|
Yoozer posted:Instead of pitch bend, see if the synth has a portamento option and set the time to the maximum. Easier to control (you can precisely determine which note you're going to end up on), can span multiple octaves without the drawbacks of the bender (which has a lower resolution), and has a smooth result. And if it's not called portamento, it'll be called glide. I have so much fun with my Electribe and glide.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 09:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
wayfinder posted:Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the matter completely? Compression lowers your peaks, and auto make up gain does exactly what you are doing here, so it's just the thing you want to avoid doing, since it will in fact make the compressed signal sound louder than the uncompressed. To a/b your compressor without the loudness factor, you should disable auto make up. I dunno what auto makeup is (normalise?) but that method is the long way of doing it. You stick a compressor on (for example) a drum loop. Set the compressor's threshold to 0dB and its ratio to 1:1. Take note of the peak signal level. Set the threshold/ratio of the compressor to whatever you want but make sure its compressing (i.e. the ratio is higher than 1:1 and the threshold is lower than the peak level of the drum loop. Now change the output gain so that the peak level of the signal is the same as it was before. To A/B compare the two, simply mute/freeze the compressor while the drum loop is playing and switch it back on again. The channel output level will be the same and you will be able to compare the compressed and uncompressed signal fairly easily. Depending on the extent of the compression, you should be able to set the output level higher than you could do on the uncompressed drum loop before clipping occurs because the compressed drum loop has less dynamic range. Certain instruments like vocals and drums need some degree of compression because you can get quite a large disparity between loud and quiet passages and it is disconcerting to listen to (rather like a movie where some people are talking quietly and you turn up the volume so you can hear what they are saying. Then a massive explosion happens and you deafen yourself). In this case, you use a compressor to make the overall volume more consistant. Synths without velocity/pressure sentivity to volume (i.e. my Juno-6) don't really need any compression in this way because every note is equally loud all the time. The other use of a compressor is for sound shaping which is completely separate. Mostly if you are batch compressing alot of audio tracks it will nearly always sound worse than without compression unless there is a big disparity in volume between certain passages or instruments. With an amp envelope (attack/release) you can also smoothly dropout and bring in instruments without a sudden change in volume caused by the compressor stopping and starting suddenly. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Sep 24, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 13:33
|
|
|
Am I reading something wrong here or are you? The original issue was A/Bing the effect of the compressor without the psychological effects of louder=better. The gain in loudness comes from what you are describing (turning up the gain until the peaks are the same as before compression - making up for the compression, hence make-up gain). Some compressors do this automatically, it's called auto make-up. So what you're describing (and what I dig gardening had discovered on his own) is actually the opposite of what the guy was doing, and that's why I posted what I did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 14:55
|
|
|
glitchkrieg posted:And if it's not called portamento, it'll be called glide.  Portamento and glide are the same thing.EDIT: Although I should say that I'm talking about on synths, since sometimes people do use glide to refer to glissando and then it's not the same thing at all. nah thanks fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Sep 24, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 16:22
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the matter completely? Compression lowers your peaks, and auto make up gain does exactly what you are doing here, so it's just the thing you want to avoid doing, since it will in fact make the compressed signal sound louder than the uncompressed. To a/b your compressor without the loudness factor, you should disable auto make up. It's fine if it sounds louder, just so long as it's not metered any higher. Yeah, compression is going to give the appearence of a louder sound, even though by the meters it isn't. Also, on things like drums, a slow-attack compressor isn't going to hit the peak, leaving it at the same level, but emphasizing the drums release. WanderingKid posted:I dunno what auto makeup is (normalise?) but that method is the long way of doing it. Auto-makeup automatically adjusts the compressors output gain up or down based on how much compression is going on. It's supposed to make your input level the same as your output level regardless of what you set in between. Quincy Smallvoice posted:Im not so sure anyone going to this much trouble to validate the effects of compression should be using it in the first place, personally. Well, once you get used to using it, it doesn't matter. I can set a compressor without hearing the source track first (just the nature of it), and get it 90% right, just because I've done it a thousand times. When you're first using compressors, you definitely should A/B the source so you know exactly what you're doing to the sound. PRADA SLUT fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Sep 24, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 19:11
|
|
|
moron posted:Does anyone here have a Novation Nocturn and use Logic 8? http://www.ehow.com/video_2372649_using-touch-latch-apple-logic.html Would that help?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 19:32
