setting up the precision multiband

[Remco]

How do you set-up the precision multiband? What do you do first, what do you look for, etc. I find it quite hard to set it up optimally. My mixes are more or less ok, so I don't need settings that compensate for mix-faults. So, what's the catch?
I usually first put the precision EQ, then the precision multiband and then the precision limiter. I'm looking for tips.
Second question. Why don't the presets work when I use the multiband in Waveburner (Mac)?
Thanks.

 

[ByronSanto]

Setting Up A Multi-Band Compressor

The concepts that I’m about to explain for programming a multi-band compressor for your source material can be applied to all multi-band compressors regardless of the number of bands or the manufacture.

1) Create a “Starter Template” which will consist of ALL bands threshold set to 0db. All bands ratio set to 1:1. All bands attack time set to max and all bands release time set to the shortest time. All bands volumes either off or muted.

2) It’s now time to set the crossovers for each band. Let’s set the Low band crossover. Increase the Volume or Un-mute the Low band. Without any compression being applied sweep thru the crossover frequencies till you find a point that makes your low band well defined or punchy.

3) Next we will set the Attack time. First set your Ratio to 10:1 and lower your Threshold until you get to about 6-10db gain reduction. Now begin to slowly decrease your attack time. When the source material becomes punchy with no artifacts you have found the Attack time for the low band.

4) Now we can set the release time. Increase the release time until there is no pumping or breathing in the band.

5) Then comes the Ratio & Threshold settings which I have found to be determined on the end result that your are trying to achieve, i.e. low threshold with a low ratio or high threshold with a high ratio or anything in between

6) Lower the Volume of the Low band and proceed to the next band by increasing the volume or un-muting. Follow steps 2-5 for each band

7) After each band is programmed it’s time to either raise all of the band volumes or un-mute them. Adjust each bands volume to taste.

8 ) Some parameters may need to be tweaked once each bands volume is set but you now have a preset that is tailored to your song.

9) Also keep in mind that this approach may work for a good percentage of your source material but you may have to automate certain parameters as the source material changes drastically.

You may also consider using the Expander on your Low band if your lacking in low end.

 

[Plec]

How do you set-up the precision multiband? What do you do first, what do you look for, etc. I find it quite hard to set it up optimally. My mixes are more or less ok, so I don't need settings that compensate for mix-faults. So, what's the catch?
I usually first put the precision EQ, then the precision multiband and then the precision limiter. I'm looking for tips.
Second question. Why don't the presets work when I use the multiband in Waveburner (Mac)?
Thanks.

If you don't need to compensate for mix-faults, you don't even need a multiband compressor.

IMHO,,
If you lack punch - go back to the mix
If you need to de-ess - go back to the mix
If you need to keep anything else "in check" - go back to the mix

- That is... if you can. If you can't go back to the mix... then multiband saves the day.

 

[Remco]

Thanks a lot for the detailed list! Very helpful. I was doing it this way, more or less, but the way you describe it is better organized and logical.
Can't help thinking though that it was better for me to buy a normal compressor for mastering, like the PSP MixPack. I don't think the LA2A is a good choice as a mastering compressor, is it?

 

[ByronSanto]

Thanks a lot for the detailed list! Very helpful. I was doing it this way, more or less, but the way you describe it is better organized and logical.
Can't help thinking though that it was better for me to buy a normal compressor for mastering, like the PSP MixPack. I don't think the LA2A is a good choice as a mastering compressor, is it?

In the appraoch that I take with my mastering is that I will use single & multi-band compressors chained together. My compression approach to my mixes is not a corrective tool but more of a final tonal shaping tool, i.e. my mix is the cake and the single/multi-band compression is the icing. So with that in mind, an LA2A could work if it is used for the icing or to add to the overall tonal shaping or coloration. Now if one was correcting mix problems then I would tend to use the multi-band only.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

I'm sure it's no surprise that I'm WAAAAYYY in Plec's corner on this...

On a mix that sounds good already, maul-the-band compression should stay away.

 

[ByronSanto]

I'm sure it's no surprise that I'm WAAAAYYY in Plec's corner on this...

On a mix that sounds good already, maul-the-band compression should stay away.

Just wondering. if your received a mix that required Multi-Band Compression due to "Bad Mixing" how would your set up your multi-band compressor?

 

[Plec]

In my mind I tend to see the MB as a dynamic EQ/frequency limiter more than a \"multi-band-compressor\". In all honesty... there are really very few mixes that get away with NO multiband processing these days. Most of the stuff I get are produced by either engineers with lesser experience and lower than par monitoring or very experienced engineers that are used to mixing analog and to analog tape, and when they mix in the digital domain it doesn't quite behave in the same way that they're used to and so they're stuck with some nasty problems that needs adressing.

