The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Distressor is for kicking ass!!
Old 1st May 2003
  #1
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Distressor is for kicking ass!!

Had to share my appreciation!

I've got other stuff in the studio, but nothing with as much character and nards.

Thanks Dave! thumbsup
Old 1st May 2003
  #2
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

INDEEDYDOODY!!! THIS THING HAS RAT TESTICLES!!!
Old 2nd May 2003
  #3
Gear addict
 
ExistanceMusic's Avatar
 

That'd be the new marketing catchphrase then?

Old 2nd May 2003
  #4
The Distressor's "daddy"
 
Dave Derr's Avatar
 

Character and nards and rat testicles? HA HAAAAA

OH man! Im chortling here... and I dont even know what that means!

I see new promotional literature coming out... may we use your guys quotes?? lol

You folks are just downright Kinky. I like it!

That being said... you know, designing gear, like any serious scientific or creative undertaking, you have to spend a horrid amount of hours alone, locked up and isolated from the world, tinkering, experimenting, revising, and doing things that really no one else can help you too much with. Its like homework, ya know?

Writing books, composing music, theoretical math, engineering, painting and anything artistic really, even physical sports and dancing require an unnatural amount of hours alone, concentrating on the snags and glitches that can prevent the break throughs of doing something different or exceptional. Some people work fast and really methodically and need less of this time than others. I'm not one of those, dammit. What Im getting around to is that hearing you all say these nice things kind of makes all that time worth it (ok, well... the money helps). So thanks again for makin me crack up and motivating me to go back to my lab and try to create things with "Rat Testicles" that will make you happy when you use them.
Old 2nd May 2003
  #5
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Hey Dave --

Just wanted to say a quick hello!! hope all is well, and i look forward to your insights...

Cheers,
John
Old 2nd May 2003
  #6
The Distressor's "daddy"
 
Dave Derr's Avatar
 

John Paterno!

Hiya. Been listening to several albums you mixed lately and love them! I had to give up the Jeffrey Gaines CD to one of the gang here and she wont give it back. Think I should fire her?

Also we love the John Osborne (SP) CD. That spends a lot of time in the car CD player. That album has such a mood to it, especially the first song with that wierd middle eastern modal melody. Crispy and full as hell. Incidently, i met Billy Ward, her drummer and partied with him and his wife in NYC last year at her Bday party. Geoff Daking took me there What a great guy. He has one hell of a Jazz record collection.

Since this is a gear oriented crowd... i have a technical question for ya. What De-essers do you use?? I used to like the Orban and the DBx modular one (the dBx902?), and then often used the little dBx 163's is it? They were cheap but seemed to work so well. I did this mod to them that just made sure no noise was added by the instrument jack on the front. Davd Blackmer from dBx was a genious and I was so sorry that he passed away recently. Earthworks is carrying on his legacy thank god, and Eric is one of those guys I try to spend time with at the shows.

SOooo... would u mind telling us your thoughts on de-essers? Any other tricks to getting those great vocal sounds you come up with?
Old 2nd May 2003
  #7
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Derr
John Paterno!

Hiya. Been listening to several albums you mixed lately and love them! I had to give up the Jeffrey Gaines CD to one of the gang here and she wont give it back. Think I should fire her?

Since this is a gear oriented crowd... i have a technical question for ya. What De-essers do you use?? I used to like the Orban and the DBx modular one, and then often used the little dBx 163's is it? They were cheap but seemed to work so well. I did this mod to them that just made sure no noise was added by the instrument jack on the front. Davd Blackmer from dBx was a genious and I was so sorry that he passed away recently. Earthworks is carrying on his legacy thank god, and Eric is one of those guys I try to spend time with at the shows.

SOooo... would u mind telling us your thoughts on de-essers? Any other tricks to getting those great vocal sounds you come up with?
Hey Dave --

You are too kind! I'll tell you what -- just to keep the peace at the company, I'll send you another copy. And you can tell her that yours has the artwork...

Thanks for your remarks on the vocal sounds. As far as de-essers, I have a few different approaches. It really depends on the situation, and the degree of de-essing needed. If it is light, I'll use the top band of a BSS 901 II 'dynamic EQ'. This is that 4 band, band limited compressor/expander. You can select a frequency, bandwidth, and amount of compression per band. If it is more serious, I still like the dBX 902. If Dave Blackmer was the guy who designed the 902, he is a genius! I have heard good things about the SPL de-esser, and I look forward to checking one out at some point.

