Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-15-2019, 05:00 PM   #161
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
What is the point of it then?

What benefit is anyone getting from that post?
Some people think they need a preset and not ears. I get it.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 05:26 PM   #162
talustalus
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
What is the point of it then?

What benefit is anyone getting from that post?

I know it's hard for people to shift their focus to working on using just their ears, but the whole point of my post is that you will become much more accomplished if you learn to do so and keep improving. Listen and listen blindly. Forget about numbers and where the dial is.
I understand those things are a comfort to people who don't really trust their ears, and that's fine. Like pilots say 'trust the instruments'. In music though, more patience through experimentation can be afforded.

Someone who relies mainly on their ears would never say 'that's it, I'm done with compressors it kills the transients too much'. That's truly a pointless and amateur statement, given how many different situations we can encounter in music. Especially when compressors can be used to actually bring out the transients more. Compressors are truly versatile tools.
talustalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 06:14 PM   #163
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by talustalus View Post
I know it's hard for people to shift their focus to working on using just their ears, but the whole point of my post is that you will become much more accomplished if you learn to do so and keep improving. Listen and listen blindly. Forget about numbers and where the dial is.
I understand those things are a comfort to people who don't really trust their ears, and that's fine. Like pilots say 'trust the instruments'. In music though, more patience through experimentation can be afforded.

Someone who relies mainly on their ears would never say 'that's it, I'm done with compressors it kills the transients too much'. That's truly a pointless and amateur statement, given how many different situations we can encounter in music. Especially when compressors can be used to actually bring out the transients more. Compressors are truly versatile tools.
I do agree with everything you say in this post.

But what I mean is that if someone is so deep in to the theoretical/academic/philosophical side of it that they're trying to abandon one of the main tools of mixing, it's unlikely your initial sarcastic post is going to make them have an epiphany and stop the academic approach, it just makes it seem like you're saying you're better than the OP (which I'm sure you are, it's just pointless to say it).

Regarding the whole "just use your ears" thing - imagine a scenario where two laymen who have never mixed anything had to try to mix a track as an experiment. One of them is just given a DAW or studio and told to use their ears and go for it while the other is first shown a video of Bruce Swedien mixing a track and told to use the techniques learned from that.

The second one will obviously do a better job because at first it's overwhelming trying to mix without learning how to first. There are just a near infinite number of variables and it's not a good use of time to just go through them at random trying to listen to them. Also, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, compression isn't as easy to hear as other effects. It took me years before I properly knew the sound of it.

Of course there's a difference between trying out others' techniques and workflows to learn how they work and making bold arbitrary decisions like "going compression free".

I'd imagine that by now in this thread the OP has learned that compressors aren't a tool to save time if you're willing to accept the damage it does to the audio and that they only kill transients if set to do so if that's what's desirable (which it absolutely can be).
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 06:43 PM   #164
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by talustalus View Post
I know it's hard for people to shift their focus to working on using just their ears, but the whole point of my post is that you will become much more accomplished if you learn to do so and keep improving. Listen and listen blindly. Forget about numbers and where the dial is.
I would mostly agree with this, but personally, I rely on meters as well as my ears to see how much I'm hitting the incoming signal, and how quickly it is hitting it. I use compression mostly for emphasizing transients so slower attack times and light reduction is what I already know I want and will dial it in visually first, then use my ears to fine tune the attack and ratio.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 07:01 PM   #165
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,254
Default

From the subject title to the first and subsequent posts, I'd expected there was an assumption (or should be) that the person already understands mixing concepts and can mix beyond beginner level. I also think talustalus could be speaking to a simpler point.

