Does anyone else think that compression is WAY overused nowadays?

[Metaltastic]

what about using it to subdue the decay, sustain, and release, so that the initial hit seems punchier by comparison? I know you said "usually" but for me that's how I usually use it. maybe I'm a just a retard - I suck with natural drum sounds.

+1, and not only that, but if you have the attack set to let the transient through, how would you go about using the compressor to bring up the D/S/R? (since IME make-up gain just functions as an overall output fader, rather than only bringing up what's been compressed, though maybe that depends on the comp.)

 

[AdamWathan]

+1, and not only that, but if you have the attack set to let the transient through, how would you go about using the compressor to bring up the D/S/R? (since IME make-up gain just functions as an overall output fader, rather than only bringing up what's been compressed, though maybe that depends on the comp.)

Yeah confused me a bit too... If you are letting the transient pass through unaffected, then you are bringing DOWN the decay... If you bring up the decay with the makeup gain then you are bringing up the transient as well, the only way to actually make the decay seem louder compared to the transient is to squash the transient...

I've always been under the impression that compressing drums was all about making them pop, by exaggerating the transient and bringing down the decay and ring, which is why I have been struggling to find a compressor that even does that well, everything I find is way too fast. Like Ermz said in another thread, how the hell is anyone using an 1176 on drums for anything other than squashing rooms or parallel comp? Is there a legendary compressor for individual drum purposes? What's the king of slow attack compressors for getting that pop?

 

[James Murphy]

this is why compressors have a Make-Up Gain control.

if you are using a Compressor as UEAK said, and the rest of you seem to be thinking, you have turned it into an Expander, because you have increased the different between louder and softer parts of the program material... that's called Expansion.... and most compressors are very good at Expansion as well.

Compression decreases the difference between the louder and softer parts of the the program material... in the case of a drum sound then, if you've compressed it, the Attack vs the Decay/Sustain/Release will be a bit closer in amplitude.

if you're using a compressor to increase the difference between dynamics, you're using it as an Expander.

all "compressors", or at least most fully featured ones (including plug-in and hardware versions) are capable of Compression, Expansion, and Limiting.... often Gating too. this is why they are more properly called Dynamics Processors rather than simply "compressors".... but "compressor" is the common vernacular.

 

[AdamWathan]

this is why compressors have a Make-Up Gain control.

if you are using a Compressor as UEAK said, and the rest of you seem to be thinking, you have turned it into an Expander, because you have increased the different between louder and softer parts of the program material... that's called Expansion.... and most compressors are very good at Expansion as well.

Compression decreases the difference between the louder and softer parts of the the program material... in the case of a drum sound then, if you've compressed it, the Attack vs the Decay/Sustain/Release will be a bit closer in amplitude.

if you're using a compressor to increase the difference between dynamics, you're using it as an Expander.

all "compressors", or at least most fully featured ones (including plug-in and hardware versions) are capable of Compression, Expansion, and Limiting.... often Gating too. this is why they are more properly called Dynamics Processors rather than simply "compressors".... but "compressor" is the common vernacular.

Hey thanks James, can you explain in a bit more detail though? Like I said, I assumed that if you let the attack through (so the compressor is not touching the attack) and then compress the sustain, the sustain goes DOWN in volume, and when you raise the makeup gain, it brings the whole thing up (attack and sustain both)... So unless you are compressing the entire hit (attack and sustain) then it is working as an expander.... The only way to decrease the dynamic range between the attack and the sustain is to compress the attack but set the release and threshold so that the sustain DOESN'T get compressed, and then use the makeup gain to bring the attack back to where it was BEFORE compressing, while raising the sustain at the same time, giving the impression of increasing the ring/sustain...


So in a nutshell, how can you use a compressor to compress instead of expand if you are setting the attack slow enough to let the transient through...?

