Tracking compression??

[13th_Omen]

I only have one compressor with two channels. I was wondering... in your guys' opinion, would it be better to record certain tracks (like the toms or bass drums) with a bit of compression, or just run them throiugh the compressor and bounce them later? I realize you don't want to write effects because you can't really undo them with an ADAT, but I need to compress more than 2 tracks and don't want to buy more compressors.

 

[SubA]

I do it all the time with some things, but sure... don't get it right and you're stuck. Some people will tell you "never" to do it, but if you find yourself applying similar compression to, say.. the kick or bass often when you mix, why not try it during tracking?

I'm not a fan of 6 hour mixing sessions for one song, and have learned to work efficiently during tracking. It saves a lot of time, and although sometimes things aren't perfect, I'm resigned to the fact that nothing about my recording situation is perfect. If you have to bounce 16 tracks to apply compression and you're in a prolific outfit, you're going to spend a hell of a lot of time bouncing tracks and boring yourself. Then again, if you don't know anything about compression, go the bounce route until you do before trying it on the fly.

 

[Outlaws]

I like to record as much as possible with the efx/compression/eq already inplace before it gets printed to the initial track. Like sub said, some will say otherwise, but I hate sitting around trying to decide what sounds better when if I just find something I like I can be done with it. Of course you have to have a good idea of what you do like and how it is going to sit in the mix, but everything inadvertantly boils down to trial and error, so to hell with the thoughts of the masses. Besides, you can track hotter signals if you compress first.

 

[Outlaws]

It saves a lot of time, and although sometimes things aren't perfect, I'm resigned to the fact that nothing about my recording situation is perfect.

As much as I am trying to look on the bright side, the good things about my set up, when I just say "fuck it" and look at it in that light, I have done some of my best work.

 

[SubA]

As much as I am trying to look on the bright side, the good things about my set up, when I just say "fuck it" and look at it in that light, I have done some of my best work.

same here...
It's a feeling similar to winning the 6' pelican at the carnival and not getting caught cheating on a grade school math test. You know you just got away with some shit

 

[Tonio]

By this do you mean to tame the peaks. Doesn't it bring up the noise floor too? I posted a similar question in the Computer board, but nadda.

Besides, you can track hotter signals if you compress first.

 

[Outlaws]

Kind of but not really.

If that makes sense?

You will get a slightly higher noise floor but you will also get more definition to the sound. So if the majority of the signal is at -4, but it clips constantly because of playing dynamics (in my case acoustic guitar...but for a snare there is less dynamic involved in one hard hit to the next hard hit, granted soft hits do though), now you get to compress some of that dynamic while getting the benifits of a hotter signal. Asuming you were going to compress anyways....

I don't think I expained it that well. I understand it, just can't put it down in words.

Someone will clear it up.......

 

[whosyourdaddy00]

i'm learning to like tracking with extremily light (transparent) compression, say 1:2 ratio, at -10 with a pretty quick attack and less quick release, this takes care of the extra loud stuff, but leave you with plenty of dynamic range to maybe recompress (a tad more) later if ya want, expecially gooin' into digital, it's kinda nice to know you have a little padding before you clip.

just my opinion

wyd

 

[Middleman]

All good advice here.

Two things I try to concentrate on while tracking.

1. limiting to control transients
2. getting as close to the sound I want going to the disk.

Saves a lot of time in mixing.

The only time I heavy compress going in is when I know the sound I want and I don't need to experiment around.

 

[mixsit]

By this do you mean to tame the peaks. Doesn't it bring up the noise floor too? I posted a similar question in the Computer board, but nadda.

The noise floor does get brought up, but no more or less either way right?
Wayne

 

[Tonio]

Good point dudes. Guess I could be paranoid about the noise floor issue, since I only read it somewheres about it.
But my environment isn't all that noisy, so on with compressing!!
Well, I do need to limit those pesky peaks.

<<Of course you have to have a good idea of what you do like and how it is going to sit in the mix, but everything inadvertantly boils down to trial and error, so to hell with the thoughts of the masses. >>

Exactly, like they say...if it sounds good it is good LOL

Tony

 

[stuntmixer]

This is like asking: what's the difference between a horse?

In other words there is no possible right answer. Getting it right at tracking is the goal, as long as you know what it is you will be wanting at mixdown. Squashing the snot out of a signal is good if you need power, weight and healthy RMS. Letting a track breath is good if you need dynamics. It depends completely on the genre, the tune, the source, the player, the drugs......

Compressing everything is usually not a good idea. Compessing yoursellf into a corner that you can't get out of at mixdown sucks. Pushing the faders up and being exited about the song is good.

Some sounds can withstand abuse better that others. Bass likes compression. So do room mics. A well compressed vocal sound can take a good performance over the top. I've been getting into double compression. Letting two different boxes do different things. i.e. Distressor into an eq into a dbx 160. Let the Distressor catch the runaway transients with a really quick attack, just taking a db or two off the top, then letting the 160 do its slow squish thing after the eq. Lots of room to juggle the tone.....

 

[Strange Leaf]

If you don't feel confident in printing the compression to tape, and still think it's too much work to bounce all tracks afterwards, the solution can be only one. Get more channels of compression.

 

[Middleman]

This is like asking: what's the difference between a horse?

In other words there is no possible right answer. Getting it right at tracking is the goal, as long as you know what it is you will be wanting at mixdown. Squashing the snot out of a signal is good if you need power, weight and healthy RMS. Letting a track breath is good if you need dynamics. It depends completely on the genre, the tune, the source, the player, the drugs......

Compressing everything is usually not a good idea. Compessing yoursellf into a corner that you can't get out of at mixdown sucks. Pushing the faders up and being exited about the song is good.

Some sounds can withstand abuse better that others. Bass likes compression. So do room mics. A well compressed vocal sound can take a good performance over the top. I've been getting into double compression. Letting two different boxes do different things. i.e. Distressor into an eq into a dbx 160. Let the Distressor catch the runaway transients with a really quick attack, just taking a db or two off the top, then letting the 160 do its slow squish thing after the eq. Lots of room to juggle the tone.....

Been doing the double compression thing for awhile. Lot's of tonal options in this arena.