RMS Super Stereo Compressor.. HEAR IT HERE

[Bang]

Ok, here are THREE Mixes.

first, no compressor:

www.blacklinerock.com/music/nocomp.wav

Now the RMS 755 at 2:1 doing its thing

www.blacklinerock.com/music/Two.wav

And last, here is the RMS 755 at 4:1 smashing this mix. At peaks the GR was 6db. You may think I'm crazy, but this is my favorite example, its so aggressive that its scarey. Its been my experience that once a mix like this is mastered, it tames up but still retains the "inyourface" sound..

www.blacklinerock.com/music/Four.wav


If you like what you hear and are interested, give me knock... Hope you enjoy.

[thethrillfactor]

For this particular mix of the 2 the classic has a better feel even though i would backoff the threshold a bit.

The minus 4 setting is eating the clarity.

The RMS while clearer(which on the classic can be fixed) doesn't gel as much.

Just an opinion.

[Bang]

Usually we are in agreement on things Thrill, but in this case I urge you to listen again, but concentrate on two things:

1. the bottom end, the RMS mix has a kick drum that sounds twice the size of the "classic" comp. The overall bottom is just bigger sounding on the RMS.

2. the high end on the RMS is softer and sweeter, the classic comp to our ears was more pointy.

One of my interns just sweats this thing, he mixed his band's album through the thing from 12 AM last night to 9 AM this morning, and he loves the "classic comp", or he did at least.

To me there is no comparison, the RMS sounds bigger in the low end and smoother on the top end. I also hear more depth in the drums, it brings out the drum reverb superbly. But different strokes I guess...

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Bang

But different strokes I guess...

I think this says it best.

To me its really how it feels in the end and the RMS doesn't have that feel that i would want for this mix.

Now it does sound more open which i do agree, but the snare is also swallowed.

Also there are different things that could affect the sound of the classic:

1) Is the makeup gain at 0 or +something?

2) The Threshold

3) How hard you are hitting it

I am not knocking the Rolls comp.

Actually the first thing i thought when i heard it was "wow this would make a great parallel/drum sub compresor".

I guess i may be biased since i mix through the buss Quad comp everyday and i know there is a certain point that when you hit it right its golden.

[gainreduction]

To my ears the classic one (SSL I suppose) pushes the midrange a bit in a nice way that fits the style better than the cleaner RMS comp.

[djui5]

I agree with the above posts.

I like the "grit" the classic comp imposes, and there is something about the "action" of the rolls comp that I'm not liking. Might be a setting issue.

Also agree the classic comp threshold could come back a touch.


I should take these to the studio when it's done for a proper comparison.


The rolls comp sounds like it could be a great comp with a different style of music, or maybe in combination with another comp like the Red3 on 2buss, or a 384/quad comp, etc etc.

I'd like to hear this kill a pair of room mic's.

[u b k]

i really respect threads like these, where someone is focused so tightly on the sonic characteristics of a new toy (open top, rounder bottom) and then some fresh, impartial ears step in and mainly hear the vibe factor, what is happening to the SONG not the SOUND.

it's a good reminder of where to keep my focus when doing my thing.


gregoire
del ubik

[Bang]

Taking all comments into consideration, I listened again. Still I felt like the RMS has a warmer and bigger sound within the whole frequency spectrum and simply sounds better for the song, and every other song I've put in it. Btw Thrill, I DIDN'T use makeup gain for either comp. I'm not saying the classic comp is bad, I will still use it. I just prefer the RMS on the two buss, it does more what I want. The drums especially just reacted really well with it. I'm curious to hear what people would have said if I didn't name the comps first.

[norman_nomad]

I dunno.. I really liked both actually.

The Rolls lets the kick drum really jump out... and the low end extension is great. It's also very clean sounding.

The first thing I noticed with the ssl is that the vocal jumped out... not sure if it's becuase the comp is pushing the midrange... or cutting some of the low end allowing the midrange to peek through.

Either way.. good mix!

[Drumsound]

They both sound cool and I do t like the low end of the Roll Music comp. I also thing the "classic" sounds better for the song. It gives it a bit more urgency that I think is good for the tune. That said, if I had never heard the other, I'd like the Roll Music comp quite a bit. The mix is very good.

[tubesandteles]

Which is the classic comp? 1176?

[Bang]

No, its the classic mixbuss comp that everyone uses...