|
|
|
On your track in the arrange window there should be a button that says "Read" in green. Click this and a dropdown list will appear that says "Read, Write, Latch, etc." Select latch and this should solve it. E: beaten by a second.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 19:39
|
|
|
I definitely agree with wayfinder there. A compressor will compress the peaks of the signal, so the wet signal sounds just as loud as the dry signal, but without the peaks. If you raise the volume, you don't hear the compression artifacts (which is why you should be A/Bing anyway), you just hear that the sound is now louder. You don't use a compressor to expand the signal. There's expanders for that. To me, A/Bing a compressor on different loudnesses, is like A/Bing an EQ on different speakers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 20:38
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Am I reading something wrong here or are you? The original issue was A/Bing the effect of the compressor without the psychological effects of louder=better. The gain in loudness comes from what you are describing (turning up the gain until the peaks are the same as before compression - making up for the compression, hence make-up gain). Some compressors do this automatically, it's called auto make-up. So what you're describing (and what I dig gardening had discovered on his own) is actually the opposite of what the guy was doing, and that's why I posted what I did. No, auto make up is related to the threshold if I recall correctly. IE if your threshold is -10 for activating the compressor, auto make up will raise the output +10 so it stays the same. If you turn it off the compressors output would be -10 what it is without the compressor on. So what Kai and I were doing is the same thing, mine is just the "long way" apparently!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 20:41
|
|
|
The Fog posted:To me, A/Bing a compressor on different loudnesses, is like A/Bing an EQ on different speakers. Word, it's called the Fletcher-Monson curve (did I get that right science goons?!). Loud will always sound better to the human ear. Which is why you should mix at low volume and A/B your compressors!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 20:43
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Am I reading something wrong here or are you? The original issue was A/Bing the effect of the compressor without the psychological effects of louder=better. The gain in loudness comes from what you are describing (turning up the gain until the peaks are the same as before compression - making up for the compression, hence make-up gain). Some compressors do this automatically, it's called auto make-up. So what you're describing (and what I dig gardening had discovered on his own) is actually the opposite of what the guy was doing, and that's why I posted what I did. You want to A/B the effects of the compressor without the output gain changing? That is exactly what I described. It is wrong to say that compression makes the input perceivably louder - this is only a by product of what it does. A compressor reduces dynamic range so if you want to compare an uncompressed drum loop with a compressed drum loop, you keep the output peak level the same. The compressed drum loop has less dynamic range so at the same peak level, more of the signal will have more power in relation to the peak. It will sound louder but the important point to be made is that the peak level is the same and they will clip at the same point. If you just want to see what the compressor does without any make up gain or delay in the action of the compressor then you do not touch the output gain on the compressor at all. The attack and release envelope must also be 0ms or the lowest they will otherwise go. This is how it works: You take a drum loop whose peak level is 0dB. You then set the compressor's threshold to -18dB and the compressor's ratio to 6:1. I'm picking nice round numbers so the mental arithmetic is easy. This means that the compressor starts supressing gain when the peak level exceeds -18dB. For every 6dB over the threshold, it reduces the output to 1dB over the threshold. 18/6 = 3. Therefore the new peak level of the drum loop is -18 + 3 = -15dB. If you try this at home you will notice that compression actually makes the peak output quieter. The lower the threshold and higher the ratio the quieter it will get. Try -50dB threshold and 10:1 ratio. It doesn't matter how freaking loud the input it, compressing to that extent will make the output very very quiet. However, it will also have very little dynamic range, meaning that you could apply a massive amount of post gain before you clip. Without any makeup gain and -50dB theshold/10:1 ratio you won't be able to hear the effects of compression properly because you just reduced the peak signal to -45dB which is barely audible over background noise at normal listening levels. So this type of comparison isn't fair either. At some point you are going to have to come to terms with the fact that you will never be able to fairly compare a signal pre and post compression at 'the same volume' because the compressor has dynamically altered the gain of the signal and the two waves no longer even look the same above threshold. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Sep 24, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 20:57
|
|
|
squidgee posted:
yeah, he was saying that different synths say different things but mean the same and all this compressor talk, i dont really understand you A/B testing people because i dont understand how you are matching levels because when you compress a sound you are making the peaks quieter so you can turn it up in a mix, so even though the peaks arent louder the whole sound is. and PS, loudness is not always better, just try to listen to the new justice album for while(i like it but goddamn) EDIT: The Fog posted:You don't use compressors to make the sound perceivably louder while keeping the same peak, but rather you use compressors to make the peaks lower, maintaining the same perceived loudness. thats what i was trying to say but mine was alot dumber. oredun fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 22:10
