Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Producing heavily-compressed music means the mix is meant to 'work'
    on the crappiest possible system.. like a table radio with 3" speakers.
    
    That's it.  It's a lowest-common-denominator decision.
    
    karl

    I'll start with the caveat that these are conclusions I've largely
    come to on my own.  There really isn't that much discussion of
    compression even in the literature I've read, which may be why its value
    as a tool is so often unappreciate.
    
    There are lots of uses for compression.   I don't look at the role
    of compressor as "reducing the dynamic range", but rather to
    have control over it on the high end (louder end) of the scale.
    
    One of the biggest uses is when your going from a source to a
    destination when the source has a wider dynamic range (mics) than the
    destination (tape).
    
    If my vocals-coming-thru-a-mic has a range of 120 db but my tape
    is only 90, clearly that range has to be compressed in some way.
    Turning the record level down is one way to do it.  But if the
    medium level of the vocals is significantly below the peaks, that
    means that I'm recording the most important part at a much lower
    level: more noise, and perhaps too quiet.
    
    Well... I could get a limiter which turns anything above, say, 0 db
    back down to o db.  But that means I lose ALL dynamics above the
    0 db threshold.
    
    The value of a compressor here is that it allows me to flatten the
    response curve above the threshold.   I.E. I get SOME dynamics, but
    just not as much.  That's what the "compression ratio" controls.
    If I get a 2 db increase in dynamics, and my compression ratio is 2:1,
    the compressor changes that to a 1 db increase in dynamics.  (Whereas
    a limiter would change to a 0 db (NO) change).
    
    So I think of a compressor as allowing you to have some control in
    how wide range sources are "packed" into a smaller range.
    
    It also, I think, has to do with the limitations of tape which does
    not have uniform response in all ranges.  I.E. too loud and it responds
    with distortion, too soft and you get noise.
    
    So I think of the other part of compression is diddling the dynamics
    in order to stay within the optimal range of tape performance.
    In the case of vocals, I think there's another effect in that the
    gain properties of mics require you to sing into it from a very short
    distance.   That causes you to have very unnatural sounding dyanmics:
    i.e. imagine that someone is singing a few inches from your ear
    instead of a few feet away.
    
    If I could draw a graph, I'm sure I could explain it in a sec but
    let's try anyway.  I'm going to use a 0 to 10 scale for dynamics
    rather than talk about db's which I've never understood that
    well anyway.
    
    Your vocal mic may have a range that goes from 0 to 10 but your
    tape only has a range from 0 to 7.   Most of the source stays within
    range of the tap
    
    proximity factor

    
    Re .2
    
    Good singers do what Dave is suggesting 'second nature', by mic
    technique. Move back when you shout, move in close when you whisper.
    
    This also saves gobbing up your SM58!
    
    Richard.

    re: .3
    
    Well... even the best singers can't possibly do "by hand" what
    a compressor does.   You really can't "do it by hand".
    
    It's not just dynamics from shouting.  Certain sybillants like
    S's and P's introduce momentary peaks.   I've yet to see the
    singer that moves their head back and forth for P's and S's.
    
    In fact, all a "de-esser" is is a compressor that works only
    on a certain frequency range.
    
    If anyone has a notion that compressors are used as a "crutch",
    I'd strongly disagree.
    
    	db

                                                                         
>      It's not just dynamics from shouting.  Certain sybillants like     
>      S's and P's introduce momentary peaks.   I've yet to see the       
>      singer that moves their head back and forth for P's and S's.       
    
    Humph.. but if that's what sibilants do, why get rid of them? 
    I could understand if you were saying that we need compressors in 
    order to sound like other (compressed) musicians, but I don't think
    that's what you are saying.  
    
    I accept that a de-esser can be useful in preventing hearing damage
    in the front row of an overloud concert.
    
    Richard.

    
    The main reason to eliminate peaks is to prevent the tape from
    distorting. My impression is that a pro studio engineer will throw
    a compressor on a channel at the first sign of trouble (i.e. peaks).
    Vocals especially are a problem, for the reasons previously mentioned.
    But, I've also had my guitar compressed because my strumming my
    be a little uneven. Seems like a reasonable thing to me.
    
    Rob

    
    Yes, but surely hi-fi of the 'direct cut' or the DDD CD variety 
    would tend not to use compression?
    
    Richard.

Going out on a limb here.

Maybe silibants do make these momentary peaks, but a mic and a human ear react
differently so they sound abnormal recorded though live to the ear they sound
ok.

Chad

(Sounds good to me  :-)

    re: .5
    
>    Humph.. but if that's what sibilants do, why get rid of them? 
>    I could understand if you were saying that we need compressors in 
>    order to sound like other (compressed) musicians, but I don't think
>    that's what you are saying.
    
    Chad is right.  Mics and audio signals and tape react differently
    than ears and nerves.
    
    Compressors are one way of correcting that.  Compressors (among other
    things) make vocals sound more natural and less mic'ed.
    
    Compressors are NOT used as a crutch, but you don't have to believe me.
    
    	db

    
    
    I also use my compressor to "shape" the sound of certain instruments.
    A good example at the moment is that I find the Snare of the R8
    a little lacking in "IMPACT". (purely personal taste). What I do
    is run them through half of my YAM GC compressor and use the attack
    and decay controls to make the sound a little more boxy. To give
    you a clue to what I am trying to acheive I think the best snare
    sound I ever heard was the one used by Bruce Hornsby on "That's
    just the way it is". At least I think that is what it's called.
    
