Looking for a decent compressor

  • Thread starter Thread starter leavings
  • Start date Start date
leavings

leavings

Member
Hey all,

I do a lot of recording for myself and friends, and my biggest challenge is with instruments (particularly vocals) that exhibit a wide dynamic range. I frequently end up having to keep one hand on the input levels to try and cut the peaks. I'm fairly sure that a compressor is the solution to these problems, so I'm looking for one to use with my Firepod and I had a few questions I hope some of you can answer.

First, I've never really used external processors and don't know how the whole thing is rigged. Once I hook it up to my Firepod, will it function over all of the input channels or just some of them?

Second, is there any software associated with it or is it all manual?

Third, can you suggest some makes and models that would be good for my needs? I typically record a lot of singer/songwriter material (a few acoustic instruments and vocals), but I would love to have something that is capable of performing well with drums, electronic instruments, and live audiences as well. I'm willing to go into the $300-$400 price range, maybe a little higher if necessary.

Fourth, anything else I need to know about getting into this kind of equipment?

Thanks!
Peter
 
You are not ready for an external compressor young one. You need to start recording with your peaks around -12 to -18 in your computer. There is no reason you NEED to record any higher then that.
 
I bought this one and really like it. Only $170 and it made a huge difference for me with recording Vocs, Bass, and acoustic. I do minimal tweaks, it just seems to do a great job at compressing.

No software involved. Just plug in to your interface. Turn it on and dial it in :)

I did alot of research prior to buying it and this is the one that I ended up buying. No regrets.

http://www.fmraudio.com/RNC1773.HTM
 
PEAKS at -12 to -18?
That doesn't sound right...
I think an average at -18 is more in the range you should be shooting for, with your peaks around -6.
 
Hmm...

without getting into a dispute about whether or not I NEED an external compressor, can anyone give me more suggestions on good models. I used to have an RNC; actually still do but it shorted out or something. It was decent, but not versatile enough for my tastes.

I do appreciate your suggestion of just reducing the average gain and recording with lower peaks. Will I lose anything by doing that and then just boosting the master gain once I have a mix I like? Everything I've read has told me that I should be trying to squeeze as much out of my inputs as I can without clipping. Can anyone expound on that?
 
whats wrong with a software one? im sure your app came with something..
 
TragikRemix said:
whats wrong with a software one? im sure your app came with something..
That's what I was thinking.
It's a lot safer adding the compression later,so you have options along with being able to run multiple instances.

I use a UAD-1 card and I'm very happy with it.
 
leavings said:
Hmm...

without getting into a dispute about whether or not I NEED an external compressor, can anyone give me more suggestions on good models. I used to have an RNC; actually still do but it shorted out or something. It was decent, but not versatile enough for my tastes.

I do appreciate your suggestion of just reducing the average gain and recording with lower peaks. Will I lose anything by doing that and then just boosting the master gain once I have a mix I like? Everything I've read has told me that I should be trying to squeeze as much out of my inputs as I can without clipping. Can anyone expound on that?

That used to be the case when recording to tape. Not so necessary when recording digitally. For as many channels as you appear to want and your financial constraints. a plugin may be your best bet. Decent hardware compression isn't cheap. The RNC and DBX 160(x, xt, a) are about the least expensive decent comps out there and they are still effectively @$175 a channel.
 
Holy continuing confusion batman,

Is there a way to use my compressor plugins when I'm recording??? I thought I could only use those for modifying the signal once it had been captured. If someone can explain to me how to use them for input signals then nevermind the external unit.
 
amra said:
PEAKS at -12 to -18?
That doesn't sound right...
I think an average at -18 is more in the range you should be shooting for, with your peaks around -6.

