|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 11, 2019 10:33:39 GMT -6
The HP side chain is unrelated to what I'm talking about. With a stereo compressor, both channels compress when either side crosses the threshold. So if either hand is banging away on a part, it's going to compress both sides, whether they need it or not. This will collapse your stereo spread. I would much rather have something that does dual mono than have a HP filter or mix knob. Depends on the compressor some use a single channel, detector, some mix the signal sent to the detector some use 2 detectors and respond to the one with the highest need for compression. My point is that a stereo linked compressor compresses both sides at the same time. That's the nature of linked. I think unlinked is better for piano. Maybe I'm the only one.
|
|
|
Post by theshea on May 11, 2019 10:34:49 GMT -6
i suggest the drawmer 1978, well within your budget. it has comp, saturation and a sidechain/eq section that works very well. plus a blend knob for parallel. it sits on my stereobus but gets used also for printing drumbusses as it it very versatile. some call it "the poor man api 2500". Looks nice, and versatile. Any particular reason you're recommending FET over VCA? No particular reason. I think the drawmer 1978 sounds good on the stereobus. And the drawmer has different character knobs which change the release settings further. That‘s quiete versatile for one compressor. To me it can sound rather close to a vca ssl buscomp, though i only have the waves ssl g comp plugin as reference.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 11, 2019 11:00:37 GMT -6
The HP side chain is unrelated to what I'm talking about. With a stereo compressor, both channels compress when either side crosses the threshold. So if either hand is banging away on a part, it's going to compress both sides, whether they need it or not. This will collapse your stereo spread. I would much rather have something that does dual mono than have a HP filter or mix knob. Depends on the compressor some use a single channel, detector, some mix the signal sent to the detector some use 2 detectors and respond to the one with the highest need for compression. So of the the stereo comps mentioned in this thread (and any others we misssed), can we categorize how they detect? Buzz Audio DBC Serpent SB 4001 Elysia X-pressor Drawmer 1978 TK Audio Wesaudio Dione AudioScape Buss Comp JDK Audio R22 Drawmer 1968
|
|
|
Post by timcampbell on May 11, 2019 11:05:12 GMT -6
Buzz Audio DBC Serpent SB 4001 Elysia X-pressor Drawmer 1978 TK Audio Wesaudio Dione AudioScape Buss Comp JDK Audio R22 Drawmer 1968
I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on May 11, 2019 11:08:25 GMT -6
Depends on the compressor some use a single channel, detector, some mix the signal sent to the detector some use 2 detectors and respond to the one with the highest need for compression. My point is that a stereo linked compressor compresses both sides at the same time. That's the nature of linked. I think unlinked is better for piano. Maybe I'm the only one. I think unlinked/dual mono is better on almost everything. But that’s just IMHO
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 11, 2019 11:08:43 GMT -6
Buzz Audio DBC Serpent SB 4001 Elysia X-pressor Drawmer 1978 TK Audio Wesaudio Dione AudioScape Buss Comp JDK Audio R22 Drawmer 1968 I feel like Rodney Dangerfield. OMG! I don't know how it happened. I must have mis-clicked on "delete" with the venerable SPL Dynamaxx!
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 11, 2019 11:37:13 GMT -6
Depends on the compressor some use a single channel, detector, some mix the signal sent to the detector some use 2 detectors and respond to the one with the highest need for compression. So of the the stereo comps mentioned in this thread (and any others we misssed), can we categorize how they detect? Buzz Audio DBC Two independent comps which can link, but no filters Serpent SB 4001 I really like this comp (with filters and mix), but it's linked and I'm not sure how it detects Elysia X-pressor (Linked only) Detection unknown Drawmer 1978 (FET - can be independent or linked - mix - interesting and powerful looking tone shaping feature. TK Audio Not sure how it detects Wesaudio Dione Not sure how it detects AudioScape Buss This has a built-in pre-set filter at 160hz with what they call "true stereo ..not summed mono" JDK Audio R22 (Independent, but no filters - no mix) Drawmer 1968 Tubes - but no filters - no mix SPL Dynamaxx No filter - no mix Hmm.. Daking FET III Variable Dual Mono <--> Stereo, with independent HP filters! Top of my price range and no mix. Also weird PSU configuration.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on May 11, 2019 11:58:40 GMT -6
The DBC-20 does have a sidechain filter. It’s a fixed filter, labeled “bass” IIRC.
