Digital Desk Processing Order?

Frank Koenig

Frank Koenig

Sophomore
Mar 7, 2011
187
0
16
Palo Alto, CA USA
www.dunmovin.com
I've been following the discussion of the current crop of mid-level digital mixers with interest but do not recall this particular subject being discussed. So forgive me if all this is old hat. I've looked at block diagrams for Behringer X32, Midas Pro 1, A&H iLive and QU, and Soundcraft Si. Here's what I see:

Behringer X32
Gate -> EQ -> Comp
with pre-fader aux available pre EQ, pre comp, and post comp

Midas Pro 1
Gate -> Comp -> EQ
or
EQ -> Gate -> Comp
with pre-fader aux available only at end of chain

A&H iLive
Gate -> EQ -> Comp
with pre-fader aux available at any point

A&H QU
Gate -> EQ -> Comp
with pre-fader aux available pre and post comp

Soundcraft Si
Gate -> Comp -> EQ
with pre-fader aux available pre and post EQ

It's interesting to me that there is no general agreement on this. I'm also surprised that it is not common to provide a pre-fader aux send that is pre comp so that, for example, an uncompressed monitor mix can be derived without using an additional channel. Only the A&H and Behringer offerings can do this.

I'd be delighted to hear folks' opinions of the relative utility (and relevance) of these various configurations. Thanks.

--Frank
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Yamaha LS9/M7
EQ -> Gate -> Comp (well, EQ -> DYN1 -> DYN2, with gates typically only available on DYN1)
pre-fade sends available pre-EQ and post EQ and dynamics

Yamaha 01V96i (I presume the older 01V96 is similar)
Gate -> EQ -> Comp
or
Gate -> Comp -> EQ
Prefade aux only at the end of the chain
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

A&H GLD:
Gate -> EQ -> Comp
pre-fade aux available at any point (but the pre-fade point has to be the same for all inputs to a given aux bus). Not sure if this is a restriction compared to iLive or not.

I'm a little surprised that pre-comp routing to auxes isn't universally available. In practice, though, it's probably not that big of a deal--double-patch any heavily compressed inputs and away you go. After all, I suspect that pre-insert routing to aux buses isn't a terribly common feature of analog desks.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Frank Koenig said:
It's interesting to me that there is no general agreement on this. I'm also surprised that it is not common to provide a pre-fader aux send that is pre comp so that, for example, an uncompressed monitor mix can be derived without using an additional channel. Only the A&H and Behringer offerings can do this.

I'd be delighted to hear folks' opinions of the relative utility (and relevance) of these various configurations. Thanks.

--Frank
Click to expand...
The ability to do a pre-comp aux send for monitors from FOH is one of the reasons I bought a GLD instead of Yamaha. As Rob mentions, this ability is missing even from the M7 - something frustrating for a desk that was originally ~$20K.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

This lack of agreement is actually really bothering me right now, because I don't have quite enough experience to decide which way is best for how I mix, and I can't experiment enough. Some person told me ages ago that he always EQs post dynamics, but I've always tended to find that EQing things before dynamics just sounds better… I don't know. I think I end up wanting EQ first or the option of either/or. #grainofsalt
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Max Warasila said:
This lack of agreement is actually really bothering me right now, because I don't have quite enough experience to decide which way is best for how I mix, and I can't experiment enough. Some person told me ages ago that he always EQs post dynamics, but I've always tended to find that EQing things before dynamics just sounds better… I don't know. I think I end up wanting EQ first or the option of either/or. #grainofsalt
Click to expand...

I always run Gate > EQ > Comp. I always want my compressor to key based on the EQ changes I have made; for instance: if I cut a whole ton of 200Hz out of an SM58, I do NOT want the comp compressing based on all that 200Hz, so naturally it needs to come after.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Silas Pradetto said:
I always run Gate > EQ > Comp. I always want my compressor to key based on the EQ changes I have made; for instance: if I cut a whole ton of 200Hz out of an SM58, I do NOT want the comp compressing based on all that 200Hz, so naturally it needs to come after.
Click to expand...

