Compressor Question

[Kevin Bayersdorfer]

Hey all, I run a Carvin C2040 as my board. I have a 4 channel compressor running into the 4 drum channels through the channel inserts. I run an old ART Multi-verb through effects 1 send and back into one of the unused channels for vocal delay and reverb. So now I need to get a compressor for vocals.

Most of the band (4 vocals) are not very dynamic in their singing, but my wife and stepson are pretty dynamic especially my stepson. I don't want to compress their individual channels through the inserts for monitor reasons of course.

So I plan on getting a 2 channel compressor and compressing the whole vocal group through the sub group, then returning it on another unused channel. Now my question is would you guys suggest using the other half of the new compressor to also compress the effects return? And if I do should I use the stereo link? Kind of defeats using a compressor on vocals if the effects are coming through not compressed so he will still peak stuff, though the effects channel return fader isnt even at unity.
Thanks

 

[Tommy Peel]

Hey all, I run a Carvin C2040 as my board. I have a 4 channel compressor running into the 4 drum channels through the channel inserts. I run an old ART Multi-verb through effects 1 send and back into one of the unused channels for vocal delay and reverb. So now I need to get a compressor for vocals.

Most of the band (4 vocals) are not very dynamic in their singing, but my wife and stepson are pretty dynamic especially my stepson. I don't want to compress their individual channels through the inserts for monitor reasons of course.

So I plan on getting a 2 channel compressor and compressing the whole vocal group through the sub group, then returning it on another unused channel. Now my question is would you guys suggest using the other half of the new compressor to also compress the effects return? And if I do should I use the stereo link? Kind of defeats using a compressor on vocals if the effects are coming through not compressed so he will still peak stuff, though the effects channel return fader isnt even at unity.
Thanks

My first thought would be to get some XLR splitters and send the offending vocal mics to a pair of channels, one uncompressed for monitors and one compressed for mains and effects(as in 2 channels for each mic). That said I run compression on vocals all the time and never have any major problems with my monitor mixes.


Sent from my iPad HD

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: Compressor Question

Kind of defeats using a compressor on vocals if the effects are coming through not compressed so he will still peak stuff, though the effects channel return fader isnt even at unity.

Not necessarily, compressing the vocals and having less compression (or none) on the reverb and delay works well (David Bowie - China Girl). When the singer goes loud, it will not get an awful lot louder (which is the purpose of the compression in the first place), but you get a bigger sound from having more reverb and delay, so you almost retain the dynamics of the performance while keeping levels in check.
As long as you have a free compressor channel, you might want to use it on the effect returns with less compression and/or a higher threshold.

 

[TJ Cornish]

Re: Compressor Question

The problem you have with running a single compressor on all the vocals is the loudest one will trigger the compression, but all the vocals get compressed at whatever amount you have set.

Better solutions would be inserting the compressor into a channel, which then solves your effects send issue, since the compressor is earlier in the signal chain than your aux send, as well as some vocal coaching for your stepson.

Compression in the monitors isn't a big deal unless you're running in-ears.

 

[Art Welter]

Re: Compressor Question

Compression in the monitors isn't a big deal unless you're running in-ears.

TJ,

Compressed monitor speakers limit peak output, reducing gain before feedback by the amount of reduction, which can be a "big deal".
Compressed in ear monitors have almost no limit on gain before feedback, so compression becomes a matter of taste.

 

[TJ Cornish]

Re: Compressor Question

TJ,

Compressed monitor speakers limit peak output, reducing gain before feedback by the amount of reduction, which can be a "big deal".
Compressed in ear monitors have almost no limit on gain before feedback, so compression becomes a matter of taste.

If you don't use makeup gain, compression when active reduces the gain of the channel, so if you have adequate gain before feedback without the compressor in the chain and then add it in "reduction-only mode", GBF should be unaffected, no?

As a[n admittedly marginal] vocalist, I find that I can tolerate compression in wedges much more than I can in in-ears.

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: Compressor Question

TJ,

Compressed monitor speakers limit peak output, reducing gain before feedback by the amount of reduction, which can be a "big deal".
Compressed in ear monitors have almost no limit on gain before feedback, so compression becomes a matter of taste.