Could be wrong but i remember the 1968 also having a fixed, switchable filter. And doesn’t the JDK have a “thrust” setting? I thought that was api’s take on a hp filter.
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 11, 2019 15:24:04 GMT -6
The Drawmer 1968 ME has a “Big” switch which is a sidechain filter at 100 hz. The 1968 mkii has a “Big” switch at 75 hz and a “Bigger” switch at 150 hz. They also have a sidechain insert on the back for each channel so you can set up your own sidechain if you want.
The Dione has has a sidechain filter with 60 hz, 90, 150, and two different shaped tilt options.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on May 11, 2019 16:39:10 GMT -6
What about Audioscapes new D-comp since the Buzz DBC was mentioned?
|
|
|
Post by the1984studios on May 11, 2019 21:08:18 GMT -6
What about Audioscapes new D-comp since the Buzz DBC was mentioned? TONS of good suggestions in this thread! But for my money, you can't beat the Buss Comp (even at twice the price; just sayin'). I own both the AS Buss Comp and D-Comp, so I'll chime in here and I've owned the Serpent, Alan Smart C1LA, and a few others for years (I've since sold them all after getting the Buss and D-Comp). FULL DISCLOSURE: I AM AN AUDIOSCAPE FANBOI to the MAX!! For a general, ALL-PURPOSE compressor, the Buss Comp is the way go to IMO. It just has the "tone" that the SSL Center Section is so famous for; as well as an accurate compression behavior/action that is spot on with an OG Rack unit. Relatively transparent but not clinical, extremely versatile and won't stomp all over your source material with it's own inherent TONE.... unlike the....... ....D-Comp, on the other hand, is AWESOME on so many sources, but because of it's much more intense inherent coloration and "vibe", it may not be quite as versatile and "set and forget" as the Buss Comp. It is an EXTREMELY versatile compressor as far as it's time constants, different modes, SC HPF options, etc... but it definitely has it's own, distinct thing going on that no other compressor out there really does. As drBill said, it's capable of adding an amazing "point" to audio unlike anything out there... (except perhaps his Dynamite's, which I agree with!). Buss Comp vs. Serpent & Alan Smart.. well. The Buss Comp is SIMPLE, #1 in operation. Takes me seconds to dial in a sound I hear in my head when using it. The Serpent AND Alan Smart (the Smart DID have a VERY cool punch to it that I loved, but after getting the AS I was quite easily able to get a very similar thing happening without all the insane features the C1LA has that I don't need) left me with option paralysis and honestly, it didn't quite have the "tone" of the Buss Comp. It is however, a great compressor with some very cool features, but I found myself parking the HPF at basically one setting (120hz I believe) and leaving it there, when I used it. I like the simplified SC Filter option on the AS comp. Flick it up, does it work? No? OK, back to off. Extremely effective and deceptively useful. If you're looking for something with more weight and a totally different compression behavior/tone, the D-Comp would be my second choice. It's a true DUAL MONO unit (Buss Comp uses a true stereo sidechain detector circuit if memory serves, so it never sounds "small" like so many "linked" comps tend to do). I always use the D unlinked, but YMMV. My favorite combo is the D-Comp into the Buss Comp. AWESOME tonal possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 12, 2019 4:10:26 GMT -6
If you're looking for something with more weight and a totally different compression behavior/tone, the D-Comp would be my second choice. It's a true DUAL MONO unit (Buss Comp uses a true stereo sidechain detector circuit if memory serves, so it never sounds "small" like so many "linked" comps tend to do). I always use the D unlinked, but YMMV. So I get that dual mono is two compressors doing their own thing, but I'm still a little hazy with stereo, which I'm pretty sure is two different compressors informed by a single source. So what's the difference between stereo and true stereo? Is it a marketing thing, or a real thing? It comes down to how the key/trigger signal is generated, right? Sum vs Highest or some other algorithm? And perhaps, most importantly, which is likely the best choice for a grand piano miced with a pair of SDCs? Whatever I get, I hope to dabble with using it as a true buss comp down the line, but baby steps.. I sure would like to get the buss comp and be happy.. It was my first consideration on this thread, and not just because of the price. I also liked the simplicity of set and forget. It's interesting that as we discuss all of the features of these compressors how easy it is to get sucked into the 'more is better' paradigm. Certainly, for those who know how to take full advantage of those features - more can be better. But I keep having to remind myself that I'm a musician first, and not a pro engineer ..and that I need to keep my eye on the prize.