If I get a problematic mix to work on I try to do as much as I can with EQ first. If you want to avoid as many problems as possible, it's much better IMO to shape the spectrum without any dynamic movement. When I've adressed the issue/s at hand and taken it as far as it'll go with EQ and I'm still not satisified, THEN I'll bring out the multiband and sort of \"frame\" the problem area dynamically as much as I can.

Depending on the audio that needs control, I will either have to use a very quick attack time to grab the stuff I don't want to shoot through or a slow attack time and lower threshold if I need more of a soft sculpting while still letting the dynamics through so you don't get unnatural pumping, then set the release for what sounds most natural and in tune with the program. For what it's worth.. I seldom find myself using attack times under 1ms or over 50ms and for the releases I usually go between 100ms and 500ms, all depending on the frequency range and the program at hand of course.

I guess that is my default mindset, but then again every program is different and the only thing that really works is experience. One thing I can tell you for sure is that I don't like the sound of multiband processing so I only use it as a last resort and as little as possible. On some programs you can be more brutal and you don't notice it and on some stuff it's the other way around.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

I'm sure it's no surprise that I'm WAAAAYYY in Plec's corner on this...

On a mix that sounds good already, maul-the-band compression should stay away.

Just wondering. if your received a mix that required Multi-Band Compression due to "Bad Mixing" how would your set up your multi-band compressor?

However the mix asks me to. Every mix being different and unique, the only starting point is to listen.

 

[ByronSanto]

However the mix asks me to. Every mix being different and unique, the only starting point is to listen.

Maybe I should have rephrased the question.
What is your procedure for setting up MBC's. I'm not interested in parameter settings which are unique to each mix and as we all know presets are useless!

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Then maybe I don't understand the question... If a mix were to require MBC, I'd insert it and set it up to make the mix sound the way I imagine it in my head...

Am I not understanding something? I haven't had enough coffee today...

 

[Plec]

I second MASSIVE... I don't get what you mean either..?

 

[Horse]

Heh - you guys! Stop playing hard to get :wink:

Now that I've started to look at this multiband lark, I thought it'd be an idea to stick a spectrograph across a mix to try and work out what was going on with the frequencies. The first thing that surprised me was how much of the 'body' of a song is in a narrower range than I first thought: just to round things up, let's say 100hz up to 4khz.

But then within that you're looking at an even tighter band where most of the 'action' take place - say 250hz to 2khz. So this has moved the multiband from being a 'general' tool to something that you have to use with a little more accuracy.

I guess it's just experience that allow you to identify by ear the frequencies that need addressing in a mix - the adjustment of the parameters to get the desired results must be secondary to that.

 

[Cabbage]

I think you may have better luck trying to get advice from someone who thinks MBC is a good idea in the first place.

Thus far, my procedure for setting up PMB is:
1. Listening hard for what I feel needs to be changed.
2. Turn the knobs until it sounds good.
3. A/B against the original.
4. Conclude that the original sounds better.
5. Remove the multiband from chain.

Oh, I did remove some hihat spil in the snare mic using the PMB.

Good luck!

Petter

 

[ByronSanto]

Then maybe I don't understand the question... If a mix were to require MBC, I'd insert it and set it up to make the mix sound the way I imagine it in my head...

Am I not understanding something? I haven't had enough coffee today...

What is the "Systematic Procedure" that you use to setup a MBC? In which order do you tweak parameter values?

In my "Systematic Procedure" I described how I setup a MBC, one band at a time with all other bands muted. I do not just grab random parameters and start tweaking. Isolating a single parameter value within an entire mix when no other bands are muted can be misleading when using a MBC.

If you do not wish to disclose you "Procedure" then that is fine. I understand that the art of programming a MBC with a "Systematic Procedure" may be considered by some Esoteric information.

 

[Plec]

Hmm.. well, I guess Massive and I don't really think that much about what we're doing 'cause it's just so intuitive to us having worked on A LOT of different mixes and sounds over the years.

I'll try to explain more in detail how I do it...

1. Decide on EXACTLY what you need to be done as a result:
If you just start \"playing around\" with the thing you will probably do more harm than good. Any time you feel you've lost track on EXACTLY what it is you're doing... STOP and rewind a bit. This is true for any type of processing you're doing. Making informed decisions is your job!

2. Set up the frequency bands you need and disable the rest:
There is no reason to use all the bands just because they are there. The more bands you use, the more artifacts you will get.

3. Set-up your attack/release/ratio for the band in question:
Set up all the paramaters for what you \"think\" you will need. This is important since you will learn a lot faster. If you're working on high frequencies you must remember that high frequencies have a lot higher cycles/second by nature so you will be working with faster settings than with lower frequencies. Having an attack time of let's say 3ms while compressing low frequencies like 100Hz and below will give you a lot of distorsion as a starting point. Setting your attack and release times right is frequency and program dependent so it's very hard giving any good guidelines there. Once you know exactly what you need to be done and you've experimented enough with it, the answer will magically appear to you . A tip is to get really good at setting up a normal broadband compressor first on a number of different sources and ask yourself why this works here, and not there etc... then everything will fall into place.