I see many of us (myself included) do this all the time, "forget" that we have ears sometimes - if we understand how some tool works then we use our ears to decide how it is used - no one else will ever convince me otherwise if I truly dig what I'm hearing. Personally, I don't care what whomever uses for about anything. I love understanding what someone else does and learning from it, but I hope not to chase what has already been done - it happens but it isn't my goal - I'd much prefer it to sound great and not like everything else, that's actually possible, not easy but possible and more valuable IMHO.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 07:12 PM   #166
TabbyCat
Human being with feelings
 
TabbyCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by talustalus View Post
Someone who relies mainly on their ears would never say 'that's it, I'm done with compressors it kills the transients too much'. That's truly a pointless and amateur statement, given how many different situations we can encounter in music
At the risk of responding to bait -- I rely completely on my ears, and I rarely use compression for reasons having nothing to do with my ears. I find that there are usually more expedient ways to get my intended result. No irrational vendetta against compression. "Ears" are a single variable in a larger picture. Beware false dichotomy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by talustalus View Post
In music though, more patience through experimentation can be afforded.
Depends! I frequently deal with same-day turnarounds, and no one has any time, any patience. I can chop up a problematic phrase and Item gain / xfade the pieces 10x faster than any amount of futzing with attack / hold / release / threshold / ratio etc, and without the risk of collateral damage and discovering oops, it's grabbing too hard on this other phrase :30 seconds later, so I have to automate that out...

It's ok to say things like "I hate reverb, I'm not using it" - and that's totally cool. (Many people have! Rick Rubin is notorious for a War on Reverb, and those records sound great).

There is no ultimate final law with this stuff, and that's what makes this caring/sharing/learning thread so great
TabbyCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 07:26 PM   #167
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
. . . if we understand how some tool works
And just like the Hokey Pokey, that's what it's all about!
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 08:02 PM   #168
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,536
Default

Hmmmm... No one actually DOESN'T mix by ear though, right? There might be plenty of things to take advantage of visual telltales with and everyone naturally does that as it comes up. But at the end of the day, it's the sound of the mix in your head driving you to realize it on the board. (Or it might be an improvising and responding aesthetic but you're still listening and guided by what you hear.)

Or is someone actually doing something purely visual? Dial something up and then have the surprise of getting to hear what it sounded like. And then... that's that. Finished. No adjusting anything based on listening. No one's doing anything like that are they?


Wasn't it Fleetwood Mac with Rumors where they initially decided they weren't going to use eq? Spoiler: They ended up using eq. So that's been played out with eq too. Kind of hard to abandon either the frequency tool or the dynamics tool!


But I do like the digital niceness of bumping up a section of audio with maybe a spot fix on a stray peak - that bit we were all talking about. And that doesn't mean I don't also like abusing a compressor to squash something when I can't figure out a more elegant way to handle whatever it is I'm doing.
serr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 08:41 PM   #169
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Hmmmm... No one actually DOESN'T mix by ear though, right? There might be plenty of things to take advantage of visual telltales with and everyone naturally does that as it comes up. But at the end of the day, it's the sound of the mix in your head driving you to realize it on the board. (Or it might be an improvising and responding aesthetic but you're still listening and guided by what you hear.)

Or is someone actually doing something purely visual? Dial something up and then have the surprise of getting to hear what it sounded like. And then... that's that. Finished. No adjusting anything based on listening. No one's doing anything like that are they?
Maybe presets is the thing that isn't being done by ear? It's named, "Sounds Great", why doesn't it sound great???

Quote:
Wasn't it Fleetwood Mac with Rumors where they initially decided they weren't going to use eq? Spoiler: They ended up using eq. So that's been played out with eq too. Kind of hard to abandon either the frequency tool or the dynamics tool!
I've been playing the song "Bare Trees" the last couple of days that felt like Fall. Pre Buckingham Nicks with Bob Welch. What a fun song! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F84yWm1ZjCg

Quote:
But I do like the digital niceness of bumping up a section of audio with maybe a spot fix on a stray peak - that bit we were all talking about. And that doesn't mean I don't also like abusing a compressor to squash something when I can't figure out a more elegant way to handle whatever it is I'm doing.
For stray peaks I prefer brickwall limiting to compression. Set a line, do not cross! I really think of compression as more a shaping tool.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 09:02 PM   #170
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,536
Default

You grab a preset to start with because you remembered dialing some stuff up before that is relevant again for what's in front of you. Then adjust to taste for the new task at hand. Every bit of that follows hearing something.

