Great thread actually. And good points to debate and think about. Thanks for posting Retrolize77.

 

Can you explain the difference with mix& masterbus?

 

Doesn't this depend on how the song was mixed though? My process is constantly changing but i've found that any compression somehow makes my rendor sound very compressed, even though it sounded ok in the session. Historically I've gone the fast attack minimal release route, on fabfilter with transparent setting whichs seems to make things sound crisp clear and dynamic. Granted I haven't done much dance music yet.

 

I currently route everything to a Mix Buss track, and before that, my compression starts with other busses (e.g. Drum Buss).
That way, there are content-based stages to the compression.
Not eveything just hitting one compressor. Also, adding Parallel Compression Sends/Returns can be beneficial for fullness and extra movement.

On my Master track is just a disabled Ozone.

 

With mix bus I mean the single groups of instruments, master bus is the whole song. So the Vocals, Drums, Leads, Basses, FX, etc that go into the master bus which is the final step.

 

that transient need slow attack is pretty elemental stuff to kno

sine waves concept to do only lp hp filter to clean up in writing process is good...i ad gainstaging to that...

rear bussing is new to me...but makes much sense to me since parallel processing is most effective

paralllel procession using sends/return tracks in ableton is highly effective imho

when just want to color lightly or glue ... sometimes a comp with no threshold set is working well..so its not compressing just process signal thru

 

Last edited: Feb 7, 2019

how much mix busses at max ?

 

dont get trapped in overkill testing... if blackrooster worx well and you like it a lot ...leave it to that ...learn it in and out

EDIT sry...wrong thread , but you kno what i mean

 

also pro's will benefit from such a chart.....but most dont want to share explicids from long term experience...the really in deep characteristics they learned over years...
but even with out deep notes...such chart...why it doesnt exist...
we have charts for everything but not for this..
i mean a chart with every comp...every comp architecture....and its use + ratios and tresholds

we in forum can list them all together its not realife fck up where you never could list waves along melda on a chart cause adverising law or what ever
like metaller did pdf book from mmj2017 music theory overkill thread posts

 

Last edited: Feb 7, 2019

Ah, ok. Thx

 

Totally true, plugin overkill is a trap! The Black Rooster & Fuse stuff is worth deeper learning, great stuff !

 

My busses (in Reaper) are usually folder tracks (easy management and routing)

Instrument Buss
Drums Buss
Vox Buss

Parallel Comps are on Returns
- therefore not in direct line of fire.


The Busses and Returns are routed to a "Mix Buss" track (last compression and fx),
which is routed to the Master Track (w/ disabled Mastering plug(s)).


Any extra stuff (genre specific) can have busses/groups as well (e.g. Guitars, Bass, Keys, etc.).

 

Seems there are some misconceptions,
to overdo crucial parameters helps to understand (hear) what they are doing,
then slowly back them off to taste.
This is valid for any and all mixing situations especially when in doubt i.e. on compression.

In terms of rythmic compression,
the chosen startup positions as described serve that purpose (overdo) very well.
I dare to say the best comp is the one you know best, it`s about rythm in the first place.
One can go easier into unknown comps then.

Due to dual mono:
to use a stereo comp with independent l/r is not idendical with using a comp 2x on l & r,
this is my extension you may want to experiment with, it`s worth the investigation.
You don`t have to use it at the end
but you`ll be surprised on how pro a track sounds from the get go
with a simple transfer of how analog consoles are constructed, a master bus in this case.

The best bet to check and proof any pace of experiment is to frequently verify mono compatibility.
Ok, that`s it from my side,
I wanted to encourage Retrolize77 a bit, he`s on something worth to discover.

 

now we got it

 

yeah right but it could be covered a bit like rick does here

you as pro had perfect value's chart in mind i guess...more like chart to get direction not 'mathematically-and technisch' on point..
sry sort of bad syntax but you kno what i mean

 

Last edited: Feb 7, 2019

@Marsupilami Thx for the encouragement
& thankyou to everyone who participated, i learned alot

 

I don't think @korte1975 read the entire OP.

Yes, fast attack at first, then you adjust the attack to let your transients in; i.e. kick, snare, etc.. (As the OP said.)

 

Sorry, I have to object Rick from the very start,
a compressor was not invented to make a signal louder
but to automatically level the volume in order to replace editing
or fader riding by hand.

As a not expected by-product of downward compression (volume leveling)
(that`s what Rick is refering to and was the initial kind of compression)
engineers took notice of an even out effect,
when one takes something down from the top it pulls up something from the bottom yet
and makes the signal to appear louder because top and bottom on average come closer.

I`m picky on that because what Rick is telling represents a fairy tale of decades
and is, from my point of view, the reason why so many people have problems with compression.

They try to get a signal louder which is compressors are not created for
and not to even out the volume which ironically makes the signal louder.
Means, wrong understanding, wrong approach, wrong settings.

A chart makes sense for an overview like on types of compressors
but wouldn`t make sense on mixing strategies.
Each track you have in front must be heard ... once, twice, thrice
and the strategy comes per listening.
Perhaps not with an instant technique but with a reflection what the track could need.

Another good point, I like this thread.