 

[James Murphy]

Hey thanks James, can you explain in a bit more detail though? Like I said, I assumed that if you let the attack through (so the compressor is not touching the attack) and then compress the sustain, the sustain goes DOWN in volume, and when you raise the makeup gain, it brings the whole thing up (attack and sustain both)... So unless you are compressing the entire hit (attack and sustain) then it is working as an expander.... The only way to decrease the dynamic range between the attack and the sustain is to compress the attack but set the release and threshold so that the sustain DOESN'T get compressed, and then use the makeup gain to bring the attack back to where it was BEFORE compressing, while raising the sustain at the same time, giving the impression of increasing the ring/sustain...


So in a nutshell, how can you use a compressor to compress instead of expand if you are setting the attack slow enough to let the transient through...?

yep. you're exactly right... sounds like you got it to me. we just tend to think of everything as compression.. because we're dong it with a compressor.... but when you increase the dynamic range, rather than decrease it, you are actually Expanding.

i may have misunderstood, or too quickly read, some of the replies to my first post... but it sounds like you understand exactly what's happening.

pointing out the difference in this case between compression and expansion, is being fairly technical... and it's not as important to the Original Post as is understanding that you should set an attack time long enough to allow the attack to get through, so as not to kill the drums.

the compressor's action in this case will increase the perceived loudness of the d/s/r.... by reducing the difference the between their amplitudes.. so relative to each other, the decay, sustain, and release will be compressed.... relative to the attack, the difference between the attack and d/s/r have been expanded, , and that's how you really get drum sounds to ''pop" without killing the decay altogether.

yep, compressors can be a bastard to wrap your head around... but once you do, they become a powerful tool... until you do, they are one of the easiest ways to destroy your mix.

 

[AdamWathan]

yep. you're exactly right... sounds like you got it to me. we just tend to think of everything as compression.. because we're dong it with a compressor.... but when you increase the dynamic range, rather than decrease it, you are actually Expanding.

i may have misunderstood, or too quickly read, some of the replies to my first post... but it sounds like you understand exactly what's happening.

pointing out the difference in this case between compression and expansion, is being fairly technical... and it's not as important to the Original Post, or to Ermz's reply to it that i was agreeing with in my first post in this thread, as understanding that you should set an attack time long enough to allow the attack to get through, so as not to kill the drums.

Awesome thanks James. So when using a compressor on drum tracks, the idea is actually to use it as an expander usually, to kill ring and bring out the pop, like I originally thought but wasn't connecting the terminology properly, cool stuff.

 

[James Murphy]

kill the ring... nah.... the d/s/r part of the envelope will be compressed... actually giving it more perceived sustain, despite that the d/s/r as a whole will be lower in relation to the attack. a carelly set gate will "kill the ring" if that's what you want to do.

you may have missed this part of my last post, which was added with an edit:

"the compressor's action in this case will increase the perceived loudness of the d/s/r.... by reducing the difference the between their amplitudes.. so relative to each other, the decay, sustain, and release will be compressed.... relative to the attack however, the difference between the attack and d/s/r have been expanded, , and that's how you really get drum sounds to ''pop" without killing the decay altogether.

yep, compressors can be a bastard to wrap your head around... but once you do, they become a powerful tool... until you do, they are one of the easiest ways to destroy your mix."

 

[Suicide_As_Alibi]

For the most part, good compression should be fairly transparent - it's about evening notes/hits out in relation to the notes immediately around it. Okay, so you might want your chorus louder than your verse, but you still want all the snare hits in the chorus to be the same volume. In that sense, on individual instruments, it's quite hard to overuse it on a natural source as even at the same volume every note/hit will sound slightly different. Where it gets abused is on buses/full mixes where it's used solely to make things louder.

