Recording 101/5 Hail! The Compressor

Neps · 2009-01-09T11:35:35+00:00

Well, let me 1st say "rock on 2009!" It was a crazy 2008 and for some of us (that would be me) it was a time to re-evaluate why I do what I do.. After mixing...

Recording 101/5 Hail! The Compressor

Bob-Dubery

Neps wrote:
I'm one of those guys whose not very hapy with the state of affairs of the current music scene.. Overcompressed is a problem. But mostly it's not the engineers. Apart from hip hop the rock guys and jazz blokes are trying to stay away from it. The problem comes from the artist and the A&R guys from record companies. The ones who want their music to 'sit' with other recordings or be louder than their counterparts.

Isn't there a problem here with multiple levels of compression? The producer apples compression to specific instruments at specific points. Then the record company wants the album compressed to make it sound good on the radio or TV. But the broadcast guys are going to compress anyway. So now the producer had intended compression for a specific guitar track - but that now ends up triple compressed and sounding flat as anything.

Does that happen?

Neps

Compression on air as a sticky business. I did a couple of music broadcasts afew weeks ago and as I was mixing I had to constanly remind myself that there was going to some compression from the broadcaster at some stage. What happend in my case though was that I had to mix a bit lower, and then master for broadcast.. something I seldom do. But I made sure that my final product came in just before the comps at the broadcaster actualy got too heavy.. I think I hit them on a 2:1 ratio, which is mild.. didnt even touch their limiters. And it translated quite nicely. BUT I've seen where the engineer will mix, then it gets mastered by someone else, and then after that the producer wants it even louder.

In the states they have quite good QCC and strict rules, ours can be bent to some extent.. The USA congress might even go as far as standardizing broadcast levels.. Last I heard there was a bill up for discusson in congress to have a look at program vs. ad levels.

On a diffrent note, I was following a discusion on the ProTools forum a while ago about the Metallica album that also features a song on GuitarHero world tour. There the actual CD sounded over compressed but in GH it sounded clean and open. So delivery format also plays a role in the 'loudness' war.

AlanRatcliffe

Neps wrote: The USA congress might even go as far as standardizing broadcast levels.. Last I heard there was a bill up for discusson in congress to have a look at program vs. ad levels.

That would be nice. Probably because with the newer digital and Hi Def delivery systems there is a lot more headroom and dynamic range and the makers of the shows seem to be mixing surround and utilising the dynamic range much better. I would imagine that coming out of a decently mixed program into an overcompressed ad is twice as jarring for the viewer.

I presume they would have to legislate the RMS for it to be really effective. If they just stipulate the maximum level allowed, everyone will just brickwall limit to that level and there won't be much improvement.

I thought that the advent of those systems that muted the sound when ads come on the TV or the DVD recorders that automatically cut out the ads (using the average level as the trigger) would have forced the industry to change but it seems not. But then, to me, it seems that an ad with more dynamics could be more effective. Go figure...

Bob-Dubery

Neps wrote:

In the states they have quite good QCC and strict rules, ours can be bent to some extent.. The USA congress might even go as far as standardizing broadcast levels.. Last I heard there was a bill up for discusson in congress to have a look at program vs. ad levels.

Boy would I like that. There's few things that get my goat more than nodding off during an episode of "Grey's Anatomy" only to be woken up by some horrendously loud advertisement.

Neps

The USA is realy where the pioneering work is being done in the broadcsting industry.I ot hold of a CAS panel discusion and boy was it interesting. The main topic was 5.1 broadcasting and also the relevant mixing loudness of shows.

As a bit of background regarding HD broadcasting and 5.1. Whenever you mix for Dolby E encoding (5.1 for HD) you have to mix accrding to the Dolby LM100 meter, you also have to fill in a sheet with you relevant info regarding RMS and those things. You have to give them a LM100 reading for a dialog track and it must be in (i think) -27 -> -23dB's. Then when you encode to HD SR your machine actualy encodes data and not audio as on Beta, here more MetaData is placed on the tape to tell the decodeing system your RMS, Your LEQ and LM100 readings. So the broadcaster then can decide if they need to push or drop your levels for broadcast.

Most guys actualy mix like I do.. well below the limiting phase of the broadcaster, but with the advent of HD there are a lot of changes taking place.

Gearhead

Bob Dubery wrote: ... nodding off during an episode of "Grey's Anatomy"

I suppose that makes sense, nodding off during that show ?

The question with the Dolby E described would seem to be that the broadcaster makes his money off of commercials. Meaning Bob will keep waking up just the same way...