Kind of exactly what I found.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Jeff Carter said:
After all, I suspect that pre-insert routing to aux buses isn't a terribly common feature of analog desks.
Click to expand...

But we're using digital now, and we want it to be better...

I like EQ before compression, if I've done anything drastic I want the compression seeing the same signal I'm hearing.

Chris
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Silas Pradetto said:
I always run Gate > EQ > Comp. I always want my compressor to key based on the EQ changes I have made; for instance: if I cut a whole ton of 200Hz out of an SM58, I do NOT want the comp compressing based on all that 200Hz, so naturally it needs to come after.
Click to expand...

But..... For normal sounding sources that don't need drastic EQ... Like a lead vocal on the right mic...if I want to do gentle presence boosts I don't want my eq boost to talk to the comp. with bussing and such many combinations are possible...plus most comps have some kind of side chain EQ built in.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

One thing they really should fix on the DL1608 is that the gate and comp are in one "chunk" so you can't put the EQ in between :(~:-(~:sad:.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Silas Pradetto said:
I always run Gate > EQ > Comp. I always want my compressor to key based on the EQ changes I have made; for instance: if I cut a whole ton of 200Hz out of an SM58, I do NOT want the comp compressing based on all that 200Hz, so naturally it needs to come after.
Click to expand...
Some mixers like the x32 has eq side chaining on the gate and compressors. The x32 have a selection of highcut, lowcut and bandpass filters. This is important if you use a different source for sidchaining.

On the x32 you can also place the eq pre or post the compressor. The fx insert can be pre or post the eq/compressor block. This leaves you with lots of options.


With the new v2 firmware they've implemented even more aux insert points.

Usually I preferer eq after the compressor but it really depends on the source and what I want to accomplish...
 
Last edited:
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Helge Dr. Bentsen said:
Most bands i mix these days prefer compressors in their monitors, so pre-comp aux sends is not a feature I need. But then again, I do pretty extreme stuff.

I prefer EQ->comp if I have a choice :)
Click to expand...

Great thread btw, I hope more forum people chime in as this seems like a topic we can all contribute to and learn from. I like clean monitors personally (to give me more GBF) and I have rarely had anyone insist on compression in the monitors (when they do I use light compression). How does the use of compression in the monitors affect things when more volume comes into play? Especially where metal is concerned, loud stage volumes can tend to turn an already chaotic soundscape into an unrecognizable mass of distorted noise. How extreme are we talking here? Deicide? Cannibal Corpse? Amon Amarth? or Slayer, Pantera, or newerish djenty crossovery stuff like Animal as Leaders?
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Ernest Graham said:
Great thread btw, I hope more forum people chime in as this seems like a topic we can all contribute to and learn from. I like clean monitors personally (to give me more GBF) and I have rarely had anyone insist on compression in the monitors (when they do I use light compression). How does the use of compression in the monitors affect things when more volume comes into play? Especially where metal is concerned, loud stage volumes can tend to turn an already chaotic soundscape into an unrecognizable mass of distorted noise. How extreme are we talking here? Deicide? Cannibal Corpse? Amon Amarth? or Slayer, Pantera, or newerish djenty crossovery stuff like Animal as Leaders?
Click to expand...

The advantage, especially on bass guitar and vocals, are a more consistent level. I have a bass player that is all over the place, including FOH :P
Never really had any issues with GBF due to compressors, more issues with bad monitors that can't go loud before feedback sets in. And these guys are not that loud on stage. Any decent hip hop act is way louder, except the already mentioned bass player. He likes it loud, but if I compress his sound in the monitors, he tends to turn his amp down.

