TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Stop sniffing the compression glue
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Stop sniffing the compression glue

During my very temporary return to this forum, I thought I'd share with all of you one of the most important things I've learned during my absence:

If you think that a better compressor (or any other "mastering") can significantly improve your track, you are wrong.

This is a subject that often comes up in the discussion of compression and mastering, and there have always been those of us who say that the best mastering cannot save a good mix. The revelation for me, over the past few months, was just how much I over-estimated said role of post-production, in spite of all those previous comments. I still thought that my tracks were "almost there", and would sound a lot more professional with that special finishing touch.

This reminded me of the many others who not only think the same thing, but have openly complained that the professional studios have some kind of unfair advantage over us amateurs. If you don't fit that definition, then you don't need to be reading this. If you do, you're wrong.

(Disclaimer: if you have listened to my new tracks, and think they don't sound particularly good and that I'm full of shit, you are entitled to that opinion and you may even be right. But in which case, why do you care enough about what I have to say to be reading this?)

Anyway, the focus here is on compression specifically. I've since realized that some of my older tracks were horrifically over-compressed. Not just on the master, but also in parts of the mix. I was not able to recognize this until I figured out better ways to bring out the mix, and experienced firsthand just how much more "clear/loud" a production can sound using more precise mixing, often with little or no compression at all.

Of course, "more precise mixing" is a nebulous term, and I'm sorry to say that I can't spell that out for anyone. For me it currently involves experience, frequent breaks, and hours of painstaking labour, but YMMV. What I can do, however, with great confidence, is tell you to stop sniffing the compression glue this instant.

A bit of compression on the master (say 2:1) is fine. A bit more compression (say 3:1) on a kick or bass is also fine. Anything else, and you're wading into dangerous territory. Here are some things you should definitely NOT compress:

• Cymbals (hi-hats etc. - never, ever, ever)
  
• Snares or claps (a little bit is OK, but be very careful)
  
• Acoustic guitar (I know it's tempting, but just don't)
  
• Piano (good EQ will bring it out 10 times better than any compressor, and won't kill the dynamics)
  
• Tribal percussion (sticks, congas, bongos, and so on - dear God, don't compress these)
  
• Strings (just kill me now)
  
• Bells or other decaying elements (they're called "decaying" for a reason - if you need to louden the tail, then adjust your synth)
  
• Anything else that you don't want to sound cold and mechanical!
  
• Probably a lot of other things that I forgot about

Good read...I'd say most of that was known for me, but for others it's definitely worth the read.

Welcome back Diginut, I was wondering where you went to actually. I read your whole post, I didn't just scan it, I read it intently. I might go read it again. Now thing is, I thought maybe proper matering would magically give my tracks that professional, commercial grade sound. I haven't gone that route yet, so I can't say if it will or won't. The only compression I use is on the kick and bass, I'm using more than the 3:1 you recommend. I'm going to experiment and try using less, it can't hurt to try. I have yet to put any compression on the final mix, every time I've tried even as little as 2:1, I either get this horrible distortion noise, or it squashes the mix or makes it sound odd.

Now I have learned something recently that you mentioned, I don't EQ the whole mix anymore, I EQ each synth and sample individually. I realize now this is the only way to go if you want precise EQing, and totall control of the entire mix.

On another point I concur, I never mix my tracks in one night, I do it over a period of time. Yep, you have to rest your ears and come back later and rehear what you've done. I find it usefully to get a family member or friend to listen too, because even if they know nothing about producing, they can tell you what their ears are hearing, whether something is too loud, or too soft to hear. I get very neurotic when I mix, because I realize this can make or break a track.

OK, to sum it up, great, thoughfull post Diginut. I know some won't agree, and then I'll be confused again. My thinking is, if a mixdown is done well, all the "mastering" that needs to be done is some normalizing, maybe a little compression, and possibly a little boost of certain frequencies to give tracks that "commercial" sound. I read that somewhere about the frequency boosting, so I might of missunderstood it.

