5-buss compression

[cebolao]

there's been a lot said here about the so called 2-buss compression - compression of a stereo master. i'm interested in multichannel hardware compression as well.

i know that alan smart c2 has the optional additional modules for that purpose. any others? manley? api? summit? whatever?

[fatty]

Originally posted by cebolao
there's been a lot said here about the so called 2-buss compression - compression of a stereo master. i'm interested in multichannel hardware compression as well.

i know that alan smart c2 has the optional additional modules for that purpose. any others? manley? api? summit? whatever?

drawmer have one specifically designed for this purpose, called the six pack.

[Fletcher]

Crane Song LTD. "Trakkers"... you can link up to 8 of them... when I used them for a 5.1 thing I linked 5 and let the ".1" run free... it worked pretty damn nicely.

[Dave Martin]

It depens on why you're looking for 5 channel compression, but for some applications, up to a dozen Tube Tech CL-1B's can linked.

[Killahurts]

Originally posted by Fletcher
Crane Song LTD. "Trakkers"... you can link up to 8 of them... when I used them for a 5.1 thing I linked 5 and let the ".1" run free... it worked pretty damn nicely.

Yeah, it would cost pretty damn much too. Of coarse, this IS the high-end forum

[Brad Lunde]

Originally posted by cebolao
there's been a lot said here about the so called 2-buss compression - compression of a stereo master. i'm interested in multichannel hardware compression as well.

i know that alan smart c2 has the optional additional modules for that purpose. any others? manley? api? summit? whatever?

Cebolao:
I put the Drawmer Sixpack in front of Mark Needham for the Fleetwood Mac project, he thought it was great for instruments-ended up using it quite a bit: for guitars and drum mixes, etc etc. Now lives at his studio, they bought it.
Bobby O (Surround Associates) uses the Sixpack for overall 5.1 mixes for his production work. Says it really helps him get levels up. I think it a nice box for most apps except high end? You certainly can get better sounding units, but not in this price range ($2450 street). Also has a LFE switch on channel 6 to get your sub out right there in one stop.

Z Systems ZQ6 is a good choice for transparent 6 channel dyanmics control. For the final 5.1 mixes of Fleetwood and the Showtime Chis Issacs thing, I got Mark the Z Systems ZQ6- he uses it full time now (along with a Sixpack) and loves it for its "invisibility". This same box is also heavily used by more than few mastering guys (Charlie Watts on Norah Jones for example, Airshow Mastering, etc). This box can do 6 channels at 24/96 or 2 at 24/192.

Other than that, I hear a lot about the SSL multichannel in the console- alot of folks dig that.

Brad

[jazzius II]

What about running 5.1 compression un-linked..for a laugh?

[7rojo7]

I use unlinked compression a bunch and I never laugh when i do it. OK maybe when it's working fine I'll slip in a chuckle but I do that when anything is working well. I use it on submixes when I actually want the movement and even over a mix if the mix is not your normal stereo thing and has different dynamics on different sides. 5.1 it would seem has a much larger psychoacoustic stage than stereo and compressing everything linked togrther might not even work well and destroy the theater (like raising and lowering an umbrella over your head). Maybe compressing the front 3 linked and then linking the back 2 would be better. I don't see much need in compressing the LF, it's usually something I'll roll off in the side chain anyway, if I can. Ear in the f-hole theory

[cebolao]

wow, lots of anwsers here!

there was something strange with this thread as it said "-" anwsers in the thread list and i didn't even look inside. thanks.

drawmer sixpack - about 2700 $
it's cheaper than the setreo 1969 unit!

alan smart c2 (stereo only) about 2500 $
+ two exp unit about 2000 $ each = 6500 $ for 5.1

cranesong trakkers - more than 2000 $ fo a mono unit
which makes 12000 $ for 5.1

tubetech cl 1b - the same story...

7rojo7: i think you're right about the 3+2 compression method. in my understanding of surround the most energetic sources should come from the front 3 speakers, the rears for ambience / reverb stuff. which would make my comp setup alot cheaper - i think don't need the high-end compression for rears, if any.

jazzius: i remember your (probably) thread about unlinked 2buss compression. i was pretty surprised with what i saw there. now in surround i think i get the point!

[cebolao]

okay, got it... the thread has been moved to the high-end forum.