Compressor Types - their usage?

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

NVM

[Scrubbing Monkeys]

I am learning recently that release curves play a big roll in how a comp sounds. I am not talking about release time but the curve it uses over that time. It could be linear, fast start slow fnish or slow start fast finish. This is a very individual thing and mosts comps give you no control over this.

More and more I am using compressors to make things jump out verses keeping them in line. Think of it this way...

Put comp on the drum bus. Set the attack so it allows the full snare transient to pass then clamps down on everything untill just before the next snare hit. then repeat. I need that release to keep everything down but then let up very quickly just before the snare. This causes the snare to jump out at you.

Most comps have controlls to cover how that compression starts but not how it gets out. A release knee if you will.

Here's where characteristics of different compressors are very important.

[Stefken]

I find these insightfull:
http://quantum-music.ca/wordpress/index ... use-which/

https://youtu.be/qe7OEVKkLJQ

[Caine123]

really really great info! so before speculating here is my first test with MIX BUS!

Ratio 4:1
Threshold +10dB
Attack 10 ms
Release Auto
GR -3db to -4db
MakupGain +3dB

Dry
https://clyp.it/4ajflfk3

WET (Waves SSL)
https://clyp.it/yx4srbrg


WET (Fabfilter C2)
https://clyp.it/0firohbj


which one do you like more? why do both sound in my opinion really different?

[Niowiad]

I can definitely recommend this beautiful mini-course to those who are interested.
https://www.groove3.com/tutorials/Compressors-Explained

[jochicago]

Compressors are tough because the settings are not naturally intuitive. There are many ways to look at them, and I would argue that all these ways are right.

Outside of getting the settings right (attack, release, knee, etc), the modeled plugins also have a layer of analog effects to mimic the sound of the hardware units. They will follow the characteristics of their hardware (FET, Opto) but they also have analog-style nuances. For instance, here is the engineer that worked on modeling the SSL 4000 compressor for Waves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eXJT-errPw

He basically says that getting the settings to match was the beginning, but the sound came together when they also incorporated a model for:
Noise
Sound of the channels (hum)
Inherent distortion

So, modeled plugins are going to have more character than just the obvious settings. But modern DAW and compressor also let you manipulate these things and have more control. Like the examples I gave of the MJUC that also has timbre and drive to shape the tone, or the Scheps Omni that has a saturator that works similarly to the inherent distortion in the SSL plugin.

I think that getting good at compression in today’s world means really digging into what makes compressors work and using the new era of compressors and coloring plugins that give you the reigns to make music, without being on the rails set by old-school units that had less knobs (more out of hardware limitations than it being a feature).

Not to say there’s anything wrong with having a go-to compressor for a particular purpose. Just that technology-wise we are a long way ahead of LA2A being “a great compressor”. I think by today’s standards the LA2A is a museum piece compared to something like a Fabfilter C2.


RE: why do both sound in my opinion really different?
Even if you get the settings exactly the same (and I don't think you did), they are on different algorithms.

Also, a modern Mastering compressor is pristinely clean. An SSL modeled plugin is not pristine, it has analog artifacts to make it more similar to the hardware unit. Having inherent noise, hum and distortion is not necessarily "better". Some people feel it helps glue the mix together. But a "mastering" compressor is supposed to be transparent, so you can apply color and effects separately and use the mastering compressor for transient management.

Again, not saying that the SSL mastering compressor is bad, just that it comes with analog modeling built in that you can't control. If you wanted to glue your tracks with some analog modeling, then using something like that Presonus Console Shaper is going to run circles on whatever that SSL compressor is doing to simulate analog artifacts.

[s28]

I understand the basics of compression, finally, more or less. A compressor makes the softer passages louder and the louder passages softer

so, in other words, you still don't understand compression

compressor makes louder passages softer, and leaves softer ones untouched. so, everything gets quieter. you then do "makeup gain" to bring things that are softer, to the same level they were before, but since the difference between "softer" and "louder" is now less (because compressor, err, compressed it), the passages that were softer, are now "louder".

So since all compressors essentially work the same way (unless I'm missing something) what is TRULY the difference? Or is it all just marketing hype?

in the grand scheme of things, not much. a compressor will generally sound like a compressor, give or take. but there may be many subtle differences, such as:
1) compressor knee (compressor starts compressing earlier but not in full force)
2) attack/release shape (how it sounds while compressing)
3) program dependency (some compressors may react to various sound sources differently)
4) lots of other small things

if you have Klanghelm DC8C 2, you can experiment with all of these and hear the difference for yourself.

Well, then I'm using my Fabfilter multi band compressor all wrong. What I do with each band (depending on the source material) does not match your description, at least not exactly. Now it's possible that I'm simply not expressing myself properly, terminology wise, but I do know what a compressor does when I use it the way I use it. And it most certainly doesn't leave soft passages untouched. Now, maybe that's the makeup gain you're referring to.

Regardless, when outside of multi band versus single band across, I'm just not hearing the big difference between what each compressor does and I have quite a number of them. And I don't use any one particular compressor for one single thing unless I absolutely know I need a multi band compressor because of a sound having highs and lows. But all the LA compressors, it's all the same to me. I don't hear anything that I can definitively say is a big difference in sound.

I'm just glad that I can finally hear what a compressor actually does to a sound at all. Some of them, depending on the settings, are so subtle that they hardly make any difference at all.

I do know that I prefer soft knee over hard knee settings for those compressors that have them.