You could pull up someone else's preset and play random fx generator I suppose. But that's another kind of thing. More composition kind of work and searching for something to land.

Even if you're trying random stuff though, at the end of the day you listen and keep what sounds right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glennbo View Post
For stray peaks I prefer brickwall limiting to compression. Set a line, do not cross!
Depends on what the stray is and how blasted down it might get. An obvious awkward example might be a random extra loud kick hit. Kinda don't want "kick kick kick KICK kick kick" to turn into "kick kick kick durk kick kick". That shitty example suggests a problem with the performance of course but I think you know what I mean.

Last edited by serr; 10-15-2019 at 09:07 PM.
serr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2019, 09:40 PM   #171
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Depends on what the stray is and how blasted down it might get. An obvious awkward example might be a random extra loud kick hit. Kinda don't want "kick kick kick KICK kick kick" to turn into "kick kick kick durk kick kick". That shitty example suggests a problem with the performance of course but I think you know what I mean.
Yeah, I generally play the track with limiting disabled toward the end of making tweaks to other things that might cause overs like EQ, and then set it so it only flashes a peak two or three times during playback. Then I'll brickwall that so the few peaks are clipped. I am also fortunate enough to generally be the person on each track, so I'm not fighting with source material that is all over the map.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 12:49 AM   #172
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,391
Default

An example of someone not using their ears at all: they put one of those virtual console plugins on every track and a tape simulator on the master channel because they've heard it said often that analogue is good.

Yet, without being pushed in to heavy saturation it's unlikely they really hear any difference.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 01:11 AM   #173
G-Sun
Human being with feelings
 
G-Sun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Norway
Posts: 7,318
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
As a huge fan of Bruce swedien
Interested in the concept I listened to another album of him, that was done without compression.
And my impression was: Man, he should have used some compressors here
__________________
Reaper x64, win 11
Composer, text-writer, producer
Bandcamp
G-Sun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 01:40 AM   #174
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by talustalus View Post
I know it's hard for people to shift their focus to working on using just their ears, but the whole point of my post is that you will become much more accomplished if you learn to do so and keep improving. Listen and listen blindly. Forget about numbers and where the dial is.
I understand those things are a comfort to people who don't really trust their ears, and that's fine. Like pilots say 'trust the instruments'. In music though, more patience through experimentation can be afforded.

Someone who relies mainly on their ears would never say 'that's it, I'm done with compressors it kills the transients too much'. That's truly a pointless and amateur statement, given how many different situations we can encounter in music. Especially when compressors can be used to actually bring out the transients more. Compressors are truly versatile tools.
You know you are using your ears when you find an effect parameter that goes from 0 to 100 and you find yourself using values like 2 and 10.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 01:42 AM   #175
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
I do agree with everything you say in this post.

But what I mean is that if someone is so deep in to the theoretical/academic/philosophical side of it that they're trying to abandon one of the main tools of mixing, it's unlikely your initial sarcastic post is going to make them have an epiphany and stop the academic approach, it just makes it seem like you're saying you're better than the OP (which I'm sure you are, it's just pointless to say it).

Regarding the whole "just use your ears" thing - imagine a scenario where two laymen who have never mixed anything had to try to mix a track as an experiment. One of them is just given a DAW or studio and told to use their ears and go for it while the other is first shown a video of Bruce Swedien mixing a track and told to use the techniques learned from that.

The second one will obviously do a better job because at first it's overwhelming trying to mix without learning how to first. There are just a near infinite number of variables and it's not a good use of time to just go through them at random trying to listen to them. Also, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, compression isn't as easy to hear as other effects. It took me years before I properly knew the sound of it.