I'm going to let a producer buddy of mine master an EP I'm working on, we'll see how that goes.

as usual the conclusion can be drawn that it's most of the time not the tools but the user that has control over the sound.
I agree with you on some points and I disagree on some others, I'm not gonna go into details tho because that's not what this is about imo (we all have a different view about our music, thank god)

The nice thing about music is that it's easy to try out for yourself to see if it's true or not and of course, there's 346723468792467 times infinity ways to get there

A 40k compressor can prolly help someone out there but the general rule apllies even on epic magic yuber hellspawn tools like that, if you can't use it then what's the point in spending 40k on it?

Same goes for EQ.

Heya! There's been heaps of stuff on compression lately, so I was just wondering... When you talk about compression at the mastering phase (ie on the whole mix) aren't you better off just whacking on a very gentle limiter? Thats what I've always done, and then left compression for individual elements.

Also when you talk about acoustic guitars and pianos not needing compression, do you mean samples/synth or actual live performances? If you know a way to put in live acoustic instruments (not samples obviously) without any compression, how do you do it? I've always found that live stuff needs compression to sound nice next to electronic stuff. Is this just poor technique?

I agree totally with the rest of your post, just wanted to check on those two things...

But, isn't the purpose of putting a compressor on the master channel just to stop clipping? Seems silly to use a compressor for something like that coz it doesn't work off an inf:1 ratio. I dunno...

Good post. Agree'd in all points.
But I guess it won't make a lot of sense with some peeps here
Just wait a few weeks and you'll have another hand full of "omfg-can i compress my traxx till they sound good" threads

but hence, it formerly was an Ama Forum

Well, maybe I'm wrong, but isn't that what this entire post's about? Using a compressor on the whole mix to make it "louder" and destroying the dynamics in the process?
If you were actually making the mix louder using a compressor then it would still clip.
The whole point of using a compressor or a limiter in the mastering process is to remove the peaks that are causing clipping that escaped you in the mixing, sort of like a last resort.
I am not suggesting putting the master up to where it clips and then just slapping on a limiter. Even I Know that's stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips If you were actually making the mix louder using a compressor then it would still clip. The whole point of using a compressor or a limiter in the mastering process is to remove the peaks that are causing clipping that escaped you in the mixing, sort of like a last resort.

This isn't entirely true. A professional mastering engineer would compress with the goal to make the overall mix louder up to a certain standard.

Oh, Ok I see, yeah I misunderstood the orginal post. Thanks for the info.

quote:

Originally posted by Storyteller This isn't entirely true. A professional mastering engineer would compress with the goal to make the overall mix louder up to a certain standard.

Indeed.
A limiter is NOT for removing clips. In fact, the signal shouldnt clip at all before it's running through a compressor/limiter. It should be by far less louder than what comes out of the comp/limiter.
Else a limiter or compressor wont influence the dynamics of the track at all (or will even get close to what's called "brickwall limiting")

A good and smart post from Diginut...
For everybody out there, try making a track without any compression or EQ and see how it sounds, I'm sure you'll be amazed at the results you can achieve.
Don't mix with your eyes.
Effero

To respond to a couple of the comments:

1. EQ: I tend to lump "master EQ" in the same category as mastering compressors. That is, it can add value in moderation, but too much of it can easily wreck the mix. However, EQ on individual mix channels is a great deal more valuable than compression on individual channels. Compression is typically unhelpful or even counterproductive when used this way, but EQ is very useful! Synths in general - and especially the preset patches - are made to sound good on their own, not to fit well into a mix. Fitting them into the mix is your job.

Now obviously this has to be used in moderation too; you generally don't want a +6 dB hump on one of your channels. But it's very common to, for example, use a highpass filter or low-shelf filter on leads or pads in order to reserve headroom in the low frequencies for your kick and bassline. This is hard to do well, but has great results when done properly. Of course this is just one thing you might do with EQ; in other cases you might want to boost/cut the mid or high ranges, or even tweak tiny notches. You often need EQ to improve separation between kick and bassline. Again, there's no magic bullet here, but this is part of what I refer to as "precise mixing".

