What are considered the most transparent compressors?

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by Ward Pike

An earlier poster mentioned the Aphex Compellor. I have one of those, and he's absolutely correct. 99% of the time the leveling is inaudible... you just end up with leveled sound. This would save you a heck of a lot of work in writing automation.

Of course, it has no sound (so to speak) and I don't find it that appealing when I want compression. But if I were in want of just pure inaudible leveling, than the Compellor would be a great choice.

By the way, those things are dirt cheap used on eBait and other places.

Thanks Ward!

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by jrhager84

My point is, it's an option. Hell, different compressors sound different! Didn't that kind of shoot you in the foot? It's a different effect for a different occasion.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

It doesn't change the original post, so please let's drop the automation thing.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by baphomet1313

Someone several pages in said the Grace 102...I have the 500 Grace M502 and it is amazing! I'm not a world reknowned audio engineer or anything, but it covers my needs perfectly and transparently.

Sent from my SPH-M910 using Tapatalk

A buddy of mine has this unit. It's very nice (especially concerning the price) and Grace is located in the town I live in. Wasn't really my flavor.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by teo

And that is what I hate about the 8900...just give me a reduction meter, or a switch from gain to GR...i don't need to see them both at the same time, FFS! It gets very confusing as often I have to stop playback to let the LED sit still and see where I'm starting from, in order to see how much GR it's applying.

About the crest factor controls, you can see them as controls on how aggressive the compressor is. It's not a proper technical explanation on what they do, but that's how I use them...

So how transparent is this thing? And more importantly is it worth almost 6k?

Is the GR so inaudible that the meters are necessary or are you saying this because the meter design is a bit confusing?

[teo]

Incredibly transparent! It does not have it's own sound, like an 1176, a sta-level, etc., but it's a great tool to SHAPE a sound. If you want more attack, less attack, bring out the tail without killing the attack...it just let's you shape the sound any way you want. It can also do 10-15 dBs of GR without you even noticing.
And it's very versatile as well. As I only have that and a sta-level as outboard comps, most of what I record goes through the 8900 on the way in. As I love mixing into compression, i put it on the stereo bus during the mix, and push it quite a lot. It does not "rock" or have the mojo (whatever that means) of an SSL quad bus comp, but it does work great on rock mixes. Still want an SSL though!

On the other hand, the metering drives me insane, Especially when in fixed ratio mode (as opposed to "soft knee" mode), since the threshold control is really a gain control into the compressor. As many other comps, you might say. Yes, the difference being that the meter will "shift" as you move the knob. Let's assume that you are looking at the meter and it's doing 3dB of GR. First of all, to know that is compressing 3 dBs, you have to stop playback so that the LED goes to it's "no reduction" position, that varies depending on how you set the threshold and output knobs. Then you push play, and want more compression. So you turn the threshold knob, which as we said is really turning up the gain into the compressor, but doing so it's shifting the LED "no reduction" point to the right. So now the LED is moving, showing GR, but to know exactly where it's starting from, and how much GR reduction you are applying, guess what? Stop playback, so that it goes back to the start. That is IF you can stop, cause no can do that while recording!

Long rant, sorry...

Apart from that, yes, it's worth the money...

[Suda Badri]

Worth every cent... Everydamn cent i cannot afford :-( imo defines transparent compression and versatility... But as the above poster says there are considerations... I hardly ever look at the meters unless setting fast rms to see how much Im actually controlling the highest peaks... Just look at the daw mostly. . But i don't track through it i can imagine id be pinned to the meters if i were!

[dandeurloo]

The videos online that George did for a distributor make it seem amazing. I have always wanted to try it. I would love to compare it to the Aphex 661 modded by Jim Williams. Just to hear the difference. Anyone have both?

I am looking at maybe getting the 8900 or the Cranesong STC-8 (which I love). But now I am also dying to hear the new Great River comp which is also a PWM comp like the STC-8 but in a 500 format.

[Pfhuck]

Duplicate track.
Split at each transient.
Normalize each clip.
Smack it with some saturation/distortion.
Mix it in really really quiet.
Shhhh....

Off topic. Sorry!