Great story about compression, but what I've never seen properly explained is how multiband compression actually works?

AlanRatcliffe

what I've never seen properly explained is how multiband compression actually works?

It's simple enough. The multiband compressor uses filters to divide the incoming signal into different frequency bands, the same way a multiband equaliser does. The difference between the two is that instead of using simple gain controls for each frequency the way EQ does, the multiband compressor has a compression circuit for each band.

This lets you process the different frequency bands with different compression settings and, in particular, stops the bass instruments (which have the most energy) from dominating the compression of the rest of the mix.

Bob-Dubery

Gearhead wrote:
Bob Dubery wrote: ... nodding off during an episode of "Grey's Anatomy"
I suppose that makes sense, nodding off during that show ?

The question with the Dolby E described would seem to be that the broadcaster makes his money off of commercials. Meaning Bob will keep waking up just the same way...

I've found that my TV has an "auto volume" feature. This may ease the problem a little.

But I'm betting it's ANOTHER compressor. So there's something else making the music sound crap(per).

Neps

That option on your TV 'auto volume' is another comp.. a friend of mine has it, and i watched a show on her TV and jip.., its a bloody comp. I dont know what her TV calles it, but I told her to switch off that bloody mess, Cause if a movie is too dynamic it lowers the level.. bloody marvelous (sarcasm intended!)

@Gearhead.. Alan hit the nail on the head with regards to the multi-band comp.

Riaan-Combrink

Saw this report in the online edition of Performing Musician.

Those with a serious interest in the issue may want to chat to this guy (e-mail addy provided):

Dave’s obsession with compression (Industry/Music Biz)
12/01/2009
SOS reader researches the commercial effect of extreme dynamics-processing

Back in November, we had an email from SOS reader Dave Viney, a post-graduate student from London College of Music, who was keen to tell us about some research he was carrying out for a report called ‘The Obsession With Compression’.

As you might guess from the title of Dave’s report, he was looking into the correlation between compression (the dynamics-processing type) and commercial success in popular music, which has been widely discussed in recent months and years in the music press and the wider media.

Since Dave was first in touch with SOS, he’s polled 36 producers and engineers from around the world (with a little help from the UK’s MPG and APRS), set up listening panels, analysed music sales records, and taken detailed measurements of the loudness of commercial material using a meter borrowed from DK Technologies.

His 77-page dissertation details the recent catalysts for discussion on over-compression, such as the reaction to the release of Metallica’s Death Magnetic album in 2008, and goes on to display the research in graphical form; there are over 300 charts!

Summarising the report, Dave comments, “there is no evidence of any significant correlation between actual loudness (and thus overall compression) and commercial success. Furthermore, assessments suggest that less-compressed material is more pleasant-sounding”. He concludes, “the obsession with compression tends to limit commercial success!”.

Having completed his report, Dave is hoping to establish himself as a part-time researcher for the music business. He can be contacted at dave-vineyATbtconnect.com.

thunderbolt

only compress where needed... otherwise, automate volume...

I have found myself not compressing anything in recordings lately, except a vocal, drum buss and very slight 2:1 on my master buss, just to tighten up the track's bottom end, if it was loose at all. I also set the release setting to the same milliseconds as the BPM of the song so that it doesn't sound too pumpy.

I have also emailed and liaised with the engineers who have worked with Paramore, Breaking Benjamin, The Almost, Underoath in regards to compression and what they use, and how they compress. These guys are literally slamming a lot of things just to make the transients pop out at you and in mastering the transients are tamed again, making the entire record sound like its attacking your face and ears. Good? Bad? I have no idea, I still listen to my dad's old Zeplin LP's and stand in awe of bonham's drum sound and Jimmy Page's guitar sound for that era. No Sampling, No Digital Editing... just pure music. recorded to tape, printed to LP. Huge dynamic range.

majestikc

To be fair,the dynamic range of LP's is only 60db from softest to loudest whereas the dynamic range of cd is 96db (1bit in digital audio is 6db of dynamic range).

And to be fair again, alot of old recordings like Led Zep and The Doors etc are really quite crap compared to modern recordings, what most modern recordings do however lack is CHARACTER.
They sound better, but they all sound the same.Everyone's trying to get "THAT" drum sound or "THIS" guitar sound,those old school guys had no one to copy,no "industry standards" to compete with,they just did what felt and sounded good and it comes through on the record.
Same with guitaring in general,there's ALOT (too many) guitarists who are very technically competent and precise,but they have no uniqueness or style or character.

I say compress everything to the extreme if it gives you something different that sounds good,or compress absolutely nothing if it get's you the same result.