Of course there's a difference between trying out others' techniques and workflows to learn how they work and making bold arbitrary decisions like "going compression free".

I'd imagine that by now in this thread the OP has learned that compressors aren't a tool to save time if you're willing to accept the damage it does to the audio and that they only kill transients if set to do so if that's what's desirable (which it absolutely can be).
Better than me? I'm the worlds 3rd greatest producer. ;-)

Last edited by Coachz; 10-16-2019 at 01:49 AM.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 01:57 AM   #176
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
An example of someone not using their ears at all: they put one of those virtual console plugins on every track and a tape simulator on the master channel because they've heard it said often that analogue is good.

Yet, without being pushed in to heavy saturation it's unlikely they really hear any difference.
I have a damn hard time hearing a difference of those without saturation. Sure I can hear some hiss but that doesnt give me the analog sound I was hoping for, like the sound of Aerosmith's Get Your Wings. I never tire of that sound. All the highs are in just the right place so I can crank it without ice pick to the ear syndrome (IPTTES).
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 02:03 AM   #177
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Sun View Post
Interested in the concept I listened to another album of him, that was done without compression.
And my impression was: Man, he should have used some compressors here
Thriller and Off the Wall sound perfect to me. I have never found another album with better a combination of bass, highs, dynamics, rhythms and sonic textures than these two, though the albums by "The Jacksons" come close.

I also like how he is not afraid to push instruments up front and in your face like the glass bottle in Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough.

https://youtu.be/yURRmWtbTbo
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 02:32 AM   #178
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Better than me? I'm the worlds 3rd greatest producer. ;-)
Maybe if you start using compressors you can get to number 1.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 02:46 AM   #179
Strange Ways
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Chicago-ish, IL USA
Posts: 82
Default

I love this thread! It's almost as hilarious as one I saw on here a few years back about how fading out a song is an artistic cop-out.

No doubt Thriller sounds phenomenal. It's impressive they tracked and mixed that without compression. The remastered versions, however, are getting crushed with compression. A real shame.

I'm just an amateur, recording my own rock/metal tunes at home. I love compression on bass. It gives it an edge when I'm digging in finger-style, and makes it pop when playing slap-style...it's a different sound than if I automated. Sometimes I like taking a piece of audio and mangling it, twisting it inside out...and a character compressor is often somewhere in that chain.

Perhaps using compression is for children or amateurs like me, and maybe one day I'll get good enough to phase it out. But in the meantime, I'm going to stick a Molot comp on the master buss and I'll see everybody in hell!
Strange Ways is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 03:52 AM   #180
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Ways View Post
Perhaps using compression is for children or amateurs like me
It's definitely not, pretty much all the top engineers use loads of it all over their tracks.

If Bruce Swedien didn't then he's very much an exception. Though, from some of the comments in the thread, it seems he used it just like everyone else and the idea that he didn't might be a misunderstanding of an answer he gave in an interview.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 04:57 AM   #181
mplay
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Curaçao
Posts: 410
Default

There's also a big difference in using hardware vs software compression imo. Even just running a signal through a high end hardware compressor without it doing any compression makes it sound better, adding depth and warmth that something like reacomp cannot. I do believe you can get close itb, but you need extra processing. In this sense adding saturation gets you closer than compression
mplay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 11:33 AM   #182
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

Okay good luck to the OP. If he can work without compression, it's certainly preferable.

I also wouldn't be so quick to say compression was "kid's stuff." Bruce Swedien started in the big band era when there wasn't too much to choose from in terms of compressors. Mostly you had tube desks, tube tape machines, and vari-mu limiters for controlling peaks on the lathes. I'm oversimplifying for time and space, but much of the "mix" happened on the floor. The orchestra controlled their own dynamics. The engineer rode the faders or rotary attenuators (depending on the gear) on the way IN. They did it live. Often they were still going direct-to-disc, so overdubs weren't an option. Comping takes wasn't an option either.

