M
mixsit
Well-known member
From what I've seen, mixing into a compressor has quite a few more complications than just picking one to add toward the end of the mix.
Wayne
Wayne
Uladine
New member
guitarboi89 said:
Ditto. It's nice to have a reference to what will happen when the mix is compressed. Sometimes its cool to actually over compress when youre checking it, because if your mix can survive that it should sound better when a more realistic compression is applied. Just my opinion, though.
Y
Yareek
New member
Freudian Slip
New member
mixsit said:
I agree, you have to have a pretty balanced mix before you want to do anything drastic. Why be triggering a bunch of compression on the whole mix because of one track or something that you might not spot because you threw up the faders at the begining under a good deal of compression.
I start with just an l2 at the begining with a brick wall at -.1 on the output just incase my mouse hand fudges it big time
I do do about the last half of the mixing under compression. Then it's nit pic time. F.S.
Y
Yareek
New member
More interesting 2-buss compression ideas.
I may not be able to hear what I'm doing, but I certainly learn a lot from people who make money doing this stuff.
I may not be able to hear what I'm doing, but I certainly learn a lot from people who make money doing this stuff.
M
mixsit
Well-known member
Right. Presumably if your sticking it on the 2-bus early on you already have (or better have) a pretty good idea of what kind of comp (speed wise etc.) you, or the song will want.Yareek said:
On top of that like 'Freudian said, you best be watching and aware of what's hitting it and why.
I've tried it a few times but I'm just not there yet. That also stems from just being realistic about the level you're working at. If the projects aren't even that well defined that early on... Usually around here it's more along the lines of 'discover and 'work-in-progress sort of thing. The vision' just ain't that tight.
It's a damned sight simpler where things are in the ballpark to step back and ask 'where does it go from here?
X
xstatic
New member
I think a lot of people over here are taking the whole compression thing waaaay to far. I do not use bus comps as "limiters" to watch overshoots, thats what mix headroom is for. I also do not slap a limiter even lightly at the end "just to see how it will sound in mastering". I do not see why people are so worried about that. Mixing and mastering are seperate for a reason. I never worry about what the mastering engineer will do, thats the mastering engineers job. If you can tell how it is going to sound when mastered by slapping an L1 or an L2 across the master buss than you need to find a new mastering engineer. My job when I am mixing is to make the best mix I can. After that the mastering engineer will make the best master of my mix that he/she can. If my ME wants a little more headroom, that can be acheived by LOWERING THE VOLUME... You do not need to slap compression everywhere to get that. When I strap a comp across the 2 track it is because I like what the comp is doing to the sound of my mix, not because it makes it louder or contains peaks. In fact, comps do not make mixes louder unless you force them to.
X
XLR
______
L e a v e . i t . o u t . u n l e s s . y o u ' r e . s o . s u r e . y o u . d o n ' t . n e e d . t o . a s k.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
xstatic, I'd give give you a positive rep for that, but I gotta spread some around first before it'll let me.xstatic said:
IMHO, xstatic has hit this nail on the head with a sledgehammer on this one.
The way I see it, anything done to the two mix is part of the premastering stage and not the end of the mixing stage. Mixing ends with the mixdown.
Just make the mix sound as goos as it can and let the ME worry about the rest.
G.
Y
Yareek
New member
Would anyone see a parallel (of some kind) between tape compression and subtle 2-buss compression?
I envision a limiter as a "brickwall"...and let's say a snare drum is a baseball bat. You smack it into the brick wall and it doesn't move. But the 2-buss compressor, something light like a 1:5 or 2:1 ratio that's taking down 1 to 3 dB, is kind of like a wall made of rubber...it moves a bit but keeps everything together. And the color of the compressor would glue things together.
I think that's why a lot of the guys on GS are big into 2-buss compression...you start with great musicians and great tracking in great rooms, and the 2-buss comp would give a little glue and a little taming of levels but nothing drastic. And the other benefit is there's less of an urge to compress individual tracks if the 2-buss comp is doing a good enough job.
