Yes once again; Tell me about which compressor

  • Thread starter Thread starter frank_1
  • Start date Start date
frank_1

frank_1

New member
Okay, first ques. Would it be smart to use a compressor for the entire mix or have seperate compressors for instruments , vocal, etc. Second ques. Which compressor? I'm just a college student with alomost no money. I'm looking through the Musicians Friend's catalog and I see the Nady CL5000 Comp/Limiter/Gate for $99. Is it good or shit. I keep hearing the Alesis 3630 is crap and the RNC is amazing. The catalog does not have RNC listed(can't get it). How is the PreSonus Blue Max Compressor, any good? $150-$170 is my limit; (I'd rather spend as little as possible).

What does a limiter and gate do? Is it important? Should I get them both with a compressor?

I know, I know too many damn questions, please bear with me!
 
Do I have to say it... again???

One word, starts with "R"........... ;)

A limiter is nothing more than the compressor set to an infinite compression ratio. A gate allows you to set a noise threshold, any signal above that threshold gets thru, anything below does not. (Useful for silencing signals in between playing cycles.)

The RNC operates essentially as a single channel unit, but will also handle a stereo mix. (It is 2-channel, but the controls operate both channels.)

Forget the NADY.... for low-budgets, if the RNC isn't full-featured enough, sonusman recommends the Behringer units. I haven't tried them myself, so I can't comment...

Bruce Valeriani
Blue Bear Sound
 
frank_1 said:
Would it be smart to use a compressor for the entire mix or have seperate compressors for instruments , vocal, etc
Click to expand...

A compressor can be used for both seperate and mix.
The use of the compressor should be tuned to the specific instrument at the time and what you want to acheive.
Do you want more attack? Less? level the dynamics? kil some "p" or "b" in a vocal mix? Fatter bass lines? protection from overloading?
Reduce peaks only? print a stronger signal to recorder?
Add more punch? Bring out the softer parts? etc...etc...
 
Is it better to have 2 channels? Why?


Do I need multi comprssors or will one do just fine?

I'm a one man band.
 
Except for the RNC, most dual-channel compressors will operate either as 2 distinct channels (2 compressors in one unit), or linked for stereo operation (1 set of controls handle both channels). For compressing full stereo mixes, you apply the exact same compression to both L/R channels, known as "linked" channel compression.

Bruce
 
Which is better the dbx 266 Compressor/gate ($150), or the Behringer MDX4400 Compressor/limiter ($190)? Is this just your opinion or is the sound quality actually better.

Which is better to have a limiter or gate? I own a Tascam 414 Analog portastudio.

[Edited by frank_1 on 12-28-2000 at 17:04]
 
The 266 is useless - I have a couple of 166XLs (which is a couple of notches above the 266) and they are very usable. I have no idea about the Behringer....

I don't know of any compressor that is not also a limiter - as I said above, limiting is simply compression at extreme compression ratios. A gate can always be useful...

Bruce
 
Another compressor that I have recently discovered (and bought) and i am very impressed with is the Behringer DSP9024 Ultradyne Pro:
6 Bands, dual/mono/stereo, EVERY parameter is user selectable, Digital 24 bit I/O, very transparent unless you want to make it obvious. About $530.
Check it out. I got on the multiband compression bandwagon from the MTK patches of the Roland VS1680. Now it seems like the only logical way to do it.

Peace,
Rick
 
Okay I think this is the last question, I promise.

Is a stereo compressor different than the compressors I listed above. What are the differences (if any).
 
I have a TASCAM 424 analog portastudio and use a Behringer Autocom compressor with it. Seems to work just fine. Its a stereo unit so you can use just one channel to compress an instrument during recording (bass, drum, etc.), then during mixdown to two-track cassette use the stereo feature, running the line outs from the 424 through just one channel again but using the 'couple' feature so that both the left and right channels receive mild compression but I only have to use one set of controls. Of course you can run the left and right outs to the left and right sides of the compressor if you like, controlling each side in a different way. The Autocom also allows for a sidechain hookup. Its a great 'budget' unit.
 
In a Stereo compressor, both channels receive the same settings and same compression effect. What determines the control of the effect may be: The sum of both channels, the average of the channels, or the loudest of the two channels, depending on how the mfg set it up.