    				Paul.
     

             
    	In my entry, I was really trying to bring out the two schools
    of thought on this; one is to compress, the other, not to compress
    anything.
    
    	Certaily, with good mics, and a direct to disk recorder, one could
    make recordings with the 110 db dynamic range. But, what kinds of
    things have this dynamic range to beging with - besides things jet
    engines, china cymbals, within Kick drums, jackhammers, Top Fuel
    dragsters and the noisier lot of things to listen to?
    
    	I guess my point is that while you can record with this amount
    of range exemplified, the only things that can make use of it would
    simply be annoying for most people to listen to anyway. Things with
    great audible dynamics are startling! Which I take is the opposite
    of "soothing".
    
    	Compression, therefore, I claim can make for a more "soothing"
    sound - it's easier to listen to. Note this is entirely a subjective
    perception on the part of the listener! I've found this to be basically
    true in doing both live and recording sound work.
    
    	So, besides making things a little easier to do, compression
    also imparts a quality to the sound, or "how it sounds". As was
    said before, it can be used "to shape the sound". Not only of certain
    instruments, but the whole sound as well.
    
    	This only means that compression is a good tool to have in your
    audio engineer's tool box - along with your electronic crossover,
    your graphic EQ, your delay effects, etc. It's use is only necessary
    when you wish to -
    
    	- limit the final signal some so you can set the recording level.
    
    	- make something seem louder against a background sound or mix.
    
    	- increase the sustain of an analog musical instrument.
    
    	- keep the vocals from blastin' the piss out of the audience.
    
        - make the sound more fluid, homogenized and easier to listen
          to.
    
    	Joe Jas
                               
    	
    	

    
    	I patch a compressor into the channel of a hot vocal, pre-fade,
    	pre-eq, not only to prevent blasting the piss out of the audi-
    	ence, but to save my compression drivers. Right Butchaka? :^)
    		
    	I also like to use them on bass, snare, and kick(sometimes).
    	
    	And always on the monitors mix.
    
    	Neal
    

Don't forget the really nice percussive effects you can get on guitar by 
adjusting the compression ratio and response time to allow for very fast 
transients which then get "squashed" immediately -- a real common application
for the foot stomp box variety.

    re .11 - what kinds of things have this dynamic range?  Symphony
    orchestras, for one, come very close.  A quiet hall can have a noise
    floor of about 20 dbA, and the peaks in a really big piece like
    the Mahler 8th symphony can approach 120 dbA.  That's pushing 100 db of
    dynamic range.
    
    len.
    

Last weekend I was talking with Bob Wey about the use of compressors.  Bob
operates a small recording studio in Westford, MA ("Ear-Relevant Sounds"),
has played hammered dulcimer for about 15 years, and has two albums out
(recorded himself).  I would venture to guess that most of his recording work
is acoustic string music and voice.

Anyway, I asked him about the use of compression when recording dulcimers, and
he said he saw little need for it.  It is sometimes useful (in rock music) when
you want one instrument to be prominent in the mix, so you compress its range
and then boost its level.  The only place he always used compression was for
voice, as he said most singers don't have enough control.

Oh, he also doesn't use equalization, except sometimes to correct for
resonances in the instruments.

    
    re -1
    
    I didn't know you knew Bob Wey! Tell him Mike D'Iorio says Hi !
    
    Mike D

I wouldn't say that I *know* him, but he was teaching a workshop at the Flower
Carol Dulcimer Festival in Watertown last weekend, which I attended.  These are
pretty informal affairs.  (You should have heard the sound of 16 hammered
dulcimers in a room less than 20 feet square.  We were pretty much in tune,
amazingly enough.)  I asked him about compression between workshops, in the
hallway.

Not on this topic, but one of the most interesting sessions at the festival was
taught by a guy who had only been playing the dulcimer for 2.5 years.  His main
experience was as ... a rock drummer.  Even the other instructors were wowed by
what had to say.

re < Note 1975.17 by DFLAT::DICKSON "twang and toot, not beep or thud" >

	So... what *did* the rock drummer have to say?

He approached playing the dulcimer from a rhythmic, rather than melodic,
viewpoint.  Since the instrument is played with almost exactly the same hand
motions as drums, many similar techniques apply.  The way dulcimer is usually
taught the focus is on melody and harmony, and how to "choreograph" the
movements of your hands so as to not trip over yourself getting from one part
of the instrument to the other.

He showed us how drummers work on very simple patterns, starting slowly at
first and practicing until they can play it very fast.  Then make the pattern
more difficult and go through it again.  There was a lot of talk about having
the two hands doing different things, in different parts of the instrument,
while still being tightly synchronized left/right/left/right.

He also talked about some basic patterns (paradiddles, double-paradiddles,
flans, n-stroke rolls, etc) that dulcimer players are already familiar with,
although not necessarily under those names.

Then when your hands can carry out these patterns "by themselves", your
conscious mind is free to think about higher-level concepts.  So instead of
thinking about playing this note, then that note, then that note, you think in
terms of patterns.  "A clockwise triangular pattern in a C-major chord with the
right hand against a counterclockwise triangular pattern in F in the left hand,
with paradiddle accent patterns" kind of thing.

The significance of all this is a little hard to describe if you are not
already familiar with how a hammered dulcimer is played.

He also demonstrated some further-out effects not normally associated with
dulcimer playing, such as string bending.

I taped the whole thing.