I envision a limiter as a "brickwall"...and let's say a snare drum is a baseball bat. You smack it into the brick wall and it doesn't move. But the 2-buss compressor, something light like a 1:5 or 2:1 ratio that's taking down 1 to 3 dB, is kind of like a wall made of rubber...it moves a bit but keeps everything together. And the color of the compressor would glue things together.
I think that's why a lot of the guys on GS are big into 2-buss compression...you start with great musicians and great tracking in great rooms, and the 2-buss comp would give a little glue and a little taming of levels but nothing drastic. And the other benefit is there's less of an urge to compress individual tracks if the 2-buss comp is doing a good enough job.
X
xstatic
New member
The thing is, its not just the guys on GS that feel that way about 2 buss compressors. It's most engineers with experience and equipment that feel that way. Two buss comps are generally very expensive so often misunderstood by those who do not have them.
M
mixsit
Well-known member
In reference to your previous post though, it would seem that most of the responses offered in this thread were sighting legitimate reasons for compressing and/or limiting. I.E. because of how it sounds (at what point does this have to be part of mastering and not mixing? Maybe that's the rub.) or to simulate some of the real effects of mastering, or (perhaps more so around here than GS) we often are doing the finished version.xstatic said:
A wise man once said...
"I would say it would only be better to mix through a compressor if the benefits outweigh the negatives." and "I would venture a guess that most distributed releases do have at least a comp on the 2 buss, if not EQ's as well during the mixdown process."I was mainly earlier trying to differentiate between working a mix into a comp Vs adding it last which is what I saw the OP as.
X
xstatic
New member
I can see your point mixsit.... And it is certainly valid.
I do feel however if you are going to master yourself and reference your own mix for your own mastering, why not just slap it there and leave it there rather than guessing what will happen to it?
I do feel however if you are going to master yourself and reference your own mix for your own mastering, why not just slap it there and leave it there rather than guessing what will happen to it?
X
xstatic
New member
Also, to me there is a difference bewteen slapping a compressor on the main mix because of how it shapes your mix as opposed to putting it there to limit your mix and make it louder. The later I do not consider to be a part of mixing, nor do I really consider it putting it on there because of how it sounds. Personally, I do not know of anyone who throws a brick wall (like the L1, L2 etc...) on a mix because somehow it shpaes the mix in a positive way. Everyone I know is putting one at the end of the chain for sheer output volume, myself included, and not for some musical or cool sonic signature.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Compare it to the transition from tracking to mixing. In general, when one asks of they should process the signal in tracking or wait to process the track in mixing, the general answer is usually to try and leave the tracking as unprocessed as possible so that one has a source that they can always fall back on if the processing takes the engineer down the wrong road. There are exceptions, of course; the more experinece one has they more they maight make an exception because they already know how it's going to come out because they've done it a thousand times before.mixsit said:
IMHO, it's the same way when transitioning from mixing to mastering (the transition point being right after the two mix has been created.) Just as one usually should get the tracking as good as possible without burning any processing bridges, and then work on getting the pieces to fit just right in the mix, one should get the mix as good as possible without burning any processing bridges, and then work on polishing the two mix in mastering.
Or put directly, why strap processing across the two mix when creating the two mix, and then be forced to have to deal with that processing in mastering, when one can just leave the two mix pristine and then process it as needed afterwards, in mastering?
You want to strap a compressor across the two mix? You can always do it after it's created.
Most of the MEs I know would prefer it that way, just as I as primarily a MixEng would much prefer having the elbow room of clean tracking over having to wrestle with mixing tracks that are poorly EQ'd or compressed to begin with.
G.
Y
Yareek
New member
No I'm actually thinking the same thing xstatic. Most people starting out mixing see compression as a bandaid rather than a tool. So when people with experience tell them they need to work on their tracking and automation, not to mention playing, they start to believe compression is bad or only necessary in extenuating circumstances.
Meanwhile, professionals have many years of experience tracking and editing mixes and see compression as a tool or even a paintbrush. They've got the experience to know what works and doesn't. And I'm pretty sure these guys aren't tossing an LA2A on the 2-buss and slamming 10 dB's at 8:1 or something ridiculous.
