Let's talk about compressors

[laklandfan07]

I don't use compression... I have learned to control my dynamics and frankly don't feel the want or need to give full control of my dynamics to FOH.

lol well you're being compressed at FOH or when recording so I guess you're 1/2 right?

 

[singlemalt]

I've tried a bunch of compressors, FEA dual, MXR, boss, rack mounts...all gone. the Onvnilab Smoothie is here to stay.

Most controls set straight up, with the tilting tone rolled off a bit. This was close to the out of the box "start here" sound. It's first in my chain, followed by the MXR M-80. Sometimes I have the pitchfork in between.

A good comp brings out subtleties like ghost notes, clicks and pops, but evens the volume swings. Also adds nice sustain to upper register stuff that might sound thin. On the other hand, you give away some dynamics on the top end.

Some comps feel like your in a tug o war. The smoothie has been one of my best ever gear buys.

 

[monsterthompson]

I really don't get why so many people piled on to @2112 's comment, either. I wish there were more people who could make a good recording without using a compressor as a crutch. It's not a bad thing to aspire to. Dynamics are a big part of a great groove.

Because he's trolling in the Effects forum.
'no effects' trolling in the Effects forum
This is a forum for discussing the usage of Effects on bass. By definition the people posting here use and love effects. Coming into here and saying that effects are useless or unneeded is as dictionary a definition of trolling as there is and will be dealt with as such.

 

[MDBass]

False. You're not the "bearer of bad news". You're greatly exaggerating

Most studios operating before I was born didn't even have enough compressors to process the bass individually at mixdown. Remember that due to channel count constraints, mixdown (as we know it today) also occurred during tracking. In fact, there are many recordings from the 50s, 60s, and 70s which didn't even use a dedicated mic/channel for the bass. If your argument is that tapes, tubes, speakers, etc reduce/limit dynamic range, then your entire response is out of context. The only compressor/limiter you can reliably say which was commonly applied to basses would be the one typically applied to the final mix (eg when CDs are mastered). Even then, it's not exclusively applied to bass.

In the studio, we often refer to compressors as Talent Boxes. A compressor isn't the only variety of Talent Box btw.

Compression is often used because the artist doesn't have great technique. This could be a vocalist with poor mic technique or a bassist or drummer without great dynamic/stick control - as a few examples. True, levels can be automated but that is incredibly tedious so people working studios tend to use some compression or limiting to rein in a performer with mediocre technique. IME compression in the studio is used as a timesaver more often than it is as an "enhancement".

Sure, compression can be used for "larger than life" sounds. However, if it's used constantly, the music/instrument lacks dynamic range and the impact is quickly lost because the music is constantly "enhanced". I like to liken it to use of sugar and salt in cooking. Use it judiciously. If you load up everything you cook with sugar and/or salt you will ruin a lot of good food. Of course, compression amounts are genre/style specific.

I really don't get why so many people piled on to @2112 's comment, either. I wish there were more people who could make a good recording without using a compressor as a crutch. It's not a bad thing to aspire to. Dynamics are a big part of a great groove.

Your estimation about how compression is used in the studio is inaccurate.

Even Jaco, arguably the greatest bass player of all time, used a few dB peak limiting when recording.

People "piled on" because someone showed up on a thread where the OP was asking for compressors to humble brag about how he didn't need one and didn't know what he was talking about.

It's not that complicated.

 

[engedi1]

Because he's trolling in the Effects forum.
'no effects' trolling in the Effects forum
This is a forum for discussing the usage of Effects on bass. By definition the people posting here use and love effects. Coming into here and saying that effects are useless or unneeded is as dictionary a definition of trolling as there is and will be dealt with as such.

