How much compression is to much compression for vocals

[Protools Guy]

I've had this problem on many occasions. I try to mainly get it sounding right going in. Plug comps are lightly used during the mix, but I mainly rely on riding the vocal fader to put the voice in the right place.
HTH

[bobwarren]

I second riding the fader although with some vocal styles it can be a challenge. Maybe automate the fader, instead.

[mrface2112]

how much is too much? when it sounds bad. it's really that simple.

you've gotta ride that fader.


cheers,
wade

[RawDepth]

Originally Posted by mrface2112

how much is too much? when it sounds bad. it's really that simple.

you've gotta ride that fader.


cheers,
wade

Yes, but if you pull the faders down too much at spots, it will simply sound the same as too much compression.

Noticeable volume drops can still sound bad no matter how they happen, automatically or manually.

When using compression, there seems to be a happy medium point between where the vocals come to life and where they begin to nosedive toward deflated misery. Put your ears to work. The art is in finding that usable spot on the dial. Automation or envelopes might make life easier in a dynamic song but you've still got to earn "that great sound" the old fashioned way.

RawDepth

[drumkideric]

It depends on the style of music. Some styles you want the vocal to have no dynamic range and you compress/limit the heck out of it. Other styles you could just ride the fader. And then there is the inbetween. Just do what sounds good.

[Acoustic Cloud]

Originally Posted by RawDepth

Yes, but if you pull the faders down too much at spots, it will simply sound the same as too much compression.


RawDepth

I disagree on that. A tad too much fader lowering in real time doesnt sound the same, or as bad as an oversquashed passage with too much compression.

Sucking the life and presence out of a part cant, well I cant anyway, be fixed.
If you jockey a fader a bit lower than needed in a passage, its easier to possibly rectify. IMO.

[JariNi]

How much compression is too much compression for vocals?
When it gets out of your control...

See how far you can go and live to see the next day.

[JuelzB]

Especially mixing ITB, i live by "less is more" when it comes to compression. 3 to 6 dB GR maximum. But recording good signals and a good performance is the most important part.
Tell the singer to back up a little from the mic, on loud parts.
Just my 2 cents.

[bobwarren]

If you are riding the fader, eesentially you are doing what the compressor does. If you hear the compressor whilst riding the fader, use a lower compression ratio and threshold. There's really no need for two comps on a vocal; a human one and an actual one.

[RainbowStorm]

Originally Posted by Stoneroses6300

I'm working with a singer now who is pretty solid on pitch but has a voice that a bit light for the harder type of stones/ pyschedelic rock there doing...When I put on 2 instances of different compressors at pretty hard settings it sounds good but when there are parts with just singing and the mix drops just to singing, the compression is noticable...Just curious of any suggestions here, or if there are any at all...It seems like a noisy cheap plug in compression helps to bring out the sound of his voice....Think lead singer of soundtrack of our lives...Full rock mix with a singer who doesnt cut across the mix without heavy compression

First of all, dynamic main elements should be much more compressed than all other elements in the mix because these days the mixes end up so smashed in the end that a too dynamic main element could easily spell disaster in the hands of the wrong mastering engineer. Furthermore, elements that consume a lot of mix signal should be processed very gently in terms of fx processing because they have a great impact on the mix signal-noise. For instance using too much artificial reverb instead of natural room reverb (amplified through compression) can make the whole mix feel pretty disguisting. In my opinion the reverb quality of a mix is much more important than the dynamic range because the sound of it is more "musical", therefore I usually let the compression level be determined by the reverb that is available and use the volume fader to make the compression ratio end up in the correct level range. With efficient tracking this process becomes very easy, so tracking vocals and drums in an efficient way is extremely important for the whole mix quality and makes it easy to set the correct compression level during mixing. I would say that you can sacrifice up to 20% of the full vocal signal and still gain mix quality. More than that will compensate negatively. Of course, the better the initial dynamic range is the more signal you can sacrifice. Compression application is one of the main reasons today why small differences in initial dynamic range will have a great impact on the final recording quality, this is especially the case when it comes to vocals and drums compression.