Me, I jump from forum to forum reading everything I can because I've got way too much free time at work
So I'd place myself in the experience of a HomeRec'er, but I do try out the techniques I read at GS and other places.
Glen and others probably hate the idea of 2-buss compression while mixing because they see it abused so often. But the premise of the 2-buss compression is that it will have to be compressed anyway, and you might as well mix with that in mind. And if you're going to mix with it in mind, might as well mix with it. Kind of like mixing with mono in mind evolves into just mixing in mono and finishing in stereo.
I just find it fascinating the different approaches everywhere...at GS most people will track, touch up a little EQ here and there, compress a track or two lightly, and use mainly buss compression and parallel compression for their mixes. They also favor delays and automation to reverbs. Most of the equipment is carefully selected and much higher quality. That's probably why their mixes sound so much cleaner and in the end louder and with more impact.
Meanwhile, professionals have many years of experience tracking and editing mixes and see compression as a tool or even a paintbrush. They've got the experience to know what works and doesn't. And I'm pretty sure these guys aren't tossing an LA2A on the 2-buss and slamming 10 dB's at 8:1 or something ridiculous.
Me, I jump from forum to forum reading everything I can because I've got way too much free time at work
So I'd place myself in the experience of a HomeRec'er, but I do try out the techniques I read at GS and other places.Glen and others probably hate the idea of 2-buss compression while mixing because they see it abused so often. But the premise of the 2-buss compression is that it will have to be compressed anyway, and you might as well mix with that in mind. And if you're going to mix with it in mind, might as well mix with it. Kind of like mixing with mono in mind evolves into just mixing in mono and finishing in stereo.
I just find it fascinating the different approaches everywhere...at GS most people will track, touch up a little EQ here and there, compress a track or two lightly, and use mainly buss compression and parallel compression for their mixes. They also favor delays and automation to reverbs. Most of the equipment is carefully selected and much higher quality. That's probably why their mixes sound so much cleaner and in the end louder and with more impact.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Whoah, there, bucko. I never said I hated 2-buss compression. I said, if it's to be done, it's probably best to do it after the mixdown, not during it, for the reason that it keeps the ME's options open.Yareek said:
G.
Y
Yareek
New member
SouthSIDE Glen said:
In the context of HomeRec'ers like me you probably hate 2-buss compression
If I were to send something off for mastering I'd send a copy with and a copy without the 2-buss compression. Mixing through it to know how the mix would react, but acknowledging that the ME has better tools, a better room, better ears, and more experience.
ecktronic
Mixing and Mastering.
xstatic said:
But alot of folk know that limiting at the mastering stage takes alot of the punch away from drums since it it chopping some of the transients off. Well limiting can takes away punch from alot of things really.
Thats why I listen to my mixes with an L2 on them to get the right amount of punch. Just makes my mixes sound better after mastering.
Eck
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
I'm not sure how many times I have to answer "no" to that before your get my point.Yareek said:In the context of HomeRec'ers like me you probably hate 2-buss compression
I can see sending two copies to an ME like that in order to use the compressed two mix as a mockup example of the direction in which you want the ME to take the mastering that he/she does to the unadultered two mix.Yareek said:
But even then you're doing just what I'm saying; you're applying the compression *after* the mixdown. You make the uncompressed two mix. Then the mixing is done. Then, as a rough guide for the ME, you take a copy of the two mix and run it through your compressor du jour to send along with the actual master two mix. While I think it's probably easier to tell the ME that you like the sound an LA2A gives that mix at medium settings, and that if I don't feel comfortable letting the ME find the right dial-ins then I probably have the wrong ME, I can see that situation (and have in fact done it.)
That's different from creating a compressed two mix in the master mixdown, however. THAT'S the part I disagree with; whether it's a home wrecker (
) or a Big Boy is irrelevant. It's simply limiting (pun coincidental) one's mastering options - whether self-mastering or sending out to a real ME - to start the mastering process with a two mix that's already been adulterated.G.