On the digital side, if I'm using Pro Tools I will reach for the Waves de-sser plug in, which does the job well.

As far as the vocal sound, a lot of times I use a parallel compressor along with the main vocal track. Basically I take the signal on the main vocal channel, and buss it over to, quite a bit of the time, a Distressor set to pump pretty hard, and blend it in to taste with the main vocal channel. I usually EQ this a bit as well to focus the range in the main vocal I'm trying to beef up. Nothing earth shattering here, but it gets the job done.

Cheers and have fun moderating!!

-John
Old 2nd May 2003
  #8
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally posted by paterno


As far as the vocal sound, a lot of times I use a parallel compressor along with the main vocal track. Basically I take the signal on the main vocal channel, and buss it over to, quite a bit of the time, a Distressor set to pump pretty hard, and blend it in to taste with the main vocal channel. I usually EQ this a bit as well to focus the range in the main vocal I'm trying to beef up. Nothing earth shattering here, but it gets the job done.

Cheers and have fun moderating!!

-John
Parallel compression, it's not just from drums anymore. Thanks for the tip for use slow guys!
Old 2nd May 2003
  #9
Quote:
Originally posted by Drumsound
Parallel compression, it's not just from drums anymore. Thanks for the tip for use slow guys!

Where have you been?

Its been done for years and i don't mean a couple(at least a decade or as long as the SSL has been around).

Its a prefered way of compressing the mix without over doing it at the end.

The toughest are vocals though. I do more freq. dependent parallels(especially on vocals). Also you will end up doing more automation at the end.

But the mix will have more life to it.
Old 2nd May 2003
  #10
Lives for gear
 
faeflora's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by thethrillfactor
Where have you been?

The toughest are vocals though. I do more freq. dependent parallels(especially on vocals). Also you will end up doing more automation at the end.

But the mix will have more life to it.
Ahh sweet heavy compression! Nothing like automatic fader rides and in some instances automixing.

Smash that track into submission!

Hey speaking of multiband compression (I assume that is what you meant by freq specific compression thrill? or did you mean sidechain?), how's that tube tech mutiband unit?
Old 2nd May 2003
  #11
Quote:
Originally posted by faeflora
Ahh sweet heavy compression! Nothing like automatic fader rides and in some instances automixing.

Smash that track into submission!

Hey speaking of multiband compression (I assume that is what you meant by freq specific compression thrill? or did you mean sidechain?), how's that tube tech mutiband unit?
Hey Fae,

The best person to ask about is Jon, he owns one and uses it regularly.

I've used the A version and I remember it having phase problems at some frequencies. I did hear that they've fixed some of the anomalies.

The compression I am referring to is a combination of both. When mixing vocals i tend to make the comp freq dependent by running and EQ into it(making the comp react or not react to the freqs its seeing) not on a side chain, but into it. Also the EQ is usually a colored unit with some kinda personality to make the vocal have a little "pizzaz"? Sometimes I will have multiple channels of different ranges of the vocals(with different dynamic combinations) and automate that. Sometimes its easier to fix the "hot spots" in the vocal this way(especially the mids). In the verse use one combo, in the chorus use another, on certain words go here.

When doing drums and bass I usually split the sounds into its acoustic envelope, treating each stage differently. This way i can build really humongous sounds with character and not overpower my mix. I then automate it and make it blend.

This way I am not overpowering the stereo mix comp and i can retain more of the clarity. Also I've been able to not have to start with the mix comp on the mix(which is normal) and add it later, and the levels do not change as much.

This is one way to get bigger mixes without making them fatiguing.
Old 4th May 2003
  #12
jho
Lives for gear
 
jho's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by thethrillfactor
When doing drums and bass I usually split the sounds into its acoustic envelope, treating each stage differently. This way i can build really humongous sounds with character and not overpower my mix. I then automate it and make it blend.

This way I am not overpowering the stereo mix comp and i can retain more of the clarity. Also I've been able to not have to start with the mix comp on the mix(which is normal) and add it later, and the levels do not change as much.

This is one way to get bigger mixes without making them fatiguing.
TF, can you expand on this? Very interesting.
Old 4th May 2003
  #13
Quote:
Originally posted by jho
TF, can you expand on this? Very interesting.

Well the concept comes from breaking the drums/bass to its acoustic envelope, attack,decay,sustain and release.

Usually 3-5 channels with different processor combinations for each sound(kick,snare and bass).