I just mixed the blackline tune SuperOne and engaged the RMS and it just put a smile on my face.. I just love what it does to the lows, and how it puts this amazing smack on the snare and makes the cymbals and top end shimmer. The classic comp is still one of my favs, but its just not as BIG sounding to me. I hear the midrange forwardness but it sounds more gritty, the RMS is clearer on the top, and I'll say it again, those lows are HUGE. It pumps the kick in a very natural way.

[tubesandteles]

Could you please tell me or PM me?

[Lanstar Zero]

The classic comp definitely works better for the vocals, but on everything else I like the RMS.

Bang- I think if you were able to objectively hear the sound, the classic would stick out just for the vocals - which is the key element for the "average" listener. But from an engineering perspective I DO like that RMS and prefer it on this mix - everything but vocals!

I just said the same thing multiple times in slightly different ways - eh, I'm tired!

[norman_nomad]

Originally Posted by tubesandteles

Which is the classic comp? 1176?

Does an 1176 have "attack 10" and "autorelease"? .... nope... it's most likely a ssl stereo comp, or one of the popular variations like the c1 or c2.

[True North]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

For this particular mix of the 2 the classic has a better feel even though i would backoff the threshold a bit.

The minus 4 setting is eating the clarity.

The RMS while clearer(which on the classic can be fixed) doesn't gel as much.

Just an opinion.

I had to sound like a kiss ass but without reading thrills reply in detail I tend to agree with the Gel comment.

The kik and snare stand out more on the RMS but almost in a way that puts them slightly out of context with the rest of the mix - it not obvious unless you focus on it but it is there . The classic mix is more cohesive sounding to me.

Both sound good though.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Bang

The classic comp is still one of my favs, but its just not as BIG sounding to me. I hear the midrange forwardness but it sounds more gritty, the RMS is clearer on the top, and I'll say it again, those lows are HUGE. It pumps the kick in a very natural way.

Well if you use the SSL comp the same way on every song this for sure will be true.

Sometimes backing up the threshold is the ticket.

Sometimes backing the attack a touch smooths out the transients in a nice way.

Sometimes shortening the release gives you a nice pumping action.

Sometimes 2:1 sounds a little more open.

Basically every song will require its own thing.

I think mixing to a certain setting instead of mixing to the song will make you set boundaries that will limit the sonic possibilities of the mix.

Heck i usually set the thing with my eyes closed.

And if it sounds and feels right...it is right.


And yeah i do like what i hear so far from the RMS comp.

Maybe i can finally take my Blue 230 of the the drumbuss and use it someplace else.

[RoundBadge]

Originally Posted by True North

The kik and snare stand out more on the RMS but almost in a way that puts them slightly out of context with the rest of the mix - it not obvious unless you focus on it but it is there . The classic mix is more cohesive sounding to me.

Both sound good though.

Agreed..both comps sound good.I like the gel on the SSL more though ..for the vibe of this particular song/ mix..
the kick/snare are already a little to out front to me on both mixes...
.... just my personal taste, the RMS accentuates this a bit.
the SSL gel seems to bring my focus back to the vocals.
but i'm old school..sometimes a little distortion ,smear,glue,gel,mystery,etc are just what the rock n roll doctor ordered.
The RMS definitely looks like another cool useful tool. ...Hi FI SSL vibe.great price.
Thanks for the samples Bang! thumbsup

[thermos]

I agree about the ssl and lack of general hugeness. Its always a bummer, and no matter what the setting. The RMS is better for that, but the ssl midrange thing is so happening I think. Ah well, nothings perfect.

[gsharp]

I know it's not Bang's type of thing, but based on the samples, and the comments re: each, I bet the RMS will kill on the Walter A/Mick G hi-fi kinda thing. The characteristics that some are not digging on the heavy stuff I would find quite redeeming on the pop tip.

G

[Chris Flynn]

just your average musician ears here, and I have to say I'm really not even qualified to post on it, but what the hell...

I really like the drums on the RMS, HUGE and explosive, big and powerful kick, but the Classic does indeed sound more musical, less in- your- face. big punch on the first one, but I agree that it somewhat steals the emphasis from the vocal. it chews up the scenery.

excellent production , by the way.

[Bang]

I do like the vocal sound on the classic comp. But it doesn't excite my ears like the bigness of the RMS, the RMS mix takes you for more of ride with the swinging drum sound. Also, keep in mind that these are mixes... And I mix with the intention that my mixes will be heavily masterized... So that is why you'll hear a kick and snare and toms slightly more then what you are used to hearing. After mastering, that vocal will come out more and the drums tame up and mix in. Here is an iTunes AAC of the RMS mix with a few mastering plugins applied.