|
|
|
Post by georgetoledo on May 12, 2019 8:52:40 GMT -6
If you use an unlinked compressor on a true stereo mic setup, it can shift the center image. Usually only gets nasty with more extreme settings, but strictly speaking it can be noticeable even with subtle compression. Not to say it isn’t a valid creative choice to have the center kind of move around.
This is a good explanation of how the SSL and Audioscape work via Chuck Zwicky. (Clone in this context refers to the gyraf gssl and derivatives.):
The SSL has a seperate detector and sidechain for each channel and the control voltages from each detector are summed to drive both channels. Each of detector gets a signal from only it's input channel, and there are no L+R or L-R signals derived from the two inputs. These voltages are summed using a pair of diodes who's cathodes are connected together, this means that only the diode which has a greater (negative) voltage across it is conducting at any one time, in other words, the compressor only responds to the louder of the two channels, but the gain reduction is affected equally across all the audio channels. The advantage of this method is that the signal which is summed is a DC voltage representing the absolute value of the input signal, rather than how the clones do it, which is to sum the *audio* signal and then feed a single detector and sidechain, so polarity differences in the source material will not affect the compression at all on a real SSL but will on a clone.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 12, 2019 9:01:30 GMT -6
If you use an unlinked compressor on a true stereo mic setup, it can shift the center image. Usually only gets nasty with more extreme settings, but strictly speaking it can be noticeable even with subtle compression. Not to say it isn’t a valid creative choice to have the center kind of move around. This is a good explanation of how the SSL and Audioscape work via Chuck Zwicky. (Clone in this context refers to the gyraf gssl and derivatives.): The SSL has a seperate detector and sidechain for each channel and the control voltages from each detector are summed to drive both channels. Each of detector gets a signal from only it's input channel, and there are no L+R or L-R signals derived from the two inputs. These voltages are summed using a pair of diodes who's cathodes are connected together, this means that only the diode which has a greater (negative) voltage across it is conducting at any one time, in other words, the compressor only responds to the louder of the two channels, but the gain reduction is affected equally across all the audio channels. The advantage of this method is that the signal which is summed is a DC voltage representing the absolute value of the input signal, rather than how the clones do it, which is to sum the *audio* signal and then feed a single detector and sidechain, so polarity differences in the source material will not affect the compression at all on a real SSL but will on a clone. So the SSL is stereo, or true stereo? ..if "true" is a thing in the first place?? And not to confuse things with the word, but when you say 'true' stereo mic setup, you mean any standard two-mic set-up, like a spaced pair or XY, right? And I'm guessing that panning them less than hard L and R will reduce the shift?
