Will I lose my decibels?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PhilM
  • Start date Start date
Robert D said:
Sorry Glen, but I gotta disagree here. Most any good MBC has adjustable band centering and band width, so zeroing in on a specific frequency, or at least a very narrow band is completely possible. On a three band MBC, you just leave two of the bands at linear response, dial in the center freq on the third, narrow the bandwidth all the way down, and then set the threshold and ratio to fix the offending notes.
Eq's, as you well know, don't limit. They cut or boost statically. That's the right approach if the offending frequesncy is consistantly offensive, but if it jumps out here and there, and cutting that freq will fix those places but leaves it weak in other places, then the MBC is the better choice.
I think we discussed this in a mastering thread. I know giving an MBC to the preset pushing neophites is like giving liquer to the indians, but lets not throw a good tool out the window because a lot of people don't use it intellegently.

-RD
Click to expand...
You know the best tool for this job (if EQ is not doing it) would be to side chain a compressor to make it sensitive to that particular frequency. Like a de-esser. An MBC can work, but isn't the right tool for the job.
 
PhilM said:
Should compression be used while actually recording, or done as an edit after recording?
Click to expand...
This is a controversial point among many on this board. Some of it depends on the music style, recording setup, and instrument being recorded. But my personal poinion is to try and track as natural as possible and save as much signal processing as possible for the mixing stage.

There are exceptions. If you have a performer who just doesn't have the greatest command of their instrument (including the throat), or if you are recording electric guitar direct, then some light compression going in on the tracking might be called for.

But in general, I'm of the school that says it's best to start out with as unprocessed of a track as possible so you always have something raw and clean to fall back on if you need to.

G.
 
I would like to agree with Glen. Before this whole computer thing happened, you would only have so many compressors. You would have to decide what to compress on the way to tape and what you would leave for the mix. Necessity made you better a compressing things to tape (if you screw up a couple times, you learn) so it wasn't a big deal.

Now you don't have to do that for the most part. It's a good thing. Out of habit, I do compress vocals and bass on the way in.
 
Yep, think I'll agree with Glen also.
I think those 3 paragraphs make a pretty good
general statement on the subject.

Would you work on each individual track, or say
use compression on the drums and bass together.

I am aware of the need to leave some
room for Mastering.
 
I tend to compress the kick and snare then route all the drums to a buss and compress the whole kit, including the reverb on the drums. This makes it breath as a unit. Bass I compress by itself. The only thing that changes is whether the compressor comes before or after the EQ.
 
And I need to agree back with Farview. I had forgotten to mention bass, which is an instrument with natural built-in idiosyncracies in volume that lend itself to compression pretty readily.

I also agree to a good degree on vocals, but for me it depends greatly on the vocalist. If I have a vocalsit that has real experience and technique - both with the throat and with the mic - I'll try to stay away from compression for as long as possible. Thoughs some might need to be sprinkled in the mix, I'll wait for the mix to tell me that.

If, OTOH, I have a vocalist that just does not have good command and/or hasn't yet learned how to work the mic well, then come press going in might be necessary just to keep the track from bouncing off the drive.

As far as drums, it depends upon the music. Much of the stuff I work with I am using a very unconventional miking technique (just a front-loaded X/Y pair with a seperate kick mic. I discrete track snare only for certain music styles and feels, and amost never discrete track the toms), so my advice may not be applicable to many with other techniques. But FWIW, when I'm using my standard 3-mic natural stereo setup, I might apply some light compression to the kick, but that's it.

But no matter how you slice it I always press the kick and bass seperately because they have different dynamic demands; the right threshold/ratio/attackfor one are not necessarily the right ones for the other.

This is not to say that there is only one right answer on those specifics. Those jsut happen to be what work for me with my gear and my style. YMMDefinitelyV.

But my general concepts of tracking as clean as can be gotten away with, and using compression only when the performance or the mix tell me to are ones that I'll stick with and recommend to anybody looking for something other than Moby or Phil Spector.

G.
 
None of this advise has anything to do with compressing for effect. That is a whole different ball of wax.
 
Comp +EQ in sidechain = success

I worked with a real experience audio guy once. When asked how he learned..."Select one know at a time. Turn it each way until you fully understand what it does. Move on to the next one."

insert an EQ into the sidechain of the compressor. By splitting the input signal, one straight through the comp and the other via the EQ, you control the comp via the EQ. Take a look at the URL below for a more in-depth explanation. What you are doing is the same as De-essing except working with different freqs.

http://www.mikekonopka.com/page26.html

Good luck!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top