In theory this works... but does it really?

[ecsound]

Hey guys,

I've been mixing ITB for a while and I decided to use some outboard just to see what it's like....I want a console now.

Before I can afford what I want, I just have outboard. I don't have a stereo compressor, but I do have an LA610. Obviously I can't send a stereo track through it and get stereo out, but could I buss a main mix one side at a time and record it back into my DAW? In theory all the information would still be there and it would be bus compressed on the same settings as if it was a stereo compressor. Would it work?

[Watersound]

I think it would work but it wouldn't give you the same effect as a stereo compressor but rather a stereo compressor in dual mono or un-linked mode...the best way to know what it's like is to try it out, if it sounds good, roll with it

[ecsound]

that's the only drawback i was thinking of! i guess i'll try it and see how it sounds! thank you!

[Unclenny]

I'm liking this idea.

I could take my stereo mix track (PT), split it into two mono's and send them one at a time to my Trident 4T strip for some EQ/Comp.

I'll be curious as to how your experiment works out.

[Jules]

I see trouble ahead!

If the compressor reacts even fractionally differently on pass 2 than on pass 1 then the centrally panned sounds may suffer phase issues due to the minute differences in compression 'action' effecting frequencies

But let us know how it works out!

[amishsixstringe]

When you listen back to it you may need a puke bucket. Be sure to put some water in it first, so it doesn't splash up at your face when you hit the dry bottom of the bucket with your puke.


You'll hear some wobblyness.


Neil

[ecsound]

Originally Posted by amishsixstringe

When you listen back to it you may need a puke bucket. Be sure to put some water in it first, so it doesn't splash up at your face when you hit the dry bottom of the bucket with your puke.


You'll hear some wobblyness.


Neil

Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I'll be sure to let you know how it pans out.

[manthe]

Originally Posted by Jules

I see trouble ahead!

If the compressor reacts even fractionally differently on pass 2 than on pass 1 then the centrally panned sounds may suffer phase issues due to the minute differences in compression 'action' effecting frequencies

But let us know how it works out!

+1!

[manthe]

Originally Posted by ecsound

Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. I'll be sure to let you know how it pans out.

He wasn't being insulting, he is just humorously illustrating the fact that what you are thinking of doing will cause the audio to sound 'wobbly'. The vomit reference is an attempt to liken it to, for instance, watching a home video where the camera holder is shaking the whole time.

[Mushy]

Originally Posted by Jules

I see trouble ahead!

If the compressor reacts even fractionally differently on pass 2 than on pass 1 then the centrally panned sounds may suffer phase issues due to the minute differences in compression 'action' effecting frequencies

But let us know how it works out!

There are soooo many variables from pass to pass that the compressor hitting differently is the LEAST of your worries. For instance, how reliable is your clock source? If you are doing this with an LE or M-Audio box I predict you will get two files of different lengths in the end (by samples of course but enough to throw your stereo image in the garbage.

One way to prevent the uneven compression problem (which isn't possible with an LA-610 because of the lack of key input but I thought I'd post a solution anyway) is to bus a mono summed mix out of a separate output and use that to key the compressor. That way it's getting triggered by both sides of the mix in both passes.

Again tho, I still think it would sound phasey and wacky unless you had your system locked to the US Atomic Clock or something.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Jules

But let us know how it works out!

So........

I took an ITB bounced stereo track, split into mono's and ran each side through the 4T with the EQ and dynamics engaged......didn't fool too much with it for this experiment, but I made certain that I changed nothing for each side's run.

BTW....PTLE, RME ADI-2.

Then I bounced them back onto a stereo track (ITB) to compare to the original. Even without any serious tweakage I'm liking the difference I hear.

Below is the new 4T track.....sounds stable to me but you guys have way better ears.

Serious thanks to ecsound for this idea.

Little Wonder 4T

[Mushy]

Originally Posted by Unclenny

So........

Little Wonder 4T

Hard to comment without a before and after.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Mushy

Hard to comment without a before and after.

Yeah......I know.

In the interest of audio science I'll get the original up shortly.

[Unclenny]

OK.......FWIW

Little Wonder

Little Wonder 4T

Or go to the Band Page on that site to toggle between the two. Curious if anybody hears a difference.

Kudos again to ecsound for thinking outside the proverbial box.

[Mushy]

As I suspected, the center image is WAY more focused in the original. I can really hear the difference when the bass comes in. As far as any benefits from this process, I like the old mix better anyway. You certainly weren't in need of any more compression.

Just my 2¢.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by Jules

I see trouble ahead!

If the compressor reacts even fractionally differently on pass 2 than on pass 1 then the centrally panned sounds may suffer phase issues due to the minute differences in compression 'action' effecting frequencies

But let us know how it works out!

On the other hand, Lanois has said in the past that he will use two unlinked comps on the 2Buss "just to see what happens".