All that heavy tube and iron, plus early tape formulas provided a natural, soft compression. You had to crank the treble to compensate for the high-end loss of tape, even into the 80s and 90s.

My point is, Bruce Swedien has skills that are largely lost today. And he was using compression, but indirectly. Even on Thriller.

Ken Scott has said something similar about compression. He also thinks music is over-compressed. I doubt this is an across-the-board commandment.

It's really important to not base your entire philosophy on one source. These older fellows are great resources, but they do themselves a disservice being so dogmatic. Bruce Swedien comes off as a snob here. Would we even know who he is if it wasn't for Thriller? I have to question if he's telling the truth about his use of compression. Memory isn't perfect.

Speaking of which, a hit album is a perfect storm. It's not just the mix. I don't love Thriller, but I see why it is so beloved. It's not because there's little to no compression.
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 11:46 AM   #183
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
Okay good luck to the OP. If he can work without compression, it's certainly preferable.
Zero compression is NOT preferable to me. I think compression is terribly misunderstood and far too many engineer's only experiences with compression is to fix bad playing - it can be eye-opening to place compression of proper amounts on very dynamically steady and pro playing, just saying.

2 cents.

Quote:
It's not because there's little to no compression
My guess is it has very little to do with it as far as it compared to others in that era, it may when compared to 2019 and over-compressed material.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 11:50 AM   #184
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
Okay good luck to the OP. If he can work without compression, it's certainly preferable.

I also wouldn't be so quick to say compression was "kid's stuff." Bruce Swedien started in the big band era when there wasn't too much to choose from in terms of compressors. Mostly you had tube desks, tube tape machines, and vari-mu limiters for controlling peaks on the lathes. I'm oversimplifying for time and space, but much of the "mix" happened on the floor. The orchestra controlled their own dynamics. The engineer rode the faders or rotary attenuators (depending on the gear) on the way IN. They did it live. Often they were still going direct-to-disc, so overdubs weren't an option. Comping takes wasn't an option either.

All that heavy tube and iron, plus early tape formulas provided a natural, soft compression. You had to crank the treble to compensate for the high-end loss of tape, even into the 80s and 90s.

My point is, Bruce Swedien has skills that are largely lost today. And he was using compression, but indirectly. Even on Thriller.

Ken Scott has said something similar about compression. He also thinks music is over-compressed. I doubt this is an across-the-board commandment.

It's really important to not base your entire philosophy on one source. These older fellows are great resources, but they do themselves a disservice being so dogmatic. Bruce Swedien comes off as a snob here. Would we even know who he is if it wasn't for Thriller? I have to question if he's telling the truth about his use of compression. Memory isn't perfect.

Speaking of which, a hit album is a perfect storm. It's not just the mix. I don't love Thriller, but I see why it is so beloved. It's not because there's little to no compression.
Those are some great insights. Thanks so much for posting
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 11:56 AM   #185
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Zero compression is NOT preferable to me. I think compression is terribly misunderstood and far too many engineer's only experiences with compression is to fix bad playing - it can be eye-opening to place compression of proper amounts on very dynamically steady and pro playing, just saying.

2 cents.
I don't disagree. I think you've taken me a bit too literally, though. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need recording gear at all, is my point. That's the true preference. Reality is somewhat different.
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 12:09 PM   #186
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
I don't disagree. I think you've taken me a bit too literally, though. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need recording gear at all, is my point. That's the true preference. Reality is somewhat different.
Maybe but even in a live situation, IMHO compression is occurring via ears, air and possibly other factors. That smoothing if you will is very important, especially with recorded material because it's a 2D representation of a proverbial 3D entity. It is very good at exposing wonderful detail if done properly without loss of liveliness and in some cases increasing percieved liveliness.