Beat me to it. But yes, its a douchebaggy troll-move to answer someone's questions about compressors with a snarky response that basically said ''I'm so good I don't need a compressor, and I'm better than those that do"

 

[laklandfan07]

False. You're not the "bearer of bad news". You're greatly exaggerating

Most studios operating before I was born didn't even have enough compressors to process the bass individually at mixdown. Remember that due to channel count constraints, mixdown (as we know it today) also occurred during tracking. In fact, there are many recordings from the 50s, 60s, and 70s which didn't even use a dedicated mic/channel for the bass. If your argument is that tapes, tubes, speakers, etc reduce/limit dynamic range, then your entire response is out of context. The only compressor/limiter you can reliably say which was commonly applied to basses would be the one typically applied to the final mix (eg when CDs are mastered). Even then, it's not exclusively applied to bass.

In the studio, we often refer to compressors as Talent Boxes. A compressor isn't the only variety of Talent Box btw.

Compression is often used because the artist doesn't have great technique. This could be a vocalist with poor mic technique or a bassist or drummer without great dynamic/stick control - as a few examples. True, levels can be automated but that is incredibly tedious so people working studios tend to use some compression or limiting to rein in a performer with mediocre technique. IME compression in the studio is used as a timesaver more often than it is as an "enhancement".

Sure, compression can be used for "larger than life" sounds. However, if it's used constantly, the music/instrument lacks dynamic range and the impact is quickly lost because the music is constantly "enhanced". I like to liken it to use of sugar and salt in cooking. Use it judiciously. If you load up everything you cook with sugar and/or salt you will ruin a lot of good food. Of course, compression amounts are genre/style specific.

I really don't get why so many people piled on to @2112 's comment, either. I wish there were more people who could make a good recording without using a compressor as a crutch. It's not a bad thing to aspire to. Dynamics are a big part of a great groove.

False on false. Every professional recording these days has compressed bass 100% Either to increase sustain or to peak limit and fit the instrument better in a mix. The notion that it's a crutch if for players with bad technique is not true in the slightest. Pino Palladino, Marcus Miller, Nolly Getgood, Jaco, Wooten, Miles Mosley are all examples of high facility players who use it to enhance their sound. Whether you have a pedal or not is personal preference but I guarantee at any venue you've played, FOH has compressed you. Also any pro/semipro recording you've done has compressed your bass (to your knowledge or not).

 

[eigentone]

You're estimation about how compression is used in the studio is inaccurate.

Even Jaco, arguably the greatest bass player of all time, used a few dB peak limiting when recording.

Do explain then. I gave examples which go back farther than 1974.

 

[eigentone]

False on false. Every professional recording these days has compressed bass 100% Either to increase sustain or to peak limit and fit the instrument better in a mix. The notion that it's a crutch if for players with bad technique is not true in the slightest. Pino Palladino, Marcus Miller, Nolly Getgood, Jaco, Wooten, Miles Mosley are all examples of high facility players who use it to enhance their sound. Whether you have a pedal or not is personal preference but I guarantee at any venue you've played, FOH has compressed you. Also any pro/semipro recording you've done has compressed your bass (to your knowledge or not).

False.

@MDBass's original argument was not "every recording these days" it was "every single album you've ever heard". Big difference.

BTW I owned a recording studio. I can safely assume I have spent more hours in them than you have.

 

[Josh Kneisel]

Darkglass Supersymmetry is the one I use.. has a gain reduction meter on the top which is nice... I think I have blend, input, and compression at about 11 oclock and output and attack around 1 or 2 oclock and release around 11 o clock... settings do need to change depending on how your bass acts with it. I find the suggestions on how to find a setting in the manual useful.

 

[monsterthompson]

Do explain then. I gave examples which go back farther than 1974.

One could argue that Jamerson was compressed even when going direct, because of the tube DI he used (The Real James Jamerson Amp). One of the reasons people like tubes in the signal path is because of the inherent compression characteristics they offer.

 

[MDBass]

Do explain then. I gave examples which go back farther than 1974.

It's not primarily used as a crutch. At all.

Every single thing on a professional record has some amount of compression on it, frequently in series; vocals can even have as much as -20dB of reduction and still sound completely natural and musical.

