Mixing and Compression - Great Bob O. Post

[Bob Olhsson]

There's no question that when doing anything with audio it's crucial to make judgments with our ears rather than with our eyes. Unfortunately it's also painfully easy to fool our ears by confusing something that is louder but worse sounding for something that actually sounds better. When you remove the hype factor of greater level, turning the eq. and compression off and simply turning the fader up is frequently a path to much more compelling sound.

The other thing I've learned the hard way is that tracking with compression and limiting frequently leads to more compression, limiting and gain riding being required in a mix to achieve the same results. It's also amazing how loud a really really clean mix can be made without sounding distorted.

[Kenny Gioia]

OK. Bob didn't start this thread but I wanted to comment on what he said here.

I agree 1,000%

On the first part, I used to compress stuff all the time until I realized that I was just enjoying the volume boost I was getting. Just making the Kick or Snare louder sounded better and was a lot easier.

So before you just compress it. Turn it up.

The second part, I was just thinking about this week. I was mixing a project and realized it didn't sound like a mix until I started automating it.

I know years ago it wasn't the case. I used to be able to set the faders and maybe do a few rides. But it wasn't crucial. Nowadays it is. Everything has such a small tolerance to fit into that 3dB of dynamic range that you have to constantly be riding stuff to hear it all.

It's obviously easier with open sounding productions where the vocal could be up or down 2-3dB and still be heard fine without killing everything else.

[Pimp-X]

It's obviously easier with open sounding productions where the vocal could be up or down 2-3dB and still be heard fine without killing everything else.


A very important point, that.

[Doylemusic]

Oh great, just when I was starting to think about tracking with compression. Thanks :Cry:

[David Aurora]

Oh great, just when I was starting to think about tracking with compression. Thanks :Cry:

theres nothing wrong with tracking with compression, the point is to do it wisely. for example, if youre trying to compress your vocal on the way in to sound like a finished product in a pop production.....you're walking a dodgy road. if youre gently compressing to maximise your s/n ratio and avoid clipping converters, youre doing the right thing.

great point bob about the loudness thing with clean mixes. i cant remember how many times the rough mix on day 1 of tracking with no processing sounded louder, smoother and punchier than the final master. of course, it isnt bright as fuck and distorting, so the clients think it sounds unprofessional, but people with ears notice :lol:

its funny, this topic comes up over and over again but it always strikes me as really fucking crucial knowledge to keep people thinking about

[Doylemusic]

theres nothing wrong with tracking with compression, the point is to do it wisely. for example, if youre trying to compress your vocal on the way in to sound like a finished product in a pop production.....you're walking a dodgy road. if youre gently compressing to maximise your s/n ratio and avoid clipping converters, youre doing the right thing.

Yeah, I know. I was just being funny (or not I guess). I'm not planning on compin on the way in for finished product. More for the s/n ratio, clipping, and a touch of smoothing and color.

[Bob Olhsson]

... I was mixing a project and realized it didn't sound like a mix until I started automating it...Compression fucks with the performance of everybody who subsequently records against the track.

[mousdrvr]

Compression fucks with the performance of everybody who subsequently records against the track.

OMG!

Thank you Bob!

I'm printing that out and taping it on the wall.



-mous

[radiationroom]

On my recent remix of Earwig's "Used Kids", I wound up turning ALL of the compression off including the two-buss. And it was plenty loud.

Remix details coming soon.

[Nutmeg]

I like to give the vocal talent a pre compressor signal in his cans.
This gives him better control and a better idea about his performance.

Of course in days of ITB not every body is able to splitt signals aas easy than with a console.

[glitchfactor]

I'd like to know what percentage of people here actually track with compression on digital systems as opposed to analog systems.

When you're recording at 24bit, obviously that headroom - s/n issue isn't really a problem.

So for those going straight to DAW, no tape, do you compress?

I personally feel that I can do all that stuff later, and fix it later if I've made a poor decision.

Thoughts?

[Bob Olhsson]

I've got the sweetest pair of very modified LA3as on the planet but I've completely stopped using them for tracking.

[Kenny Gioia]

I always compress to digital.

I don't do it for the S/N ratio thing though. I do it because most singers are way too dynamic without it. I couldn't get a tracking level.

Same with Bass.

I do prefer to ride the vocal in the mix rather than slap on more compression. Although I am drooling about Bob's LA3a's.

[weedywet]

somewhat off topic... but I have never liked La3as.

they sound to me like if an La2a had a bad sounding amp... oh wait, that IS what they are...