I think the discussions are fine but IMHO compression gets a bad rap due to overuse, being misunderstood and constant parroting of "leveling" and "fixing" when it is a great tool outside of that. Something I see and mention in almost every one of these discussions is that there is nothing that says a compressor has to be acting 100% of the time yet we discuss and tend to treat them as if that is the case and/or the norm. I very often use compression that only kicks in here and there and maybe knocks of .5 to 2 dB when it does kick in - no one here is going to say "ah there's compression" - that is likely far outside most discussions when it should certainly be in more of them.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 12:30 PM   #187
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,013
Default

Supposedly the instrumentation on Thriller consists of a Minimoog synthesizer, a Linn LM-1 drum machine, a Rhodes piano, a Roland Jupiter-8 synthesizer, an electric guitar, a pipe organ, and a horn section consisting of trumpet, trombone, flugelhorn, saxophone, and flute.

The synths and drum machine are items that don't really need compression anyway. In the 80s I used midi sequencing with drum machines and outboard midi gear for the core of most of my projects. None of the midi stuff ever needed compression.

Only when tracks of audio with microphones got recorded was compression ever used in my analog studio. The midi stuff kept very consistent levels and in the case of the drum machines, the samples were already compressed.

Acoustic drums and real bass guitars are a couple of the biggest beneficiaries of compression, but Thriller used neither.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--

Last edited by Glennbo; 10-16-2019 at 12:58 PM.
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 02:45 PM   #188
vdubreeze
Human being with feelings
 
vdubreeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,611
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post

... from some of the comments in the thread, it seems he used it just like everyone else and the idea that he didn't might be a misunderstanding of an answer he gave in an interview.
That's worth checking. Meanwhile, any record he recorded and mixed "without compression" that went to tape (all of the examples of his mentioned) can't be said to have used no compression, only used no outboard compression. Tape compression is a thing
__________________
The reason rain dances work is because they don't stop dancing until it rains.
vdubreeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 07:28 PM   #189
SoundGuyDave
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 150
Default

Karbo's got a GREAT point, in that there are a lot of factors involved that affect the signal (any signal) between creation and appreciation by the listener.

1) Air absorption/temprature/humidity. Yes, it absolutely IS a thing. Ask any live guy that has ever mixed a festival and done soundcheck at 2:00PM, 92*F and 80% relative humidity, then mixed the show at 9:00PM, 78*F and 35%RH if the system EQ had to be adjusted to compensate.... Hint: the correct answer is "good GOD, yes!"

2) Stick your head right where most people would mic a solo violin. "Screech" and "scrape" are the first two onomatopoeia that come to mind. So why does it sound fantastic through a Schoeps mic, a Neve pre, a Pultec EQ, a Teletronix LA-2A and laid down on a nice Studer 2" machine?

3) What are the two most non-linear devices in any live or recording signal chain? These would be the items that have THE most dramatic impact on the signal... Answer: The microphone and the loudspeaker. Now ask yourself what are the two devices that most engineers absolutely obsess over and fuel the most heated arguments... Exactly.

4) Typical recording signal chain: Sound source, microphone, preamp, recorder, console or DAW with EQ plugs, power amplifier, loudspeaker, ear. EVERYTHING between "sound source" and "ear" introduces non-linearities. The design goal for an amplifier circuit is simply stated as "a straight wire with gain." NONE of them can do it. Some do it better than others, but none hit the design goal. Preamps, op-amps (Eqs), buffering amps, VCAs, summing amps, balancing amps (output stages)and power amps are ALL amplifier stages. Each stage introduces a non-linearity to the signal. Anybody want to guess how many amplifier stages a typical signal runs through from input to output in an SSL G-series or Neve 80-series console? Viewed through an oscilloscope, a signal going TO tape and a signal coming BACK from tape is horrendously altered. Same thing with a signal going TO a A/D converter, and the same signal coming back from a D/A converter. NOTHING we use is linear.

