Compression on the final mix?

[d46163]

Ok, someone clue me in here...I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would ever want to put compression on the output bus of their stereo mix BEFORE sending it to the mastering guy..Several folks on the forum speak of buying cheap gear like the ART piece and putting on the final mix. Even if the results "sound" ok, 1 shouldn't compression on the final mix be at the descretion of the mastering engineer and 2 from a technical aspect, what's a $300 piece of equipment REALLY doing to my audio?? I understand the purpose of the compression but if you have to put it on the master bus before sending to the mastering guy shouldn't that indicate a problem with the mix? Shouldn't that mean going back and fixing the track or tracks that are causing the problem? If you're going for an "effect" ok, beyond that, I don't get it!

-dle

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by d46163

Ok, someone clue me in here...I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would ever want to put compression on the output bus of their stereo mix BEFORE sending it to the mastering guy..Several folks on the forum speak of buying cheap gear like the ART piece and putting on the final mix. Even if the results "sound" ok, 1 shouldn't compression on the final mix be at the descretion of the mastering engineer and 2 from a technical aspect, what's a $300 piece of equipment REALLY doing to my audio?? I understand the purpose of the compression but if you have to put it on the master bus before sending to the mastering guy shouldn't that indicate a problem with the mix? Shouldn't that mean going back and fixing the track or tracks that are causing the problem? If you're going for an "effect" ok, beyond that, I don't get it!

-dle

The end result is all that matters. It's fairly common practice, but like with anything else it's up to the user to get it right. Someone who will ruin a mix with 2 mix compression probably won't make a great one without it anyway.

[pingu]

What Chris said.



and this Ill have to quote UBK.

the point to this whole game (from our end) is the mix. tone is a factor, but so are balances and attitude. mixing into a 2buss compressor allows you to create a mix that you simply CANNOT create without the compressor patched in, nor can you create it by slapping the compressor on after the fact. the envelope shaping and tonal response of the compressor are integral to the mix. i have built mixes where the mix comp was invisible, you'd never know one was working so diligently. but hit that bypass button and everything fell completely apart, you would never in a million years build a mix like that and send it off to mastering.

if the only tool you have to allow for that kind of action is a plugin, one that perhaps degrades the tone but enables a mix that surpasses in every other regard --- balance, energy, coherence --- is the choice not obvious?

the use of 2 buss compression at mixtime is a delicate craft, and allows for possibilities that are unavailable anywhere else, anytime else. this point cannot be overstated, and you can ignore it at your own peril.

this is art, after all, and i'm always suspicious of any conversation about art that contains some variation of the phrase "you should never." limitations and rules? really?


gregoire
del
ubk

I cant mix without anything on the buss
ITB

[Kiwiburger]

I don't get it either. And I don't do it (mixing Cubase SX3 ITB).

I can see that it would affect the way you mix - sure.

Maybe I have to work harder.

Every mix and every mix engineer is different. If it works for some people I suppose it works for those people.

I would still send the ME a mix through the cheap compressor and a mix without.

[JonCraig]

thou shalt not post without searching first.



--jon

[jayfrigo]

If it sounds good, do it. If you aren't very experienced with it, be conservative at first. Don't do it just because you think you're supposed to, or thinking you can avoid having to make a good mix by slamming it. If it doesn't help, don't do it. Sometimes it sounds great.

The main thing to avoid is hard limiting or clipping on a mix that is destined for mastering. Don't anything purely for level. It ties the mastering engineer's hands and limits how much the mix can be helped. Maybe that's why they call it limiting...

[Durv]

I'll just say that i LOVE the UA Multiband on the 2 bus.
But never SQUISHING it to hell. i dont use it ALL the time, but its definitely one that i have come to use at times.
its great. its not a "cheapy" plug either to my ears.
I think a couple people also use the SONALKSIS one??
i hear good things about it.
Durv

[Bob Olhsson]

There are generally some things good about overall compression and at the same time some things not so good. Beware that it's really easy to overlook the problems when it's doing something you really like.

I can often find a way to accomplish the same thing in the mix without the compressor on the buss. For example just compressing a bass and drums submix can give you low-end "glue" without losing clarity or pumping the lead lines too much.

[Durv]

I can often find a way to accomplish the same thing in the mix without the compressor on the buss. For example just compressing a bass and drums submix can give you low-end "glue" without losing clarity or pumping the lead lines too much.
Today 04:33 AM

Hence YOU are Mr.Bob Olhsson.
i WISHED i had skills like that!
i DO love my Samp 8.3, i just dont have the experience thus far....one day??