I have to admit, I compress almost everything (except drums, I hate compression on close drum mics) at least a little.

In comparison to most people THESE days, i don't compress a lot. But I do a bit.

[CaptainHook]

So for those going straight to DAW, no tape, do you compress?

I personally feel that I can do all that stuff later, and fix it later if I've made a poor decision.

Thoughts?

I've said it before, but the closer I can get the instruments
sounding like the final 'mix' BEFORE hitting digital, the better.
As soon as you hit the convertors any compressing/eq you may
have to do is worse for it. At least in my experience.

And a little in the analog world goes much further for me than
a LOT done in digital.

[E.M.]

I always compress to digital.

I don't do it for the S/N ratio thing though. I do it because most singers are way too dynamic without it. I couldn't get a tracking level


True. Tracking a vocalist without any compression makes you concentrate too much on the recording levels.. closer to mic..further away from mic.. and so on. Disturbs the performence as well.You might even fuck up a great take just because suddenly the singer gets very loud and it distorts.I know i have. This is why i like to use compression when tracking a vocal. Nothing heavy though.

[Bob Olhsson]

In 24 bit audio the recording levels are not an issue at all provided you set levels to error on the low side. Most of the singers I've known say hearing compression in the phones really screws up their performance and ability to "work" the mike. Obviously performers who have never worked without hearing compression wouldn't know.

Finally, don't take my or anybody's word for it.

Try it yourself and listen!

[dandeurloo]

I compress (1176 or la2a) vocals, bass and acoustic always on the way in to digital. Helps from cliping on things that are super dynamic. I often find myself setting the compression for each section as well. So if the vocal is up closer and quite it gets one setting and then I will reset the comp for the chorus performance. I also do adjustments sometime as I am tracking. So if I have time in between prechorus and chorus I will make the move in analog. that way the singer or whatever can still get a full take and vibe happening on the song. I would rather get it close right away.

[Kenny Gioia]

In 24 bit audio the recording levels are not an issue at all provided you set levels to error on the low side. Most of the singers I've known say hearing compression in the phones really screws up their performance and ability to "work" the mike. Obviously performers who have never worked without hearing compression wouldn't know.


"Work the Mike". Oh. I've heard about THOSE singers. :very happy:



Finally, don't take my or anybody's word for it.

Try it yourself and listen!

Finally? Where ya' goin?


I often find myself setting the compression for each section as well. So if the vocal is up closer and quiet it gets one setting and then I will reset the comp for the chorus performance.

I do a similar thing except I change the preamp during different sections. Although it obviously affects compression. It's hard to get "one setting fits all". If you do, you're probably using too much.

[Bob Olhsson]

Not going anywhere!

I set up different compression and eq. for different parts too however I found I didn't need to as often when I tracked vocals without compression.

Maybe I should describe my experience of moving into digital recording because it's pretty different from what folks might expect.

I was doing 24 track analog until around 1990. I left music right before the DAT machines came out and never did anything but film dialog and sound effects work in 16 bit production although I also returned to mastering because a bunch of my friends had become unhappy with the results they had been getting trying to make decent sounding CDs.

Around 2003 I walked into a music session for the first time in over 13 years. It was 24 bit Pro Tools and we were trying to make a late '40s style recording with mostly ribbons, all tube preamps, etc. We were also recording live without headphones.

The experience completely changed my outlook. Over the next few years I slowly let go of tracking with compression or eq. and learned that Pro Tools sounds way better if I never go over -6. I also discovered that recordings made this way were lots easier to mix. (I needed all the help I could get because it had been a long time and I don't have the chops I had 30 years ago.) Thankfully it seems one's ears keep on improving with age.

At this point, I really suspect we took a bit of a wrong turn in the late 1960s and threw out some important advantages of previous recording methods in our rush to embrace new technology. (and believe me, I was leading the pack!)

I'm not a big fan of trying to sound retro or contemporary. I want recordings to connect with people and will happily use any technique that can accomplish that goal.

[Mo Facta]

I use compression tracking vocals only. Bass is not generally a problem unless the bass player is horrible and his instrument equally so, in which case I would use a compressor. Other than that everything goes in clean. I find that I can get a more natural sounding compression from using a good pre with a good transient response. It really does make the world of difference and I firmly believe that using the right pre in combination with the right mic for the right sound is paramount. Digital recording has it's restrictions so the front end is the most importatat thing, in my view.