|
|
|
oredun posted:yeah, he was saying that different synths say different things but mean the same  I misread what he was saying, I thought he was saying that it's actually called portamento.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2008 22:26
|
|
|
WanderingKid, I think you know how the technical side of a compressor works, however you seem to have confused the real-world application and the intention of it. You don't use compressors to make the sound perceivably louder while keeping the same peak, but rather you use compressors to make the peaks lower, maintaining the same perceived loudness. THAT is the reason you don't A/B at different volumes. You A/B so that you can hear if the sound is too squashed after compression. If you A/B at different volumes, you'll be unable to tell. I Dig Gardening, the Fletcher-Munson curves just tell you that we perceive certain bands of frequencies differently, no more, no less. However, louder volumes are perceived as better/phatter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 00:46
|
|
|
The Fog posted:WanderingKid, I think you know how the technical side of a compressor works, however you seem to have confused the real-world application and the intention of it. I hate to step into the middle of this debate, but I use faders to control loudness and leave the "peaks" and "dynamics" to the players, the instrument, and the dynamics of the room. Anyone familiar with a synthesizer will recognize the most important controls on a compressor, the attack and the release. On a synth you don't think of these as controlling volume, you think of them controlling character. To me a compressor has little to do with the initial impact of a sound, even a drum. Compression is really about the guts of tone. It's about the rhythm of your tone. FYI - if your attack time is less than 50-70ms, you're not really compressing. You're limiting, which is fine and a very useful effect. But if you really want to understand compression, stop turning your compressor into a limiter. TheFog, the function you are describing is limiting, not compressing. RivensBitch fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 01:12
|
|
|
A compressor doesn't affect peaks unless it's got a fast attack. Give a snare a slow-attack compressor and it won't have cleared the attack envelope by the time the transient has passed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 04:34
|
|
|
Kai was taken posted:A compressor doesn't affect peaks unless it's got a fast attack. Give a snare a slow-attack compressor and it won't have cleared the attack envelope by the time the transient has passed. Is there a reason to use a compressor instead of a regular gain thing then?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 04:41
|
|
|
IanTheM posted:Is there a reason to use a compressor instead of a regular gain thing then? It's a hell of a lot easier for gaining up. If you have a snare with a slow attack compressor on it, it'll gain up only the release stage of the sound, keeping the initial snap of the snare. I suppose you could do the same thing with automation, but it would be a pain in the rear end to do on every sound.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 05:13
|
|
|
this thread just got nerdy as poo poo
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 08:04
|
|
|
I'm currently transitioning from FLStudio to Pro Tools M-Powered and I need some recommendations for a drum-centric sampler to replace FPC which I used in FLS. Any suggestions that aren't Kontakt or Battery? My only list of firm requirements are mp3 support (I can potentially overlook this, but I have my reasons) and choke/mute groups. Cheers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 08:13
|
|
|
Is there a tutorial web-site where I can download pre-made songs in Ableton so I can open it and figure out how everything was put together? I'm interested in trying to make some House, but I don't have the slightest idea where to start and all my drum loops that I make sound artificial and terrible 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 08:25
|
|
|
Adrenochrome posted:Is there a tutorial web-site where I can download pre-made songs in Ableton so I can open it and figure out how everything was put together? I'm interested in trying to make some House, but I don't have the slightest idea where to start and all my drum loops that I make sound artificial and terrible Look into the built in tutorials, there's a ton of presets to dissect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 08:36
|
|
|
WanderingKid posted:snip, snip  You must have missed that I wasn't commenting on how to use a comp, but only on how what I dig gardening was doing and what he was thinking he was accomplishing with it weren't the same thing at all. *I* don't want to do anything at the moment, I was merely commenting on a technique that couldn't work, and explaining why it couldn't I agree with RivensBitch that we could as well be talking about limiting, but since the distinction is pretty much one of attack time only, I don't think it matters much. In drum hits, a 15ms attack leaves most peaks intact, with most instruments and vocals it's 50ms or so, it's an artificial distinction really. But I also have to disagree with RivensBitch (and The Fog) on the purpose of a compressor. The machine itself has no purpose, it's just a machine. It might have been intended a certain way or engineered with a certain application in mind but there's no law that it can't be used differently, or that using it for your own, different purposes is somehow wrong. You can only measure "success" if you have a goal. So I guess both of you are right about what a compressor is there for and wrong about how it's there only for that
