Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lindsay Dean]

Working for a new church, before sound check I start looking over settings etc. The last tech had hard compression on each input, hard compression on the output of the console to the main processor, hard compression on both of the inputs to the live stream, on the input channels to the live stream console and compressors on the output to the digital interface. Then I go into the recording software it has multiple limiters and comp.
Somebody splain to me why.

[Helge A Bentsen]

Mixing towards a LUFS target?

[Russell Ault]

Working for a new church
before sound check I start looking over settings etc
The last tech had hard compression on each input ,
hard compression on the output of the console to the main processor
Hard compression on both of the inputs to the live stream
on the input channels to the live stream console
and compressors on the output to the digital interface
then I go into the recording software it has multiple limiters and comp
Somebody splain to me why

I agree with Helge about hitting LUFS targets on the streaming side of things (YouTube, for example, uses a LUFS target of only -14, which can be quite challenging to achieve), but it's a little more surprising on the reinforcement side. I guess the question is, how do you define "hard compression"?

-Russ

[Tim Weaver]

I am guilty of using serial compression.  Its just how I've developed my "sound" over the years and with digital desks and plugins it just gets easier and easier. I love the polished "pop" sounding vocals you can achieve running something like an 1176 into an La2a. I will also generally make a pass through a multiband comp and/or de-esser as well.

All of that eventually hits a master buss comp at a very low ratio.

what I don't do is squash any of these very hard. They all have their place and I find it to be practically inaudible yet that vocal can really sit on top of a mix quite well.

I guess what I'm saying is.... How did it sound?

[Bill Meeks]

I agree with what Tim said.

Hard compression needs some number given with it as that can be a subjective thing. One person's "hard" is another's "spanking it". Chris Lord-Alge is known for using copious amounts of compression in his mixes. Of course he is not doing live sound, he is mixing studio recordings. The biggest issue with more compression in live sound is the potential for feedback when the singing or music stops, and the increased level of stage noise bleed- both of these a consequence of the required make-up gain with high compression levels.

I agree that hard compression on the stereo bus of a live mix is not good. But a little low-ratio "gluing" with bus compression just kissing it a bit can be beneficial I think. Something like -1 dB or so with maybe the occasional peak to -3 dB. Almost every popular pop and rock record known to man has been passed through an SSL Master Bus Compressor during its creation ... . If you want to "make it sound like the record", then you might need a little gentle compression. Depends on what your mixing target is, though. Cover bands or contemporary worship praise bands might be aiming to "make it sound like the record".

[Tim McCulloch]

Working for a new church
before sound check I start looking over settings etc
The last tech had hard compression on each input ,
hard compression on the output of the console to the main processor
Hard compression on both of the inputs to the live stream
on the input channels to the live stream console
and compressors on the output to the digital interface
then I go into the recording software it has multiple limiters and comp[size=78%] [/size]
[size=78%]Somebody splain to me why[/size]

Tap A Talk?  Scott H has the same issue, or did.

[Tim McCulloch]

I agree with what Tim said.

Hard compression needs some number given with it as that can be a subjective thing. One person's "hard" is another's "spanking it". Chris Lord-Alge is known for using copious amounts of compression in his mixes. Of course he is not doing live sound, he is mixing studio recordings. The biggest issue with more compression in live sound is the potential for feedback when the singing or music stops, and the increased level of stage noise bleed- both of these a consequence of the required make-up gain with high compression levels.

I agree that hard compression on the stereo bus of a live mix is not good. But a little low-ratio "gluing" with bus compression just kissing it a bit can be beneficial I think. Something like -1 dB or so with maybe the occasional peak to -3 dB. Almost every popular pop and rock record known to man has been passed through an SSL Master Bus Compressor during its creation ... . If you want to "make it sound like the record", then you might need a little gentle compression. Depends on what your mixing target is, though. Cover bands or contemporary worship praise bands might be aiming to "make it sound like the record".

