Common mistakes when mixing: overused plugins and techniques

[Aloysius]

Not for vegetarians.

[gearwatcher]

Not meat ratio but "peak to meat" ratio.

Trying to convey the image of making transients less prominent and sustain louder which is a fairly common (if not most common) use of compressors

[zerocrossing]

Ignoring the fact that "saturation" is distortion and adding to the mix because it sounds loud and fat (and bad)

Agree totally.

I hate saturation, all of it!
To my ears, it just decreases the fidelity of a mix. And in so many terms that are out of the scope of this topic.
I don't care if the best (or not) producer likes it. They usually came with a with a Lo-Fi and 1990' argument, especially because of its "warmth"..

On Gearspace we were talking about the benefits of an all analog production, and someone posted some old track from the 1990s that sounded like garbage.

I love saturation, but I never use it on a full mix. It's like putting ketchup in the ground beef, on the finished burger and baked into the bun.

[Aloysius]

Saturation on the full mix could be considered as glue.

[jens]

Believing binary, non-negotiable advice like "always eq after compression, never before" has any merit in reality, or comes from a point of authority and not mere cargo cult practices.

The reason EQ is better after compression is because the compressor will need to be adjusted any time the EQ is changed.

Then again, you might want to compress a more "balanced" (not the most appropriate word here, "sounding more like you intend it to sound" is what I mean) source to begin with.
But of course nothing is stopping you from EQing both before and after either if need be, right?

Common mistakes are certainly being revealed in this thread, one way or the other.

[markmann]

Believing binary, non-negotiable advice like "always eq after compression, never before" has any merit in reality, or comes from a point of authority and not mere cargo cult practices.

The reason EQ is better after compression is because the compressor will need to be adjusted any time the EQ is changed.

Then again, you might want to compress a more "balanced" (not the most appropriate word here, "sounding more like you intend it to sound" is what I mean) source to begin with.
But of course nothing is stopping you from EQing both before and after either if need be, right?

Common mistakes are certainly being revealed in this thread, one way or the other.

Yes. In my experience, it's usually easier to remove unwanted frequencies or resonances by EQing before compression. Also, compressors seem to provide better results when I've performed EQ corrections to get that "balanced" sound prior to compressing. However, I definitely reverse the order of EQ/compressor if I'm not getting something that sounds good.

[Aloysius]

Joining a community like KVR and spending all of your money on plugins you think will help you jump the queue on all the time you actually need to spend working by yourself, in your home studio.

[martinjuenke]

Best way is the Hamburger Strategy:
EQ
Comp
EQ

[jakke]

I've always approached the order of effects in a practical way. If I have a compressor in the signal chain, I can alter the way it responds to the signal with a pre-EQ. If I'm happy with the way the compressor processes the signal but I want to EQ it, I'll add the EQ after the compressor.

Simple.

[bmanic]

Also keep in mind that compression is not only about the dynamics control itself. All moderately fast compressors cause a lot of harmonic distortion (usually strong 3rd harmonics). Thus when you EQ a signal before the compressor, you actually change the tonality of the harmonic series as well as the dynamics it responds to.

[metamorphosis]

I did a whole video on this:

[pluginnow]

That was a good video.

[Aloysius]

Bruce Swedien - Compression is for kids

[whassup]

Bruce Swedien - Compression is for kids

OK. No compression on the next Frank Sinatra record then.

[Aloysius]

Bruce is no longer with us. It's safe to use compression again.