|
|
Post by ab101 on Feb 17, 2024 18:50:49 GMT -6
Aphex 651 is great on snare! Actually, it is also great on kick.
|
|
|
|
Post by subspace on Feb 17, 2024 19:41:09 GMT -6
I just normal my kick and snare mics through 160XTs, why, is there another way to do it?
|
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Feb 17, 2024 23:00:15 GMT -6
I normally don't track with compression on snare but the other day I had a 160x on it for the whole session. Sounded perfect and along with the LH95 (SO good on snare!) it just sounded finished and never felt like I was painting myself into a corner. Oh man, I pretty much ALWAYS track with compression on the snare. No sense in delaying the inevitable! Same. I've gotten almost CLA like in that my BD and SD compressor generally doesn't change, and I don't mess with the settings much. |
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Feb 18, 2024 2:19:02 GMT -6
yeah, me too. i always have a 1176 on the snare when recording reducing some 2-3 db. i prefer to do it in stages as snare hits have to be limited the most in a mix. better doing it in various stages and start at the tracking stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Feb 18, 2024 8:49:18 GMT -6
I think I might to try a new habit of compressing snare while tracking.
Much of my early tracking years were done to tape and I was almost always sending kick/snare to a 1176 in parallel in mix so can't say I ever felt I needed it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Feb 18, 2024 9:11:59 GMT -6
I use the UAD one on bass occasionally. It will do the snappy bass thing. Agree completely. |
|
|
|
Post by bossanova on Mar 1, 2024 10:19:25 GMT -6
Patience rewarded…going with the newly free Softube version. Happy to still have the $40 to boot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2024 10:55:46 GMT -6
Someone clear this up for me...sorry if it has already been covered...but no waves plugins oversample?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2024 11:02:31 GMT -6
I think I might to try a new habit of compressing snare while tracking. Much of my early tracking years were done to tape and I was almost always sending kick/snare to a 1176 in parallel in mix so can't say I ever felt I needed it. The snares are already pretty compressed during tracking at most places I track in...I've kind of gone away from compressing snare/snare replacement unless there are tons of ghost notes. I usually try and control the snare with my drumbus comp. Right now, I've been using the Pulsar 1178 on Drumbus...obviously, faster attack, more control on the transient...but then sometimes bumping the ratio up to 12:1 is really nice - really controlling the transients (it also has a filter section where you can focus in on the snare fundamental tone and target the hit)...I like the high ratio for that and for leaving the lower level stuff more alone. SSL Bus Comp does a nice thing too - need to try that more often. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Mar 1, 2024 11:30:20 GMT -6
Someone clear this up for me...sorry if it has already been covered...but no waves plugins oversample? Some do. The only way to tell is to look at the impulse response of the plugin to see the preringing from linear phase anti-alias filters at 44.1 or 96 kHz because so many have lookahead.
Their dbx 160 oversamples to 88.2/96 kHz so is more accurate than the UAD which doesn't upsample. The free Softube one goes to 176.4/192 kHz and has some cool features like the high frequency expander (from the Drawmer DL251, Aphex Expressor, and u-He Presswerk) to compensate for the high end loss from dug in RMS compression and older VCAs. The Waves BSS DPR 402 oversamples to 192 kHz but still is pingy to me.
Some other waves plugins have other ways to smooth the response. Attack / release are low pass filters to slow down the application of the ratio. Then lookahead slows down the attack time giving it a finite time it has to attack for instead of just a slower rate.
Renaissance Compressor has a 64 sample lookahead. The delay sees the signal in advance and then ramps the attack to get where it is supposed to over that length but it must attack for at least the length of the lookahead. It's not just a simple sidechain delay like the dbx supergate. Do some basic math and you find out how fast it can modulate the volume:
64 samples / 44100 samples to get the minimum attack time and it's 0.001451 seconds. Let's convert that to frequency: f = 1 / t. f=1/(64/44100) and we end up with 689 kHz as the fastest the attack can modulate the signal. That means it stops being able to distort any frequencies faster than that because the attack and release of the compressor is slower than the signal. This means it cannot track high and midrange frequencies and will turn them down slower than they are. This will either push them down in volume (it's ramping them down ahead of time and keeping them down for too long) or pull them up in volume (when everything else gets distorted by the compressor). So it cannot really alias but it can only ramp midrange and high frequency events down. This still sounds better than crazy wild misfires like the CLA-76 or what comes with your DAW.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2024 11:39:45 GMT -6
Someone clear this up for me...sorry if it has already been covered...but no waves plugins oversample? Some do. The only way to tell is to look at the impulse response of the plugin to see the preringing from linear phase anti-alias filters at 44.1 or 96 kHz because so many have lookahead.
Their dbx 160 oversamples to 88.2/96 kHz so is more accurate than the UAD which doesn't upsample. The free Softube one goes to 176.4/192 kHz and has some cool features like the high frequency expander (from the Drawmer DL251, Aphex Expressor, and u-He Presswerk) to compensate for the high end loss from dug in RMS compression and older VCAs. The Waves BSS DPR 402 oversamples to 192 kHz but still is pingy to me.
