|
With and without multi-band compression. Need to borrow your ears.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Magnus |
I've been experimenting lately with multiband compressors and have come to place where I like the results but I'm afraid it might be compromising too much on the quality and the dynamics of the original material.
Take the sample with the band settings I've applied below for example and please have a listen. Both are the exact same clip, one with and one without the compression I've come up with. Which do you prefer?
Using the multiband, I feel it has a better stereo field, things stand out more, and the low end sounds tighter. However I feel it might be crushing the dynamic range of the higher frequencies.
The sample without seems to sound more flat and boxy but more of the original material is present. Or so it seems to me. At this point I just need some extra sets of ears for comparison which is what drove me to come on here and ask.
Right click, Save as...
Sample WITH MultiBand compression
Sample WITHOUT MultiBand compression
What do you all think? Which one does your ears prefer? I really appreciate any feedback. :) |
|
|
| palm |
| what is realy multibanded here? the whole mix? i think u need to work more on each element before u start on doing anything on the master. on both samples the acid baselines are realy cool but the level is all over the place. also at the start i can hear that u are totaly overcopmressing/sidechaining the lead. start with that, u have a cool idea here but its WAAAYY to much compression on both samples. its like the dj is punching his fader up and down fast as hell. other that that u have a great idea her man, id love to hear more from it later. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
Firstly, that's a wicked tune. Top work!
IMO, the sample with MBC, has better element separation and the stereo image is far more defined. You certainly benefit from the MBC, but it is overkill (too much).
The good: the low sub bass is pushed down meaning the lead/ background synth elements sit on top better (in their own band with less crossover). Those mid sounds also are slightly more compact which helps with element separation. Because of this the hi and mid perc stand out more, giving the track more perceivable rhythm.
The Bad : The compression is just way too much, especially on the low sub bass (the one from the beginning, not the one that comes in half way); you loose the rolling effect of it making the kick stand out less and losing some of the drive. The mid synth elements are a little too boxed in. Basically you can hear the compression - it should be more subtle.
Personally, I don't have the track in front of me so it's difficult to give specifics, but I would.....
Ease off on the compression, less ratio, less mix, etc.
I'm not convinced the whole track needs MBC across it like this - you could group together certain elements then route some (not all) of those groups to the MBC. This might help with maintaining that frequency separation but not losing any drive.
What I'm trying to say is you are gaining from MBC in terms of separation and spread but losing in terms percussion drive. Try to find a middle ground and use just a little less MBC.
Anyway, it's all subjective, just my $0.02, hope it helps. |
|
|
| Magnus |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Firstly, that's a wicked tune. Top work!
IMO, the sample with MBC, has better element separation and the stereo image is far more defined. You certainly benefit from the MBC, but it is overkill (too much).
The good: the low sub bass is pushed down meaning the lead/ background synth elements sit on top better (in their own band with less crossover). Those mid sounds also are slightly more compact which helps with element separation. Because of this the hi and mid perc stand out more, giving the track more perceivable rhythm.
The Bad : The compression is just way too much, especially on the low sub bass (the one from the beginning, not the one that comes in half way); you loose the rolling effect of it making the kick stand out less and losing some of the drive. The mid synth elements are a little too boxed in. Basically you can hear the compression - it should be more subtle.
Personally, I don't have the track in front of me so it's difficult to give specifics, but I would.....
Ease off on the compression, less ratio, less mix, etc.
I'm not convinced the whole track needs MBC across it like this - you could group together certain elements then route some (not all) of those groups to the MBC. This might help with maintaining that frequency separation but not losing any drive.
What I'm trying to say is you are gaining from MBC in terms of separation and spread but losing in terms percussion drive. Try to find a middle ground and use just a little less MBC.
Anyway, it's all subjective, just my $0.02, hope it helps. |
palm - Thanks for your help. Yes the entire mix was multiband on the master out. I realize this is a bad idea but I was just looking for something quick at the end of a production to put a quick sheen over the mix. I gave up on mastering myself a long time ago and leave that up to mastering people but I was just wanting to experiement with a quick solution. I will back off the compression as I have a tendency to over compress and SC somtimes.
DJ RANN - Thank you greatly for such an informative post I really appreciate all the info and guidance. Your answers confirm much of what I was leaning towards but I just needed other opinions. I will take these thing to heart and head back to tweaking. My goal would be to find a nice medium in between the two.
Thanks again all! :) |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnus
palm - Thanks for your help. Yes the entire mix was multiband on the master out. I realize this is a bad idea but I was just looking for something quick at the end of a production to put a quick sheen over the mix. I gave up on mastering myself a long time ago and leave that up to mastering people but I was just wanting to experiement with a quick solution. I will back off the compression as I have a tendency to over compress and SC somtimes.
DJ RANN - Thank you greatly for such an informative post I really appreciate all the info and guidance. Your answers confirm much of what I was leaning towards but I just needed other opinions. I will take these thing to heart and head back to tweaking. My goal would be to find a nice medium in between the two.
Thanks again all! :) |
Cool. please let us hear it when you've tweaked - would love to hear the finished item..... |
|
|
| airwalker1 |
i think the second version was more open and it sounded less sqwashed compared to the first. i dunno maybe a fine combenaton of the two.
ie pinpoint areas in the track that needs that compressd effect. |
|
|
| costizzle |
| i like the 1st one better. but a fine combo of the two would be perfect. you can hear the higher frequency notes clearer in the 1st mix although it may not sound as compressed and bassy in the 2nd. but sounds like a tight song |
|
|
| evo8 |
The one with the multiband compression sounds better to me because the bass is louder and the hats are louder
But you should be able to make those louder in the mix without using mbc |
|
|
| Magnus |
| Thanks for taking the time everyone to listen as its been very helpful. It seems overall this comes down to a matter of personal taste but the overwhelming theme of meeting somewhere in the middle is prominent so that is what I'll be aiming for. Thanks again. |
|
|
| Beyer |
| How about mixing the compressed mix, with a "dry" mix? Often done in rock, and other genres. "The middle path". |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Plain and simple, I'll take the original version.
Multiband compression seems like it should be really useful but for some reason I've just never gotten good results from it. Probably just me though... |
|
|
| Fledz |
Hey mate, first of all nice track as the others have said.
To be honest, the one without MBC sounds cleaner but that's because I think you've gone overboard on the one with MBC. It's got potential and I think if you just gently add some compression to certain parts rather than the final track it will do the trick :) |
|
|
|
|