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on May 12, 2019 9:07:41 GMT -6
If you're looking for something with more weight and a totally different compression behavior/tone, the D-Comp would be my second choice. It's a true DUAL MONO unit (Buss Comp uses a true stereo sidechain detector circuit if memory serves, so it never sounds "small" like so many "linked" comps tend to do). I always use the D unlinked, but YMMV. [...] I sure would like to get the buss comp and be happy.. It was my first consideration on this thread, and not just because of the price. I also liked the simplicity of set and forget. It's interesting that as we discuss all of the features of these compressors how easy it is to get sucked into the 'more is better' paradigm. Certainly, for those who know how to take full advantage of those features - more can be better. But I keep having to remind myself that I'm a musician first, and not a pro engineer ..and that I need to keep my eye on the prize. I'll say this from my own experience: Years ago, the SSL bus comp style was probably the first compressor that helped me really "get" what the compression controls were actually doing. I'd been using 1176s and LA-2As for quite awhile by then, but for some reason, with the SSL bus comp style, I finally understood how to use compression. It would be hard to go wrong with that as your first outboard compressor, IMO. And the Audioscape is really affordable and sounds great. Now whether you end up liking compression on a piano while you track or not is another question. I can go either way on that. Sometimes it's nice to "play into" a compressor. But there's no "undo" button, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by georgetoledo on May 12, 2019 9:44:37 GMT -6
If you use an unlinked compressor on a true stereo mic setup, it can shift the center image. Usually only gets nasty with more extreme settings, but strictly speaking it can be noticeable even with subtle compression. Not to say it isn’t a valid creative choice to have the center kind of move around. This is a good explanation of how the SSL and Audioscape work via Chuck Zwicky. (Clone in this context refers to the gyraf gssl and derivatives.): The SSL has a seperate detector and sidechain for each channel and the control voltages from each detector are summed to drive both channels. Each of detector gets a signal from only it's input channel, and there are no L+R or L-R signals derived from the two inputs. These voltages are summed using a pair of diodes who's cathodes are connected together, this means that only the diode which has a greater (negative) voltage across it is conducting at any one time, in other words, the compressor only responds to the louder of the two channels, but the gain reduction is affected equally across all the audio channels. The advantage of this method is that the signal which is summed is a DC voltage representing the absolute value of the input signal, rather than how the clones do it, which is to sum the *audio* signal and then feed a single detector and sidechain, so polarity differences in the source material will not affect the compression at all on a real SSL but will on a clone. So the SSL is stereo, or true stereo? ..if "true" is a thing in the first place?? And not to confuse things with the word, but when you say 'true' stereo mic setup, you mean any standard two-mic set-up, like a spaced pair or XY, right? And I'm guessing that panning them less than hard L and R will reduce the shift? Yeah, when I was referring to a stereo mic technique, but also entire mixes. If you use an unlinked compressor on an entire stereo mix, if the compressor hits hard on one “side”...well “half” of the center image also squishes too. With the two detector method...say you are playing an arpeggio on the piano with your right hand hard enough to trigger some compression. Well, the other side that’s getting a bit more of the ambient sound, will also compress, so it stays even relatively. That makes the center stay “in the center”. Does that make sense? When you have stuff in a mix that’s panned more into center, the end effect is that the image still stays “correct”, and tracks stay pinpoint in their pan places. If you have some out of phase reverb hard panned one way (or maybe out of phase bleed)...and the dry track panned opposite, the reduction stays correct and still clamps down because it doesn’t have the “one detector” summed mono problem either. Now...this is not to say that unlinked channels don’t have “a sound” and that the side effect can’t be cool for some things. It’s a little funky but might be just the right kind of funky for some things. Lightly done, maybe not funky at all. Maybe play around with that ITB some to get a feel.
|
|
|
Post by subspace on May 12, 2019 10:30:17 GMT -6
At the top end of your price range used, I'd say the A-Designs Nail fits your thread title. It's dual mono/stereo linkable, sounds great tracking piano, acoustic instruments or vocals, and has the mix bus features you've outlined, variable side chain HPF and wet/dry mix control. It would be my choice for a compressor that gets used both in tracking and again on the mix, only caution I'd give would be the threshold/hard threshold controls take actually using them a bit to learn how they interact.