******//www.blacklinerock.com/music/a...edomaster3.m4a

I should also say that increasing the attack on the RMS led to a more in your face vocal sound like the classic comp. It seems by nature the classic is a bit faster. But after an hour of trying, I couldn't get the classic to make the drums as big as the RMS, but I could get the RMS to push the vocal a bit more. I don't think you can go wrong with either piece, but nickname is Bang for a reason, I love the big drum sound and I think listeners love it as well. And just to level us all here, I had three non engineers listen to the two mixes and find absolutely no difference...

[Chris Flynn]

is it just me or do the guitars blow you to smithereens with the RMS.. I can totally see where a guitarist would love that RMS.

[moeses]

okay you had something to do with making the RMS compressor right?
isn't it a ltitle classless to put up a comparison between your compressor and the compressor (as it sounds) you failed to clone?

[Bang]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

.
I do take exception to Steve's sales pitch on the web site, though:
Everything just sounds like a record by using this box?

Ok, lets talk about it. To me, the "record" sound has the gelled, fat, punchy, together, bigness... The RMS box does this rather well. Its quite cool hearing the unit go from bypass to "on", because a very cool thing happens to the audio. So I stand by that statement 100 percent. You engage this thing, and all the above adjectives come to be. If you have an awful mix to begin with nothing will come from it no matter what you do, but if you have something nice, the RMS helps you out. So when my web designer asked me for a quote about the RMS, thats what I said. Its not a sales pitch, its my opinion.

Moeses. If you actually read on the website, I had Roll Music make the prototype of the compressor, but it is Justin's design, and he's an amazing designer. I don't own any stake in the company, and its as much YOUR compressor as it is mine. I just love the thing and decided that I should share the wealth and spread the word. And get this straight my friend. Its as much a clone of the classic comp as you are a clone of someone with class. It has different features, and a different sound. You can say its INFLUENCED by things like the classic comp, but it is not a clone. If you think the sound is "failed" then I'm sorry but I think your ears have failed. Being a hip hop guy like yourself, you'd think that you would appreciate the huge low end the RMS brings..

I make my money from mixing and producing. I'm not a sales guy and my small two product pro audio business is not intended to do anything but pimp some gear that I think really kicks ass. Its not a slimy money making machine. The purpose of this thread is so I can actually stop anything that can be considered a sales pitch so people can actually HEAR the stuff.

apologies to the fine folks who can give their opinion, be it positive or negative, with some elegance... carry on

[moeses]

i apologize then...

[Bang]

Originally Posted by moeses

i apologize then...

gladly accepted.

[Bang]

A friend of mine pointed out something quite important that i foolishly didn't say from the start. I mixed the song with the classic comp originally. So it was tailored to that sound. Had I mixed it with the RMS, I could have pushed the midrange out more. I am mixing another tune now and the mids sound fabulous through the RMS, but I still can get that big smacky kick to punch through. Having said that, I still dig the above mix through the RMS.. what can I say, I love big lows.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Bang

A friend of mine pointed out something quite important that i foolishly didn't say from the start. I mixed the song with the classic comp originally. So it was tailored to that sound.

Agreed you can hear it.

Originally Posted by Bang

Had I mixed it with the RMS, I could have pushed the midrange out more.

Possible or you could have over done it looking for what the SSL comp gives you.

Originally Posted by Bang

I am mixing another tune now and the mids sound fabulous through the RMS, but I still can get that big smacky kick to punch through.

Sounds good and good luck with it.

Originally Posted by Bang

Having said that, I still dig the above mix through the RMS.. what can I say, I love big lows.

So do we all.

Alot of guys mix through the SSL buss comp and get big sounding lows(Andy Wallace we both know).

There are lots of ways to get lots of bottomn even when working through the SSL buss comp.

I would take issue though with the fact that it sounds like your hitting the SSL buss comp a little too hard and the lows are getting squeezed out.

But again its just an opinion.

[Bang]

I've always found that the harder you hit the quad, the more it'll pump your kick and therefore make it bigger. I like hearing the thing, hence the 4 db max. Mostly its hitting 2-3 db.

At this point I'm leaving the RMS comp on the two buss. To my ears its easier to get a warmer and bigger bottom and I like what it does to the high end. The RMS mix also was easier to master, it got less gritty when doing the mastersizing..