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 10:40
|
|
|
Rivensbitch posted:I hate to step into the middle of this debate, but I use faders to control loudness and leave the "peaks" and "dynamics" to the players, the instrument, and the dynamics of the room. Oh please. Unless you can lookahead and ride a channel fader as fast and accurately as a machine can you are never going to do anything with a channel fader that is comparible to what a compressor can do so don't even go there. I can't believe I'm even telling you this since you know it already so why say something as dumb as you just did? You of all people know how useful compressors are on tracks that have alot transients in a short space of time (most electronic dance music to be honest). You don't have the time, the reflexes or the computer like mental arithmetic to do what a compressor does with your bare hands. And then there are performances that simply benefit from a little compression because the style is fast and very dynamic (which is not always a good thing contrary to popular belief). You can't realistically have some guy sitting on a mixer and twatting a channel fader up and down a couple of times per second. Lets be real about this. The Fog posted:you seem to have confused the real-world application and the intention of it. I agree with Wayfinder on the point that the intended purpose of a compressor is meaningless. All you need to know are the mechanics of how it works. I don't really care what it was originally intended to do since that does not mean that it cannot be used for other creative purposes if you saw fit. If we all thought like that then you wouldn't have people using turntables to make original music. I mean their intended purpose was just to play records right? I use compressors alot in sound design where you can shape simple sounds like short low frequency sine waves into thumping bass drums. You can set up a compressor to work like a threshold sensitive amp envelope (and I personally find it much more controllable and faster than drawing a volume envelope in Soundforge but hey). Hell, half the effects you probably use are the creative, unintended results of exploiting a compressor's sidechain for things other than peak level detection (like de-essing, frequency dependent compression, knee etc. etc.) WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 11:14
|
|
|
WanderingKid posted:Oh please. Unless you can lookahead and ride a channel fader as fast and accurately as a machine can you are never going to do anything with a channel fader that is comparible to what a compressor can do so don't even go there. I can't believe I'm even telling you this since you know it already so why say something as dumb as you just did? You of all people know how useful compressors are on tracks that have alot transients in a short space of time (most electronic dance music to be honest). You don't have the time, the reflexes or the computer like mental arithmetic to do what a compressor does with your bare hands. You may have noticed the innovation of the automated fader driven by DAW's? You could listen to a track, make note of the level changes you'd like to make, draw them in, and still be controlling the volume "by the fader" and not by hand....
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 11:52
|
|
|
toadee posted:You may have noticed the innovation of the automated fader driven by DAW's? You could listen to a track, make note of the level changes you'd like to make, draw them in, and still be controlling the volume "by the fader" and not by hand.... Are you seriously suggesting that you hand draw a volume envelope and create an automation track to do the exact same thing a compressor does, only slower and less acurately? Be my guest but you are wasting your time. Edit: If you want to ride channel gain fast without having to do it with your hands or hand draw annoying envelopes and click in a bunch of automation tracks and do all the mental arithmetic yourself then just use a compressor. Its dead easy. Come on, ML is above this sort of crap. Both of you are above this sort of crap. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 12:22 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 12:04
|
|
|
easily the nerdiest most pointless discussion ive read in a while
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 14:34
|
|
|
I have a kick-related question. Is it supposed to clip?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 15:10
|
|
|
A MIRACLE posted:I have a kick-related question. Is it supposed to clip? nothing is
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 15:33
|
|
|
A MIRACLE posted:I have a kick-related question. Is it supposed to clip? Ummm it can if you want it to. It depends on the sound you want. For instance, I often make composite bass drums from D16 Drumazon and Nepheton demos (to get straight 909 and 808 drum sounds respectively). I tend to like them massively overdriven and the first transient very often gets flattened off. I'll post an example when I get home to show you what I mean. I noticed from some reference tracks that the bass drum can sometimes be clipped in the sound design stage deliberately. A good example of this is the bass drum in Tiesto's Urban Train which is a composite of an 808 and 909 BD and a 909 OH and the first transient squares off pretty dramatically. Theres quite an aggressive clicking sound to it if you give it a listen. You might also want to listen to some Alphazone kicks or pick up a few free samples of Alphazone style kicks. These are usually composites of several different sounds (snares, claps, hihats, drum machine kicks etc) and in some of them you can see a massive and deliberate clip. Alphazone style kicks are usually very hard, very aggressive and the clip is key to that sort of sound. I tend not to like them because they go off like gunshots and I prefer my drums to not be so banging. I don't want my meters redlining in the mix though. If I introduce