The problem with the dynamics argument is that not everyone thinks of it in the same terms. Dynamic range in a compressed single track is not the same as the dynamics of a fully mixed song. When you talk about a dynamic song, it means there's variations from section-to-section (verse to chorus etc.), which can be achieved not only through compression and overall volume, but with layering, EQ, effects, tempo, and most importantly with how it's played in the first place. When I'm recording guitars, I almost always play more gently in verse parts than choruses - you get less attack, the notes' sustain is more even, and the whole thing sounds less urgent. With distortion, you obviously get less crunch too. Even at the same volume, gently played tracks feel quieter. Personally, if the playing is all fairly similar across the whole song and the end result sounds a bit repetitive or dull, I mix the whole thing to the same level, and then on the mixed-down track I use an envelope to bring down the verses a touch - literally 1dB or so. Listening back you don't even notice the volume change, it just feels like the chorus is bigger.
bi
It's why you have to be careful with comments like Ermz made. When he says he doesn't want dynamic tracks, he means he doesn't want big volume changes - literally, in audio engineering terms, that's right. But stylistically, dynamics don't just refer to volume. The human brain is designed to pay more attention to changes than constants - constants are predictable and safe; changes might be important or dangerous, so they peak our interest. The reason the death metal scene now puts in slow breakdowns and clean parts with orchestration etc. is because the early bands were so full on all the time that it just got boring (and with early DM recordings, painful) to listen to. It doesn't matter how heavy or fast your band is, if they're fast and heavy for too long our brains switch off. Grindcore overcame that fatiguing nature largely by making the songs short (and the songs rarely lead in to each other - there's always moments of silence between tracks); death metal expanded the sound instead. They don't get quieter necessarily, they just change things up. Saying all that, you have to remember that "loud" is a relative term - without quiet, there is no loud.

Metaltastic : You put the threshold so that more-or-less everything is over it by a decent amount, including most of the decay of the notes/hits. As the note fades out, the compression eases off so the volume is reduced by less but is still over the threshold, so is still compressed. Because the volume of the decay is gradually reduced by less, it give the impression that the sustain is longer, and it means the D/S/R don't drop off as much - so relative to the attack it is louder. You need to balance it with the 'release' of the compressor to make sure it sounds natural. If your attack is long enough though, the initial transient still gets through without getting the full effect of the compression, as compression is gradually increased over the length of the 'attack' phase - the attack is how long it takes to go from no compression to whatever ratio you're using. It's a real balancing act getting the threshold right so that most of the decay is compressed, but there is a tiny moment before each hit when it isn't.

Steve

 

[AdamWathan]

kill the ring... nah.... the d/s/r part of the envelope will be compressed... actually giving it more perceived sustain, despite that the d/s/r as a whole will be lower in relation to the attack. a carelly set gate will "kill the ring" if that's what you want to do.

you may have missed this part of my last post, which was added with an edit:

"the compressor's action in this case will increase the perceived loudness of the d/s/r.... by reducing the difference the between their amplitudes.. so relative to each other, the decay, sustain, and release will be compressed.... relative to the attack, the difference between the attack and d/s/r have been expanded, , and that's how you really get drum sounds to ''pop" without killing the decay altogether.

yep, compressors can be a bastard to wrap your head around... but once you do, they become a powerful tool... until you do, they are one of the easiest ways to destroy your mix."

Wow I've never even thought of that, makes perfect sense! So you are basically taking everything after the initial thwack of say a snare hit for example, evening out all of the ring and decay so that the snare has some more even body, but still letting the transient pass through before hand so it doesn't get lost in with the rest of the sound... Totally understand now, makes so much sense and a little light just turned on about how to properly set some of these parameters now... Thanks so much dude, that was super helpful!

I have been struggling a lot with proper use of compression on percussive elements but I'm now realizing it's because I was trying to do something totally the wrong way, now that I actually know what I'm trying to do with the damn thing I am already getting much poppier AND fatter drum sounds, so stoked on this. I feel like a n00b.

 

[James Murphy]

Wow I've never even thought of that, makes perfect sense! So you are basically taking everything after the initial thwack of say a snare hit for example, evening out all of the ring and decay so that the snare has some more even body, but still letting the transient pass through before hand so it doesn't get lost in with the rest of the sound... Totally understand now, makes so much sense and a little light just turned on about how to properly set some of these parameters now... Thanks so much dude, that was super helpful!

np

snare is pretty abrupt compared to a tom though.. you'll hear it way better if you practice on a tom with a nice decay.