Bottom line (in my opinion): EQ is an integral part of the mix itself; compression should be more of an after-thought.

2. Compression on kick/bass: When I said 3:1 I didn't mean it as a hard rule. In general I try to stay within that range, but there may be cases you need more. Just don't get ridiculous and use 10:1 compression. Use what you feel you actually need in order to sound right - if you start hearing distortion or long tails on a kick, or pumping on a bass, you've gone too far.

3. Clipping: Mastering compressors should never, ever be used to prevent clipping in a mix. They may sometimes be used this way during a live recording session, but in that case that's the only way to prevent clipping. In fact, this is really what the $4000 compressors were made for - live recording of vocals and other material which might have spikes.

The proper way to use a mastering compressor is to normalize the track to something like -3 dB, compress with a low cutoff (usually anywhere between -6 dB to -15 dB), and adjust the output gain of the compressor so it's as loud as possible without clipping. Do not - I can't stress this enough - do not jack up the input gain to the compressor and try to compress it down to 0 dB.

4. Limiters/levellers: These are fine, again when used in serious moderation. They generally complement compressors rather than substitute for them. Limiters or soft-saturators can be used to increase the overall volume by 1-2 dB using various waveshaping algorithms that "hide" the clipping, so to speak (not literally, but it helps explain). Some do this by acting as heavy compressors, others have different algorithms. Crushing a track using a leveller is usually worse than crushing it with a compressor, it's very hard on the listener's ears. And again, the proper way to use one of these is to first normalize the track to around -3 dB, set the leveller's cutoff to -4 or -5 dB, and increase the output gain to compensate.

--
All mastering tools (compressors, levellers, EQ, etc.) are great - for mastering. The $25,000 question is whether or not they can do anything for a mediocre mix, and the answer is no. To get any real value from mastering, you have to have a good mix first. You should be able to create a good-sounding mix without any compression or mastering whatsoever.

The mix, sans mastering, should be the thing that sounds "almost professional". The mastering, if done properly, will make it sound "actually professional".

Cheers!

It also does matter what kind of genre you're mixing. Acoustic music will require very little if any (classical genre) mixing, whereas electronica relies more heavily on the use of external effects. But, I agree with Diginut on all points, a mix that sounds good without compression or too much EQ will sound amazing with the finishing touches applied. The question is...do you know how to apply these finishing touches properly?...

Compressor = Device that increases the average level of a signal by reducing its dynamic range. That is all.

They are very very useful, and I wouldn't say not to use them at all.

I would be more inclined to say don't use them unless you really know what you're doing as mastering (no pun intended) the basics of level and EQ will produce a much more controlled (and sharper) result than trying to mix through a device that if used incorrectly will be fighting you every step of the way.

Control of your mix is the secret of the "Pro" sound. This control comes from having a deep understanding of what is going on.

Put a n00b in a $1500 per day studio and you'll get crap. Put someone who knows that they're doing infront of the cheapest laptop with a few choice VSTs and the results will be infinately better.

Why? Because of knowledge (and talent, let's not forget that!).

