|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 15, 2023 15:54:23 GMT -6
A question for you guys. Since I lately received my new joy, Rubber Bands stereo pultec style (this thing grows on me fast) for my mix bus I realized I could start routing my mixbus different than I used to. Not going into details why, I do not have my mix bus comp routed as an insert but between mixbus and print. So that’s where I threw in my pultec too. Until now with this setup I have used the pultec plugs in the mix bus, meaning it comes before the hw compression. I’ve got used to this setup despite I know many will route the pultec after the comp.
Anyone here who have extensively tried both ways and would like to elaborate real life difference pros and cons. I will surely swap and try out both ways myself now as my setup allows it but it will take some time to grow into new habits so meanwhile I’d be glad to hear how u feel about it.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 16,061 
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Dec 15, 2023 16:09:11 GMT -6
I prefer comps first. I have come to think of them as like dynamic equalizers as the post sound is different. I prefer equalizing the compressed signal, so comp before eq for me.
Experiment and see what you prefer.
|
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 15, 2023 16:16:59 GMT -6
I prefer comps first. I have come to think of them as like dynamic equalizers as the post sound is different. I prefer equalizing the compressed signal, so comp before eq for me. Experiment and see what you prefer. This seem to be the consensus I believe in general. The reason why I had to run the other way around was actually that, since I mix itb and when I went for uad I got the apollo twin with octo sat. At that time i didn’t use hw in the mixing at all. Since then I got the vari mu in the rear end and have to route it Mixbus-out 3/4-hw comp-in 1/2-print track. So in other words I don’t use a master fader in my mix setup per se. So any plug eq went before the comp. Worked great for me, no issues there. But now as the option is there I will sure experiment and try it both ways. Was planning to upgrade to another interface with more i/o but as of now, it would not really change anything for me as all my hw is in the front end or rear. |
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Dec 15, 2023 17:56:34 GMT -6
I do eq cuts before the compressor and boosts after the compressor.
|
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Dec 15, 2023 18:10:29 GMT -6
Modifying the eq setting if its pre compression will change the compression action (for better or for worse). If the relationship between those two pieces of gear is something you're unfamiliar with, and if you're someone who regularly adjusts the mix buss eq through the course of a mix, the 'easier' setup is to put the eq post compression. Then you can tweak each unit without worrying too much about their interaction. That said, I generally like my broad-stroke eq in the path pre-compression so I can shape the compressor's action with it, but I would add the caveat that this is a slightly more 'advanced' technique that requires a better understanding of compression in general. Not sure if that would be or wouldn't be a possible snag for you. As mentioned, the best move is probably to experiment, and to enjoy that tube-y goodness while you do  |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Dec 15, 2023 20:00:32 GMT -6
Compressor > EQ
|
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Dec 15, 2023 21:49:43 GMT -6
Stam VCA on insert, Silver Bullet baxandall EQ after to lift the top and (maybe) goose a little sub.
|
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 16, 2023 9:08:49 GMT -6
I think it comes down to sound preference at the end of the day. Never felt loosing any bottom with comp last, but i guess you can get an more open and airy character with comp into pultec.
The interesting thing ofcourse with pultec/passive vs active eq is that you are not boosting with passive into the comp as you might with active
|
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Dec 16, 2023 10:51:11 GMT -6
I often had comp first but now have it reversed. I like being able to push the mix into the compressor and feeling it react.
