RNC or nice VST?

[cominginsecond]

Right, it captures the wide range by compressing it into a narrower range that can be recorded.

But no matter what, you can get a wider dynamic range by not using a compressor and turning down the input level. I'm not saying that's the best strategy (I usually compress on the way in for guitar amp, drums, and vocals), just that a device whose purpose in life is to limit dynamic range cannot be used to widen it.

I see what you're saying: that by using you can get a much hotter recording level and not effect the dynamic range too greatly, but the fact remains, the only thing a compressor can do is limit, not widen, the range.

 

[xstatic]

I really don't buy the excuse of using a comp during tracking to keep peaks out. That's what faders and gain knobs are for. If you are peaking, turn it down. Digital metering is very different and people seem to forget that a lot here. Many (if not most) digital devices are designed so that a unity gain 1.23volt signal should meter anywhere between -15 and -20 on average. This means that you should have 15 to 20 decibals of headroom before you clip. Many preamps will not be able to consistently push too much farther without some sort of shift on tone. This goes for compressors as well.

 

[jayridge]

I really don't buy the excuse of using a comp during tracking to keep peaks out. That's what faders and gain knobs are for. If you are peaking, turn it down.

Second that. Also, riding the faders while mixing will also reduce your need for compression. This can be a lot more fun than setting the fader once and throwing a compressor on every channel.

Having said that... RNC is great sounding workhorse and I haven't yet found a plugin that is as versatile. I'd go for that first and add plugins to taste.

Jay

 

[FALKEN]

I think the RNC sounds like a plugin anyway. I dont really see a difference here other than where the cables go in which order.

 

[FALKEN]

But no matter what, you can get a wider dynamic range by not using a compressor and turning down the input level. I'm not saying that's the best strategy (I usually compress on the way in for guitar amp, drums, and vocals), just that a device whose purpose in life is to limit dynamic range cannot be used to widen it.

I see what you're saying: that by using you can get a much hotter recording level and not effect the dynamic range too greatly, but the fact remains, the only thing a compressor can do is limit, not widen, the range.

are you sure this is true? I see what you are trying to say. Using a comp for the purpose proposed (to avoid clipping) would seem to naturally lower the dynamic range. sort of. one way to look at it is that if you are limiting say, one or two peaks in a performance, but you are gaining a lot more low-level detail, then I would argue that you have increased the dynamic range that is captured. which is sort of true and sort of not true. you are trading one part of the dynamic range for another. the other aspect to consider is that with a slower release, the compressor can "shape" the sound, such that the sound has more dynamics, even if not more dynamic range.

 

[xstatic]

Personally, I have never found the RNC's to be all that special. I would take a new 166 any day of the week. I had a couple of the RNC's a while ago but sold them pretty quickly. They are pretty clean with up to about 6 db of compression, but after that they really tend to splatter things. If they had been clean down to about 15 db of compression I probably would have kept them for my live racks (where I actually do use compresison for volume constraint purposes). In the studio however I believe in proper gain staging and a little bit if fader riding or track seperation if necessary. When I use compressors in the studio I use them to shape tones, and to change sustains, attacks etc.... The RNC just seemed pretty useless to me as a tool for that type of processing. In fact, it seemesd very similar to the plethora of plugin compressors for DAWS.

As far as increasing or decreasing dynamic range with compression, that is really all about perspective. Nowadays as the standard converters have gotten better, dynamic range is not a real issue. Technically, a compressor would always reduce dynamic range unless you set it up more as an expander. However, especially on poor converters, Falken's statements could be realistically correct. However, it would take a signal that swung by 40 db+ before a compressor would be able to bring up the track headroom to a point where you could actually hear the difference in the low signal level accuracy. Not only that, but in order to raise those lower signals enough to really make a difference you would really have to slam the peaks by about 15 db or more and crank up the output gain. That would probably add enough noise (especially with an RNC to make that technique pretty counterproductive.

I guess in the end, i guess it just makes me sad to see so many people using compressors as a quick and easy way to just maximize levels. There is a lot more technique involved to really dial in a mix session or a tracking session than just compressing and normalizing. But, in the end, the ONLY thing that matters it how the product sounds, and not how you got there. That is the beauty of making music. There is no right and wrong, but only what I like and what you like.