The only real difference I find in compressors is work flow. How easy or hard each one is to use. There, I find tons of difference. I find Fabfilter's to be the easiest to use. I find this true for all their plugins, which is why I use them more than any other. Whereas I find Waves stuff really clunky to use. Izotope, somewhere in between.

But sound wise? Damned if I can tell them apart in a mix.

Your definitely missing something as is the OP. It's not simply about raising lower parts and reducing higher parts, it's about compressing for tone and also movement in the groove. For example, a vari-mu compressor has program dependent attack and release so the curves you get are very different to that of a standard compressor, the way in which it reacts is different, so on a buss with multiple drums say, you can alter the groove in a specific way.

Those kind of things may not be of importance to you in your music or sound but it's clear to hear why they would be for someone else, at least I think it is. It's the same as lots of plugins that get released that don't have a sound that appeals to me, but I can totally understand why someone else making different styles of music would utilize it.

Compressing for tone - sometimes it's not even about doing hardly any compression, it's about getting the tone from that compressor. If I take say airwindows pressure, and abletons stock compressor for example and compress something heavily there is a huge difference in overall character. Even at lesser settings it's very audible. Perhaps listen in headphones if you really can't hear it.

Anyway these things might not matter to you and that's absolutely fine, I just want to outline that there definitely is a difference between all these compression styles, circuits and models so that anyone very new to this doesn't think that simply matching attack and release times or knees on any comp will yield the same results as another.

There's obviously a place for both modern and older compression styles. Modern, flexible compressor plugins or something simple like the VCL-4 plugin are neither better or worse than one another, simply different and will result in different sound, go with what works for you. I think to suggest it's 2018 so why aren't we all using modern compressors misses the point for a lot of people. Those older compressor topology and even newer ones provide very different characteristics, useful to some, not to others. Find what works for you but understand what's out there. I think regardless of what year it is just experiment and find tools that click with you.

[Fleer]

So I guess between FabFilter Pro-C2, Pro-MB and Slate FG-Stress I can cover pretty much everything.

[s28]

So I guess between FabFilter Pro-C2, Pro-MB and Slate FG-Stress I can cover pretty much everything.

You can certainly cover a lot of ground with those! The only way to answer that though is for you to know what else is out there and if that gives you something you can't achieve with these. No one else can answer that though.

[jochicago]

So I guess between FabFilter Pro-C2, Pro-MB and Slate FG-Stress I can cover pretty much everything.

The only way to answer that though is for you to know what else is out there and if that gives you something you can't achieve with these. No one else can answer that though.

That's a pretty mystical perspective.

I think properly learning Fabfilter Pro C2 can take years on its own, because the compressor is so rich and versatile. I would probably offer the opposite advise: if you have a powerful tool then hone your tool, live and breath it, learn it until you can wield it blindfolded.

You can sample other compressors for fun and inspiration, but keep a goal of mastering a good one. Compressors along with EQs are the core of all mixing work IMO. You want to get really good at both.

[MogwaiBoy]

Dry
https://clyp.it/4ajflfk3

WET (Waves SSL)
https://clyp.it/yx4srbrg

WET (Fabfilter C2)
https://clyp.it/0firohbj

which one do you like more? why do both sound in my opinion really different?

At first I lthought the Waves version was more cohesive ("glue") but then about halfway when the synth comes in, the Fabfilter copes much better with presenting all the elements. Pro-C gets my pick. Bearing in mind that I am only listening on crappy built-in laptop speakers right now though, so my answer could change when I try it on my monitors and AKGs.

[s28]

So I guess between FabFilter Pro-C2, Pro-MB and Slate FG-Stress I can cover pretty much everything.

The only way to answer that though is for you to know what else is out there and if that gives you something you can't achieve with these. No one else can answer that though.

That's a pretty mystical perspective.

I think properly learning Fabfilter Pro C2 can take years on its own, because the compressor is so rich and versatile. I would probably offer the opposite advise: if you have a powerful tool then hone your tool, live and breath it, learn it until you can wield it blindfolded.

You can sample other compressors for fun and inspiration, but keep a goal of mastering a good one. Compressors along with EQs are the core of all mixing work IMO. You want to get really good at both.

Yeah no doubt, I wasn't saying don't learn what you got and I totally agree with learning just a few tools. All I meant was that they mentioned with this set up, they can cover everything, in general terms of compression; yes most definitely, all i meant is that there may be something out there that provides something different that you don't get with these, I think that's a fair statement.

I'm completely an advocate of learning a few tools. I hope that makes what I meant clearer! I don't think I was saying the opposite to only learn a few tools, more about the different compression types.

[Armagibbon]

Good advice to learn how the comps sound and what they do on material. Real bad f*ckin advice to grab a comp for vocals just cus some cat says its good for that. Dont do that shit it wastes time. Try all the comps you can get. Try em all on everything you got. Learn the flow not the genre.

Peace.

[Caine123]

Dry
https://clyp.it/4ajflfk3

WET (Waves SSL)
https://clyp.it/yx4srbrg

WET (Fabfilter C2)
https://clyp.it/0firohbj

which one do you like more? why do both sound in my opinion really different?

At first I lthought the Waves version was more cohesive ("glue") but then about halfway when the synth comes in, the Fabfilter copes much better with presenting all the elements. Pro-C gets my pick. Bearing in mind that I am only listening on crappy built-in laptop speakers right now though, so my answer could change when I try it on my monitors and AKGs.

Let me know