tracking with compression

[lance]

OK, so a number of years ago I did 2 sessions a couple of weeks apart. One on ADAT and one on 2 inch 456. Both got a quick rough mix and were put on a cassette. After listenig to both for little while the ADAT session sounded like it was too \"open\" for lack of a better term. Fast forward to the present. It seems alot of people say to record completely dry and then have a clean slate to work with in the box. So that's what I've been doing but I'm getting that \"too open\" sound. Now this could just be that I suck but Iwant to experiment a little bit. So, for shits and giggles, I think I'm going to try tracking everything with a touch of compression like 1.5:1 or something just to see how it sounds. So what about the rest of you. Do you track with or without compression? If yes, than what kinds of settings? On everything or just some things? Also what favorite comps and such. You know, what ever.

 

[imdrecordings]

A couple of reasons not to use it while tracking>
1. What's the point of having a great front end Pre/Mic, A-D and putting a compressor of lower quality(like Behringer, Presonus, JoeMeek,etc.) in line. Take the time puttting the mic in the right place and have the Player play as best they can.
2. I never have to compress Loud/Distorted guitars. It's just over kill!
3. Everytime I have tracked with compression, I've regreted it, because you can't take it away.
4. I use compression & limiting, as a tool for controling dynamics, mostly, and not for a sound. It's hard to do that before the take is recorded (for me)
5. with 24bit you don't have to record so hot that you need to compress the peak transients, so you don't clip. I don't go any where near zero.
6. The only time I might use compression (while tracking), would be if I liked it as an effect on what it was I was recording. Like a SMASHED MONO drum sound...some times I like the sound of a compressor working it's ass off.
7. YOU CAN\"T EVER GET RID OF IT!!! oh wait... I said that already
8. Compress the snare? HELLOooo HI-HATT!!!! No thank you :?
******************************************
The openness, you don't like, I love. It's called Dynamics & Space. It takes a lot of Guts and great musicianship to make that work, but in the end, to me it's the best thing. That \"openness\" is room to put in other elements or to be appreciated as \"space\". Of course you can't compare recording digitally and analog to recording with or without compression. It's completely different.

But really, it all depends...
I've found that 9 out of 10 times I use Comp. while tracking, I've regretted it. Your on the right track, only using a touch. Try it out, see what you think.

And lastley:
I have to work so quickly, I don't have time or the gear to use compression on the way in. Takes to long to set it up, on top of micing and headphone mixes...
If the band is there and ready to record, I gotta be too :wink:

When I record to tape, I compress while tracking.... but not with digital...

 

[BTLG]

Scott -

I disagree with you pretty strongly on this.

I really like the idea of people making decisions in the recording process and being forced to stick with it. I feel like it makes us all better engineers in the end and it helps develop our ability to track with a greater vision of the final result.

 

[lance]

Ok, so open was probably the wrong word. Maybe big, like artificialy big, would better describe what I'm thinking. Anyway just a question to get opinions.

 

[Plec]

I always get the sound I want to hear at the recording stage. I also plan ahead...

When I record vocals for instance... If I have a production with hard rock (not metal) guitars and big pumping drums. You can not make a vocal fit in there without compression (or riding a fader). I always engineer the vocal to fit into what I'm hearing and to get it to where I want it to be. On some sessions that might mean an LA2A taking of 5db at most.. and on some sessions like one I'm doing now where I ride the gain on the preamp inbetween takes and making that go into an LA2A taking 15db of at most plus an 1176 doing 5db of fast limiting at most.

It all depends...
But I'm from the school of thought like BTLG here, where I like to make decisions on the spot. If I can't make a decision, that means that I don't know what I want and/or how to get it. I usually have the final product in my head from the getgo.. so I only avoid making decisions in those areas I feel I don't really have enough information about yet... but if you know what you want... I say go for it!!!!

I even use compression, EQ and multiband compression on my mixes before mastering. Why? Because I know how the gear sounds and it sounds like I want. Don't need a mastering engineer telling me how to make artistic decisions. I want them to enhance the final mix once I'm satisifed with it. I haven't had a complaint from a mastering engineer yet.. quite the opposite.

 

[imdrecordings]

Scott -

I disagree with you pretty strongly on this.

I really like the idea of people making decisions in the recording process and being forced to stick with it. I feel like it makes us all better engineers in the end and it helps develop our ability to track with a greater vision of the final result.

I disagree with you too...
The take is the most important part for me..
No compression while recording? Big deal. Add comp later. No Biggy in the Digital Realm, no noise.
Makeing a decision and sticking with it should be for the take and not dealing with things that could possibly be over compressed. I never know what needs to be compressed untill I can hear everything @ the mixing stage. By the time I'm ready to roll and start in on a headphone mix, my ears are shot and I lose judgment. I can't afford to F things up with Comp on the way in, when tracking.
I track in the same room as I monitor/mix... hearing every little detail isn't an option for me. Time is a huge issue. This is just my work around and it works for now. I haven't done any Big Budget work or worked for a major studio, with countless amounts of gear, for a living. So I might be doing the same as you, if I were in your shoes, but I'm not...

I always get the sound I want to hear at the recording stage. I also plan ahead...

That's just it.. I do too.
Overdubbs? Sometimes I'll break out the 2-1176 or Distressor... but rarely do. I'll compress a vocal on the way in, but not very much.. Just a little on the LA-610 or go into one side of the 2-1176. When recording bands that decide to record that day and I only have 1-2 hours to prepair, planning ahead is not an option. Rock-N-Roll moves fast. Good bands need to be captured FAST! Mic it up and go go go!!!