It's subtle but it seems like the dance between comp threshold and getting a good frequency balance (lows mostly) ends up a win/win for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiospecific on Dec 16, 2023 13:41:10 GMT -6
A question for you guys. Since I lately received my new joy, Rubber Bands stereo pultec style (this thing grows on me fast) for my mix bus I realized I could start routing my mixbus different than I used to. Not going into details why, I do not have my mix bus comp routed as an insert but between mixbus and print. So that’s where I threw in my pultec too. Until now with this setup I have used the pultec plugs in the mix bus, meaning it comes before the hw compression. I’ve got used to this setup despite I know many will route the pultec after the comp. Anyone here who have extensively tried both ways and would like to elaborate real life difference pros and cons. I will surely swap and try out both ways myself now as my setup allows it but it will take some time to grow into new habits so meanwhile I’d be glad to hear how u feel about it. Sounds like the Edcor transformers in its output stage are acceptable. Nice. I have a couple of Klarks that I got dirt cheap ($200 ea) that I tried and stuck in the super mod pile. I'll have to bug Edcor if the Midas output transformers are not good. The input one and the EQ circuit is not the same as the Pulse. But for around the price of the real EQ section ($400), it was worth the try. |
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 19, 2023 5:34:01 GMT -6
Did a small shootout with a little more time now on a mix, switching the order forth and back. And yes, there is surely a difference in sound. compressor last gives a nice finished fat result, which is less responsive to variations on the eq wise obviously. An it is what is kind of sollution, but if it's good, don't fix it. While the pultec last in the chain results in a more variable, controllable, open, more highs type of result. It looses some of the fatness maybe. But then again, it's not in the mastring stage yet. In the mixbus the more common eq last seem to make a lot of sense. I have to leave it in for me the new order of eq last for some time and see if it grows on me. I sure will miss some of the mixing it all into a compressor, kind of feels wrong to fiddle with it after that  but I suppose it's a question of habits and changing them in hope of growth. I never use a limiter either at mixing, so the compressor has played a significant role for me, not the least sound wise. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Dec 19, 2023 7:11:50 GMT -6
I do eq cuts before the compressor and boosts after the compressor. A very sensible approach! Minimizes noise and maximizes effectiveness. I won't do boosts before a comp unless it's for effect, but will generally do most EQing post compressors and/or limiters. |
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 16,061
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Dec 20, 2023 2:41:24 GMT -6
For context:
|
|
|
|
Post by audiospecific on Dec 21, 2023 2:12:40 GMT -6
Did a small shootout with a little more time now on a mix, switching the order forth and back. And yes, there is surely a difference in sound. compressor last gives a nice finished fat result, which is less responsive to variations on the eq wise obviously.
Its kind of like the paradigm of compressing reverb in a way. (compressor last)
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 21, 2023 9:48:55 GMT -6
Almost always do compressor before EQ these days. It does sound different if you do it EQ before compressor, but I find that it's less predictable that way and these days I'm all about finding a way to streamline the process and sticking with it because it's predictable.
|
|
|
|
Post by poppaflavor on Dec 21, 2023 12:11:14 GMT -6
I'm usually doing mic pre => fast comp => slow comp => EQ => additional saturate. I wish I had a logic for the comps before the EQ but after endless (re)trying frankly it just seems easier to gainstage and get the sound I want than trying to EQ right out of the pre and before the comp. But actually, the couple of Pres I have include EQ-esque features like shelves, contours and air band. So I guess I'm kinda sorta EQing first. Since the VariMu will also saturate, I guess we are also discussing the order of EQ <=> Saturation as well a discussing the EQ <=> signal downward compression? So far I am trying to use dedicated saturators as 'last in line' processors. Like stand alone transfo boxes, a tube pre in line mode, Zulu, etc will go after EQing. But still experimenting. In this regard, I'm all in on a really sweet in-development stereo tube saturator that has just as of yesterday been updated to allow for a really sweet array of EQ/Saturate options. The device will 1) EQ prior to tube saturation; or 2) EQ after tube saturation; or 3) EQ before saturation and then reverse those Pre Sat EQ settings after saturation. Obviously number 3 is the really intriguing one in the hardware space. I do it all the time in the box, but haven't seen any hardware that does this. I'm particularly intrigued how this is going to work. It kind of doesn't make sense to my limited understanding in terms of Post Sat EQ completely balancing the Pre Sat EQ. When higher order harmonics are added then that changes the momentary frequency curve and so an equivalent Post Sat EQ cut following on a Pre Sat EQ boost would be cutting on a different frequency spectrum than the boost was made. I could imagine a Acustica Audio Pensado EQ or Chandler Gem Comp development approach where the Post Sat EQ wasn't numerically balanced against Pre Sat EQ changes, but instead the Post Sat EQ was balanced against Pre Sat EQ changes by dialing and listening and then setting offsets in the Post Sat EQ. Either way, it sounded interesting enough to jump in and help fund development. You can check it out here: Stereo Bus tube saturator RSE TS508 |
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 21, 2023 16:28:44 GMT -6
Been mixing now with the new setup and it has surely find it’s settings and place. Comp to eq has grown on me and this vari mu to pultec is pure CREAM. I am so happy with the outcome. I am not saying I wasn’t close enough with itb pultec, but I sure do like the smooth creamy character personally I get with rubber bands. There is mid fatness to it, I was not able to achieve with the uad pultec, at least by itself. The combo of the vari mu and rubber bands somehow makes a 1+1=3. But all and all, thanks for your inputs guys, gave me a lot to spin on and it seems I am changing my mind and the comp into eq arrangement is likely to stay for me. I did however, intrigued by the cut before comp color after the comp, leave a chandler curve bender plug on my mix bus before going into comp. I have used this now for cutting some, but also boosting some highs if needed, but just a notch. Seem to work like a charm in the chain. Cheers
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,098
|
Post by ericn on Dec 21, 2023 18:09:47 GMT -6
There is no real right or wrong answer it’s about the sound and effect you’re after. My usual teaching answer to this is play around move the knobs learn the difference. I could explain the theoretical differences but honestly learning them on your own is going to help you far more.