Please and THANK YOU!
-pfhuck

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by Pfhuck

Duplicate track.
Split at each transient.
Normalize each clip.
Smack it with some saturation/distortion.
Mix it in really really quiet.
Shhhh....

Off topic. Sorry!

Please and THANK YOU!
-pfhuck

That comment is helpful and a breath of fresh air! Thank you sir. You ever mix at the Bourbon Theater?

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by dandeurloo

The videos online that George did for a distributor make it seem amazing. I have always wanted to try it. I would love to compare it to the Aphex 661 modded by Jim Williams. Just to hear the difference. Anyone have both?

I am looking at maybe getting the 8900 or the Cranesong STC-8 (which I love). But now I am also dying to hear the new Great River comp which is also a PWM comp like the STC-8 but in a 500 format.

What is PWM? Great River is in South St. Paul right? Get a demo and tell us what you think!

Minneapolis is one of the best original music towns in the US.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by teo

Incredibly transparent! It does not have it's own sound, like an 1176, a sta-level, etc., but it's a great tool to SHAPE a sound. If you want more attack, less attack, bring out the tail without killing the attack...it just let's you shape the sound any way you want. It can also do 10-15 dBs of GR without you even noticing.
And it's very versatile as well. As I only have that and a sta-level as outboard comps, most of what I record goes through the 8900 on the way in. As I love mixing into compression, i put it on the stereo bus during the mix, and push it quite a lot. It does not "rock" or have the mojo (whatever that means) of an SSL quad bus comp, but it does work great on rock mixes. Still want an SSL though!

On the other hand, the metering drives me insane, Especially when in fixed ratio mode (as opposed to "soft knee" mode), since the threshold control is really a gain control into the compressor. As many other comps, you might say. Yes, the difference being that the meter will "shift" as you move the knob. Let's assume that you are looking at the meter and it's doing 3dB of GR. First of all, to know that is compressing 3 dBs, you have to stop playback so that the LED goes to it's "no reduction" position, that varies depending on how you set the threshold and output knobs. Then you push play, and want more compression. So you turn the threshold knob, which as we said is really turning up the gain into the compressor, but doing so it's shifting the LED "no reduction" point to the right. So now the LED is moving, showing GR, but to know exactly where it's starting from, and how much GR reduction you are applying, guess what? Stop playback, so that it goes back to the start. That is IF you can stop, cause no can do that while recording!

Long rant, sorry...

Apart from that, yes, it's worth the money...

Don't be sorry this is pertinent information. As Suda suggested, do you ever watch the meter or waveform in the daw to get the end result?

[Suda Badri]

Originally Posted by Verve111

What is PWM?

Pulse Width Modulation | TransAudio Blog

biggest advantage being it responds to lighting fast settings with minimal switching artifacts...

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by Suda Badri

Pulse Width Modulation | TransAudio Blog

biggest advantage being it responds to lighting fast settings with minimal switching artifacts...

GML seems like versatile city. Charter Oak (at a glance) is more bus determined. Aphex 661 per google search turns up as a GS thread titled "Perfect comp for noobs."

Thoughts?

[Suda Badri]

Gml isn't for everyone... From what ive heard about the stc 8 this would fall in the same category, id seriously love to get my hands on one to see how it behaves... Both these comps along with the a few nicer high end tube opto are designed to be dynamic processors that perform functions you would need two or three simpler boxes along the way... If you are looking to say compress a signal and level the peaks while attacking anything approaching the nasty sounding limit all the while sounding effortless then something like the Gml, safe sound is for you from what people have been describing the squeezebox requisite audio comp do the same and aphex along with Joe meek is what i learnt on so what can i say Haha i don't actually like the aphex very much i used it while tracking on pres that didn't have enough juice... I don't know much about the charter oak stuff at all...

[teo]

Originally Posted by Verve111

Don't be sorry this is pertinent information. As Suda suggested, do you ever watch the meter or waveform in the daw to get the end result?

Not really. I don't find the daw meters really helping in this case.
I use my ears, of course, but sometimes is nice to "see" what you are doing to the signal, especially when recording a full band. No chance to screw up when the red light is on!

