Your go-to compressor in 2023?

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

99% of compression duties can be done with the DAW's built in compressor. ReaComp is great. Ableton's Compressor and Glue Compressor are great. When my music sounds bad, it's never a compressor's fault.

From my experience i'd say 99% of comps CAN'T do what some units do.
For example - LA2A Tube,LA2A Grey ,PA VSC-2,PA V17 do magic no other plugin i've ever try will add to your mix.
In one word a good compressor saturator is irreplaceable in cases,where clean compression doesn't add anything interesting to digital sound.
Cheers

[Papuzzo]

99% of compression duties can be done with the DAW's built in compressor. ReaComp is great. Ableton's Compressor and Glue Compressor are great. When my music sounds bad, it's never a compressor's fault.

From my experience i'd say 99% of comps CAN'T do what some units do.
For example - LA2A Tube,LA2A Grey ,PA VSC-2,PA V17 do magic no other plugin i've ever try will add to your mix.
In one word a good compressor saturator is irreplaceable in cases,where clean compression doesn't add anything interesting to digital sound.
Cheers

I personally like to separate compression from saturation/distortion and have more control over both individually. But honestly no one ever hears the difference in blind tests between hardware vs software tests, this EQ vs that EQ tests, this compressor vs that compressor, and all the "MOJO" all these companies talk about with their products might be more marketing hype than anything else. For people getting started, it's better to focus on getting the "MOJO" from the musician and not plugins.

[Medenka]

But ReaComp and AC vs The Glue are completely different things! Not really comparable!
In general, you don't want or have to use 'analog' everywhere and on everything. Keeping things sounding 'digital' is OK, if that is what you want.
However, 'analog' devices really add magic that is impossible to create with other devices. So, if that is what you want, you have to know what to use and how, in order to achieve the desired result.
Focusing on the 'musician' means that you are dismissing this layer of production altogether. That is a mistake.

[Papuzzo]

But ReaComp and AC vs The Glue are completely different things! Not really comparable!
In general, you don't want or have to use 'analog' everywhere and on everything. Keeping things sounding 'digital' is OK, if that is what you want.
However, 'analog' devices really add magic that is impossible to create with other devices. So, if that is what you want, you have to know what to use and how, in order to achieve the desired result.
Focusing on the 'musician' means that you are dismissing this layer of production altogether. That is a mistake.

So, does the typical digital emulation of a Fairchild 660 compressor really capture a 100% replica of the magic of the physical hardware?

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

99% of compression duties can be done with the DAW's built in compressor. ReaComp is great. Ableton's Compressor and Glue Compressor are great. When my music sounds bad, it's never a compressor's fault.

From my experience i'd say 99% of comps CAN'T do what some units do.
For example - LA2A Tube,LA2A Grey ,PA VSC-2,PA V17 do magic no other plugin i've ever try will add to your mix.
In one word a good compressor saturator is irreplaceable in cases,where clean compression doesn't add anything interesting to digital sound.
Cheers

I personally like to separate compression from saturation/distortion and have more control over both individually. But honestly no one ever hears the difference in blind tests between hardware vs software tests, this EQ vs that EQ tests, this compressor vs that compressor, and all the "MOJO" all these companies talk about with their products might be more marketing hype than anything else. For people getting started, it's better to focus on getting the "MOJO" from the musician and not plugins.

I get your point.
Objectively virtual environment give more opportunities and tools - SYNTHS,FX,SO ON are 'better' for modern production,cause are cheapper and efficient.
And this is just the beginning of virtual era - 20 years ago many stuff was a dream.
I don't think analog vs digital is useful philosophy ,just today analog is too expensive compared to digital,even if there is advantages,people prefer 30 euro compressor delivering 95%,than 3000 to deliver 100%,unless you can justify the price using it.
Most advanced mixing guys use best from both worlds.
I test a lot of demos and when a compressor in first 60 seconds makes my sound warm or interesting (whatever it put on the track:) i like it more than just clean compression.
There is wisdom in that to separate saturation from compression,just some compressors are build with saturated dna,so why not to use both fx in a chain - save time,add color and makes me happy how easy boring sound become alive
Of course everything music related is subjective and things are not right-wrong,good-bad ...just fantasy and taste.
Cheers

[Papuzzo]