Re: Stop sniffing the compression glue

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut During my very temporary return to this forum, I thought I'd share with all of you one of the most important things I've learned during my absence: If you think that a better compressor (or any other "mastering") can significantly improve your track, you are wrong. This is a subject that often comes up in the discussion of compression and mastering, and there have always been those of us who say that the best mastering cannot save a good mix. The revelation for me, over the past few months, was just how much I over-estimated said role of post-production, in spite of all those previous comments. I still thought that my tracks were "almost there", and would sound a lot more professional with that special finishing touch. This reminded me of the many others who not only think the same thing, but have openly complained that the professional studios have some kind of unfair advantage over us amateurs. If you don't fit that definition, then you don't need to be reading this. If you do, you're wrong. (Disclaimer: if you have listened to my new tracks, and think they don't sound particularly good and that I'm full of shit, you are entitled to that opinion and you may even be right. But in which case, why do you care enough about what I have to say to be reading this?) Anyway, the focus here is on compression specifically. I've since realized that some of my older tracks were horrifically over-compressed. Not just on the master, but also in parts of the mix. I was not able to recognize this until I figured out better ways to bring out the mix, and experienced firsthand just how much more "clear/loud" a production can sound using more precise mixing, often with little or no compression at all. Of course, "more precise mixing" is a nebulous term, and I'm sorry to say that I can't spell that out for anyone. For me it currently involves experience, frequent breaks, and hours of painstaking labour, but YMMV. What I can do, however, with great confidence, is tell you to stop sniffing the compression glue this instant. A bit of compression on the master (say 2:1) is fine. A bit more compression (say 3:1) on a kick or bass is also fine. Anything else, and you're wading into dangerous territory. Here are some things you should definitely NOT compress: Cymbals (hi-hats etc. - never, ever, ever) Snares or claps (a little bit is OK, but be very careful) Acoustic guitar (I know it's tempting, but just don't) Piano (good EQ will bring it out 10 times better than any compressor, and won't kill the dynamics) Tribal percussion (sticks, congas, bongos, and so on - dear God, don't compress these) Strings (just kill me now) Bells or other decaying elements (they're called "decaying" for a reason - if you need to louden the tail, then adjust your synth) Anything else that you don't want to sound cold and mechanical! Probably a lot of other things that I forgot about I know I always say that there are no rules, and obviously there are some people who will disagree with me on the above points and still make great tracks. I'm not talking to those people. I'm talking to the people who think that the only thing lacking from their tracks is good compression. Chances are, your track may already be suffering from overcompression. But even if you haven't used much or any compression, don't think that a fancy compressor is going to suddenly bring out the magic in your track; chances are very high that you're lacking something else, like EQ (which by the way has to be done on individual channels to really be effective, don't expect master EQ to really take care of this either). And remember: Compression is cumulative. If you put a 2:1 on one channel, then a 3:1 on its routing group, and another 2:1 on the master, it's going to sound squashed and ugly in the end. Yes, I'm ignoring the role of knees and trigger levels and attack times and release times, because they're basically irrelevant to this particular post. I hope this has been enlightening. If not, feel free to launch into a tirade on how I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, and how $4000 hardware compressors can make such a HUGE difference compared to cheesy old VSTs. I'll be happy to respond to you by bringing out the ole' give-a-fuckometer and spending my extra $4000 on booze and hookers. Cheers!

tehehehe dood hilarious....u came back for that -

A response to the original post by DigiNut:

I understand what you're getting at and your overall point with your post. Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't agree. And you are probably right that a lot of newbies over-compress to make it "better". Also I think you're spot on, saying EQ'ing each channel is more important than compressing each channel.

However...

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut 2. Compression on kick/bass: When I said 3:1 I didn't mean it as a hard rule. In general I try to stay within that range, but there may be cases you need more. Just don't get ridiculous and use 10:1 compression. Use what you feel you actually need in order to sound right - if you start hearing distortion or long tails on a kick, or pumping on a bass, you've gone too far.

Well, it all depends, I guess. Try playing a basic offbeat bass with the classic "Lately Bass"-preset (used in 10000+ dance tracks) and run it through the Fairchild or 1176LN-compressor and then turn the ratio to extreme settings (i.e. push all buttons on the ratio settings on the 1176). It CAN give you exactly the sound you're after. A lot more of that "in-your-face"-feeling that enables you to turn the bass down in the mix, while still having it very much present.
I guess my point is that compressors (in particular on kick and bass) can be used in a creative manner to _shape_ a sound into something that is very usable in your mix. (I don't believe you disagree with this notion, I just think your "10:1"-warning can be misunderstood by some as a "hard" rule).

Also try running your piano-solos through a LA2A with a VERY gentle setting. Even though it doesn't do much compressing, it almost always makes the piano-keys sit much more nicely in my mix. It's not really compressing, more like magic ;-) But it definately DOES something positive for pianos...