4. Adjust threshold for the type of effect you had in mind:
Set up your thr for the type of gainreduction/expansion you need and if it's necessary go back and fine-tune your parameters to get exactly what you needed.

5. Multiband - DO NOT's:
* NEVER audition/solo a single band over the rest. As soon as you do this your ears will start adjusting to the new program and when you un-solo it will sound strange to you no matter what you were doing. ALWAYS tweak settings while auditioning the entire spectrum.

* You do not want to use an MB to the point where you really start noticing a change in the sound, if it's not totally appropriate for the music that is. When you reach this point.. back of a bit. One of the biggest differences between pro-mastering engineers and beginners is that the pro's learned from a lot of experience how far you can take different processes before it starts hurting instead of helping.

 

[ByronSanto]

5. Multiband - DO NOT's:
* NEVER audition/solo a single band over the rest. As soon as you do this your ears will start adjusting to the new program and when you un-solo it will sound strange to you no matter what you were doing. ALWAYS tweak settings while auditioning the entire spectrum.

Wow, guess I'll need to tell my mentor, who is a developer of hardware MBC’s that his instructions to me were incorrect.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Then maybe I don't understand the question... If a mix were to require MBC, I'd insert it and set it up to make the mix sound the way I imagine it in my head...

Am I not understanding something? I haven't had enough coffee today...

What is the "Systematic Procedure" that you use to setup a MBC? In which order do you tweak parameter values?

In my "Systematic Procedure" I described how I setup a MBC, one band at a time with all other bands muted. I do not just grab random parameters and start tweaking. Isolating a single parameter value within an entire mix when no other bands are muted can be misleading when using a MBC.

If you do not wish to disclose you "Procedure" then that is fine. I understand that the art of programming a MBC with a "Systematic Procedure" may be considered by some Esoteric information.

I'm not trying to "not disclose" anything - I listen, I visualize what I want to hear, and I set up whatever I'm using to get me there, usually without listening. I don't even want to hear the change - I want to hear the result. I make the settings that I think are needed without the track playing, then turn it back on and tweak it a little if needed (sometimes the threshold might require some sort of adjustment - I tend to start VERY conservatively).

If I'm listening to a fast, heavy tune that has a guitar "thwump" at around 110Hz, I'm going to set it up to handle that thwump. If I'm listening to something with a hi-hat that sounds like it was recorded with a C-1000, I'm going to set it up for that.

I don't know if you'd consider that a systematic procedure, but that's it in a nutshell. I set it up like I'd set up anything else. Listen, visualize, shut off, set up the chain, turn on, tweak. If I don't have a very clear end-game in mind - A specific idea of what I'm going to do with the tool, I don't put it in the chain. "I want 2dB of gain reduction on the side signal only between 100 and 180Hz..." If it isn't that specific in my head, I go have a coffee. And the procedure would be to set up the chain to do that. I don't need to listen to the signal while I'm doing it - I already know what it should sound like when it's done. If it doesn't, THEN I worry about tweaking the parameters. Again, usually the threshold, and thank Jeebus for the "mix" control - because you can bet that I'm going to bring it down until it's *just* doing what I want it to do.

 

[saemskin]

5. Multiband - DO NOT's:
* NEVER audition/solo a single band over the rest. As soon as you do this your ears will start adjusting to the new program and when you un-solo it will sound strange to you no matter what you were doing. ALWAYS tweak settings while auditioning the entire spectrum.

Wow, guess I'll need to tell my mentor, who is a developer of hardware MBC’s that his instructions to me were incorrect.

As someone who doenst know which of you is correct in this case, and I usually tend to believe people who seem to know what they are talking about, which is both of you.
Is this truly a matter of preference? I thought I was learning something from this thread, now you two are confusing me. :x

Could either of you perhaps elaborate a little more on why you believe your method to be "more" accurate than the other? Or, as I mentioned already, it this a case of your ears working differently?

 

[ByronSanto]

As someone who doenst know which of you is correct in this case, and I usually tend to believe people who seem to know what they are talking about, which is both of you.
Is this truly a matter of preference? I thought I was learning something from this thread, now you two are confusing me. :x

Could either of you perhaps elaborate a little more on why you believe your method to be "more" accurate than the other? Or, as I mentioned already, it this a case of your ears working differently?

I think what you are seeing are the various ways of using a MBC. As John mentions, he uses it for corrective purposes. Myself, if I cannot get that little extra that I'm looking for in my mix or on a specfic inst then I use the MBC as a tonal shaping device. I may only use band or all of them to achieve what my minds ear is hearing. I'll also add this, I'm an extended range bassist and MBC's have shaped my bass tone quite a few times.

And after taking part in this GREAT thread I believe that the "systematic procedure" should be determined by the usage of the MBC, whether it be corrective or tonal shaping.