Let's look at this from the perspective of the last 25 years. For 25 years the Internet has been arguing over which DAW sounds the best, which compressor is the best, which EQ sounds the best, which reverb sounds the best, etc., etc. and what is the consensus? There isn't one. The closest thing to a consensus is the latest plugin or DAW sounds the best, until the next latest plugin or DAW comes around. Then one day someone tries ReaComp and realizes it does the same thing as the other 200 "best" compressors they bought. When they share this revelation on the Internet everyone comes back with Nuendo sounds 20-40% better (Who here remembers that grand debate?) and this just released compressor plugin sounds 20-40% better. My suggestion to those getting started? Unplug from the Internet and just trust your ears. Oh, and actually learn how to effectively use a compressor. And musicianship is 100X better than audio engineering at creating MOJO and magic. And GarageBand sounds just as good as ProTools. It's not the hammer, it's the carpenter.

[audiojunkie]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

I am far from expert and can't answer technically,but i can say why i bought some of my favorite vst compressors.
When start to upgrade the mix ,the instruments always get to the point of need to be pushed - like a full bag,where you want to put more stuff and need to smash some so to open space for others...
Not sure it's correct technically,just the way i perceive the job of compressors.
Compression give space and presence...
To me compression is the way to tune instruments one to another inside the mix,to change some characteristics ,so to fit one to another and to have their 'right' place and space in the sonic 'picture'...
I use my ears as tool,despite i watched many videos about hardware types,practical side to me is to hear it working in the mix.
For example LA2A is kind of tool you don't need to learn anything,just turn the knobs until you find the right value.
I adore Grey one,it's a bit slower,but the character it gives wow...as well two even three compressors with small amount of compression give more smoothness,than one used on everything...but i guess it's all matter of taste ...
I wish to hear advice from guys with more experience.
Correct me if i you think i am wrong about anything.
Glad to learn something here.
Cheers

[jamcat]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

Different compressors have different characteristics due to their topology. FET and VCA are going to be very quick, and are good at squashing fast transients, or accentuating them, depending on your attack speed. Optical and tube compressors are going to smooth things out in a more transparent way.

There isn’t really such a thing as a “drum compressor” or a “vocal compressor.” Or a “mixbus compressor” or a “mastering compressor.” There is just the compressor that is right for the particular task. It just happens to be that what engineers are trying to achieve with drums is typically best served by a FET or VCA, and what they are trying to achieve with vocals is best served by an optical or tube compressor. Or a FET or VCA. Or some combination of two or more of those compressors. Or maybe a Distressor, which is an “all of the above” compressor. Because there is only the compressor that is right for the job.

People like modeled compressors that look and behave like various real-world vintage compressors because you feel like a boss when you slap an “1176” or an “LA-2A” on the mix. But they’re all just code with artificial limitations and fancy graphics at this point. It’s just as easy to create an algorithm that does everything from snappy to smooth and beyond in the digital domain. But it’s not as fun.

[audiojunkie]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

Different compressors have different characteristics due to their topology. FET and VCA are going to be very quick, and are good at squashing fast transients, or accentuating them, depending on your attack speed. Optical and tube compressors are going to smooth things out in a more transparent way.

There isn’t really such a thing as a “drum compressor” or a “vocal compressor.” Or a “mixbus compressor” or a “mastering compressor.” There is just the compressor that is right for the particular task. It just happens to be that what engineers are trying to achieve with drums is typically best served by a FET or VCA, and what they are trying to achieve with vocals is best served by an optical or tube compressor. Or a FET or VCA. Or some combination of two or more of those compressors. Or maybe a Distressor, which is an “all of the above” compressor. Because there is only the compressor that is right for the job.

People like modeled compressors that look and behave like various real-world vintage compressors because you feel like a boss when you slap an “1176” or an “LA-2A” on the mix. But they’re all just code with artificial limitations at this point. It’s just as easy to create an algorithm that does everything from snappy to smooth and beyond in the digital domain. But it’s not as fun.

OK, so how does one find out which characteristics are best for what? I don't recall fact sheets for different compressors stating that they are quick and good for squashing fast transients (or accentuating them). It makes complete sense that one would need this type of compressor for that type of job, but how does one determine this when searching for a good compressor? For example, I'm grabbing a URL to a compressor that I know nothing about:

https://unitedplugins.com/RoyalCompressor

Based on the information on the page, how would someone know (without actually trying it), what this compressor is good for? Drums, vocals, bus, Mastering, etc, etc.?