Just my two cents. Great post, btw... I also for a long time thought "I was almost there" and just needed to send it off to someone that could make it all perfect... Hah, the joke's on me! Fix it in the mixdown, is probably one of the most important things to remember when producing...

Regards

I agree with you too RivalMan. Compressors can be used for unusual sound shaping purposes, and it does sounds awesome especially when you use good plug-ins such as UAD products. One of the ways I could obtain a bouncy deep, present and clean kick in my latest remix was using an 1176-LN with an 8:1 ratio.
Effero

Re: Re: Stop sniffing the compression glue

quote:

Originally posted by girllovingtvibe tehehehe dood hilarious....u came back for that -

Cleared up shit for me

Great Post btw

quote:

Originally posted by Diginerd I would be more inclined to say don't use them unless you really know what you're doing ........

Well thankyou for the words of advice, BUT how the fuck am i supposed to get good at something if i'm not allowed to use it till i'm good at it!!!!!

Apreciate what you are saying but to learn is to experiment and fail and then try again and then fail etc....

Now you've probably gone thru this process dijinut, which is great 4 u, but u can't realy expect us 2 learn from YOUR mistakes can you.

No disrespect, but it seems a bit overly eletistly critical.

For the record, i rarely use compression, don't see the point.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips Well, maybe I'm wrong, but isn't that what this entire post's about? Using a compressor on the whole mix to make it "louder" and destroying the dynamics in the process? If you were actually making the mix louder using a compressor then it would still clip. The whole point of using a compressor or a limiter in the mastering process is to remove the peaks that are causing clipping that escaped you in the mixing, sort of like a last resort. I am not suggesting putting the master up to where it clips and then just slapping on a limiter. Even I Know that's stupid.

A compressor on the master channel with a very small ratio is sometimes used to smooth out the peaks in the track.

A limiter is most often used to make the track "hotter".

Both can be used if you know what you're doing and what sound you're wanting to create, and it can help make your track polished and professional *if* you use it with discretion and in moderation.

Re: Stop sniffing the compression glue

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut blah blah blah.. (Can't be arsed quoting the whole thing)

Great post.

Not saying I agree with everything, or disagree with anything, just a great post.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut I'll be happy to respond to you by bringing out the ole' give-a-fupostckometer and spending my extra $4000 on booze and hookers.

Surely you meant coke and hookers?

quote:

Originally posted by ralpheeee Well thankyou for the words of advice, BUT how the fuck am i supposed to get good at something if i'm not allowed to use it till i'm good at it!!!!! Apreciate what you are saying but to learn is to experiment and fail and then try again and then fail etc.... Now you've probably gone thru this process dijinut, which is great 4 u, but u can't realy expect us 2 learn from YOUR mistakes can you. No disrespect, but it seems a bit overly eletistly critical. For the record, i rarely use compression, don't see the point.

I think you're mistaking the nerd for the nut... :-P

The nerd says concentrate on EQ and levels until you really really think you've hit the limit as far as you can go. At that time start to play with compressors. the nut say's stop sniffing glue.

To put it another way, 90% of beginner to intermediate level issues can be fixed with good EQ and levels, it's not until you get deeper that compression can be effectively used.

On the flip feel free to play with all the toys, but as my my baby daughter does, give her a couple of crayons and she draws a great picture. Give her a shit ton of media and it all comes out some kind of mucky brown. If you add compressors too early you simply hit information overload...

Mind you, I'm a bear of little brain...

Re: Stop sniffing the compression glue

quote:

If not, feel free to launch into a tirade on how I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, and how $4000 hardware compressors can make such a HUGE difference compared to cheesy old VSTs. I'll be happy to respond to you by bringing out the ole' give-a-fuckometer and spending my extra $4000 on booze and hookers.

$400 on a semi decent hardware compressor > than all but the most expensive TDM software ones..

I'll take the rest of your $4k and spend it on E's as the resultant tracks & chick pull > coke arrogance and cheap lays.

Crap!

I wish I wasn't a married Mr. Potatohead..

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.