I wonder if GML still comes to GS...it'd be nice to hear his take on the metering.

[GYang]

After Elysia Alpha all other clean compressors sound like joke. Well, OK, better said, definitelly not so great.
Really, there is something in general integirty of sonics that remains uncompromised after being processed by Alpha and slightly blurred in all other compressors incl. really great ones as Atomic Squeeze Box or GML.

[Suda Badri]

^^^ way to make me want something im gonna have to wait twice as long to save up for man! haha but seriously that sounds incredible... i dont even want to try one if it is that good lol and also have you tried the plugin version and compared against hardware? might be off topic though

[dandeurloo]

Originally Posted by Verve111

What is PWM? Great River is in South St. Paul right? Get a demo and tell us what you think!

Minneapolis is one of the best original music towns in the US.

Yeah, I am sure after AES I will be able to check it out some how. I have been waiting to hear this comp for years. I heard it has been in the works a long time ago in a video that RCM did with Dan.

Gonna be very nice I am sure.

[mouthbleed]

Crane Song Stc-8 is the most transparent I've heard, but with the optional Ki/hara switch can get more mellow and even smoother if you like.

[Alécio Costa]

I have the STC8 and the Ocl2. Soon picking a Sebatron Smac.

Stc8 adds a slight bottom and silk top end.
Woth checking the 3 units.

Gearjunkies.com: Sebatron SMAC - Stereo Musical Audio Compressor Announced

[Bassmankr]

While I'm sure a $3k to $6k comp brings something to the table maybe the smart choice especially when looking for transparent is to grab a used Aphex 651 Expressor or Aphex Compellor for $150, have Jim Williams mod it for another $150 (total $300) and use that as a comparison while testing other units. If you end up going with one of the uber expensive comps then with flipping the Aphex you will probably only loose the cost of shipping. If instead you find out the modded Aphex fits your needs you'll have $2,700 to $5,700 still in your pocket for other use.

[Kelly Cameron]

Originally Posted by Bill@WelcomeHome

I don't know what is the -most- transparent, but the Daking was pretty nice.

Oh ya, Daking FET II is very nice, subtle sheen, and very non-intrusive muscal compression.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

[jetam]

Originally Posted by Emwolb

Exactly.

That guys response was ridiculous!

I use automation to EQ things... WTF

I don't think that it was that ridiculous. Compressors are often (if not usually) used to control micro dynamics while the automation is usually used for macro dynamics.
Show me how you ride the faders 10 dB up and down in a few milliseconds after every snare hit.

[audio ergo sum]

Originally Posted by Verve111

Obviously transparency can be achieved through the proper settings, but what hardware compressors are the quickest, most natural, non artifact imprinting around?

The most transparent compressors are those with a bypass switch.

[BB Bill]

Originally Posted by audio ergo sum

The most transparent compressors are those with a bypass switch.

Funny how a straightforward question from the OP elicits so many off target answers, ranging from "why use compression - use automation" to this.

[audio ergo sum]

Originally Posted by BB Bill

Funny how a straightforward question from the OP elicits so many off target answers, ranging from "why use compression - use automation" to this.

It's simply the truth.

btw, what are the most transparent sunglasses?

[perky b]

Atomic squeezebox.

[Verve111]

Originally Posted by audio ergo sum

The most transparent compressors are those with a bypass switch.

This is actually far from the truth. I still want to compress audio. Bypass would not achieve this, obviously.

[audio ergo sum]

Originally Posted by Verve111

This is actually far from the truth. I still want to compress audio. Bypass would not achieve this, obviously.

A compressed signal is not transparent. By definition. Sorry, that minimum amount of linguistic sanity is necessary.

The question should be, which compressor at a given equal setting for all (time/dynamic parameters) has the most transparent/least audible sound.

The challenge is tricky and impossible to answer, because compressors on the market do not follow the WYSIWYG rule. So even if every compressor has the same numbers dialed in, the actual parameters would fluctuate. So it's comparing apples and oranges.

[shobud]

Well, the question was not "What compressor is transparent?" but "What compressor is the most transparent?" Which does ackowledge that fact that compression is not transparent!

Dan