Durv

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by d46163

Ok, someone clue me in here...I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would ever want to put compression on the output bus of their stereo mix BEFORE sending it to the mastering guy..Several folks on the forum speak of buying cheap gear like the ART piece and putting on the final mix. Even if the results "sound" ok, 1 shouldn't compression on the final mix be at the descretion of the mastering engineer and 2 from a technical aspect, what's a $300 piece of equipment REALLY doing to my audio?? I understand the purpose of the compression but if you have to put it on the master bus before sending to the mastering guy shouldn't that indicate a problem with the mix? Shouldn't that mean going back and fixing the track or tracks that are causing the problem? If you're going for an "effect" ok, beyond that, I don't get it!

-dle

your not supposed to put a $300 piece of crap on your mix buss. One reason why you would use a good compressor ala SSL FG384, Crane Song STC-8, API 2500 etc is because your mix will change when it gets mastered with out it. The idea is to slap it on fairly early and mix into the compressor.

[d46163]

ok, those are some good thoughts...I know this topic has already been covered and I'm not questioning anyone's artistic freedom..I understand there are no rules and your ears are the final authority. Further, I agree...Guess what I'm getting at is if the mastering engineer is probably going to compress and limit your mix, why would you throw compression on the master bus before mastering? I can't remember a time when I ever compressed a bass track then threw another compressor on top of that! Wouldn't that be like doing the same thing to your mix? I think good mastering engineers would know much better than I what's appropriate on the final mix anyway. That's why we pay them isn't it?!

My final thought is not regarding sonic perception but rather geared at technical specs. Since we spend so much time and money getting the best mics, pre's and converters we can find, even with the best compressors out there, I can't imagine compressing a mix twice would have positive effects. What happened to getting it right the first time?!

[gabler]

Originally Posted by d46163

ok, those are some good thoughts...I know this topic has already been covered and I'm not questioning anyone's artistic freedom..I understand there are no rules and your ears are the final authority. Further, I agree...Guess what I'm getting at is if the mastering engineer is probably going to compress and limit your mix, why would you throw compression on the master bus before mastering? I can't remember a time when I ever compressed a bass track then threw another compressor on top of that! Wouldn't that be like doing the same thing to your mix? I think good mastering engineers would know much better than I what's appropriate on the final mix anyway. That's why we pay them isn't it?!

My final thought is not regarding sonic perception but rather geared at technical specs. Since we spend so much time and money getting the best mics, pre's and converters we can find, even with the best compressors out there, I can't imagine compressing a mix twice would have positive effects. What happened to getting it right the first time?!

It is common to compress a vocal,and sometimes other insruments while tracking then adding more when mixing then some on the whole mix,a mastering engineer may add more compression even later. We dont pay mastering engineers for compression only... If you mix into a compressor on the 2 buss you may use less on each individual channel. Same thing you can do with an EQ.

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by d46163

ok, those are some good thoughts...I know this topic has already been covered and I'm not questioning anyone's artistic freedom..I understand there are no rules and your ears are the final authority. Further, I agree...Guess what I'm getting at is if the mastering engineer is probably going to compress and limit your mix, why would you throw compression on the master bus before mastering? I can't remember a time when I ever compressed a bass track then threw another compressor on top of that! Wouldn't that be like doing the same thing to your mix? I think good mastering engineers would know much better than I what's appropriate on the final mix anyway. That's why we pay them isn't it?!

My final thought is not regarding sonic perception but rather geared at technical specs. Since we spend so much time and money getting the best mics, pre's and converters we can find, even with the best compressors out there, I can't imagine compressing a mix twice would have positive effects. What happened to getting it right the first time?!

If you're not comfortable with the approach you shouldn't use it. You probably won't get very good results. I can tell you for a fact that it is a VERY popular technique [and as always some folks use it to better effect that others]. If your looking for someone to tell you that it's WRONG or that it's a bad practice you're barking up the wrong tree.

[JonCraig]

Originally Posted by d46163

I can't remember a time when I ever compressed a bass track then threw another compressor on top of that!

actually... that one is a great trick. two compressors each knocking of 4 dB can sound a lot better than one knocking off 8dB. get my drift?

i regularly double compress a vocal (first one will be really light ratio, like 1.5:1, slow attack, really low threshold. second will be a higher ratio, say, 2 or 2.5:1, faster attack, higher threshold.) the first one does general squeezing, the second one kicks in if things really start to get crazy.

bass also benefits from this kind of treatment, as does steel guitar.

but i digress from mastering...

--jon

[Kayo]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

There are generally some things good about overall compression and at the same time some things not so good. Beware that it's really easy to overlook the problems when it's doing something you really like.

I can often find a way to accomplish the same thing in the mix without the compressor on the buss. For example just compressing a bass and drums submix can give you low-end "glue" without losing clarity or pumping the lead lines too much.

Mr. Olhsson...
That was great advice.. my tunnel vision... blown apart... BOOOMM!!!!
Thankyou sir..