This is my first post! Hello to all from South Africa! You guys would be shocked to see some of the world-class studios that are just sitting here doing nothing. Neve-consoles, you name it...

Thanks!

[Kenny Gioia]

Digital recording has it's restrictions so the front end is the most importatat thing, in my view.



It's the absence of the back end that has made the front so important.


This is my first post! Hello to all from South Africa! You guys would be shocked to see some of the world-class studios that are just sitting here doing nothing. Neve-consoles, you name it...


Welcome. What a shame about the consoles though. :Mad:

[Doylemusic]

You guys would be shocked to see some of the world-class studios that are just sitting here doing nothing. Neve-consoles, you name it...

Thanks!

I'll send you my address, just send a console on over. Not that I'm going to use it or anything, just want to sell it to Kenny!:lol:

[Mo Facta]

Ha ha. I wish man. Can you read Afrikaans? All the knobs are labelled in it.

It's such a tragedy, seriously. Basically, the South African Broadcasting Association, when it was built in the 70's by the BBC and the apartheid government, put in all the highest quality equipment they could at the time because they were spending British cash. But since then, after regime changes, drops in maintenance quality, or even technicians who know how to service these things, all this great equipment is just sitting there and rotting in the basement. Studer analog multi-tracks, old LA-2As, the list goes on. I worked on this Neve the other day and half the channels aren't working and everything has either a crackle or a hum. The rooms are great though, real quality. There's about 5 massive studios and who knows how many more minor ones in the complex, all being 'upgraded' to Alsihad and I can only imagine what's going to happen to all that classic gear. In fact, I know of some British producers and engineers who fly here to SA, use the studios and fly back and it costs them less than actually using a studio of similar quality in the UK. Tsk tsk tsk. We're sitting on a gold mine but no one's got a shovel...

Check out http://www.rpstudios.co.za/studios.htm if you wanna see.:grin:

[elroy jetson]

I'm doing post on a show from south africa. Although i wish i could be doing it in a studio over there. very nice stuff. you should try and snag some cheap gear when they decide to "upgrade" to pro tools. Just try to sell them on how awesome the digirack plugs are and that they don't need those La2a's anymore.:D :Wink:

Edit: as for the topic of discussion, I to have been slowly moving away from tracking with compression and i'm loving it. not that i had great compressors to track with in the first place though...

[dandeurloo]

Bob or Kenny or anyone here's a question.

My Mastering guy works with me alot which is great. he has me fix small things here and there that may be hard for him to work with or to A B against each other then we choose which one we like the most.

On my last project he thought the overall mixes had to much dynamic(what????). Anyway, I have to agree with him he has great ears and is a smart guy. He told me to try and do more compression on the indvidual tracks instead of trying to do it across my 2 buss or having him do it.

I am assuming you have a few thoughts about this. Now I am compressing the moajority of tracks a few db and doing more automation which I think is getting a better result.

Does this make any sense or am I still searching.

[lebouche]

I dont' compress on the way in... I've tried but I'm still not sure I really GET compression. Even though I use it at work evreyday.

I don't find it hard to get safe good levels on my DAW. I got some really cool distortion the other day on my pre but none on the digital ins.

[Bob Olhsson]

I'd try JUST doing the automation.

I've found that if I've compressed on the way in, I'll need to do lots more automation and compression in the mix.

[nobby]

I'd try JUST doing the automation.

I've found that if I've compressed on the way in, I'll need to do lots more automation and compression in the mix.

I'm probably misreading you, but I don't understand.

I compress vox on the way in and I have to do less compression and automating in the mix.

Vox is pretty much the only thing I compress on the way in because it tends to be dynamicky and it's the center of the mix.

[IntelDoc]

I usually only track vocals with compression going into Pro Tools. I "prefer" to track everything clean going in and have that ability to hammer it later if needed. I do like to EQ going in so I do not have to do much later. Why EQ it in the mix, get it right and commit to start is what I like to do. There is that decision though of "Oh shit! I eq'd that too high, now what?" Well with sample enhancement I think you can get away with it.

The only time I really hammer compression going in is if I have a room mic, or mono mic that is yelling at me for a distressor on it. That is always fun to have in case ya need it. NUKE MODE of course. ;-)

Otherwise I tend to track clean and mix with the outboard. Just depends on the project though.

Best,

Doc

[Bob Olhsson]

I'm probably misreading you, but I don't understand.