In a situation where channel compression is needed and there is a potential gbf issue, I prefer to set the threshold high enough that no makeup gain is needed, and in effect just soft-limit the signal. This tends to even out level differences between signals, and further comp can then be done in a subgroup. By limiting what goes into the monitors, feedback can sometimes be kept in check as well, so the compression can almost work to your advantage. But the threshold has to be at around or above nominal level so that no extra gain is introduced in the monitor path.
"Many compressors are better than few compressors" ~;-)~:wink:

 

[Max Warasila]

Re: Compressor Question

To the OP:

Dave Rat teaches us to avoid stereo linking if we can, as if we are compressing stereo subgroups, something panned to only one side should not kill the mix to the other side if it slams into the compressor. The trick is finding the right pan that fits into the mix and also catches both sides of the compressor enough. You can also always run a pair of post-fader auxiliaries into the side chain inputs, if you get extremely excited and have the extra auxiliaries for it. Then you can decide exactly how much each instrument triggers either compressor, almost like a ducker for each side, Left/Right.

Also, compressing the effects in stereo is sometimes important, depending on the particular effect. Putting a compressor on the verbs/delays is always interesting and fun- so try it! If you don't like it, you can always return everything differently.

 

[Kevin Bayersdorfer]

Re: Compressor Question

To the OP:

Dave Rat teaches us to avoid stereo linking if we can, as if we are compressing stereo subgroups, something panned to only one side should not kill the mix to the other side if it slams into the compressor. The trick is finding the right pan that fits into the mix and also catches both sides of the compressor enough. You can also always run a pair of post-fader auxiliaries into the side chain inputs, if you get extremely excited and have the extra auxiliaries for it. Then you can decide exactly how much each instrument triggers either compressor, almost like a ducker for each side, Left/Right.

Also, compressing the effects in stereo is sometimes important, depending on the particular effect. Putting a compressor on the verbs/delays is always interesting and fun- so try it! If you don't like it, you can always return everything differently.

Well I went out today and got a DBX 266. Watching a Dave Rat video on mixing RHCP is where I got the idea about compressing the effects. I tried stereo linking and didn't like the results. I got a gig to do Sunday, kind of an all day thing 5 sets, 3 are actual bands, 1st will be singer/songwriter thing, and last will be a jam session. So I will get to test it out pretty well and get a handle on it. I am trying to avoid channel insert at all costs at this time. I think compressing the sub group is going to work out just fine. It really is just needed for a few songs where the 2 more dynamic singers peak a little. Especially on Feeling Alright where my stepson imitates Joe Cocker's screams at the end, and my wife gets pretty dynamic on Gold Dust Woman. Almost all other songs all 4 singers maintain a pretty even volume level.

 

[Greg Cameron]

Re: Compressor Question

Well I went out today and got a DBX 266. Watching a Dave Rat video on mixing RHCP is where I got the idea about compressing the effects. I tried stereo linking and didn't like the results. I got a gig to do Sunday, kind of an all day thing 5 sets, 3 are actual bands, 1st will be singer/songwriter thing, and last will be a jam session. So I will get to test it out pretty well and get a handle on it. I am trying to avoid channel insert at all costs at this time. I think compressing the sub group is going to work out just fine. It really is just needed for a few songs where the 2 more dynamic singers peak a little. Especially on Feeling Alright where my stepson imitates Joe Cocker's screams at the end, and my wife gets pretty dynamic on Gold Dust Woman. Almost all other songs all 4 singers maintain a pretty even volume level.

FWIW, Dave still uses mild compression on the vocal channels as well as the subgroups. Low ratio on the channels. higher ratio fast attack on the group compressor.

 

[Art Welter]

Re: Compressor Question

If you don't use makeup gain, compression when active reduces the gain of the channel, so if you have adequate gain before feedback without the compressor in the chain and then add it in "reduction-only mode", GBF should be unaffected, no?

As you said, "compression when active reduces the gain of the channel", it is impossible to have the same gain before feedback when the compressor has reduced the gain on peaks.

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: Compressor Question

As you said, "compression when active reduces the gain of the channel", it is impossible to have the same gain before feedback when the compressor has reduced the gain on peaks.

Semantics, either you use the compressor to control the peaks, and the nominal level is unaffected, or you use the compressor to flatten more of the dynamics to bring more of the material up to nominal level. In the first case, gbf is unaffected, in the second case it is obviously reduced by the amount of gain reduction at nominal level. If you want to be pernickety, even maximum available power, power compression etc. might at some intermittent points in time be reducing gbf because you have gain reduction at those points.