But yeah, as Jules indicates, you are submitting yourself to fate.

[ecsound]

Originally Posted by Unclenny

Kudos again to ecsound for thinking outside the proverbial box.

haha, thanks man. i guess it was truly an otb idea. i like using it in mono and i KNOW it works; stereo's just my next test. i can't hear any problems in the 4t sample, i wonder if it'd make sense to analyze it?

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by ecsound

i like using it in mono and i KNOW it works; stereo's just my next test.

Me too.

First blush on my little experiment was that it sounded more open and the instruments sounded more distinct. The problem is, of course, that I wanted it to sound that way......and my abused brain is not that trustworthy.

The fact that there are way better ears here than mine (thanks, Mushy, for your analysis) leads me toward caution.

I think I'll do another tune or two and give it the best listen I can.

I imagine that you'll be doing the same.

[Jack Ruston]

The main problem with it is that you cant mix with it in there from the get go. And that's the whole thing with mix bus compression...it's part of the mix, not something you apply to the mix at the end...otherwise the mix would need to be slightly wrong, as anticipated by you, so that the final process would make it 'right'. How likely is that to work?

J

[Kiwiburger]

An alternative idea for using a mono compressor on a stereo mix ...

Convert your stereo mix into Mid & Side (Sum & Difference). Send these M & S channels to a mixer - first with the compressor inserted on the Mid channel.

Use the mixer to decode the processed M/S back into L/R.

This means you can hear what this M/S processing is doing in real time, and retrack L/R simultaneously with no phase alignment necessary.

Simply compressing the Mid information might be all that is necessary. But if not, you can do it again, and this time compress the Side information.

Could be worth trying.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Jack Ruston

The main problem with it is that you cant mix with it in there from the get go. And that's the whole thing with mix bus compression...it's part of the mix, not something you apply to the mix at the end...otherwise the mix would need to be slightly wrong, as anticipated by you, so that the final process would make it 'right'. How likely is that to work?

J

This is exactly what I'm finding out as I work through a few of the tunes I'm working on.

The tracks I'm getting from the Trident sound SO much clearer....instruments are more distinct, seperation is better, there is more depth....all of the things you guys get from your quality outboard stuff. I'm not hearing any phasing issues.

BUT............the problems with the mix are now somewhat glaring. I had an inkling of that when Mushy remarked about the bass coming in. That particular bass track needs some help in the mix. I'm picking up things that I simply didn't hear before, including distortion issues, balance problems....you name it. Kind of makes me want to reach for that bucket.

Hey....it's all good, though.....they are my mixes and I don't charge by the hour.

I'm going to end up with something that I didn't think was possible with the gear I have. It may take a while, but time I've got.

[Watersound]

Originally Posted by Jack Ruston

The main problem with it is that you cant mix with it in there from the get go. And that's the whole thing with mix bus compression...it's part of the mix, not something you apply to the mix at the end...otherwise the mix would need to be slightly wrong, as anticipated by you, so that the final process would make it 'right'. How likely is that to work?

J

This is very true.

[dbbubba]

Originally Posted by Jack Ruston

The main problem with it is that you cant mix with it in there from the get go. And that's the whole thing with mix bus compression...it's part of the mix, not something you apply to the mix at the end...otherwise the mix would need to be slightly wrong, as anticipated by you, so that the final process would make it 'right'. How likely is that to work?

J

I will agree that the method described won't let you hear what you are doing to both channels at once.
I don't think that you absolutely need to have the compression applied when you mix.

Personally, I don't and never have mixed with compression on the 2-mix for music stuff. Radio/TV stuff that is a finished mix and ready to be delivered for broadcast, yes.
I apply compression later as a "mastering" type of process.
I just don't want to make the compression decision and be stuck with it.

I still wouldn't use a mono compressor and two passes even if I only had one, fantastically great, mono compressor.
There are too many things that can and will happen to the mix once you listen afte processing this way.

[Mushy]

Originally Posted by dbbubba

.
Personally, I don't and never have mixed with compression on the 2-mix for music stuff. Radio/TV stuff that is a finished mix and ready to be delivered for broadcast, yes.
I apply compression later as a "mastering" type of process.
I just don't want to make the compression decision and be stuck with it.

I personally find it WAY more helpful to mix with a compressor in the circuit if the mix is to be compressed ultimately. Why? Because compression changes your mix. I'm a huge believer in color through compression so it's helpful to me to hear how my mix is being colored while I'm mixing. Also, balances between instruments are HUGELY affected by compression. I can't tell you how many times an artist has sent me back a mix that he/she had "mastered" and the drums are gone from the mix because of the "clever compression" that the mastering dude slapped on my mix.

This is all BS philosophy nonsense and I'm not trying to start a fight, but there is also the element of committing to your sound. If not while mixing then when? Just like a great mix isn't going to fix a bad song, a great compressor or mastering blah blah isn't going to fix a crap mix.