Claiming that neither tube amps nor tape machines don't count is also just silly; despite not being pure compressors, the musical compression they impart on a signal is a huge part of the reason why they were/are so widely used and loved.

I'm honestly not particularly interested in listing all of the reasons why and how an engineer might use compression on a sound source, it's a really long list, but you can Google it if you'd like.

 

[Josh Kneisel]

False.

@MDBass's original argument was not "every recording these days" it was "every single album you've ever heard". Big difference.

BTW I owned a recording studio. I can safely assume I have spent more hours in them than you have.

Every single album you have ever heard does have compression regardless as to whether it was added on purpose or not since recording audio with a Mic and pre to tape naturally compresses the signal a bit (especially since pre and amp were all tubes back then)......

 

[HelpImaRock]

 

[eigentone]

One could argue that Jamerson was compressed even when going direct, because of the tube DI he used (The Real James Jamerson Amp). One of the reasons people like tubes in the signal path is because of the inherent compression characteristics they offer.

That's certainly true, but I touched on that in my first post.

Tube/Tape/Speaker distortion/limiting/compression would have put MDBass's response/argument out of context. It wasn't the compression he was writing about.

 

[engedi1]

Do explain then. I gave examples which go back farther than 1974.

Of course Jamerson didn't have compression, as it hadn't been invented yet. And it would have be so much better if he had compression, as it pisses me off how low in the mix his bass is. Compression would have allowed his bass (not to mention the drums) to be present in the mix without burying everything. He has the most consisted attack and touch of anyone ever, but a little compression would have gone a long way. It's no accident that you can suddenly hear the bass guitar in 70's records.

 

[eigentone]

It's not primarily used as a crutch. At all.

Every single thing on a professional record has some amount of compression on it, frequently in series; vocals can even have as much as -20dB of reduction and still sound completely natural and musical.

Claiming that neither tube amps nor tape machines don't count is also just silly; despite not being pure compressors, the musical compression they impart on a signal is a huge part of the reason why they were/are so widely used and loved.

I'm honestly not particularly interested in listing all of the reasons why and how an engineer might use compression on a sound source, it's a really long list, but you can Google it if you'd like.

I didn't say they "don't count".

 

[MDBass]

That's certainly true, but I touched on that in my first post.

Tube/Tape/Speaker distortion/limiting/compression would have put MDBass's response/argument out of context. It wasn't the compression he was writing about.

It absolutely was what I was writing about.

Some people still think of "compression" as a dirty word, when in fact it has a been a critical part of all of their favorite contemporary music.

What I originally said is 100% accurate even if they didn't use a separate compressor on the bass signal; at the very least the signal was compressed once when it was tracked through some sort of tube amp/DI and/or tape machine, and again on the mix/master bus with tape.

 

[eigentone]

Every single album you have ever heard does have compression regardless as to whether it was added on purpose or not since recording audio with a Mic and pre to tape naturally compresses the signal a bit (especially since pre and amp were all tubes back then)......

FYI There happens to be modern music made without compression. Let's start with Classical.

 

[MDBass]

I didn't say they "don't count".

Did you have something useful to offer the thread/OP, or are you just here to argue semantics?

EDIT: Nevermind, just saw your post above. The answer is pretty obvious.

 

[David Jayne]

False on false. Every professional recording these days has compressed bass 100% Either to increase sustain or to peak limit and fit the instrument better in a mix. The notion that it's a crutch if for players with bad technique is not true in the slightest. Pino Palladino, Marcus Miller, Nolly Getgood, Jaco, Wooten, Miles Mosley are all examples of high facility players who use it to enhance their sound. Whether you have a pedal or not is personal preference but I guarantee at any venue you've played, FOH has compressed you. Also any pro/semipro recording you've done has compressed your bass (to your knowledge or not).

Probably true almost always but I remember reading where Victor Wooten said he doesn't use any at all, live or in the studio. That was a ways back and may no longer be the case with him.