some sort of clipping distortion it is because it is necessary to have it there. I don't want it occuring because of poor mixing or anything like that. If it does happen it could mean the bass drum is disproportionately loud compared to other instruments and/or there is some clashing with the low frequency component of another instrument that happens to sound at high amplitude in the same phase. If its clipping in the mix then you really want to identify why and how it is clipping and whether you want that effect or not. There isn't a straight answer that always applies because its a creative decision. As a general rule, most people try to avoid clipping in the mixdown because they already distorted their bass drum and their guitars and what not exactly as desired and they don't want any ugly digital distortion on top of that when its getting mixed. Do you get where I'm coming from? WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 15:47
|
|
|
Yes thank you that was very helpful. I just need (a lot) more practice with Ultrabeat and Logic in general.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 16:06
|
|
|
A MIRACLE posted:Yes thank you that was very helpful. I just need (a lot) more practice with Ultrabeat and Logic in general. digital(redlining logic) clipping generally sounds really bad, you want "analog" distortion, like tubes overdriven, distortion pedal, etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 17:35
|
|
|
I got a technical help question actually. I rewire reason into live a lot, and I've done it on several computers and don't think I'm doing anything 'wrong' per se. However, I always have to do some pre-delay on the reason tracks. Always took this as standard cause its separate programs, whatever. However, a lot of the time the amount of delay I need won't be static, and it'll depend on what my computer's doing. For instance, maybe I need a like 60ms predelay with just reason and ableton running and one synth. However with several other synths in ableton playing and maybe firefox running, it'll change. And then if I create another synth track, it'll alter it further. This is a major pain in the rear end, anyone know why it's doing this? (it's gotten to the point at times where I can't touch the computer while its rendering as any cpu usage will gently caress up the timing)
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 18:35
|
|
|
Hello, I've been making music on my PC on and off for a while now, but I still consider myself a beginner. I'm looking to buy my first MIDI controller, and I'm seriously considering this one when it comes out: http://www.soundslive.co.uk/product~name~Korg-NanoKey~ID~9308.asp (Another page with more info: http://www.korg.co.uk/products/software_controllers/nano/sc_nano.asp ) Not only is it cheap, but it also doesn't take up much space, which is perfect. I'm posting this to ask if this is as good an investment as I think it is. What do you guys make of it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 18:39
|
|
|
mezzir posted:I got a technical help question actually. I rewire reason into live a lot, and I've done it on several computers and don't think I'm doing anything 'wrong' per se. However, I always have to do some pre-delay on the reason tracks. Always took this as standard cause its separate programs, whatever. However, a lot of the time the amount of delay I need won't be static, and it'll depend on what my computer's doing. For instance, maybe I need a like 60ms predelay with just reason and ableton running and one synth. However with several other synths in ableton playing and maybe firefox running, it'll change. And then if I create another synth track, it'll alter it further. This is a major pain in the rear end, anyone know why it's doing this? (it's gotten to the point at times where I can't touch the computer while its rendering as any cpu usage will gently caress up the timing) What ASIO driver are you using? Try this if your soundcard doesnt have a native one: http://www.asio4all.com/
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 19:44
|
|
|
Edirol FA-66 Audio Interface, running asio with buffer set to minimum :/
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 20:16
|
|
|
Pickman posted:I'm posting this to ask if this is as good an investment as I think it is. What do you guys make of it? If you want to learn to play keys, I would avoid this like the plague. Get at least 49 keys of decent quality, it'll be an actual investment instead of a cruel torture for your fingers. If you're doing nothing more than messing around, I guess it's okay. Personally I'm more interested in their knobs/faders controller.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 20:44
|
|
|
Yoozer posted:If you want to learn to play keys, I would avoid this like the plague. Get at least 49 keys of decent quality, it'll be an actual investment instead of a cruel torture for your fingers. In that case, I might wait a while longer and save up for something better, while I carry on using the mouse to play notes in the piano roll. I'm still very much in the learning process with this, so I guess I will try and make a few complete tracks before splashing out on something. Thanks for the advice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 21:47
|
|
|