Not to say that Unclenny's mix was crap, of course. I personally thought it had great character. My advice to Unclenny would be: If you aren't satisfied with it, hone in on the elements IN THE MIX that you aren't happy with and tweek them until you are. There isn't a magic box or plug that you can drop over your mix that's going to give you what you are looking for. The beauty is in the details and all you have to do is find it. That's half the fun right there.

And when you are done and YOU are happy... OWN IT! Say to anyone who will listen, "This is what this piece of music is SUPPOSED to sound like!" and more often than not, they will agree with you. There is no right way or wrong way. If it moves you then it's bound to move at least one other person in this world... And that's art....

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Mushy

There isn't a magic box or plug that you can drop over your mix that's going to give you what you are looking for. The beauty is in the details and all you have to do is find it. That's half the fun right there.

And when you are done and YOU are happy... OWN IT! Say to anyone who will listen, "This is what this piece of music is SUPPOSED to sound like!" and more often than not, they will agree with you. There is no right way or wrong way. If it moves you then it's bound to move at least one other person in this world... And that's art....

Great stuff!!

Anyway........I put a few tunes through this system yesterday and was really forced to go back to the mixes for corrections.

The Trident 4T became like a magnifier for me....which was both good and bad. With great attention paid to all of the facets involved in using a channel strip in a mastering chain I believe I have achieved something that would not have been possible before.........high quality EQ circuitry and a decent compressor, both of which allowed me to twist knobs for a change.

Was all that time spent worth it? For me.....absolutely!

Here are a couple of the results.
The Train 4T
The Train

Life's Hard 4T
Life's Hard

[duckoff]

An alternative idea for using a mono compressor on a stereo mix ...

Convert your stereo mix into Mid & Side (Sum & Difference). Send these M & S channels to a mixer - first with the compressor inserted on the Mid channel.

Use the mixer to decode the processed M/S back into L/R.

This means you can hear what this M/S processing is doing in real time, and retrack L/R simultaneously with no phase alignment necessary.

Simply compressing the Mid information might be all that is necessary. But if not, you can do it again, and this time compress the Side information.

Could be worth trying.

nice idea - at least it would be stable ( panoramically speaking )

[manthe]

Lenny - I tried to post this before, but somehow it didnt go through

Anyhow, I know that you and I are particularly big fans of the 4T, and I wanted to impart this important nugget of info. As you might remember, I have 2. Among the many fabulous reasons to own 2 is an amazing and virtually undocumented feature...

There are those jacks on the back labeled CV In and CV Out. the CV jacks carry a control voltage signal for the compressor on the tip and the timing circuit reference on the ring and do not carry any audio signal.

The purpose of the CV in and CV out jacks is to enable the chaining together of two or more 4T Celebration Channels. To do this you simply need to connect the CV output of one unit (master) to the CV input of the next unit (slave) using a standard stereo TRS cable. When linked together, the slave unit will follow the master unit in respect of the attach, release, ratio and threshold controls. All other controls on the 4T units will remain separate.

This is one of the most versatile channel strips I've ever used or even heard about. As if you really *needed* another reason to want to get a 2nd one

Anyhow, this feature makes what you are trying to do a true reality. Having 2 is like have a true stereo unit (finalizer??)

Anyhow, just FYI...

Originally Posted by Unclenny

Great stuff!!

Anyway........I put a few tunes through this system yesterday and was really forced to go back to the mixes for corrections.

The Trident 4T became like a magnifier for me....which was both good and bad. With great attention paid to all of the facets involved in using a channel strip in a mastering chain I believe I have achieved something that would not have been possible before.........high quality EQ circuitry and a decent compressor, both of which allowed me to twist knobs for a change.

Was all that time spent worth it? For me.....absolutely!

Here are a couple of the results.
The Train 4T
The Train

Life's Hard 4T
Life's Hard

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by manthe

Among the many fabulous reasons to own 2 is an amazing and virtually undocumented feature...

Hey Mike.....

Thanks.....I remember clearly your post about this from some time ago......been interested in finding a way to incorporate my single unit into the end game since then. I passed on a second unit on EBay.......wish I hadn't.

That said, I was pleasantly surprised by the results I got from this convoluted yet effective system of finalizing with one channel. I really wasn't asking for much from the dynamics section.....which may have saved me from the potential nastiness as described in the above posts. My goal was to take advantage of that creamy EQ.

With this project in the can I'll be on the lookout for another 4T for the next sessions.

[Vogon]

Originally Posted by Kiwiburger

Convert your stereo mix into Mid & Side.

Yep. It's easy and it'd work perfectly - considering...

[cornboy7x]

is there a sidechain input on the LA? you could sum the mix outputs and send that in the sidechain and then send each side through it independently.

just a thought. i didnt bother reading the whole thread in case this was already mentioned.