Why do multiband eq/compressors translate so horribly?

[ORC]

I think that you will find that we mastering enigineers rarely, if ever use multiband compressors or limiters. I personally often use one digital eq, 2 analog eq's, 2 outboard compressors, and one digital limiter. Also, I only use these eq's and comps when needed. When I recieve really excellent mixes, I often don't have to to much at all, except level match tracks.

From a mixing standpoint, i would stay away from multiband anything, unless you're getting stellar results, which it seems you aren't.

[StringBean]

I been hearing that MBC is becoming a crutch for those super crazy loud masters some guys are pumpin out these days.

It makes sense: when you can maximize the loudness of particular frequency ranges you can really get an entire mix blasting.

That being said, I do not have an ear for them yet (compression alone is a beast) and stay far away until the day I feel I'm ready to jump in. But used wisely I can see (and hear) the potential.

[Thor]

Every time I've tried it, it made things worse. Maybe I just wasn't using it correctly, but I've always found a better solution some other way than with MB comp. In every case it ended up causing more problems than what we were trying to solve.

YMMV. But don't believe what the magazines tell you. MB is not some mastering engineer secret to loud masters. Not at all. (and believe me, we've made some *really loud* masters through the years - not that I would advocate it. Our job is to serve the client, in the end).

Thor

[Ace Carson]

I got a grip on MBC awhile ago and got some satisfactory results (comparing to the "dry" mix). The thing in multiband compression is subtlety - ordinary compressor techniquies do not quite translate to individual band settings. If used very scarcely and with a knowledge of what you're doing, MBC tend to produce great results.

[wado1942]

Why are you screwing with the mix after you got it sounding great?

[acorneau]

Originally Posted by P2thaDro

I can have a great mix (to my ears) and add a C4 or linearMB to the Masterbuss.

To ask the obvious question...

If you have a "great mix" then why are you adding a multi-band compressor (or anything else, for that matter) at all?!?

[sanddigger1]

Originally Posted by StringBean

I been hearing that MBC is becoming a crutch for those super crazy loud masters some guys are pumpin out these days.

It makes sense: when you can maximize the loudness of particular frequency ranges you can really get an entire mix blasting.

That being said, I do not have an ear for them yet (compression alone is a beast) and stay far away until the day I feel I'm ready to jump in. But used wisely I can see (and hear) the potential.

What you're saying might seem intuitive, but it's not the way it works. MBCs can help with poor mixes which cannot be redone, if you've got to tame a random snare drum using a single band, as an example, but that's all. Same for the multiband enhancer in Ozone which is useful only in 'restoration mastering' of very low quality recordings.
Not only compressors are not necessary in all mastering jobs, but they play no or very little part in the loudness processing. Same goes for multiband ones which are more prone to generate weird artifacts that will be brought up by further limiting/clipping/whatever.
MBCs were hype a few years ago, the craze didnt last, for good reasons.

And multiband limiters are pure evil and should be outlawed on the whole Earth. The worst thing I've ever heard was a 'master' done by a young but usually gifted mix engineer who managed to add to the usual overlimiting artifacts a flanger-like effect caused by multiband pumping of the satanic Waves L3. And the average RMS was 'only' -9...

[wado1942]

Originally Posted by sanddigger1

MBCs were hype a few years ago, the craze didnt last, for good reasons.

I don't know about that. More people are taking them for granted now than ever. I had a guy ask me if I ever use wide-band compression on vocals at all or if I ONLY use multi-band. I could only comment that I've never used an MBC on any individual track. Then there's been several guys who thought I was an ignorant fossil for not only using a hardware compressor, but it wasn't even multi-band.

Good point about compression not really helping with loudness, BTW. I've done many masters recently with no compression at all or even applied expansion.

[Rick Sutton]

How deep do you set that MB to cause translation problems? I'm guessing a lot of the hate on MBC has to do with too aggressive use.
On a TC 5000 MD2 a starting point of -6.0 threshold (0 being out of circuit), 2.0 or 1.8/1 ratio and fairly relaxed attack/release can be useful and not cause the damage that some think that all MBC are guilty of.
At least that's my experience.

[arnielarsen]

If I remember correctly when I read Bob Katz mastering book he references multi-band compressors with steep flank curves as a source of trouble he does not recommend using them I believe he said they could cause phase issues. that could mess up your sound

[Babaluma]

I wouldn't know because I never use them.

I've heard tragic abuse with them from inexperienced mix engineers though.

[Zownd]

Only way to use them is to select a single band.
On the frequency where there might be a problem.

for that I would suggest looking into Brainworx DynEQ,.. it does just that.
Only one band, but with more control.