|
|
|
Post by the1984studios on May 12, 2019 11:22:55 GMT -6
[...] I sure would like to get the buss comp and be happy.. It was my first consideration on this thread, and not just because of the price. I also liked the simplicity of set and forget. It's interesting that as we discuss all of the features of these compressors how easy it is to get sucked into the 'more is better' paradigm. Certainly, for those who know how to take full advantage of those features - more can be better. But I keep having to remind myself that I'm a musician first, and not a pro engineer ..and that I need to keep my eye on the prize. I'll say this from my own experience: Years ago, the SSL bus comp style was probably the first compressor that helped me really "get" what the compression controls were actually doing. I'd been using 1176s and LA-2As for quite awhile by then, but for some reason, with the SSL bus comp style, I finally understood how to use compression. It would be hard to go wrong with that as your first outboard compressor, IMO. And the Audioscape is really affordable and sounds great. Now whether you end up liking compression on a piano while you track or not is another question. I can go either way on that. Sometimes it's nice to "play into" a compressor. But there's no "undo" button, obviously. HUGE +1 to this! I couldn't agree any harder. The "SSL Style" comp, in this case, the Buss Comp will not only suit your sonic needs exceptionally well (for stereo piano and down the road, like you mentioned, as an actual 2BUSS compressor) but it's also a great EDUCATION on "compression" and how different ratios affect the sound, attack times, release times and the interaction between all of these things. I believe that's part of the beauty of SSL G Comp's and why, in particular, I like mine straight up, without all the crazy options. SSL initially designed released the G-Comp with a certain set of controls / options for a reason and it's probably why so many people dig it. Set and forget. No option paralysis. Period. =D ALSO! georgetoledo's quoted explanation from Chuck on how the SSL/AudioScape detector works is an absolutely awesome read... explains it perfectly. Somewhat techy, but I'm sure you can get the gist of it. Put simply, the SSL, AS (and I'm sure a few others) will not mess with your stereo image, unlike many other "clones". Don't read too much into all the tech stuff, you're a musician first, KEEP IT THAT WAY. That's the best advice I can give you. Purchase tools that AID your musical endeavors and don't bog you down with too much of the "tech" side of things. I've seen too many musicians totally stop creating music simply because they got wrapped up in gear. Hence, this makes the AS one of the top choices in my book! ROCK ON
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 12, 2019 12:21:27 GMT -6
I'll say this from my own experience: Years ago, the SSL bus comp style was probably the first compressor that helped me really "get" what the compression controls were actually doing. I'd been using 1176s and LA-2As for quite awhile by then, but for some reason, with the SSL bus comp style, I finally understood how to use compression. It would be hard to go wrong with that as your first outboard compressor, IMO. And the Audioscape is really affordable and sounds great. Now whether you end up liking compression on a piano while you track or not is another question. I can go either way on that. Sometimes it's nice to "play into" a compressor. But there's no "undo" button, obviously. ...I've seen too many musicians totally stop creating music simply because they got wrapped up in gear... I mean, hell, I got 'wrapped up in gear' and now I'm halfway through an EE degree and I have no time for music cause all I do is study. HEED THE WARNINGS.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 12, 2019 13:58:26 GMT -6
Buy an audioscape, plug it in: be happy, make music, not posts!
|
|
|
Post by the1984studios on May 12, 2019 16:46:58 GMT -6
Buy an audioscape, plug it in: be happy, make music, not posts! Super Helpful Dude strikes again! Couldn't agree more!
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on May 12, 2019 18:04:48 GMT -6
I have a bunch of FCS stereo comp variants (P4, P3, P3500) and an SB-4001, and if i was forced to pick on flexibility and sound it’d be the SB-4001 that would go away. Not that it’s not good, but it’s more of an effect device. I rarely like unlinked stereo comps, has to be a special case/need. Don’t dig hearing the middle swim around side to side.
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 12, 2019 18:49:53 GMT -6
I like my VCA home brew based on THAT data sheets and some personal tweaking. It’s very very clean and useful.
It has NE5532s in the sidechain, a THAT VCA, and discrete op amps for the balanced input and output stage. I took some notes from my API 2500 and added feedforward and feedback to it.