 

[AerialThesis]

The release phase of a compressor is what's making the tail of a sound louder and sustained. Raising the volume afterwards is simply bringing your compressed material up in volume, not bringing your tail up in volume but simply the whole shit. You guys talk about a downward compressor as an expander, but this statement is totally false. The release time of a compressor is the time between the moment it started compressing to the moment it will stop. If the music goes downward, but the release does not (ex: 1.5second release), the music will stay around the treshold and have more sustain. It is the release phase that makes the content louder. You are not expanding shit when compressing.

 

[James Murphy]

yeah..i did say i was being "technical" about that point, did i not? i meant exactly what you are saying.. and i spoke of that in some detail when i said the delay/sustain/release part of the envelope is being compressed... just re-read my posts more clearly.... but the attack is NOT being compressed when the attack-time is set long enough to let it through, it is only being affected by the make-up gain.... what i meant here, and again i tried to make it clear, is that the NET EFFECT of this is that the difference in amplitude between the attack and the d/s/r is increased, not decreased. that is, technically, expansion... because relative amplitude differences are "expanded" and not "compressed". the reason why i referred to it as being a "technicality" was that we are talking about individual drum hits here, and not total program material i.e., as in one hit relative to another) of a given track.

we were originally talking about drums being "killed" by compression... again, i worded it the way i did in order to make it clear that the attack is made louder in relation to the d/s/r of the snare's envelope... exactly because it's not being compressed, and the d/s/r is. using the term "expansion" here, i knew i was going to get some overly literal interpretations, so i went to pains to explain clearly the context in which i was using the term... which was in a very liberal fashion... in order to make it clear that the difference between the attck and d/s/r of the snare would be increased in the scenario we were discussing... not decreased.

i read a lot of this thread quickly, and fired off replies just as quickly, because i'm mixing today... so perhaps i didn't write with enough clarity, but i think it's clear that what i'm talking about is correct:

amplitude/dynamics decreased = compression

amplitude/dynamics decreased = expansion

to be totally clear, actual Expander functionality vs. net result of traditional compressor functionality is the difference between what ArielThesis is saying and what i said. actual Expansion functionality involves reversed ratios, e.g. 1:2 rather than 2:1... etc...

i was speaking of the net result of compression with a slow attack on single events... which, for a third time now, is that the attack becomes louder than the remaining envelope... thus the ability of appropriate compressor settings to allow drums to really "pop".

sorry if i was being too oblique.

 

[drew_drummer]

Is compression way over-used?

Well.. I'd rather not sound like something from the 40's ... kthxbye.

 

[[UEAK]Clowd]

thanks for that explanation, James. I understand what I'm doing a whole lot more now while compressing drums.

much love.

 

[AerialThesis]

yeah..i did say i was being "technical" about that point, did i not? i meant exactly what you are saying.. and i spoke of that in some detail when i said the delay/sustain/release part of the envelope is being compressed... just re-read my posts more clearly.... but the attack is NOT being compressed when the attack-time is set long enough to let it through, it is only being affected by the make-up gain.... what i meant here, and again i tried to make it clear, is that the NET EFFECT of this is that the difference in amplitude between the attack and the d/s/r is increased, not decreased. that is, technically, expansion... because relative amplitude differences are "expanded" and not "compressed". the reason why i referred to it as being a "technicality" was that we are talking about individual drum hits here, and not total program material i.e., as in one hit relative to another) of a given track.

we were originally talking about drums being "killed" by compression... again, i worded it the way i did in order to make it clear that the attack is made louder in relation to the d/s/r of the snare's envelope... exactly because it's not being compressed, and the d/s/r is. using the term "expansion" here, i knew i was going to get some overly literal interpretations, so i went to pains to explain clearly the context in which i was using the term... which was in a very liberal fashion... in order to make it clear that the difference between the attck and d/s/r of the snare would be increased in the scenario we were discussing... not decreased.