Afterwards i just balance/blend them(automation) and and put it back together(also I might send them to drumsub and EQ and crush that).

If the original tracks are in excellent condition I might blend it all, if not I just use my new "franken track".

It takes lots of practice to find out the best processor combo for each aspect of the envelope(it can also be time consuming), but that's one of way to get really great rhythm tracks.
Old 5th May 2003
  #14
jho
Lives for gear
 
jho's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by thethrillfactor
Well the concept comes from breaking the drums/bass to its acoustic envelope, attack,decay,sustain and release.

Usually 3-5 channels with different processor combinations for each sound(kick,snare and bass).

Afterwards i just balance/blend them(automation) and and put it back together(also I might send them to drumsub and EQ and crush that).

If the original tracks are in excellent condition I might blend it all, if not I just use my new "franken track".

It takes lots of practice to find out the best processor combo for each aspect of the envelope(it can also be time consuming), but that's one of way to get really great rhythm tracks.
TF, thanks as usual for taking the time to respond

Are you doing in PT? and if so are you printing these 3-5 tracks, so that each's time delay going in/out PT can be delt with? that's a lot of things to line up to prevent phase
Old 5th May 2003
  #15
Quote:
Originally posted by jho
TF, thanks as usual for taking the time to respond

Are you doing in PT? and if so are you printing these 3-5 tracks, so that each's time delay going in/out PT can be delt with? that's a lot of things to line up to prevent phase

For Kick, snare, and bass alone I can end up with 16 tracks in PT.

Yeah the delay sh*t is a drag!!!heh

That's why I've been on Digi to finally get around fixing it.

It is very time consuming, but I am so used to it by now that I don't really think about it anymore(except at the start).

It drives my clients crazy though.heh

They don't understand what takes so long. Its hard explaining that I have to compensate for all of the delays inherent in PT.
Old 5th May 2003
  #16
no ssl yet
Guest
Man I thought I was crazy and I was the only person doing this. When I mix a song (PTOOLS) I end up with several drum tracks also. Especially since Most Rap/RnB songs start out with 3 or 4 snares and kicks or bass sounds layered to begin with. I can easily end up with kick/snr/bass taking up 20 tracks What I do since I'm limited as far as DSP is I put the same RTAS Plugs on all of my Kicks/snrs Usually Compressor bank/FilterBank/Pultec BF or analog channel

in my own Productions I try to commit stuff to tape during production Layering different sounds as representative of the acoustic envelope that Thrill spoke of. I often filter the sounds using filterbank and resample them according to position in acoustic envelope for that song

(Man I must have a million different versions of every kick/snare in my sample collection.)

Also any time someone comes by with a piece of outboard that I don't have I process some sounds through it and sample it usually in SSC because it is so easy to use Protools strip silence and Export selected as files to get drums into SSC

Ok So I'm nnot crazy afterall
Old 5th May 2003
  #17
The Distressor's "daddy"
 
Dave Derr's Avatar
 

I/O Delays is another of the big problems that keep the "On the Clock" Pros from moving away from their favorite analog boards and analog processing. Anytime they wanna do parallel processing, (often even with digital plug ins etc), they have to start double thinking about whether the phase or delay has been altered, and then dealing with it. The problem is compounded by the fact that different converters have different delays coming in and out of a system to an engineers favorite analog gear. This means an engineer cant become familiar with the delay of one system and think he can apply that same delay adjustment to the next system.

I heard of a time align plug in a few years ago but it doesnt seem to address the situation adequately (I forget the name of the plug in?).

This problem isnt peculiar to Protools etc, of course, because I have seen people fuss with Neve Capricorns, and Sony Oxfords to re-align tracks also.

I dont know if there is a tidy answer for this problem. Putting a pulse out thru all the channels, 50 dB down or something, and then seeing what tracks come back skewed seems pretty obvious, but what if the engineer has already offset some tracks on purpose? He would have to tell the system to "ignore" certain tracks for phase alignment. Does this make sense?

Many, many things can be done "off the clock" now at home on the engineers Protools (or other) system, but I have a feeling many big projects and many major engineers well still be running to their SSL's, Neves, and other large format analog boards for years, and years to come, and one of the reasons will be this dang track re-alignment problem.
Loading mentioned products ...
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
lakeshorephatty / So much gear, so little time!
6
SUGARCULT666 / So many guitars, so little time!
101
SoniqKwality / High end
3
RichT / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
9

Forum Jump