Limting or compression - which to use and when?

[celebritymusic]

Hi

I'm a rookie when it comes to producing and mixing.

Just wondering what makes you decide to use a limter as opposed to compression, and visa versa. What instruments would you use either one on, and how do you know when too much is too much (to avoid the overcompressed sound that is rampant today)?

I'm a little scared to use too much of either, and because I'm a rookie, I have no idea how much is too much.

BTW, I am refering purely to mixing, not mastering.

Cheers!

Shaun

[TotalSonic]

Limiting is essentially compression but with a very high ratio (and usually a higher threshold). In mixing compression is generally used more than limiting. Vocals, bass guitar, kick and snare are the instruments that most often get compressed in mixes - but there is certainly no "rule" on this - application of compression is a matter of taste and what works for the particular track. It's very rare that I don't use at least a smidgeon of compression on a vocal track though.

The best thing to do in order to learn the effect compression has on the sound is to put a compressor on a track and play around with the various different attack, release, threshold, knee and ratio settings on it and then a/b the track with the compression off and on. After a while you'll build a "vocabulary" where you'll be able to hear a track and know almost automatically what settings to apply to get to the sound you are looking for.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[mikebuzz]

VERY good advice Steve !!! compression is something that takes time to learn but I think Steve just gave you the "Elenor Woodhead Speed Reading Course" version

LAter
Buzz

I use an 1176ln on all my vocal tracks pre recording ( so far I like the sound ) but you have to be VERY careful the settings need to be RIGHT ( trust me I've screwed up some good takes :( , )

[Ian Alexander]

I think of limiting as knocking off a few peaks to raise the overall level, usually after the mix is otherwise complete. The "few peaks" bit is probably a minority opinion, considering how many commercial CDs are squashed beyond recognition.

I think of compression as making a track "denser" to help it fit into a mix better. There are many ways to decide how much to use. On many radio and tv projects, I like to keep the compression as inaudible as possible, just enough to help a VO compete with today's crushed production beds. At times, though, and in music production, compression is as much flavor as it is technique, and it's perfectly okay to use it to change the track in obvious, but artistic ways. The only way to tell how much is right is to play with it. Start with extreme settings to see what they do and then find a happy medium that works in the context of the project. Listen with the track soloed and in context.

This is pretty much what Steve already said well, but maybe it will help, too.

[Dan Hauck]

You are wise to be cautious, as I can listen to things I did 7 or 8 years ago & sincerely wish I had done things differently (most of these are things I compressed before they went to tape & therefore , even with a remix, I'm still stuck with that "choked" sound on the acoustic guitar). Can't imagine why I couldn't hear then what I can so clearly hear now. But I digress...
For the SAWStudio Levelizer: (I normally use it post-fader).
I would begin by looking at the track to see how "even" it looks overall. If you see the amplitude varying wildly (and unless you have seasoned studio musicians, the amplitude will probably vary wildly) I would recommend a low ratio (1.5 to 1) and would pull down the threshold to a point about halfway between the "body" of the music & the peaks. This should tame the dynamics quite a bit & still be relatively transparent. I would then get the track up to the point where it is useful volume-wise by setting the peak limiter about halfway between the compression threshold & the highest peak & set "normalize" at 98%. At this point, your track will probably be quite a bit too loud, so pull it's volume down with the output level on the normalizer. Don't use the track volume as that will alter the response of the levelizer. Now, does it sound more even? It should, without sounding "choked" (hard to describe, but you'll know it when you hear it). To get a visual check for how well you're doing, solo the track you're trying this on and see if it looks like a natural track, i.e. symmetrical from end to end with peaks not looking "chopped". If they look chopped, either lower the threshold, raise the peak limiter or do a bit of both. Though this may sound a bit formulaic, this method has worked quite well for me.

Good luck

Dan Hauck

[Mark Stebbeds]

I would begin by looking at the track to see how "even" it looks overall. If you see the amplitude varying wildly....

I agree with your advice for the seasoned engineer who can correlate what you see to what you hear, but......

I recommend listening....using your ears. If you are going to look at something, look at the meters. If something is jumping out, causing a problem by "going into the red", then deal with it accordingly by using a limiter. I agree with Steve's advice that compression is a creative tool, as well as a way to control level.

There is a difference between amplitude and apparent volume, or what you hear. It is commonplace for something that "sounds loud" to be of lower amplitude. On the other hand, a musical note or vocal passage can easily be "too hot" without sounding loud at all.

Of course, visually examining the wave form can be helpful in learning about those differences, but I recommend using your ears and your meters first.

Mark

[Jay Q]

I would recommend a low ratio (1.5 to 1)Since Shaun says he's a rookie, I wanna make sure he's not confused by this. Dan probably made a typo here; a ratio of 1 results in no compression being applied, so he probably meant 1.5 to 2. But as Steve mentioned, play around with the settings, and the meanings of the numbers will become apparent.

Jay

[Mark Stebbeds]

Dan probably made a typo here; a ratio of 1 results in no compression being applied, so he probably meant 1.5 to 2.

I think he meant 1.5:1, which is about as close as you can get to no compression.

Aa a popular studio bass player once said to me after I commented on his very busy part...."If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing."

Mark

[Dan Hauck]

1.5:1 is what I meant. This is the type of compression that I do just to tame tracks & make them easier to work with. At this point, my goal is transparency. I would compress the doo doo out of things for effect later on. Also, I neglected to say after soloing the track you're working on, process it to a new soundfile and this will give you visual reference for what you've done. This will allow you to work with both your hearing & your eyesight. This way I learned pretty quickly that what sounded wrong also looked wrong. It's a visual aid for learning what a compressor does. Of course, do what works for you. This is only what works for me.


Dan

[Jay Q]

1.5:1 is what I meant.Ah, got it. Funny 'cause as I was typing that post, I was thinking that 2:1 was a bit much for the threshhold you were suggesting. :)

Jay