Controlling the input vocal velocity through vocal instructions by the producer is the number 1 thing to focus on in terms of vocal dynamic range. This will add a lot of different properties to a mix, including:

- Emotions
- Drama
- Deliciousness
- Colour
.
.
.

Using the right mics, to get the best possible initial dynamic capture, is the most efficient way of dealing with the dynamic range of main elements by using gear. In combination with the correct vocal velocity, compressors can be set to output beautiful reverb tails that will fill up the listening room with beautiful sound.

[loydma3]

did I miss something???? were in low end- and you guys are talking about riding a fader- more than likely the guy is using some type of interface- no faders- just knobs-


I feel like to much compression for track depends alot on the comp- if you have a really noticable compressor the too much might be around -6 threh and over 6:1 ratio for me- when im am editing- i tend to use at least 2 or three more compressors in the chain at moderate levels-


i seconds the reverb beingmore important than the comp

[woomanmoomin]

Just give him an SM58 and get him to hold it close to his gob.

[KingUgly]

Run it through a sans amp (lightly)

[alnico]

Atomic Squeezebox

[Unclenny]

After reading all of the discussion in other threads on multiband compression......both on the mix and on vocals, I have recently re-discovered the Waves C-1 for my vocals. I've found it useful to tweak a single bandwidth that may be troublesome before sending the signal to a different comp for more light and careful stomping.

[Methlab]

I put the Waves C4 in there first off and mess with the pop vocal setting. I then use Rvox later in the chain and that usually does it.

when you guys say run it through the sansamp..are you talking about the bass driver DI? Is that pretty much what people are using on snares and things like that for reamping?

[KingUgly]

Originally Posted by Methlab

when you guys say run it through the sansamp.

Sometimes I use the sans amp (plugin) on a bus and vary the amount to taste so that's not a distortion effect necessarily, but rather a means of jamming certain frequencies in order to make the vocal pop. It's program dependent of course, but it can be a quick and useful way to help out a vocal that is just languishing in a mix.

[Methlab]

Originally Posted by KingUgly

Sometimes I use the sans amp (plugin) on a bus and vary the amount to taste so that's not a distortion effect necessarily, but rather a means of jamming certain frequencies in order to make the vocal pop. It's program dependent of course, but it can be a quick and useful way to help out a vocal that is just languishing in a mix.

Right, but would the sansamp bass driver work for this application? Thats what Im wondering. I have the DI pedal.

[mrface2112]

Originally Posted by RawDepth

Yes, but if you pull the faders down too much at spots, it will simply sound the same as too much compression.

i'll disagree for the same reason acoustic cloud did--there's a sonic difference between "too quiet" and a compressor sucking the life out of something. i'd far rather deal with "oops, fader too low".

Originally Posted by RawDepth

Noticeable volume drops can still sound bad no matter how they happen, automatically or manually.

agreed.....but then again, that's our job right? making it sound good? and not making the volume drops noticible? that's where the art in mixing lies......hence *ride* the fader. it takes practice.

Originally Posted by RawDepth

When using compression, there seems to be a happy medium point between where the vocals come to life and where they begin to nosedive toward deflated misery. Put your ears to work. The art is in finding that usable spot on the dial. Automation or envelopes might make life easier in a dynamic song but you've still got to earn "that great sound" the old fashioned way.

+1 +1 +1 +1 amen brother. that's exactly what i was trying to say. see, I thought you and i were speaking to the same point here.

fwiw, i'll usually do both--compress (and/or limit, depending on what's called for) and ride the fader (draw automation, etc). diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.


cheers,
wade

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by Stoneroses6300

I'm working with a singer now who is pretty solid on pitch but has a voice that a bit light for the harder type of stones/ pyschedelic rock there doing...

With a thin voice, there's only so much that can be done. Over-compression will most certainly make the voice sound even thinner. I'd use thoughtful EQ to add a bit of meat and then make sure that the arrangement of the song leaves enough room for the voice. The denser and louder the 'band' is, the thinner the singer will sound. That might work for certain styles but personally I'm very tired of the 'distortion/megaphone' effect often used in such cases.

Remember than you could also mute say a distorted guitar during the verses and bring it back in at other points in the mix and the result will most certainly be much more dynamic with the added benefit of making the singer sound 'weightier' too.