Vreid - I Krig (Live - Vreid Goddamnit) - YouTube

That should give you an idea.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Ernest Graham said:
Especially where metal is concerned, loud stage volumes can tend to turn an already chaotic soundscape into an unrecognizable mass of distorted noise. How extreme are we talking here? Deicide? Cannibal Corpse? Amon Amarth? or Slayer, Pantera, or newerish djenty crossovery stuff like Animal as Leaders?
Click to expand...
I did sound for a well known metal artist and measured 115dBA at mixer position. This was from stage noise only :-(

The artist (no earplugs!) just wanted more monitor all the time. It didn't get any better when he placed his foot on the floor monitor and half-bent over it.

This is the only time in my career where I've had to have a finger riding the monitor fader throughout the show...
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Damn! I guess I'd always just presumed that at the very least the channel configuration would be a globally route-able option, if not selectable per channel. As Jeff mentioned, it's probably generally not a big deal. Except when it is. Then it's really, really important. Definitely a re-assessment of choices for future purchases and more to think about.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Robert Lofgren said:
I did sound for a well known metal artist and measured 115dBA at mixer position. This was from stage noise only :-(

The artist (no earplugs!) just wanted more monitor all the time. It didn't get any better when he placed his foot on the floor monitor and half-bent over it.

This is the only time in my career where I've had to have a finger riding the monitor fader throughout the show...
Click to expand...

I had a show like that too. Interestingly this was one where the lead guitarist had a cabinet with four 10" drivers in it (looks like a Marshall stack's bottom half). It was two nights in a row and if the room was small the first night the next room was tiny. There was a guitar hotspot in the audience zone near my FOH position. That guy and his lead vocalist had me fighting feedback all night. Fortunately, cream rises and bands don't grow unless they learn how to manage their stage volume, except in rare cases like the one you mentioned. Most hip hop acts that don't have a live band, I get to control their stage volume as the guy mixing! I was the drummer in a live hip hop band this past weekend and it was nice having a competent soundman and crew out there working for me. They made it easy, but in return as long time musicians, the band knew how to behave and manage stage volume relatively well on their own. Its got to be a two way street!
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Lee Douglas said:
Damn! I guess I'd always just presumed that at the very least the channel configuration would be a globally route-able option, if not selectable per channel. As Jeff mentioned, it's probably generally not a big deal. Except when it is. Then it's really, really important. Definitely a re-assessment of choices for future purchases and more to think about.
Click to expand...

I am glad to see that we are demanding such high standards these days! It was not too many years ago that consoles with features like these were not on my shopping list. I am glad this thread came up because it really does give you a better starting position when you start looking to buy new consoles. A few years ago it wasn't a deal breaker to not have remote control preamps for me, but now suddenly it is mandatory that I be able to use an iPad remote. I also suspect that I will never go back to using a mixer that is less configurable than the X32 and in terms of routing that goes double. As far as price for features they set the bar for the mid level digital console. Going forward it will be my measuring stick, of course not the only one.
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

Thank you all. It makes sense to me that, generally, EQ should be upstream of compression. Silas's example of the 200Hz-centered cut on an SM58 is exactly the situation I think of.

I believe that for my (amateur, bar-level) use I'd ideally have

gate -> EQ -> comp,

with the monitor contribution tapped off post EQ and pre comp. My reasoning is that, with well corrected monitor and house speakers, if the tone is good in the house, it won't be too far off in the monitors. Should further monitor tone control or feedback notching be required, it can be accomplished on the monitor output EQ.

The APB Prorack House I'm using now is wired, on certain channels, to make pre-EQ aux sends pre insert (where the compressor is inserted) so I get uncompressed monitors at the cost of the monitors going naked for channel EQ. This works OK, but I think I would like post EQ, pre comp better.

All this complicates my selection of a digital mixer since, as Chris pointed out, when we want digital we want it all :)~:-)~:smile:

--Frank
 
Re: Digital Desk Processing Order?

If I am stuck on a small analog console I don't want channel EQ or Comp in the monitor sends. These are things I need to hear out of the speaker to adjust. My monitors usually don't sound the same as my FOH.
 
Top Bottom