i read a lot of this thread quickly, and fired off replies just as quickly, because i'm mixing today... so perhaps i didn't write with enough clarity, but i think it's clear that what i'm talking about is correct:

amplitude/dynamics decreased = compression

amplitude/dynamics decreased = expansion

to be totally clear, actual Expander functionality vs. net result of traditional compressor functionality is the difference between what ArielThesis is saying and what i said. actual Expansion functionality involves reversed ratios, e.g. 1:2 rather than 2:1... etc...

i was speaking of the net result of compression with a slow attack on single events... which, for a third time now, is that the attack becomes louder than the remaining envelope... thus the ability of appropriate compressor settings to allow drums to really "pop".

sorry if i was being too oblique.

Exactly thanks for clarifying: A good use of paralel expansion mixed with accurate compression (with a medium to slow attack time) can really accentuate the dynamics of a drum.

Limiting your drums afterwards is killing all that hard work tought. A nicely compressed and expanded drum stem that keeps bouncing from around -10dBFS to full scale does sound really, really punchy. Limiting it afterwards so it goes from around -2dBFS to full scale is simply stupid and kills all that hard work you have been up to.

That is where I believe compression should not be used these days. I firmly believe and testify that some drums from old rock bands like Supertramp, Yes and Led Zeppelin are punchier than todays flat pancakes. Modern heavily compressed drum tracks may seem punchier, but doesn't feel like it at all. (except for the kicks low end, that still has to punch you in the chest these days and still feels great)

The problem with metal music having to be compressed is due to the kick's low end during fast parts where the ear has not much downtime during each hit to assimilate the next one has punchy. But compressing something that allready has not much downtime will simply make it louder, but in a wimpy loud manner.

My true opinion about compression is that it can be one of your best tool to work on seperate tracks or some stems, but compressing a whole mix in order to make it louder simply kills all that nice work youv'e been doing on the individual tracks, making the mix sound alot more monophonic or cluttered, killing the clarity and life behind every instruments (uncomprehensible lyrics and absent bass guitars) and creating artifacts such as pumping, clipping and instruments fighting against each other.

If you guys really want to make your content louder, but still alot more clear, sidechaining or automating stuff can really help sometimes. There is a part in the song Duality by Slipknot, at a certain point before the vocals comes in, where the guitars back off a bit and get panned more to the side to give space to the vocals wich are quite clear when they kick in even with all the processing that's on it.

 

[ElektricEyez]

One thing I've quite never understood is the attack and release times. Sure you judge it by ear yadda yadda, but just exactly how fast is 10ms in relation to lets say a snare hit or a tom, or even the beginning phrase of a vocal. Lets say someone sings 1 banana 2 banana... (I know its a totally cheeseball example but its all I could think of) If your setting the compressor to say 30ms , will it compress the '1' or the 'ba'? Or say a snare hit, you hear 'crack' cr being the initial attack, a being the middle and ck being the ring of the snare. If you were trying to make your snare in your face, according to what James explained you would want the compressor to start compressing during the 'a' what would you set that to approx? Like 30ms?

 

[drew_drummer]

Er... look at the waveform in your DAW, and count 30ms from the initial peak that corresponds with your threshold setting.... that place is where the compressor reaches the end of its attack stage, and begins its release stage.

 

[AHChris]

Just do it by ear man...

Put the compressor on the snare track, set attack to the fastest setting and increase the attack time until you hear the crack coming through. Easy as pie.

 

[ElektricEyez]

Not a bad idea, I'll have to try that. I'm still curious what the general knowledge is behind this though?

 

[ElektricEyez]

Just do it by ear man...

Put the compressor on the snare track, set attack to the fastest setting and increase the attack time until you hear the crack coming through. Easy as pie.

But is it now? So many people get it wrong.