|
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Dec 23, 2023 0:29:06 GMT -6
I like to mix into the compression. I'll mix for a while, get things happening, make some adjustments on the compressor, mix some more, add in HEAT, mix some more and THEN take the EQ out of bypass. I play around with it for a few passes, and do some more things within the project, etc, and eventually print.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Dec 25, 2023 13:00:51 GMT -6
I always thought a real 670 followed by a real Pultec sounded best.I was surprised to find that the reverse sounded better with plugins.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Dec 25, 2023 14:35:22 GMT -6
I have always always done EQ -> compressor, for individual tracks and for mix bus. Because that’s the way my mind thinks of it. It goes “ok, what’s sticking out, what’s lacking, let’s shape this into what we want” and then after that it goes “now, how dynamic or squished do we want this to be”. But, I should experiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Dec 25, 2023 17:02:27 GMT -6
I have always always done EQ -> compressor, for individual tracks and for mix bus. Because that’s the way my mind thinks of it. It goes “ok, what’s sticking out, what’s lacking, let’s shape this into what we want” and then after that it goes “now, how dynamic or squished do we want this to be”. But, I should experiment. I think opposite, often. I often reach for dynamics first, partially because as the dynamics are squished, the tone changes, so I like to get them happening (if the track needs dynamics). After the compressor is dialed in, I might then think "it's time to sculpt the tone." Though, it does vary, and sometimes I EQ at the beginning. |
|
|
|
Post by jampa on Dec 25, 2023 19:48:16 GMT -6
When you EQ, you are also changing the dynamics (frequency dependent)
When you compress, you are also changing the equalisation (loudness dependent)
I typically cut yuck before a compressor and boost yum after it, then limit for loudness
|
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Dec 29, 2023 15:27:15 GMT -6
Did furthermore some deeper a/b testing, not with order though, that one seem to have find it’s right way for now. But I got interested to do the hw/plugin comparison on 2bus chain. I was able to use the order I wanted I realized by using the plugin in the console/unison. So I tweaked and tweaked until I was as close enough as I could get with both UAD pultec vs. IGS rubber bands and UAD fairchild vs. IGS tubecore.
The pultec plugin could not match the hw in this case. Sound wise I was able to get pretty close, but the oumph, the dynamics the mid range fatness was never there with the plugin. It was just thin in lack of other words. All the characters I wanted to achieve by getting the rubber bands, it delivered, and those all where lacking in the plugin.
The vari mu had exactly the same analogy. The oumph and midrange boldness and liveliness the tubecore brings to the table, the uad fairchild is just lacking, though it should be the essence of the fairchild. Especially when the chain of these two is engaged the effect multiplies. I was actually hoping the difference to be less 😄.
When I mix itb I don’t feel as much difference on track basis plug vs. hw. Maybe due to the fact that I am compressing quite a bit on the way in and building the character in the front end. The track treatment is more cutting and light compressing. But in the mixbus the difference is noticable, likely couse it defines so much of final character.
Must say I am over the moon now after mixing a few weeks and found that my theory of nice hardware in, mixing itb, nice hardware out is paying off and proves to be working. This path seem to give me most bang for the buck. No hustle of hybrid mixing, I can even mix on the road with plugins as place holders for mixbus chain and then replace them in studio with the hw and tweak the final stage. So i feel i get the ease and quality of itb mixing and the character and sound of hw. Super happy, best setup I had so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by bossanova on Dec 30, 2023 13:46:46 GMT -6
Almost always do compressor before EQ these days. It does sound different if you do it EQ before compressor, but I find that it's less predictable that way and these days I'm all about finding a way to streamline the process and sticking with it because it's predictable. I went back and checked some of my recordings, because I’ve gone back and forth over the years, and found that I also preferred the results from doing compression first. Like you said, if you EQ first and tweak it later it can change the compression, whereas getting the compression dialed in and then doing EQ still leaves your dynamic foundation intact. (One exception being a De-esser if the sibilance is being exacerbated by the compressor.) |
|
but I suppose it's a question of habits and changing them in hope of growth. I never use a limiter either at mixing, so the compressor has played a significant role for me, not the least sound wise. 