[jampot]

I've recently finished a mix and used the McDSP multiband compressor on the bass guitar, sounds beautiful, really smooth. I guess its all about the application.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Gearslutz App

[Zownd]

Originally Posted by jampot

I've recently finished a mix and used the McDSP multiband compressor on the bass guitar, sounds beautiful, really smooth. I guess its all about the application.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Gearslutz App

For mixing I DO see the application, but in mastering it can just wreck everything.

[stinkyfingers]

i love multi-band compression (...and limiting)
but multi-band clipping is where it's at...
i got this one master so loud it should probably be illegal and it sounded like total shit but the artist loved it and that was his sound anyways so whatever buys dog food, ya know...

[Ace Carson]

I mainly use it as an upward compressor during mastering so it doesn't really wreck anything given reasonable amounts of compression.
During mixing it is very good for de-essing.
Also gentle band-pass slopes sound smoother with MBC for me.

[Laurend]

Originally Posted by P2thaDro

I know I am just using it wrong but even on default settings it causes this. It makes it sound so much better on PT too.

MB are very powerful processors which require a lot time and experiments to be used wisely.
Most default presets are just plain wrong on regular compressors. There're very few chances a default preset can be OK on a MB.

[Brian Cares]

Originally Posted by P2thaDro

Why do multiband eq/compressors translate so horribly?

Phase distortion.

[grrrayson]

Originally Posted by Laurend

There're very few chances a default preset can be OK on a MB.

Years ago when I was working my way up I assisted Jean-Marie Horvat on a mixing session and he put the C4 on something in a mix. I asked him about the settings and he said, "Oh, I just always leave it on the default preset. Either it works or it doesn't."

Originally Posted by P2thaDro

Why do multiband eq/compressors translate so horribly?

I'd argue that no signal processor ever "translates" (or doesn't translate). It's your monitoring system/environment that either translates or not.

[Rick Sutton]

Originally Posted by grrrayson

I'd argue that no signal processor ever "translates" (or doesn't translate). It's your monitoring system/environment that either translates or not.

Absolutely agree with this. I think this thread is built on a false premise and you just narrowed in on it.

[grrrayson]

Originally Posted by Rick Sutton

Absolutely agree with this. I think this thread is built on a false premise and you just narrowed in on it.

Cheers, Good Sir!

[Bob Olhsson]

Broad strokes with processing are what translate well. Stuff like multi-bands tend to optimize for the listening environment where they are tweaked. The cold hard truth is that even the very best monitoring is still flying blind.

[teebaum]

why companies like weiss/maselec/tubetech make mb or dynamic eq's and you find them in many serious masteringstudios?
because they sound shitty, make only strange phase distortions (explain me the sound of phase distortion...) or destroy your signal?
a great mix normaly didn't need mb-dynamics, but most people are not able to use a mb proper or just tell you, they are bad because it's so popular today to say this.
nearly every masteringengineer i know use them - daily.
a maselec is great to tighten up the bass, for de-essing (this is also mb or dynamic eq). some digital mb's like soniformer or gliss can help you to control to loud notes of a bass much less noticeable than any eq.
mb's & dynamic eq's are powerfull tools who should used careful.

[ncoak]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Broad strokes with processing are what translate well. Stuff like multi-bands tend to optimize for the listening environment where they are tweaked. The cold hard truth is that even the very best monitoring is still flying blind.

well said

[engmix]

as a mixer i often use multibands for vocal and bass plosives, but that's really just using the comp as a dynamic eq. These days i get a lot of vocal tracks that sound like a handheld mic was used, or constant moving in and out of the mic. This is where mb comps are a life saver, and in this type of situation i will often use 4 bands. It's also sometimes cool on drum overheads where the drummer is heavy handed on cymbals. MB on an entire mix is a crap shoot, it either works or it doesn't, but that pretty much goes with every other processor one can use on the master bus. One doesn't need a multiband compressor to ruin a good mix.

[ckreon]

I got into them back in the day. I had some fun with them, then started to dislike what it was doing (mostly due to user-error). I stopped using them for years.

Recently I've gotten back into them again, and am absolutely loving it! I'm much more conservative with them now, and use them in the mixing stage on individual elements, not on the whole mix (as was the case before).

I imagine I'll get tired of them soon again for one reason or another

[nambams]

The very nature of splitting the entire mix into discrete frequency bands with filters/crossovers, treating them individually and recombining them does irreparable damage to the integrity of the signal as a whole.

Yes, MB is useful for treating some specific problem area, but to generally use it just to 'pump things up' may not be the best idea...

[grrrayson]

Originally Posted by nambams

splitting the entire mix into discrete frequency bands with filters/crossovers, treating them individually and recombining them

Isn't that what EQ is (more or less)?

[QuadWing]

I'm in the same boat as a lot of people here. I never use them. When I do, they sound good for the first day, then the next day the mix sounds like complete crap, so I take it off.