I feel like my basslines profit from using using the glue or live's glue compressor on a shared bus. It's subtle but lately I feel like that's the case with most good mixing choices. On their own they are not changing anything fundamentally but when you keep going and apply everything you think is a good idea for the track the added effect is having a pretty big impact in the end. I guess using compression without an actual purpose behind it only hurts you sound though....

 

After 6 pages, this thread can be summarized as such:
Reckless compression can lead to chronic depression so follow this short suggestion for improved musical expression

 

Watching 10 hour tutorial about compression lead to chronic depression

 

Indeed, compression depression is a devastating cycle of emotional trauma that nobody should go through alone.
We see you. We hear you. And we are here for you.

 

I'm not watching that. Please just tell me, should my auto-gain be on or off.

 

True, but it would have been used during tracking too, and tape compression added to this.

 

Considering this thread has gone left, right, north and south of center at times, I really wanted to say something silly because I am pretty sure you are piss-taking it.
I think I have always known the answer with compression. If it makes whatever i am using it on sound worse then I do not use it. Sometimes with some tracks, I chop up the waveform and manually adjust in the places I want it to be something precisely what I heard because the compression upwards or downwards, or gain-riding or limiting just does not deliver. It's a lengthy and oftentimes painful method, but it is 100% successful. Auto-gain is interesting because it works differently on different developers compressors.

It sounds good? Great. It doesn't? Chuck it. That is only my take. Auto-gain and gain-matching have their uses, but my ears make the decisions always.

P.S. Some engineers would say to use cc controllers to adjust rather than chopping up wav files. The thing is, if you chop the file right, it's there forever. It takes the same or less time to visually chop it up if you've been doing it for a while than to add 50 cc controller settings all varying in the entire tune for attenuation, threshold, ratio, attack and release settings. Many compressors have a very poor understanding of a real instrument that has natural performance dynamics and auto-adjusts based on thresholds. That often makes purposeful softer passages sound wrong if done the wrong way. You can of course chop it post-compression, providing the sound of the compression is something decent.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 13, 2024

Yes
I agree with your answer though lol

 

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2024

 

Last edited: Feb 13, 2024

Wouldn't automation make this easier for you?

 

It sucks having to add volume automation too early during your production process. Many people don't do any automation until they are nearly done. It's because you keep getting stuck fighting with the fader wanting to revert back to your automation points. It's better to chop it, because then you can use clip gain; and any other parameter available to you in your region inspector, per region. If you setup a custom key command for split at playhead, each segment you chop is two key presses. His way is faster and more accurate. Also, if you want to add an effect to each of those chopped regions, you can use selection based processing very quickly.

 

I rarely chop the files, I prefer automation. Pre-fader, trim (relativ to fader position), fader or compressor (threshold or output (or both)). But as you said, not too early - unless it's extremely obvious that I'll need it.

 

OK on a file that has consistently differing and inaccurate light and shade, yes. In my scenario because all the musicians I associate with on instrument recordings have self-compression, definitely not. This means that most of the time I am adjusting only small sections. Say for example, the bassist and pianist came down for a softer part and the drummer did but too late, even though the timing was fine. I segment the areas where the attenuation was too strong exactly, then decrease the waveform(s) volume only in that tiny bit. The other reason why I personally find this a better choice is because when I do apply compression the audio is already right. This means that basically, the compression is truly transparent and you hear the players play.

I use automation for many things. Just not musical dynamics (not to be confused with audio). As we both agreed many times, horses for courses (sorry for the bad cliche ). I use automation regularly more for global functions, and fader functions in a final mix rather than during. If using MIDI all of the time, I can absolutely see a necessity for it.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Feb 14, 2024

For audio tracks (incl. FX and groups) I create about 60 - 120% automation tracks. Haven't made MIDI for a while.

 

FX groups, fades and global dynamics, definitely . Meticulous musical dynamics, definitely not. Live recordings and all real instruments are a different beast though, which as you well know, is my thing for better or worse.