Ask any of the pros around here, they will say -18 DBfs, is more then enough with 24 bit recordings. I like -12, but there is no need to go higher, remember each bit of 24 bits is 6dB, 6 times 24 is to high for me to count, and to high for the noise level of your converters to count either, trust me, trying to squeeze ever last bit out of your recordings is not needed in the day and age of good converters in $100 cards like the M-Audio 24/96, not to mention better, even great converters in more pricey gear. When people went to tape you wanted every last bit you could get before noise level crept in and bit you in the butt, I remember making mix tapes on cassettes as a kid and I always shot for +3dB on the tape deck meters, now a days, its just not needed.
 
leavings said:
Holy continuing confusion batman,

Is there a way to use my compressor plugins when I'm recording??? I thought I could only use those for modifying the signal once it had been captured. If someone can explain to me how to use them for input signals then nevermind the external unit.

You can use them when recording but its only effecting the signal after it has already gone thru conversion, so you would be just doing it for the fun of it not cause its doing anything like a external compressor is doing.
 
So you think I'm better off just turning the inputs down and recording at a lower level rather than compressing the input signal?

Anyone disagree?
 
Lots of people use compressors while tracking. I use it for a safety measure when recording someone doing screaming type vocals, or a real dynamic instrument like a bass just to compress anything that gets past -6 db.

You can get by without it, but it can be a useful tool. Not a critical tool for the home recorder but a useful one.


BTW, I am pretty sure the pros on here say you should record with your AVERAGE around -18db not the peaks reaching -18db....
 
Taken from the very end of this thread: https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?p=2318360#post2318360

"if you record with a 24 bit word, the noise floor is so low that setting levels that peak well below full scale is fine, still way above the noise floor.

Each bit you add to the word doubles the available values the word can represent, and therefore doubles the dynamic range (signal to noise ratio from full scale down to noise) that you can record.

A doubling of dynamic range equates to 6db. Therefore, each bit in the word contributes 6db of dynamic range. A 16 bit word therefore has a 96db signal to noise ratio, and 24 bit word can express 144db of signal.

In the real world, the audio electronics in the converter provide a higher noise floor than a 24 bit word can represnt, so a good 24 bit converter will give, lets say conservatively, 110db of signal to noise.

This means that if you record your audio with peaks no higher than -14db under Full Scale, you'll still be experiencing a recording with 96db of dynamic range, which is the best any 16 bit CD has every accomplished.


To make the point even more graphically - this all assumed that the source signal has a dynamic range in excess of 96db too. I would bet you a beer that it isn't even close. There's no tube mic that operates that cleanly. Your studio room has noise higher than that. All your hardware compressors and EQs operate with a much higher noise floor.

If you were very careful, and ended up having a source with 70db of dynamic range (congratulations!) you could record it with peaks at -26dbFS (-26 under full scale) and still have preserved every ounce of dynamic range.

So its obvious that hitting full scale isn't necessary at all - why not preserve some headroom just in case? Let's say you do make it just under full scale. No harm in doing that if you don't go over, right?

Well, what do you do when you want to EQ something +2db? Where does that 2db go? Into clipping of course, unless you lower the input level of the plug in, which is going to lose any hypothetical S/N benefit you had preserved anyway.

Even more importantly, when you record this hot, I've got to ask - what did you do to your preamps, and analog chain to get this level? Most converters are set so that 0dbVU = -18dbFS.

That means that if you're getting -6 below full scale on your converter, that you're +12db over the 0VU point! Many analog electronics can crap out here, but almost all will sound different at least. Some times it may be "better" but usually, its a small accumulation of distortion that builds into a waxy fog that makes people blame "digital recording" for its pristine playback of their slightly distorted, but "pretty on the meter," tracks.

If you record with levels around your 0 point, some thing like -18dbFS or -14dbFS, depending on how your converter is calibrated, you'll have your analog electronics in their sweet spot, headroom for plug ins and summing, an appropriate analog friendly level if you use analog inserts later in the process, and on a modern 24bit converter with 110db S/N, the ability to faithfully record signals with a dynamic range of over 90db.

And by all means, 0dbVu is no glass ceiling like 0dbFS is. Keeping levels around 0dbVU doesn't mean that peaks won't exceed that by 6 (or more) db. If they do, your ability to record 96db of S/N (if you even have it in the source, and you don't), just like the best CD you ever heard will be preserved, if peaks don't exceed -12dbFS! More if they do.