I'm starting to get an idea about these things, but I still don't understand enough to be able to see an advertisement for a compressor and know what that compressor is good for. I've always just used what came with the DAW in the past. Now I want to learn and understand more.

[eLawnMust]

My 'Go To' Compressor-

[jamcat]

OK, so how does one find out which characteristics are best for what? I don't recall fact sheets for different compressors stating that they are quick and good for squashing fast transients (or accentuating them). It makes complete sense that one would need this type of compressor for that type of job, but how does one determine this when searching for a good compressor? For example, I'm grabbing a URL to a compressor that I know nothing about:

https://unitedplugins.com/RoyalCompressor

Based on the information on the page, how would someone know (without actually trying it), what this compressor is good for? Drums, vocals, bus, Mastering, etc, etc.?

I'm starting to get an idea about these things, but I still don't understand enough to be able to see an advertisement for a compressor and know what that compressor is good for. I've always just used what came with the DAW in the past. Now I want to learn and understand more.

Well, back in the day, people learned what gear was good for by using it. It's really a visceral, immediate thing when using real hardware. So perhaps the engineer would try the Discombobulator on the drums, and the producer would say, "That's too purple, man. I want something more green, like mushy peas." So the engineer would try the Hermanator, not because he knows what "green" sounds like, but because he knew it had a very different character than the Discombobulator. Over time, mythology about these units built up. And now that's why you ALWAYS use a Hermanator on drums, and a Discombobulator on guitar. But originally, these guys were just going on a tangible gut feeling of what sounded better for that performance.

So I'd say, rather than trying to memorize some textbook examples of what to use on which instruments, just listen to the part and try to think of what might need fixing. Or what you might want to bring out more. A lot of times, the performance dictates that. Maybe you like how the snare "pops" so you want to really highlight that. So you use a VCA compressor and you let the attack come through before it clamps down.

As for this Royal Compressor, just looking at the page, it says it's modeled on a British tube ("vari-mu") compressor from the 1960s. There's some visual cues like the green shade and the particular shape of the VU meter that developers usually use to drop hints.



From that bit of information, I'd say it's some sort of Altec compressor. Probably a 436 or 438. But they also name-dropped the Beatles, who were known to have used an Altec RS128 on Paul McCartney's bass. So perhaps it's based on that. Either way, they added a bunch of stuff not on the original unit.

So a little knowledge and a little research goes a long way.

Even without knowing the precise unit, just knowing it's a "vari-mu" (which just means tube) compressor really helps. So what would you use it on? Probably vocals, bass, piano, overheads, a room mic. Something you want to "warm up" and smooth out. Because, tubes.

Here's a couple links to articles about the different compressor types and what they're good for:

https://producelikeapro.com/blog/types- ... ompressors
https://www.stockmusicmusician.com/blog ... ompressors

[audiojunkie]

Cool! I'll read the articles.

[Papuzzo]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

Different compressors have different characteristics due to their topology. FET and VCA are going to be very quick, and are good at squashing fast transients, or accentuating them, depending on your attack speed. Optical and tube compressors are going to smooth things out in a more transparent way.

There isn’t really such a thing as a “drum compressor” or a “vocal compressor.” Or a “mixbus compressor” or a “mastering compressor.” There is just the compressor that is right for the particular task. It just happens to be that what engineers are trying to achieve with drums is typically best served by a FET or VCA, and what they are trying to achieve with vocals is best served by an optical or tube compressor. Or a FET or VCA. Or some combination of two or more of those compressors. Or maybe a Distressor, which is an “all of the above” compressor. Because there is only the compressor that is right for the job.

People like modeled compressors that look and behave like various real-world vintage compressors because you feel like a boss when you slap an “1176” or an “LA-2A” on the mix. But they’re all just code with artificial limitations at this point. It’s just as easy to create an algorithm that does everything from snappy to smooth and beyond in the digital domain. But it’s not as fun.

OK, so how does one find out which characteristics are best for what? I don't recall fact sheets for different compressors stating that they are quick and good for squashing fast transients (or accentuating them). It makes complete sense that one would need this type of compressor for that type of job, but how does one determine this when searching for a good compressor? For example, I'm grabbing a URL to a compressor that I know nothing about:

https://unitedplugins.com/RoyalCompressor

Based on the information on the page, how would someone know (without actually trying it), what this compressor is good for? Drums, vocals, bus, Mastering, etc, etc.?