In a dual-mono compressor, the two channels remain separately controlled. To me, this sounds better, but it is an area of debate.

Most stereo compressors can be decoupled to also do dual mono. The RNC is one that can't. Many preople buy two RNCs if they feel like they need the dual mono capability.

Rick
 
The Axis said:
...In a dual-mono compressor, the two channels remain separately controlled. To me, this sounds better, but it is an area of debate...
Rick
Click to expand...
Huh??? what's the debate? if you are compressing a stereo mix you definitely need to have both channels compressed equally (ie, linked), otherwise the stereo imaging and relative loudness between channels tends to waver as each channel's gain gets varied as the compression occurs.

No debate there, it's just the way it is! ;)

Bruce
 
OK, I'm almost afraid to say this, but..but.. I'm using a SOFTWARE plug-in compressor with my Cubase! There, I said it! I've never tried a hardware compressor, cuaSe I understand you would use it while you're recording. Most of my stuff is midi, except for my guitar, and I convert each midi track into an audio track, then mix everything down. This is where I use the plug-ins, like reverb, EQ, and compression. Is there a better way that I should be doing this?

Thanks in advance for the help.

Lee
 
I think mostly everyone who mixes on a PC uses plug-in compressors. (I didn't say everyone, so no one lynch me) I use a real compressor when recording tracks, but after it is on the PC, everything I have stays there. It seems like you introduce possiblilty of noise when going out of the PC and back in. I think there are some really nice plug in comperssors out there.
 
sonusman has a particular fav plug-in compressor - can't remember the name off-hand though....

Bruce
 
my favorite plug in compressor is the Waves Renaissance Compressor. it's very smooth and usable but it uses LOTS of processor power. for tracking and mixing i use an RNC and a blackface dbx 166. both are good, one does somethings better, and vice-versa.

lee-
midi stuff doesn't need the judicious amounts of compression as most other sources do so you're probably just fine using only software compression.

back to frank's questions-
i'm not sure how good the presonus bluemax is, but most of their stuff is pretty darn good. their preamps are amazing for the price. if you can't get an RNC, get a used dbx 166 off of eBay. you can get one in your price range.
 
bvaleria: "No debate, that's just the way it is."

You are right. I have learned that people who think they understand compression will refuse to even consider any flaws in that good-sounding theory, so I don't even try anymore ! :) Keep linking your stereo pairs if you are satisfied. But for others: just humor me and give dual-mono a try. You might be surprised.

Peace,
Rick
 
Er, Rick... so how do you get around the stereo image shift problem then, in a dual mono situation??? Hey - I'm happy to try new technique, as long as the results warrant it..........

'Splain please?

Bruce
 
bvalaria:
First of all, I like compression used very mildly (3 to 6 dB) and low ratios (1.5:1 to 3:1)...just a gentle evening-out of everything, without being noticably audible. If you are squashing the pee out of a funk band, your mileage may vary (nothing against funk bands, I toured with one for three years !)

Now think of it this way: Even when stereo miking a single instrument, with NO compressor, if you watch the level meters do they track each other exactly ? No. Yet the "image" is not moving just because the relative levels vary. That is because a big component of variations in level are caused by reflections and resonances interacting in every room in a quasi-random manner. The human ear is accustomed to this, and it causes no alarm as "unnatural". If you turn down the volume of the L channel everytime the R channel sees a random variation, THAT is what sounds unnnatural. If you compress only the "spiking" channel, the spike goes unnoticed and the stereo image is actually MORE well-preserved.

Of course this is just my opinion and theory. All theories about this sort of stuff are attempts to explain what we hear AFTER we hear it. That's why I also emphasize: Don't believe me, just try it and hear how it sounds !

I have had the same discussion almost blossom into an argument on other discussion forums by people who steadfastly hold to their preconceived theory (because it is on the dbx website) rather than just try it out. If I am wrong, just dismiss me as a fool and keep smiling. I've tried it both ways, and have decided what I like. maybe it is just poor taste. :)

If you do try it, report back. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and you are probably more experienced than i am.

Peace,
Rick
 
Rick... I have done it (inadvertently!) in the past, and I have noticed image shift... I would agree if the compression ratio is minimal that it may not be as obvious, but still it MUST occur to some (possibly unnoticeable) degree...

I'll give it a try again and let you know!

Bruce
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top