Shit! I need a sandwich...
Lunch TimE!!

 

[imdrecordings]

Ok, so open was probably the wrong word. Maybe big, like artificialy big, would better describe what I'm thinking. Anyway just a question to get opinions.

That's cool Lance...
Go with it..
Go for what you like. Try just a little. Then a lot and in between...
What ever works for you. I work completely different than BTLG and Plec and I like it.
To me, time is so fk'n precious, that I rarely have "time" for experimentaion. Often because of this, just micing things up correctly and rolling is the BEST way.

I guess it all depends, really.

I've recorded a bunch of bands and learned the hard way. Sitting there, playing with compression, eq, effects can go on forever and when you finally get that sound that sounds SOooo PERFECT , you might have missed the right take....also, come mix time things may change dramatically. That takes even more time...AH!! TIME TIME TIME.. I need more of it.



Up to you man... work it.
Just use that thing in your head and those thingys on the side.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

I use compression for flavor during tracking, but not really to control the dynamics. A dB or two of (well, normally if I'm looking for \"flavor\" it's going to be the VariMu, but once in a while it's something different) and that's about it. Same with EQ. I'll move mics around for an hour (or change the sound of the source) before I engage the EQ switch. But an occasional tweak - A little high end perhaps - A roll off on the lows if needed, maybe.

 

[lance]

I like what massive said. That's more along the the lines of what I'm thinking. I'm not so much thinking serious dynamics control but more just really really subtle. Again though, for me this is one of those things to go through the motions and see what happens and whether I like it or not I'll at least I'll know what it sounds like. I just like being able to talk it out with others. It's nice to hear how everyone skins their cats

 

[Plec]

Yeah, remember that there is no right way of doing anything. To figure out what works best for yourself you should try everything at least once.

 

[Arys Chien]

Same with Massive here.

If I have to record with a compressor for its \"color\", I won't let it compress more than 2dB.

(Sometimes a compressor in the chain really gives the right sound for the song.)

Most of us are recording into DAWs here. Therefore there's no need to get the input level \"as hot as possible\".

p.s.: If the singer sings better with hearing their own voices compressed, while you don't want to have a compressor in the chain, you can send the compressed audio to their headphones but record the uncompressed signal.

 

[BTLG]

Some of the more awesome tracking I've seen though was by Ray Bardani when he did 'The London Souls' recently.

The whole thing was tracked so that the instrumental mix was essentially 'faders up. print'. They took more time with the vocals, but all the effects were printed to tape.

The point I was trying to make was that there's something so gratifying to pull up the faders and just have a mix up. That, to me, is accurately 'capturing the music'.

Then again, I guess that's the kind of skill that comes with 30 years of experience.

Matt

 

[brian]

The whole thing was tracked so that the instrumental mix was essentially 'faders up. print'. They took more time with the vocals, but all the effects were printed to tape.

The point I was trying to make was that there's something so gratifying to pull up the faders and just have a mix up. That, to me, is accurately 'capturing the music'.

I've been getting more into this style of tracking lately. Not really faders up, print, but at least recording with levels set so that everything sounds balanced at unity gain in the monitor section. This tends to speed up the process of switching between songs on the same reel. Getting a quick headphone mix like this is cake. It's also nice to begin a mix with everything fine at unity so that automation is a little easier to keep track of when riding faders. Some people are bound to complain about S/N ratio issues doing this since it means some levels are getting printed pretty low, but it sounds fine to me.

As far as compressing to tape/hdd, I say go for it as long as you are confident. Obviously when going to tape, you're gonna get some nice compression depending on your levels but sometimes I will use comps as well. Mainly LA-2A or 1176s for vocals or bass, and Distressors or dbx on drums. I go really gentile on the comps, but if the song is really intense I have no problems with squashing the vocals a lot more or killing some room mics. I'm inclined to use comps even more if going straight into PTools, which is practically all we do lately. If I didn't have access to this kind of gear (like at home) I would probably just skip on the compression though.

We had a Vari Mu in our mobile mastering rack that was recently replaced by a Weiss, which means it is now free for tracking. Never had the chance to use it so I'm looking forward to experimenting with it.

I also record with HPFs on most tracks for what it's worth.

 

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Some of the more awesome tracking I've seen though was by Ray Bardani when he did 'The London Souls' recently.

The whole thing was tracked so that the instrumental mix was essentially 'faders up. print'. They took more time with the vocals, but all the effects were printed to tape.

The point I was trying to make was that there's something so gratifying to pull up the faders and just have a mix up. That, to me, is accurately 'capturing the music'.

Then again, I guess that's the kind of skill that comes with 30 years of experience.

Matt

There's a much simpler version of that - Back in the day, really almost *all* mixes were "faders up" and you were 90% there.

If you record at normal levels, it's *still* that way. But a lot of people try to overdrive their input chain to "get hot signals" when tracking (which is more damaging than most things I could mention off hand).

A "normal" (line level) signal is going to read around -20 or maybe -18dBRMS. That's where your gear is designed to work. If you track with those levels, you'll probably still have to bring the faders down a whisker here and there to prevent clipping, but you won't have to drag them all down 15dB (as many of the "get all the bits" types will).

 

[BTLG]

I'm not only referring to levels though, all processing of the signal of ANY sort was done while tracking and kept. In addition, all the music was on 8 tracks of the tape! Drums/Bass/2 guitars.

The remaining 8 were for vocals/FX.

Either way, we don't see enough of that these days as far as I'm concerned.

Matt