) A 24 bit PCM word can express a theoretical limit of 144 db of S/N.

2) The analog electronics in the converter limit the performance to a functional 100 db of S/N. (slightly more in some cases, but I'll use a conservative figure and make the point even without those extra 6 db)

3) As long as the noise floor in any recording system is lower than the noise floor in the signal you're recording, you will record the full dynamic range perfectly.

4) No source you've ever recorded had a signal to noise ratio higher than 80 db, and most would be much much lower. Lynn suggests that he RARELY sees the source's noise floor lower than 70 db down, and even then, rarely. Assuming that his peaks are not at full scale, his typical source S/N ratio must be in the 50-60 db range?

This means that if you record your (best ever) 80db S/N source into a converter so that the highest peak just reaches -19 dbFS (below full scale) on the meter, that the noise floor in your signal will be louder than the noise floor in the converter. You needn't record it any hotter than that.

In the real world, you could get away with peaks around -28 dbFS, and be PERFECT. Any higher than that is totally unnecessary.

Conclusion: There is absolutely NO benefit to tracking hot.

But does it hurt to do it? Read on...

1) Your microphone preamp is set to perform best (gritty distorted choices aside) peaking around 0dbVU. This is where you'd have it set if you were recording to analog tape, hitting 0 on the VU meter. Plug that same source into most converters, and you get peaks around -20dbFS to -14dbFS, depending on how the converter is setup.

The scientists who developed this system understood the situation, even if the guys who wrote the digidesign manual don't! They EXPECT you to record with peaks around 0VU (-18dbFS on the digital scale). They KNOW about the signal to noise deal I explained earlier. That's why they chose to put the nominal level so "low" on the meter.

When you record hotter, with peaks at -6dbFS, lets say. You're driving your mic preamp 12 db hotter than you did yesterday in the analog world! That's going to add a subtle layer of distortion to your project. And they say analog sounds so much better than digital - maybe its because most people use their analog gear incorrectly when recording to digital. Maybe the "problem with Pro Tools summing" is really the effect of tracking too hot?

I've heard people say "My Neves can handle outputs +24db according to the spec, so what's the big deal?" My Neve 1073s are great sounding workhorses. They are rated for a LOT of gain. Still, they definitely sound very different even at +12. Very different. Maybe a good choice in some cases, but not the norm.

2) If you have a peak at -2dbFS, and you try to boost a mid range frequency +3db on an equalizer, you're going to clip.

Another unintended detriment to tracking hot is that you no longer have any headroom in your plug ins!

3) Most analog gear doesn't like inputs that are 12db and more over 0, even if the spec says they can take it. If you track hot, you're causing a nightmare for analog gear that you may choose to insert during the mix. Keep your levels around 0dbVU, and you can leave the digital domain freely without adding more sonic grunge.

Conclusion: Tracking hotter than 0dbVU can easily cause distortion in any number of places in the chain.

So, to reiterate:

1) There is absolutely NO benefit to tracking hot.

2) Tracking hotter than 0dbVU can easily cause distortion in any number of places in the chain."
 
leavings said:
Hmm...

without getting into a dispute about whether or not I NEED an external compressor, can anyone give me more suggestions on good models. I used to have an RNC; actually still do but it shorted out or something. It was decent, but not versatile enough for my tastes.

I do appreciate your suggestion of just reducing the average gain and recording with lower peaks. Will I lose anything by doing that and then just boosting the master gain once I have a mix I like? Everything I've read has told me that I should be trying to squeeze as much out of my inputs as I can without clipping. Can anyone expound on that?

I would suggest a Presonus BlueMax compressor. It's a great little piece and not very expensive. It has idiot proof presets (which is great for an idiot like me!) where you just set the dial to what you're recording (vocals, drums, etc.), tweak your input level, output level, and gain reduction and you're good to go! Very simple to use, stereo, and very good sound too.
 
leavings said:
Hmm...

without getting into a dispute about whether or not I NEED an external compressor, can anyone give me more suggestions on good models. I used to have an RNC; actually still do but it shorted out or something. It was decent, but not versatile enough for my tastes.

