Quote:
Originally Posted by davetbass
What about the great live albums from the 70's was compression used on them? I'm struggling with compression in my rock recordings, so maybe I do want to hear that you don't need it, lol!
|
Sure, compression was used on them like crazy. But - some things to consider:
- Recording to tape at higher levels will automatically induce some "gentle" compression that many find pleasing, without the need for a dedicated compressor....and the 70s were all tape. They got a little bit of compression "for free", so to speak.
- Tape has much lower headroom than the average DAW - when recording you need to be loud enough to get "out of the noise", so compressors helped with this. Digital has no noise however, with 24 bits you have 120+ dB of headroom so you can print at lower levels and just deal with it later. This eliminates the need to compress at input.
- You can make adjustments to your recordings right on the timeline in Reaper, for example you could select just the first few notes of a chorus that are too quiet and bump them up. People working with tape didn't have the luxury of being able to "look" at the result and make edits - so compression was a brute force way to make sure everything sat it where it needed to - not too loud and not too quiet.
I mention these because while compression was used a lot in prior decades, it's quite possible to work without it these days due to the difference in tech - you shouldn't get insecure about it
Having said that, there are solid reasons why you might want to work with a compressor, for creative / artistic reasons. Some people just like the sound. For example, track the same guitar part several times and smoosh the takes together in a compressed wall of voodoo. Chris Lord-Alge was mentioned earlier in this thread, he uses it like nuts. But - this is a creative choice that achieves an intended result, not a necessity. Don't lose sleep if you're not doing it.
Put differently: "If it sounds good, it IS good." -Duke Ellington