I compress vox on the way in and I have to do less compression and automating in the mix.Yes because the singer will have more control because of what they hear. The more control you can get without adding the distortion from a compressor, the ballsier the vocal will sound.

We couldn't do this with analog because of the tape hiss.

[lebouche]

Yes because the singer will have more control because of what they hear. The more control you can get without adding the distortion from a compressor, the ballsier the vocal will sound.

We couldn't do this with analog because of the tape hiss.


There you have it.....Bob says "Digital is better than analog".

New sig anyone?:grin:

[Bob Olhsson]

I think digital could be better than analog. It just almost never is because most people and manufacturers treat it as only a way to save money.

[nobby]

Yes because the singer will have more control because of what they hear. The more control you can get without adding the distortion from a compressor, the ballsier the vocal will sound.

We couldn't do this with analog because of the tape hiss.

I can't speak for everyone but I've practiced the vox so many times before I record them that what I hear in the way of the tube mic, tube pre, and compressor doesn't effect it.

Add to that, in my case 99% of the distortion is upstream of the mic :grin:

My thinking is that he compressor makes it easier to hear my vox past the guitars, but it's possible that my cue mixes could be better, and I don't have world class monitoring.

Also I figure since I'm going to use my best hardware compressor anyway since it sounds better than any of the plugins, I'd just as soon not pass it through an ADC.

I'm always open to trying new things, though. The audio engine in the new platform I'm using makes a big difference. I tried fooling around with recording vox peaking at -15dB with no compression during tracking and it came out pretty good. Even compressing it later with a free "1176" plug :Coolio:

Back in the 20th century using 15ips analog, I'd record vox into the red... with compression.

[CaptainHook]

Here's the thing, Bob is dealing with singers that actually
dynamically adjust the way they sing, and even use
mic technique depending on what they hear.

I have recorded many vocalists that i think sing 'well',
I enjoy their voice and they sing in tune. None of them
even heard of mic technique.

My experiments have shown most singers i work
with perform better when hearing their voice
with compression.

I've worked with ONE that doesn't and is better without.

Yet another sign of the times? :Roll eyes:

[Kenny Gioia]

Bob or Kenny or anyone here's a question.

My Mastering guy works with me alot which is great. he has me fix small things here and there that may be hard for him to work with or to A B against each other then we choose which one we like the most.

On my last project he thought the overall mixes had to much dynamic(what????). Anyway, I have to agree with him he has great ears and is a smart guy. He told me to try and do more compression on the indvidual tracks instead of trying to do it across my 2 buss or having him do it.

I am assuming you have a few thoughts about this. Now I am compressing the moajority of tracks a few db and doing more automation which I think is getting a better result.

Does this make any sense or am I still searching.

I haven't heard your mixes but this can make a lot of sense. There's only so much you can do in Mastering.

IMHO - There are 2 types of compression:

1. Automatic Gain Riding: This just keeps the level more even for those times when you're too lazy to ride the faders.

2. Pumping and Breathing Effect: This can't really be done by hand. It can definitely be a desired effect. And riding a snare track is pretty close to impossible.

Using a bit of both is usually optimal. You don't want to crush a vocal out of laziness but sometimes that up close compression can really bring out the intimacy.

Hope that helps.

[velvet]

I found out that sometimes the best result I can get is riding the fader or turning knob during recording the talent. By result I mean the easiest way to mix it. Some vocalists can not work the Mic. Some singers do. For those who can not, I am compensating with fader or knob on a Mic Pre. Ofcourse, I can use it only in case I know the song and recognize the critical parts of the song where singer usually goes louder or opposite. So I can turn knob or move fader before he starts doing that...
It was more helpfull than using a compressor quite often.

the different situation is, when I decide to record vocal with some fx, comp and EQ incl. That is not often at all. But sometimes I really like the vocal setup or gear chain for particular talent. If that "wow, that's it!" happens, I record a vocal track maybe or even if compressed EQed and/or distorted as hell, don' t touch it with comp or EQ any more and built all other tracks around this one.

With bass I always split the signal with DI box and record one track directly w.o. anythying. The other signal I might route to compressor and tapemachine. I have to allign those two bass tracks ofcourse. Sometimes I use amp or amp+cab too.

btw. I think that having a good cable is really a critical thing, when recording to digittal - especially dry bass or guit tracks for later re-amping. And from my experience one cable might be ok for recording through amp/cab or to tape, but the same cable might be not that good when recording to digital.