5) The most quintessentially definitive guitar sounds in history are hardly a pristine representation of the vibrating string. [sarcasm] My God, they're DISTORTED!!!! [/sarcasm]

6) Quiz: When recording a rock guitar or snare (not metal, not jazz, basic AOR rock-n-roll), what is the correct mic to use? Answer: SM57. Follow-up question: Is there a better mic for those than a '57? Answer: Yes, there is. A Royer 121 for the guitar, and a 414 or U87 for the snare. Follow-up to the follow-up: Then why do we still use SM57s for those??? Answer: Because they sound "right." Food for thought: The "sound" of a Marshall half-stack or snare recorded through an SM57 has formed a paradigm for most genres, and even if it's not the "best" it could be, it is the "right" sound given the paradigm in place.

Now, take all of the above in sequence, and apply some extrapolation. If distance, air density, temprature and moisture content all affect sound, what, exactly, represents "correct?" If a studio is kept at 68*F, 20%RH, shouldn't we maintain our listening rooms in the same state? Shouldn't our speakers be the same distance from our ears as they were in the studio to accurately reproduce the mix? (Note to self: bottle compressed air and sell to audiophiles as "studio reference air.")

If microphones and loudspeakers are so hideously non-linear (compression, phase, distortion, as well as frequency balance alteration), why are there so many really, really decent ones that all sound different?

If circuitry (of any kind, passive or active) imparts so much non-linearity to the signal, why are we not recording with an Earthworks M50 or a B&K into the most linear preamp and A/D converter we can find, and calling that it? I mean, honestly, even STEREO recording induces phase shift when recombined in an acoustic space. The "one-mic, straight in" concept is obviously the most pristine, correct way to record. Therefore, "Louie, Louie" by The Kingsmen is demonstrably the most perfect recording, right?

Jimi Hendrix sucks, obviously. "His tone" is nowhere near what a close-mic'ed Fender Stratocaster sounds like...

If we accept that paradigms DO influence what is "correct," and compression on some recorded sources (kick, snare, toms, overheads, rooms; bass, guitar, vocals, keys, horns, etc. Pretty much everything.) forms the "norm" of that paradigm, then is it "right" or "wrong" to FAIL to apply compression to those sources, within that paradigm?

Food for thought...
SoundGuyDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 10:19 PM   #190
technogremlin
Human being with feelings
 
technogremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I think the discussions are fine but IMHO compression gets a bad rap due to overuse, being misunderstood and constant parroting of "leveling" and "fixing" when it is a great tool outside of that. Something I see and mention in almost every one of these discussions is that there is nothing that says a compressor has to be acting 100% of the time yet we discuss and tend to treat them as if that is the case and/or the norm. I very often use compression that only kicks in here and there and maybe knocks of .5 to 2 dB when it does kick in - no one here is going to say "ah there's compression" - that is likely far outside most discussions when it should certainly be in more of them.
Totally agree. I use compressors all over the place, but mainly for sound effect. My compressors are always 'just kissing the needle' as they say. Also, to me it seems that parallel and serial compression techniques are all about NOT smashing the sound but instead do very subtle things. A serial setup with a slow and a fast compressor both doing close to nothing, can do wonderful things on a (good) vocal for example. I don't see how you could do that with fader riding.

As a side note, my killer feature in reaper is the little mix knob on the plugin windows. It makes me 'parallel' almost everything
technogremlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 01:47 AM   #191
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 11,044
Default

Yup. Air acts as a compressor.

The "smallinator" effect of "overdone" compression can be great, when used in combination with reverb and rolling off the top end, to make things sound further away and get more depth in a mix.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 01:49 AM   #192
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 11,044
Default

...oh, and most importantly, our hearing acts as a compressor.

One of the most desirable effects of compression for mixers is to make music sound loud even when it is quiet.

