|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 9, 2017 14:59:26 GMT -6
Vocals come last for me, and yes, I ride every syllable or whatever it needs. It depends a lot on the compression, but I generally do not go heavy handed with a sta-level or smashed LA2a or something like that on the vocal to get it to sit. That's what automation is for. I automate with the vocal sitting WITHIN the mix. If I start with the vocal first, I'll be redoing it almost certainly. I might start with a vocal and get everything laid in around it, but when it comes to starting in with the fader moves, the instruments come first, vocals last. I make sure the track is solid, and the vocal is sitting where I want it. Then I start automating with a fader to dial it in. I'll use an Artist Mix to do that, or a Kensington (large ball) trackball. I am actually more accurate with the trackball. I'll look at waveforms, but by the time I get there, I am intimately familiar with the vocal, so I don't really need to watch waveforms. Plus, I mixed with consoles and tape machines for years, and there's nothing to see..... heh heh PS - compression gets used more for the sonics it imparts and for transient taming - ABSOLUTELY NOT for holding stuff in place so I don't need to automate things. After the compression flattens things out, almost everything gets automation moves. From subtle to massive. I puts life back into the music. If someone is using compression and mouse break points to automate and level out their mixes, the music tends to end up very static. Sometimes that's cool, but it's not the way live music sounds to me. I love compression, but I want life, movement and surprises in the music I mix. Even this simple Ac Gtrs, Bass, Piano piece has automation moves all over. For me, a mix is not done if I look at the volume moves display and see flat lines. You can obviously tell they are done by fader and not drawing lines.  BTW, the mix sounded "good" with zero automation, but it was too flat and didn't achieve what I knew it could without the automation. hat. I rid I'm curious about why you automate while the compression is inserted and not automate first and then compress. I'm definitely not Dr. Bill but the reason is pretty obvious when you think about it for a minute - you don't want the comp responding to your fader/automation moves. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 9, 2017 22:26:29 GMT -6
Hmm.. that's interesting, I'll double check on that John, thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Oct 10, 2017 4:45:06 GMT -6
I'm curious about why you automate while the compression is inserted and not automate first and then compress. I'm definitely not Dr. Bill but the reason is pretty obvious when you think about it for a minute - you don't want the comp responding to your fader/automation moves. I'm not disagreeing, but why then is it OK, if not standard practice to apply compression after clip gain? Answering my own question, I know that clip gain is more of a gross adjustment and brings all clips into the threshold range of the comp, but there is similar logic at play, right? |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 10, 2017 10:35:34 GMT -6
You can automate before or after or before AND after a compressor. Automating before is essentially what we are doing when we have a comp on the 2 bus and are writing automation to the individual channels before the 2 bus. Automating after is a more normal procedure -- i.e.: comp on channel insert - which is ahead of fader.
Personally, if I could have only one method - (aside from 2 bus) - I'd automate after the comps. That's what makes sense to me. I view that kind of automation as standard mix balancing. I view automating INTO a comp more as a special affect kind of thing.
They both have their place, but one gets used the vast majority of the time, while the other is pulled out for special occasions.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 10, 2017 13:35:22 GMT -6
I'm definitely not Dr. Bill but the reason is pretty obvious when you think about it for a minute - you don't want the comp responding to your fader/automation moves. I'm not disagreeing, but why then is it OK, if not standard practice to apply compression after clip gain? Answering my own question, I know that clip gain is more of a gross adjustment and brings all clips into the threshold range of the comp, but there is similar logic at play, right? Actually I mix on a console and we almost always use complete tracks. But the rule of thumb as long as I've been mixing is that the comp goes on a prefade insert in nearly all cases. So I'm not really very familiar with the use of clip gain, especiaslly since we don't use ProTools here, we use Reaper. Isn't clip gain mostly used to adjust the gain of individual clips that have been edited together to construct a track? And wouldn't you want the compressor to respond to the completed track, not to individual clips which are not level compensated? Like when we do a punch-in to tape (or sometimes digital), we always have to make sure the the record level matches the track. I guess nowadays you can ignore that and fix it in the computer? I don't think I entirely approve.... Compression is usually used to control the dynamic range (and sometimes "color") of a track, not to adjust the volume of the track in the mix. They're very different things. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Oct 10, 2017 13:50:17 GMT -6
You can automate before or after or before AND after a compressor. Automating before is essentially what we are doing when we have a comp on the 2 bus and are writing automation to the individual channels before the 2 bus. Automating after is a more normal procedure -- i.e.: comp on channel insert - which is ahead of fader. Personally, if I could have only one method - (aside from 2 bus) - I'd automate after the comps. That's what makes sense to me. I view that kind of automation as standard mix balancing. I view automating INTO a comp more as a special affect kind of thing. They both have their place, but one gets used the vast majority of the time, while the other is pulled out for special occasions. Unsing a comp on the 2-buss (or any mix buss for that matter) isn't really the same operation as using it on a track. On a buss it's often there to glue things together as well as control unwanted additive effects. And in this case the level control fader of the mix (or submix) is still generally AFTER the comp. |
|
BTW, the mix sounded "good" with zero automation, but it was too flat and didn't achieve what I knew it could without the automation.