It has a slew rate limiter in the sidechain but I don’t use it much, preferring the auto response of the nonlinear capacitor THAT lists in their datasheet.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 12, 2019 22:31:52 GMT -6
I like my VCA home brew based on THAT data sheets and some personal tweaking. It’s very very clean and useful. It has NE5532s in the sidechain, a THAT VCA, and discrete op amps for the balanced input and output stage. I took some notes from my API 2500 and added feedforward and feedback to it. It has a slew rate limiter in the sidechain but I don’t use it much, preferring the auto response of the nonlinear capacitor THAT lists in their datasheet.
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on May 12, 2019 22:41:14 GMT -6
I have 8 analog channels of compression. 4 of them are dual mono or stereo link capable. 2 are dual mono only. 2 are stereo linked only.
I discovered how I liked my stereo compression set up just by playing with it a bunch. I noticed some patterns in my decision making.
The question I ask myself every time: Do I care about whatever is in the center of the stereo image (and do I have something side panned that would hit hard enough to significantly engage only one side of the compressor)? Do I care if the left side compression manipulates the right side (and vice versa)?
Main guitar bus? I don't care about the center and I don't want the sides manipulating each other. Hard panned guitars (probably). Dual mono compressors almost definitely. If they were stereo linked the chord stabs on one side would pull down the arpeggio on the other side. Not ideal to my ears.
Stereo bus? Do I care about the center of the stereo image? Yep. I also mix a lot of heavy music so toms are often panned wide-ish and are fairly loud. If a floor tom groove comes in it will probably cause my compressor to engage more. If it engages evenly both sides my mix will tighten and pump (good or bad is a different thing entirely). If it doesn't engage evenly - only one side of the compressor compresses - the center of my mix will lean away from the floor tom. That's probably bad in my opinion...ESPECIALLY if I'm banging onto the compressor with a little gusto!
OK. The more obvious things are easy. But what about the other stuff?
Drum overheads? Same questions: Do I care about the center of the image? Do I care if one side ducks the other side? That depends on the role of my overheads. Am I trying to get cymbals from the overheads or am I trying to get the sound of the whole kit? Will the overheads be the main source of drums or will it be the supplemental source? If I'm just using it for cymbals I don't care what happens to the snare or kick. Dual mono to make sure the cymbals compress in a manner that shapes the cymbal hits the way I want 'em. If I need the kit image from the overheads, I'll be using it linked stereo because I don't want my kick and snare location moving as the player moves around the kit. The wider my mic technique, the more the stereo linking (or not) matters. X/Y will kind of always have that strong center thing in both mics so it's not as big a deal as when I'm using a spaced pair.
Drum rooms? How loud are they going to be in the mix? I don't mind some movement to the drum rooms if they're ambient and providing vibe. If I'm getting my kit image from them (which I often am because I'm using overheads to focus on cymbals) then I'm going to want to lock the image in place with a stereo linked compressor. If it's a vibe/ambience thing, then I don't mind that stuff swimming around a bit and the dual mono thing might add a little sauce to the whole thing.
Which brings us to piano. What's your mic technique? What sort of parts are you playing? X/Y back a bit over top with the lid open? It might be nice to get a gentle left-to-right sway in the mics as the independent dual mono compressor's sides compress differently. Spaced pair close up? I'd stereo link that stuff to make sure it doesn't start pushing the stereo image around. Are you going to collapse to mono in the mix anyway? Dual mono for MAXIMUM CONTROL (trol, trol, trol).
I guess I'm saying (like always): it depends.
If I were getting something for piano specifically, I'd make sure to get something that could do both. ART's Pro VLAII is stereo linked or dual mono if you want to go the inexpensive route. The JDK R22 is something I've never had a chance to use but I've heard good things. It's also linkable or dual mono. My cheap-ass (but surprisingly useful) Alctron CP 540s are linkable or dual mono.
Hopefully my ramblings gave someone something to think about! If not, then I just thought out loud a bit and helped my brain find the words to describe the thing it was doing already!
|
|