The merits of this are debatable, but the reasoning is solid.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 02:42 AM   #193
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundGuyDave View Post
2) Stick your head right where most people would mic a solo violin. "Screech" and "scrape" are the first two onomatopoeia that come to mind. So why does it sound fantastic through a Schoeps mic, a Neve pre, a Pultec EQ, a Teletronix LA-2A and laid down on a nice Studer 2" machine?
Funny how you mention all those brand names as if recording with an off-brand mic in to a DAW and doing the same EQing and compression will sound more like the "screech" and "scrape".
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 05:42 AM   #194
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

I'll take a u-87 and sm57 for miking guitar amps. If it's good enough for Angus that's good enough for me
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 05:48 AM   #195
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 11,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
I'll take a u-87 and sm57 for miking guitar amps. If it's good enough for Angus that's good enough for me
I'll take whatever I can afford (which is 50% of the above ) and make the best of it.
Judders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 05:53 AM   #196
Tiggerdyret
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 428
Default

I'm budging in here, so I hope I'm not being too redundant, but this is probably the best overall explanation of compression I come across. Not only does he explain how many uses compressors have in general terms, he also explains a general philosophy of mixing, that I never heard explained so clearly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2VOgUgitJM

I think the OP does make the mistake of looking at compression as a one purpose tool to simply even out the waveform or place sounds in the mix. I agree that if you want a natural and open sound it's better to rely on automation, but compression is vibe and groove it can be a color or add saturation. Imo you can't get the sound of a compressor by automating the volume with a fader. And automating attack and release times to make a compressor-like-groove seems a near impossible task, if you don't have forever to work.
Tiggerdyret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:02 AM   #197
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post

It's really important to not base your entire philosophy on one source. These older fellows are great resources, but they do themselves a disservice being so dogmatic. Bruce Swedien comes off as a snob here. Would we even know who he is if it wasn't for Thriller? I have to question if he's telling the truth about his use of compression. Memory isn't perfect.

Speaking of which, a hit album is a perfect storm. It's not just the mix. I don't love Thriller, but I see why it is so beloved. It's not because there's little to no compression.
I don't understand why anyone takes advice from an "expert" on what to like.

They think music is too compressed? Great. Don't listen to it.

Take everything an "expert" says with a grain of salt. We're supposed to be learning techniques from these fellas. Not what we should or shouldn't like.

For example, the loudness wars are over but I still like a bit of brickwall limiting on my mixes. I learned to use it musically and I like how it sounds. Period.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:22 AM   #198
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I'll take whatever I can afford (which is 50% of the above ) and make the best of it.
Good point. I wish I could afford a u87 but I do have a Trion 8000 Tube Mic that I love quite a bit and use it with my blue one hundreds and those work well
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:24 AM   #199
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
I don't understand why anyone takes advice from an "expert" on what to like.

They think music is too compressed? Great. Don't listen to it.

Take everything an "expert" says with a grain of salt. We're supposed to be learning techniques from these fellas. Not what we should or shouldn't like.

For example, the loudness wars are over but I still like a bit of brickwall limiting on my mixes. I learned to use it musically and I like how it sounds. Period.
The reason I pay very very close attention to experts like Bruce swedien and mutt Lange is because I think their albums are the best sounding albums I've ever heard. I learn a lot from listening to the album's and any interviews I can find.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2019, 08:26 AM   #200
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiggerdyret View Post
I'm budging in here, so I hope I'm not being too redundant, but this is probably the best overall explanation of compression I come across. Not only does he explain how many uses compressors have in general terms, he also explains a general philosophy of mixing, that I never heard explained so clearly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2VOgUgitJM

I think the OP does make the mistake of looking at compression as a one purpose tool to simply even out the waveform or place sounds in the mix. I agree that if you want a natural and open sound it's better to rely on automation, but compression is vibe and groove it can be a color or add saturation. Imo you can't get the sound of a compressor by automating the volume with a fader. And automating attack and release times to make a compressor-like-groove seems a near impossible task, if you don't have forever to work.
Yeah I'm definitely a compression noob and I see them usually used for tools to tamp down dynamics or to add saturation and vibe.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.