I'm starting to get an idea about these things, but I still don't understand enough to be able to see an advertisement for a compressor and know what that compressor is good for. I've always just used what came with the DAW in the past. Now I want to learn and understand more.

There are hundred of youtube videos that explain how compressors work. I say watch a few and then just take a standard generic compressor that has a threshold control, ratio amount, attack time, release time and knee adjustment and put it on an unprocessed drum loop. Play with each control and listen to the subtle changes that occur to the transient and the overall volume. Then throw an unprocessed vocal clip in and repeat the exploration. Then on a mix. I think the best thing anyone can do is get really good with a compressor and an EQ and the only way to do that is practice and experimentation.

[audiojunkie]

This makes good sense. I’ve always been confused about what aspects make a drum compressor a drum compressor. What makes a good vocal compressor, and how is it different from a drum compressor. And then there is a mastering compressor—how is it different than the others? There are several different compressors that supposedly do different things from each other. How are they different from each other? Can anyone explain this?

Different compressors have different characteristics due to their topology. FET and VCA are going to be very quick, and are good at squashing fast transients, or accentuating them, depending on your attack speed. Optical and tube compressors are going to smooth things out in a more transparent way.

There isn’t really such a thing as a “drum compressor” or a “vocal compressor.” Or a “mixbus compressor” or a “mastering compressor.” There is just the compressor that is right for the particular task. It just happens to be that what engineers are trying to achieve with drums is typically best served by a FET or VCA, and what they are trying to achieve with vocals is best served by an optical or tube compressor. Or a FET or VCA. Or some combination of two or more of those compressors. Or maybe a Distressor, which is an “all of the above” compressor. Because there is only the compressor that is right for the job.

People like modeled compressors that look and behave like various real-world vintage compressors because you feel like a boss when you slap an “1176” or an “LA-2A” on the mix. But they’re all just code with artificial limitations at this point. It’s just as easy to create an algorithm that does everything from snappy to smooth and beyond in the digital domain. But it’s not as fun.

OK, so how does one find out which characteristics are best for what? I don't recall fact sheets for different compressors stating that they are quick and good for squashing fast transients (or accentuating them). It makes complete sense that one would need this type of compressor for that type of job, but how does one determine this when searching for a good compressor? For example, I'm grabbing a URL to a compressor that I know nothing about:

https://unitedplugins.com/RoyalCompressor

Based on the information on the page, how would someone know (without actually trying it), what this compressor is good for? Drums, vocals, bus, Mastering, etc, etc.?

I'm starting to get an idea about these things, but I still don't understand enough to be able to see an advertisement for a compressor and know what that compressor is good for. I've always just used what came with the DAW in the past. Now I want to learn and understand more.

There are hundred of youtube videos that explain how compressors work. I say watch a few and then just take a standard generic compressor that has a threshold control, ratio amount, attack time, release time and knee adjustment and put it on an unprocessed drum loop. Play with each control and listen to the subtle changes that occur to the transient and the overall volume. Then throw an unprocessed vocal clip in and repeat the exploration. Then on a mix. I think the best thing anyone can do is get really good with a compressor and an EQ and the only way to do that is practice and experimentation.

I think you misunderstood my question (which I think got answered). I know how to use a compressor. I've used one for years. But I've always used the bog standard one that came with my DAW. I was interested in understanding what characteristics of various compressors that make them good for one task or another. I now (after reading Jamcat's articles) understand that there are various types of compressors that often model the real world analog compressors' various characteristics that lend themselves to one type of job or another. For example:

There are "essentially" 5 Primary types of compressors:

1. VCA Compressors - Clean sound. Good for buses, or groups of instruments, drums, or mix bus

2. FET Compressors - Fast attack/release time, colors the sound. Good for vocals, guitars, drums

3. Optical Compressors - Slower attack/release times. Considered "musical" or "smooth". Glues tracks together.

4. Tube Compressors - Colored sound. Has a slower response to transients.

5. PWM Compressors - transparent, with very fast attack/release times.

I have much more research to do before I'm going to feel confident that I will know exactly what to grab in what situation. But regardless, I know that I can do better than just grabbing the same compressor for every job and trying to make it do what I want. I'm started on a more advanced path, and know what I want to learn and how to find the additional information I need.

I always understood the basic characteristics and the general purpose of a compressor, but this is a step up in my understanding, because now I understand that not all compressors are the same, and their characteristics will make them better or worse for a particular purpose, depending upon what I want to do.