I've mixed through a compressor with decent results. I was curious about mixing through some form of tape and/or console saturator plugin as well as or in place of a compressor. Anyone have any success mixing through a saturator with or in place of a compressor? Would starting your mix with something like the McDSP AC1 (console saturator) + AC2 (tape saturator) + a compressor be overkill (assuming I am only kissing the tracks with each)?
Thanks for the tips.
Mixing through compressor and/or tape saturator question.
-
- KVRer
- 22 posts since 10 Oct, 2011
-
- KVRAF
- 3086 posts since 4 May, 2012
I presume, E-Z_Rankin is placing compression/saturation on the master buss channel during mixing. Not a practice I would recommend. Get the mix balanced clean first.
-
- KVRAF
- 3506 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England
He means putting a compressor on the master while writing/mixing etc.
Most will tell you mixing through anything is a bad idea, but my personal feeling is to go nuts with it and see if it works! I've been really happy with the results when mixing into full blown distortion let alone compression/saturation. Check Boiler Room on my Soundcloud for an example. Putting ludicrous amounts of distortion, an artificial noise floor, and all sorts of nasty shit on the master was the very first thing I did. I mean, it's not something I'd do every time, but in this case it got me a sound I'd never have arrived at had I done things the 'right' way.
Most will tell you mixing through anything is a bad idea, but my personal feeling is to go nuts with it and see if it works! I've been really happy with the results when mixing into full blown distortion let alone compression/saturation. Check Boiler Room on my Soundcloud for an example. Putting ludicrous amounts of distortion, an artificial noise floor, and all sorts of nasty shit on the master was the very first thing I did. I mean, it's not something I'd do every time, but in this case it got me a sound I'd never have arrived at had I done things the 'right' way.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 22 posts since 10 Oct, 2011
I know a number of engineers doing this technique. Essentially after setting track levels, I create a stereo submix that sums all my tracks before heading off to the master. On that submix channel I'll insert a compressor (usually one suited for mix buss compression), set it to lightly compress about (ratio of 1.5 to 2.5 no more) 2 to 3 dB gain reduction max. Essentially just enough to help "glue" the tracks together. Then I start working on my tracks, processing etc. Thus mixing 'through' a compressor from the start.
Now I've herd of people adding a saturation plugin on the mix buss and mixing into that. Setting it up as if you were in analogue going to tape or through a console preamp.
Now I've herd of people adding a saturation plugin on the mix buss and mixing into that. Setting it up as if you were in analogue going to tape or through a console preamp.
-
- KVRAF
- 3086 posts since 4 May, 2012
Ah yes. That makes sense to me. A little parallel compression. Also interesting when sending channels by varying amounts to create a different mix to the one hitting the master channel. It's a nice trick to use with multiband distortion on industrial mixes too.
I think the main advantage in processing a saturated parallel submix is that one can still maintain dynamics by preserving transients more than if the master channel itself is saturated.
Whilst I would still advise avoiding saturation of the master during a typical mix, I did create a template with 32 channels feeding 32 more, upon which tube saturation plugins were placed. Then each original channel also feeds the two neighbouring channels by around 2% to (weakly) emulate crosstalk. It sounds quite nice and allows for saturating individual channels just by driving the faders - rather than fiddling around with the mouse to tweak input levels.
I think the main advantage in processing a saturated parallel submix is that one can still maintain dynamics by preserving transients more than if the master channel itself is saturated.
Whilst I would still advise avoiding saturation of the master during a typical mix, I did create a template with 32 channels feeding 32 more, upon which tube saturation plugins were placed. Then each original channel also feeds the two neighbouring channels by around 2% to (weakly) emulate crosstalk. It sounds quite nice and allows for saturating individual channels just by driving the faders - rather than fiddling around with the mouse to tweak input levels.
-
- KVRAF
- 7578 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
I like mixing into a compressor. But I don't like mixing into a saturator. I usually save saturation after the compression is okay, with EQ here and there between. And if I even use saturation on the master, it's usually very light, something like 1-2dB peak reduction, with limiting after. You really should be mixing with an idea of what will happen on the mix bus, before making any settings to the mix bus effects, as a couple of decibels of ill-used effect can mess up the midrange.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 22 posts since 10 Oct, 2011
Yeah I would assume mixing into saturation would necessitate that the saturation plugin would have to be only minutely noticeable on the mix, just a sprinkle of color. AC2 seems to be quite subtle. Of course I suppose you can just apply saturation at the end of the mix or at the mastering stage. Another idea I thought of would be to clean up the tracks, then render all tracks with some light tape saturation, then re-import them and start the mixdown from there. The idea being trying emulate that the tracks were actually recorded to tape and thus picked up the odd harmonics.
Tube saturation is another thing as well.
Tube saturation is another thing as well.
-
- KVRAF
- 2118 posts since 1 Apr, 2004 from Athens, Greece
If you have to ask then don't mix through a compressor yet. Complete a few clean mixes, and then after you really learn how a compressor sounds you may experiment with mixing through it.
Personally, I prefer to mix without a compressor on the master bus. Sure, many people will tell you that it can be faster if you decide to do so, but if later on you decide to change the settings of this compressor then the whole mix will fall apart, costing you more time to fix it.
I hope I'm making sense, it's a difficult time for me.