WanderingKid posted:Oh please. Unless you can lookahead and ride a channel fader as fast and accurately as a machine can you are never going to do anything with a channel fader that is comparible to what a compressor can do so don't even go there. I can't believe I'm even telling you this since you know it already so why say something as dumb as you just did? You of all people know how useful compressors are on tracks that have alot transients in a short space of time (most electronic dance music to be honest). You don't have the time, the reflexes or the computer like mental arithmetic to do what a compressor does with your bare hands. Woooaaahh there buddy. Woooaah. Take a step back. Breathe. We're sharing advice and opinions on audio equipment, not artificial heart valves or pace makers. Now my point, which I think you may not have quite understood, and maybe that's my fault, but my point was that there is a clear distinction between a compressor and a limiter, and that it is a mistake to not differentiate between the two. There are very specific techniques to using both, and to refer to one as the other just because your plugin or box is labeled a "compressor" or a "limiter" is going to confuse anyone who doesn't yet understand the differences (and apparently there are plenty of people even in this thread who don't seem to know or care about them). Point of fact - if you are using attack times below 50ms, you are not compressing, you are limiting. Many people prefer limiting on their drums, and many "compressors" have attack times that can be set to limit. But to take a compressor, lower it's attack to 1ms, and start trying to school people on how this is your preferred means of "compression"... well, that's like telling someone that a reverb box is the best way to create delay. It's one way to create delay, I suppose, but you're going to confuse anyone who doesn't know the difference themselves. I could also take a delay box, crank the feedback all the way up, and use it to create loops, but if I called it a looping box and posted on a forum that this was the best way to do live looping, I'd be doing a lot of beginners and novices a great disservice. One of the most confused and misunderstood topics of recording and production is compression. The vast majority of advice I see on these and other forums in response to questions about "compression" are often really answers about limiting. I think that making this distinction is actually really helpful, because I know many people that don't understand actual "compression" and how to use it to affect the life and character of an instrument, EVEN drums (I often use long attack compressors on snare drum to liven up and control it's tone and character). As for my comment about using faders to control dynamics, I think you may have misunderstood me there as well. For the record, I rarely ride or automate faders. I think if you properly balance your mix with side chain gates and compressors (not limiters), high pass filters, and the proper EQ cuts, then you can set each of your instruments in a balanced sound stage where they actually play and interact with each other dynamically. Now this may come down to style and opinion, but here's my first approach to a track that is having a hard time sitting in a mix dynamically. Rather than get heavy handed with a limiter with the intent of removing or changing the performers dynamics, instead I bring the track into the mix so I can hear the louder peaks, and then ask what else in the mix is making it hard to hear those quieter bits? Usually I'll mute the more dense tracks and see what it takes to make the more dynamic part intelligible. Maybe an EQ cut in another instrument will clear things up. Maybe a ducking compressor with a sidechain from the more dynamic instrument. Maybe panning the more dynamic instrument and giving it a slapback delay timed just right could thicken up the quieter dynamics without accentuating the louder bits too much. It's this kind of rhythmic approach to a mix that brings a song to life. The alternative is to limit everything until it's a square wave, pan everything center and then set all the faders at unity, which to me sounds very muddy. RivensBitch fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Sep 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2008 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
The reason why you set the attack time to 0ms to demonstrate automatic gain reduction on a compressor or limiter is because it takes the delay out of the equation. Which is particularly useful to know when you stick a compressor on a drum track and all the transients over the threshold are less than 10ms long. If your compressor reachs peak gain reduction at 50ms after detecting signal over threshold then it may appear not to do anything. This is because the compressor detects the peak over the threshold. 10 ms later the transient has passed and the peak signal goes under the threshold again. 40 ms later, the compressor reaches maximum gain reduction but it has already missed the transient so no gain reduction occurs (and that confuses people). There is no misunderstanding. A limiter and a compressor work in fundamentally the same way even if they are often used for vastly different purposes. They automatically suppress the amplitude of a signal if it goes above a certain threshold. It is easy to see and hear that gain reduction if it is instantaneous and the threshold is low and ratio is high. Will you set up a compressor to hard limit like this very often? Probably not. Its very extreme and it sounds it. But its a useful starting point to take it as far as it will go so you can see what is possible with these tools. In truth, hard limiting is mostly the preserve of large soundsystems where the aim is to completely supress transient clips that will destroy speakers. Its why the attack time has to be so short so it can catch even the shortest transients. Depending on the music you make and the sounds you are working with, you may even find yourself using very short attack times on a compressor. I know I do. If I seemed exasperated or offensive that was not my intention. It was merely to make an example that is easy to understand, easy to demonstrate and which produces a very prominent effect that you cannot fail to notice no matter what type of sound you are running into a compressor. At the end of the day, compression is really simple and really easy to understand if it is explained properly. Therefore, if there is any misunderstanding it is because you or I have failed to explain it properly. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Sep 26, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 00:07
|
|