DP is not FX

[Hink]

Just an observation that irks me a little. Effects has become a generic name for anything that you do to a sound. But that is just not true...kinda similar to the term pistol being a generic term for all hand guns (fwiw a pistol and a revolver are both handguns, but a revolver is not a pistol).

I don't know if it's a by-product of so many vsts or what...but as of the last few years a compressor is considered an effect. True when using it as an effect it is an effect. But under normal circumstances compression, eqs, limiters, gates, exciters and such are not effects at all. They are dynamic processors.

I know here I will call them effects because if I don't I won't make sense, but when I'm dealing with other producers and musicians of my generation we call it what it is, DP.

Yeah it doesn't make a big difference does it? Sure it does, because as a result some people do not understand the nature of the two and end up getting the wrong thing.

An example is here today, someone asked for vocal effects...and I am quite sure that his question was answered as he intended it. However a channel strip is not an effect, reverb, delay..they are both effects that may be added to the channel strip...but in this case Voxformer is not an effect, nor is de-essing (actually that's like removing an effect), compressing or gating.

From google about channel strips

One of multiple identical sections in a mixing console from the mic preamp and phantom power (if present) to the bus outputs, and typically includes the input pad, EQ, and signal routing, including pan, effect sends and effects returns, and main channel fader, and optionally an automation interface. There is one channel strip per mixer input.

Note it says a channel strip has effect send and returns. Granted Voxformer does not have sends or returns, but it is part of the signal chain. Really Voxformer isn't a channel strip either, but dynamic processing.

From Google on DP

Dynamics processing is simply what the name implies ... manipulating the dynamics of an audio signal. The two processes with which we are most familiar with are compression and limiting. Compression and limiting involve automatically lowering the signal as the level of one signal increases, thereby reducing, restricting or limiting the dynamic range.

See that is not reverb, delay, flange, ect...those are effects.

So what the hell difference does it make? Well imo I find that people are confused and expectations are not met because of miscommunications in life as it is. But when it comes to DP/FX it can be really confusing. People buy compressors, limiters and subtle dynamic processors and expect it to be a magic box that makes everything radio ready, pro sounding and finishes the project. All true, however when they start tweaking they do not hear these great feats of magic, soon they blame the piece...but it's not so...they have the wrong tool, or are mis-using the correct tool because of a fundemental lack of knowledge.

As a rule (I understand that we do use DP as an effect sometimes, I speak in general) an effect is something that should be heard, dynamic processing is something that no one should know is there.

So I hope for an intelligent thread about the differences between the two and why it's important so that all of us can have a better understanding of what we need for the task at hand...ultimately I would like to see people (myself included, because there is always so much to learn) understand the differences between the two, understand the techniques to use each effectively so they benefit us the best they can. Even if you're going to use DP as an effect you will understand the best way to do so. I think it's important to have them in their proper categories.

So there it is flame me, support me, but let's get a good educational thread here about effects/dp and which is which that everyone can learn from...

[Hink]

err wrong forum...early morning...can a mod move this for me...

[jupiter8]

I know what you mean and i agree with you. I could argue that an EQ is not a dynamic processor but i won't.

It was easier in the "good old days". When i started out in the 80'ies DPs were analog and effects were digital.And there were no mistaking them.On look at them was enough.

[spacefox]

Time and technology blur the edges, same way it isn't so clear where does synth stops and sampler begins. Hell, sometimes you don't know if it an effect or an instrument anymore.
Even you said it, a compressor can be used as an effect. So can a gate.

Not disagreeing with you, just suggesting what might be a reason to this phenomenon.


And sure VST blur the line further: if it processes audio, it's an effect, compared to a VST instrument

[Liquidclear]

in my book, anything that 'effects' the audio is an effect....if you need to get specific, just say limiter, reverb, delay, eq, etc

[Hink]

in my book, anything that 'effects' the audio is an effect....if you need to get specific, just say limiter, reverb, delay, eq, etc

so faders are effects?

[rokkon]

I used to learn that per definition only processors that mix the processed signal with the dry signal are effects. Whatever replaces dry with wet (compressor, eq, ...) is something else.

[Hink]

fwiw LiquidClear, you have missed my point, which you won't be the only one...and you proved my point...this is not about labels...it's about fundamental differences between how effects, and dp does alter the audio...each go about it in a totally different manner, understanding that difference can further your enlightenment on how to use them both effectively...not just turning knobs until it sounds right...

[Liquidclear]

so faders are effects?

Sure, if the fader is moved or automated your affecting the amplitude of the sound. Every process to a sound changes it somehow.

[Hink]

so faders are effects?

Sure, if the fader is moved or automated your affecting the amplitude of the sound. Every process to a sound changes it somehow.

that's a mighty big blanket...but if it works for you that's cool...

[Hink]

I guess the hierarchy of the studio plays in some...and the difference in what that hierarchy is. By your point LQ, tools are effects...where I feel that effects are tools...

[Liquidclear]

Hink, I do understand you point, and was being a bit general and cheeky. The problem is DP can be used as an effect but not really vice versa. The common consensus the days seems to be that any sort of 'processing' is an effect.

[DWb]

As a rule (I understand that we do use DP as an effect sometimes, I speak in general) an effect is something that should be heard, dynamic processing is something that no one should know is there.

That makes a lot of sense, but then the name dynamic processing is pretty misleading, since under your other definition

Dynamics processing is simply what the name implies ... manipulating the dynamics of an audio signal. The two processes with which we are most familiar with are compression and limiting. Compression and limiting involve automatically lowering the signal as the level of one signal increases, thereby reducing, restricting or limiting the dynamic range

a trancegate is DP whereas EQ isn't.

I'd consider it to be the difference between 'sound design' and 'production' (or something similar), and consider an 'effect' to be something that can do either or both. I might put on the slight restriction that just linearly scaling the volume doesn't count, but that's an artificial hack to get rid of the fader example! Wikipedia suggests that

effects units are devices that affect the sound of an electric instrument when plugged in to the electrical signal path the instrument sends... While some effect units transform the sound completely, others just color the sound picture in a minor way.

Which seems pretty sensible.

[Aleksey Vaneev]

Dynamics processing is dynamic range compression/expanding. Everything else is NOT dynamics processing. So, I can't get the idea of such categorization. Also, Voxformer in its whole appearance can be implemented as a hardware channel strip, theoretically speaking. So, it is valid to call it a channel strip since it is an insert effect like any channel strip of a mixing console.

There are really only two groups of effects exist, talking from the technical side of things: send effects and insert effects. These are divided into linear time-invariant and time-varying effects. Impulse response length of an effect can be also considered as a base for categorization between delayed and immediate effects.

Going deeper, amount of total harmonic distortion applied can be also a base for categorization. Quality of stereo/surround field adjustment can be also considered. Then we have resampling/time-stretching/pitch-shifting and bit depth reduction effects - these do not fit any 'standard' category like delays or equalizers. Do not forget about carrier-signal based effects like vocoders.

[Josmoker]

Quote:
effects units are devices that affect the sound of an electric instrument when plugged in to the electrical signal path the instrument sends... While some effect units transform the sound completely, others just color the sound picture in a minor way.
Which seems pretty sensible.

It's a bit flawed, though - why would the instrument need to be electric? Could be any line signal really, couldn't it?
I think the differentiation in DPs and effects is flawed as well or at the very least it is badly explained. Hink, maybe you can go into detail on what is the exact difference between DPs and effects?

Cheers, Jo