Personally, I prefer to mix without a compressor on the master bus. Sure, many people will tell you that it can be faster if you decide to do so, but if later on you decide to change the settings of this compressor then the whole mix will fall apart, costing you more time to fix it.
I hope I'm making sense, it's a difficult time for me.
-
- KVRAF
- 7578 posts since 17 Feb, 2005
I think of mix saturation like, if it is gonna saturate, it better sound good.
But why all the saturation? Are you trying to increase headroom, or is the tone the factor here? You gotta remember that if you saturate all your tracks versus just the master, this is two totally different sounds. If the tape multitrack is what you are thinking of, you should try a little reduction with a high shelf on every track, then a tape saturator on the mix followed by a high shelf boost. That should bring more tone to the mids, but the mix has to be right. You might be looking for more trouble this way raher than using a multiband saturator, which will filter the mids on the mix bus and not require any track shuffling. But if you want headroom, use a limiter on each track.
But why all the saturation? Are you trying to increase headroom, or is the tone the factor here? You gotta remember that if you saturate all your tracks versus just the master, this is two totally different sounds. If the tape multitrack is what you are thinking of, you should try a little reduction with a high shelf on every track, then a tape saturator on the mix followed by a high shelf boost. That should bring more tone to the mids, but the mix has to be right. You might be looking for more trouble this way raher than using a multiband saturator, which will filter the mids on the mix bus and not require any track shuffling. But if you want headroom, use a limiter on each track.
-
- KVRist
- 407 posts since 24 Aug, 2004 from under the big oak tree
You can always use a vintage type/emu buss comp on master, then you will get some subtle saturation too.
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 22 posts since 10 Oct, 2011
I'm gonna try mixing into the McDSP AC-1 (which does a very subtle analog console emulation saturation) + a compressor both on the 2-Bus. Both plugins will be just touching the mixing lightly for a little color and cohesiveness. I'll probably try out some tape/tube/console saturation effects on individual tracks as well to see how it sounds.
-
- KVRer
- 20 posts since 24 May, 2012
The general idea of mixing with a compressor strapped on the master is to compress less, not more. In this case, compression is there to lend a realistic sense of how the song will end up sounding after it's mastered and maybe shoved through the radio, so you don't unnecessarily overdo it before the mastering engineer can ruin it himself. It can also point to subtle problems that might otherwise only show up later and be less fixable. The compressor is - when used this way - is not printed on the final mix. It makes perfect sense. Just as you work the processors in FX chains together with respect to the way one processor depends on and impacts the rest in the chain, and beyond that to the rest of the mix, compression on the mix is helpful for the same principle, working with everything together.
I'm with Cron. Stick a damn LFO'ed ring mod on the whole buss if you want. If you don't discount the idea of two-track creativity altogether, then of course it will be better to do it against the mix-in-process so you can tailor the entirety together, including what's happening on the master. Compressor, tape saturation, whatever, if you think ahead and there is a a particular treatment you already have in mind for the two-track, might as well stick it in now. I'm sure a lot of us can relate to those moments where everything is sounding great through a certain effect or process *except* one thing, maybe a crash, that doesn't playing nice with it. You can prep for it when you know.
Analog-style sat of the type you refer to meets this all in principal, but doesn't need to be distinguished from any other processes as unique. Funky compressors can operate on signal just the same way a dedicated sat plug might, for all practical purposes. Likewise going mild with tape/tube sat can acting no different than how a funky compressor would. When you sat, you compress; when you compress, you might also sat. That's my take on it, and not prescriptive.
I'm with Cron. Stick a damn LFO'ed ring mod on the whole buss if you want. If you don't discount the idea of two-track creativity altogether, then of course it will be better to do it against the mix-in-process so you can tailor the entirety together, including what's happening on the master. Compressor, tape saturation, whatever, if you think ahead and there is a a particular treatment you already have in mind for the two-track, might as well stick it in now. I'm sure a lot of us can relate to those moments where everything is sounding great through a certain effect or process *except* one thing, maybe a crash, that doesn't playing nice with it. You can prep for it when you know.
Analog-style sat of the type you refer to meets this all in principal, but doesn't need to be distinguished from any other processes as unique. Funky compressors can operate on signal just the same way a dedicated sat plug might, for all practical purposes. Likewise going mild with tape/tube sat can acting no different than how a funky compressor would. When you sat, you compress; when you compress, you might also sat. That's my take on it, and not prescriptive.
-
- KVRist
- 253 posts since 15 Nov, 2009 from Chicago
Just a question. I was always told not to mix into a compressor. If you have a 3rd party master your work for you how does this affect their job even though you turn off the compressor before rendering? I'm guessing an experienced Mastering Engineer can tell if it's been mixed through a compressor and does it affect how they do their job in a negative way?
I keep a compressor and limiter on master just to check how it would sound. Sometimes forget to turn them off while mixing. Probably not a big deal though.
I keep a compressor and limiter on master just to check how it would sound. Sometimes forget to turn them off while mixing. Probably not a big deal though.
-
- KVRer
- 20 posts since 24 May, 2012
Mastering Engineers are getting audio files that are clipped, converted, and already compressed to hell. There's a boring clip on youtube with mastering engineer Chris Athens. The random track he happens to be working on in the video was summed to mono due to human error on the other end. I don't know what a ME can establish about how a track was produced and with what level of detail. But it seems like simply getting clean, raw, audio is enough for them to be happy with and all they ask for.