I do appreciate your suggestion of just reducing the average gain and recording with lower peaks. Will I lose anything by doing that and then just boosting the master gain once I have a mix I like? Everything I've read has told me that I should be trying to squeeze as much out of my inputs as I can without clipping. Can anyone expound on that?

If you did not like the RNC (which is exactly what I was going to suggest as a first compressor) I might suggest the RNLA.

I am confused since you said you used one and you also said you do not know how to hook them up. Anyway, on a firepod you would buy something like this: http://www.directproaudio.com/product.cfm?directid=25270 and plug the TRS (black in this photo) into the insert point for channel 1 or channel 2 on your firepod, then plug the red and blue into the back of the RNC or RNLA.

It would only effect the ONE channel that you have it inserted into.

Really though, if what you said in your original post is correct...

leavings said:
my biggest challenge is with instruments (particularly vocals) that exhibit a wide dynamic range. I frequently end up having to keep one hand on the input levels to try and cut the peaks.
...it seems like you were doing something wrong if the RNC did not fit the bill.

FWIW I prefer the RNLA over the RNC but would not recommend it first as it (in my opinion) is not as versitale. The RNC seems to work for almost anything.

Also, I am 90% sure you will not find anything else in that price range that comes close to the FMR products.

Hope this helps.

Jim
 
jdier said:
...it seems like you were doing something wrong if the RNC did not fit the bill.

FWIW I prefer the RNLA over the RNC but would not recommend it first as it (in my opinion) is not as versitale. The RNC seems to work for almost anything.

Also, I am 90% sure you will not find anything else in that price range that comes close to the FMR products.

Hope this helps.

Jim

Yes I agree with Jim. I do extremely dynamic vocals going from a soft croon to a very loud scream and the RNC works every time.

It may be in the way you are using it. Try using it in "supernice" mode for vocals, and remember the key to good vocals isn't compression. It's technique.
 
SRR said:
Ask any of the pros around here, they will say -18 DBfs, is more then enough with 24 bit recordings. I like -12, but there is no need to go higher, remember each bit of 24 bits is 6dB, 6 times 24 is to high for me to count, and to high for the noise level of your converters to count either, trust me, trying to squeeze ever last bit out of your recordings is not needed in the day and age of good converters in $100 cards like the M-Audio 24/96, not to mention better, even great converters in more pricey gear. When people went to tape you wanted every last bit you could get before noise level crept in and bit you in the butt, I remember making mix tapes on cassettes as a kid and I always shot for +3dB on the tape deck meters, now a days, its just not needed.

Actually, an average of about -18 is pretty much the preferred level. Peaks of -18 is far too low to want to track an album at. Generaqlly the best level is letting your analog front end average at about 0dbvu or slightly less. Typically this would correlate to a dbfs rating of about -18.
 
SRR said:
Ask any of the pros around here, they will say -18 DBfs, is more then enough with 24 bit recordings. I like -12, but there is no need to go higher, remember each bit of 24 bits is 6dB, 6 times 24 is to high for me to count, and to high for the noise level of your converters to count either, trust me, trying to squeeze ever last bit out of your recordings is not needed in the day and age of good converters in $100 cards like the M-Audio 24/96, not to mention better, even great converters in more pricey gear. When people went to tape you wanted every last bit you could get before noise level crept in and bit you in the butt, I remember making mix tapes on cassettes as a kid and I always shot for +3dB on the tape deck meters, now a days, its just not needed.

Excellent points.
 
Another vote for the RNC. Excellent, EXCELLENT, compressor!

I've been using the RNC for recording vocals with much success for some time now. Super Nice Mode just does amazing things to all vocals I've put through it.

You can find better comps, but you'll pay big bucks to get them!

Joel
 
Back
Top