors do have tonal characteristics. A compressor IS level automation that preexisted the kind of automation that's now available to everyone. The fact that it can have tonal effects on the signal was a byproduct of the processing which was then exploited by engineers and then touted by equipment manufacturers after the fact.

You are treating an artistic preference as if it's an objective technical fact. There's nothing wrong with altering the dynamic envelope of a signal with a dynamics processor. If that's what gets the sound you want then it's the right tool. A performance can never be "right" when the definition of "right" changes over time, from writing to arranging to tracking to mixing of a song and through the years as styles change. Yes, you should try to get the performance as close as possible to your vision of the final product as early in the process as possible, but a dogmatic approach to creativity is an oxymoron. If it sounds good it is good.
Click to expand...


PERFECT!!! How do you give reputation points?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top