do you guys find yourself using more compression when talent is not that good?

[nessup]

The short answer is yes, the long answer is not necessarily.

Short answer: Yes, you compress bad singers because their dynamics do not mesh with the intent of the song.

Long answer: Not necessarily; some great singers (Beyonce, Patrick Stump, certain screamo guys, etc...) are loud because it's the only way they can produce the tones in their voice that they intend to record. Compression, in this case, is more like an artistic liberator: it allows for loud tones to be bumped down in the mix while still retaining their emotional intensity.

At the end of the day, I say you should make your decision based on the style of music in light of the skill of the singer. If you think the singer is ill-suited to the style of music and poor dynamics are a reflection of that, then chances are you'll need to do more than just compression to make it work. On the other hand, if you think the singer has a ton of emotion going for him and just needs to be smushed, then go for it. Remember, this whole thing is an art form.

[jonathan jetter]

i would say no.

these days i'm in a phase where i use a lot of compression on everything. modern music is as dependent on mixing as it is on anything else.

[betamatt]

yes, yes and yes. also a direct relationship between no. of overdubs and amount of compression used. For me more live tracking, better musicianship, and less use of headphones all can lead to less compression

[kelvyn]

Isn't it more a case of 'the right tools for the job'. Dynamic playing in the right context can be very interesting. Sometimes we need to tame the beast and sometimes the beast needs to roar

[mdme_sadie]

Oh hells yeah, when I'm the "talent" I have the compressor dialed up so hard it's pumping out square waves! If it's good enough for 99.99% of modern pop production then it's good enough for me :D.

[mikeyrad]

Thanks for the replies guys now I feel like I'm not the only one.

I do use compression what I feel like its needed but also If i feel like I'm using it more when the client is not as good to get the song rockin and glued

[cavern]

Not just compression.
The worst the talent,the higher the plug-in count.

[Slikjmuzik]

Yes, when the talent sux, your job is still to find a way to make what the layman hears as special. Same thing Dr. Luke does with Ke$ha.

[Jim Williams]

I find myself using more "muting".

[Charliewonder7]

I guess so coz I've found I use limited to none when I have great musicians

[taherbert]

IME, use of compression totally depends on the style of music, density of the arrangement, where you want the vocal to sit psychoacoustically in the mix, and the consistency of the vocalist/musician.

I use compressors (and sometimes limiters) for several things:
1) To make the volume level more consistent between soft and loud passages
2) To make the place where the vocal sits in the mix more consistent at different playback levels (limiters especially useful for this)
3) To emphasize the proximity effect and/or feeling of intimacy on a vocal and make something seem closer in the mix
4) As an effect to alter the tone of a track, pump it a little, or affect the attack/decay envelope to bring out certain features of the sound (though I generally do this more with guitars, bass, and drums than vocals).
5) Compensate for bad mic technique of a vocalist or wildly dynamic bassist or guitarist in getting consistent levels to tape.

So of these considerations, only #5 depends on the talent, but yeah, it does play a role.

I generally do not find compressors useful as a tool to keep a vocalist from getting too loud or overloading the signal chain. For that I use a pad switch, gain knob, etc. If they consistently go from too quiet to too loud in the same take, I either split the track up into sections or try to find a mic/mic position that evens out the dynamics.