^^^ What Bill and Weaver said.

Pretty much the deciding factor is the target of the output.  I want less dynamic range on streams, recordings, video... anything where I have no control over the reproduction or listening environment.  Note that most streaming mixes are flogged down to a 6dB dynamic range and there are end user expectations to meet.  I find most streams fatiguing to listen to for any length of time.

Live?  I want a mix that sounds somewhere between vinylly-warm-wholesome-goodness and audio compact discs after the first 12 years (when we'd finally learned to mix and master for a medium that was unforgivably accurate).  For me, that means serial compression starting with the channel strip, then groups, and as Bill says, "the chef's kiss"  (had to add the chef) at the output bus.  Different approaches for each spot in the chain.

I like multi band comps (C4 and C6) followed by a fast peak limiter, followed by a smoother, slower comp on the bus.  Or do it the other way around... it depends on what the source presents versus what it really needs to sound like.  The SSL G Bus Compressor is a must-have, as is a good Fairchild 660 modeler (the PuigChild, I like).  I need remedial LA2a classes, I've yet to find a use I like; I'm sure this is pilot error on my part.  OTOH I like the Waves CLA LA3... go figure.

So, Lindsay, I'd say what you observed is "the new normal" in mixing live stuff for non-proximate audiences.  How'd it sound?

[lindsay Dean]

In my opinion if you can hear compression it's too much
Just wondering if somebody had some reason for this voodoo chain of compressor limiters that in no way improve the sound and all the high pass filters at least 100 Hertz on the kick and bass
Over 200 on anything else I don't understand how anyone would think this sounds pleasing unless you're going for the 1930s bullhorn sound with compression
🥴⚠️

[Bill Meeks]

In my opinion if you can hear compression it's too much
Just wondering if somebody had some reason for this voodoo chain of compressor limiters that in no way improve the sound and all the high pass filters at least 100 Hertz on the kick and bass
Over 200 on anything else I don't understand how anyone would think this sounds pleasing unless you're going for the 1930s bullhorn sound with compression
🥴⚠️

From your description it sounds like the setup was much less than ideal. High pass filters can be your friend, but only if used on the right channels and with appropriate roll-off points. 100 Hz on kick and bass is almost certainly too high unless he was going strictly for some kind of metal kick sound .

Depending on the vocalist and the genre/style of the song, a 200 Hz high-pass would not be completely unreasonable -- especially for a "lips to the grill" singer. And other channels might benefit from a HPF with a higher cutoff -- not always everytime, but in a busy mix removing some stuff below 250 Hz for things that don't really need it will free up room in the low mids for the things that do need it.

High levels of "pumping" compression is certainly not what the others of us posting here are praising. But I would sort of take issue with your comment that compression should not be heard. I would agree that large amounts with obvious pumping is objectionable, but I will counter that when done well your ear will notice if the compression is missing and probably be less pleased. By "done well" I refer to the techniques described by Tim and Tim in their posts above.

I still consider myself a novice in this field, so I do a lot of reading and searching around for related topics on Google (and have watched dozens and dozens of YouTube videos from various mixers). One thing I noticed early on in the field of mixing sound, particularly live sound, is it is more subjective than objective. And there seems to be lots of hard-core inflexible "do this, but never do that" myths that different mix engineers hold. Using compressors and high pass filters are two areas where I have noticed some of that "myth adherence". Some folks attach an almost religious fervor to their opinions on those topics. While there are certainly some things that are obviously wrong to anyone watching or listening, there are many more things that are subjective in nature. It's ultimately what sounds good to the audience.

[Brian Jojade]

So, Lindsay, I'd say what you observed is "the new normal" in mixing live stuff for non-proximate audiences.  How'd it sound?

The real question is how did it sound, both live and on the stream?  If it sounded good, then it IS good, no matter what ingredients were used to get there.  Some may take a wildly different unconventional approach, but if it gets the job done is it wrong?

[ProSoundWeb Community]