Some other waves plugins have other ways to smooth the response. Attack / release are low pass filters to slow down the application of the ratio. Then lookahead slows down the attack time giving it a finite time it has to attack for instead of just a slower rate. Renaissance Compressor has a 64 sample lookahead. The delay sees the signal in advance and then ramps the attack to get where it is supposed to over that length but it must attack for at least the length of the lookahead. It's not just a simple sidechain delay like the dbx supergate. Do some basic math and you find out how fast it can modulate the volume:
64 samples / 44100 samples to get the minimum attack time and it's 0.001451 seconds. Let's convert that to frequency: f = 1 / t. f=1/(64/44100) and we end up with 689 kHz as the fastest the attack can modulate the signal. That means it stops being able to distort any frequencies faster than that because the attack and release of the compressor is slower than the signal. This means it cannot track high and midrange frequencies and will turn them down slower than they are. This will either push them down in volume (it's ramping them down ahead of time and keeping them down for too long) or pull them up in volume (when everything else gets distorted by the compressor). So it cannot really alias but it can only ramp midrange and high frequency events down. This still sounds better than crazy wild misfires like the CLA-76 or what comes with your DAW.
haven't read the whole thing, but wait...I thought all the UAD plugs were upsampled - that not the case? |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Mar 1, 2024 12:11:20 GMT -6
Some do. The only way to tell is to look at the impulse response of the plugin to see the preringing from linear phase anti-alias filters at 44.1 or 96 kHz because so many have lookahead.
Their dbx 160 oversamples to 88.2/96 kHz so is more accurate than the UAD which doesn't upsample. The free Softube one goes to 176.4/192 kHz and has some cool features like the high frequency expander (from the Drawmer DL251, Aphex Expressor, and u-He Presswerk) to compensate for the high end loss from dug in RMS compression and older VCAs. The Waves BSS DPR 402 oversamples to 192 kHz but still is pingy to me.
Some other waves plugins have other ways to smooth the response. Attack / release are low pass filters to slow down the application of the ratio. Then lookahead slows down the attack time giving it a finite time it has to attack for instead of just a slower rate. Renaissance Compressor has a 64 sample lookahead. The delay sees the signal in advance and then ramps the attack to get where it is supposed to over that length but it must attack for at least the length of the lookahead. It's not just a simple sidechain delay like the dbx supergate. Do some basic math and you find out how fast it can modulate the volume:
64 samples / 44100 samples to get the minimum attack time and it's 0.001451 seconds. Let's convert that to frequency: f = 1 / t. f=1/(64/44100) and we end up with 689 kHz as the fastest the attack can modulate the signal. That means it stops being able to distort any frequencies faster than that because the attack and release of the compressor is slower than the signal. This means it cannot track high and midrange frequencies and will turn them down slower than they are. This will either push them down in volume (it's ramping them down ahead of time and keeping them down for too long) or pull them up in volume (when everything else gets distorted by the compressor). So it cannot really alias but it can only ramp midrange and high frequency events down. This still sounds better than crazy wild misfires like the CLA-76 or what comes with your DAW.
haven't read the whole thing, but wait...I thought all the UAD plugs were upsampled - that not the case? Most UAD2 programmed by UAD are. They ported UAD1 LA3A and dbx 160 to native according to Quint. Also their circuit models running at 192 kHz often cannot behave like the hardware. 1176 and API 2500 are off to the point I'd rather just use something else purely digital or like have any hardware printed that's 1) working (🖕 to warm 76) 2) not a pedal, 3630, or Behringer Composer. |
|
|
|
Post by jaba on Mar 1, 2024 12:36:02 GMT -6
I think I might to try a new habit of compressing snare while tracking. Much of my early tracking years were done to tape and I was almost always sending kick/snare to a 1176 in parallel in mix so can't say I ever felt I needed it. The snares are already pretty compressed during tracking at most places I track in...I've kind of gone away from compressing snare/snare replacement unless there are tons of ghost notes. I usually try and control the snare with my drumbus comp. Right now, I've been using the Pulsar 1178 on Drumbus...obviously, faster attack, more control on the transient...but then sometimes bumping the ratio up to 12:1 is really nice - really controlling the transients (it also has a filter section where you can focus in on the snare fundamental tone and target the hit)...I like the high ratio for that and for leaving the lower level stuff more alone. SSL Bus Comp does a nice thing too - need to try that more often. Yeah, for years I normally left compressing snares to the mix, usually a drum group and kick/snare into a 1176 in parallel. I felt like the snare level can vary so much song to song, even section to section, I didn't want to over do it in tracking. Hitting tape helped. Now I'm more inclined to throw a comp on it when tracking but it's not an essential for me. If working with limited outboard, I'd rather park them on other things and deal with close-mic'd drums later. When mixing a track with a lot of snare ghost notes, I find two compressors help. First an opto to start pulling things closer together, then a FET or VCA for more standard thwack. |
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Mar 1, 2024 12:36:15 GMT -6
You had me up to "3630" Dan.  BTW my "beloved" Vintage 90's Nanocompressor is getting noisy. How surprising!  Chris |
|
|
|
Post by niklas1073 on Mar 1, 2024 13:02:21 GMT -6
Regarding the 160/165, I don’t have uad nor waves, but I do have Arturia. High quality thing. Use it occasionally on bass. Why I am promoting this is because they have a sLe on it now apparently 49 bucks. I also have their STA and 1176 which are great. Both on sale them too. www.arturia.com/products/software-effects/comp-vca65/overview |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2024 13:56:54 GMT -6
haven't read the whole thing, but wait...I thought all the UAD plugs were upsampled - that not the case? Most UAD2 programmed by UAD are. They ported UAD1 LA3A and dbx 160 to native according to Quint. Also their circuit models running at 192 kHz often cannot behave like the hardware. 1176 and API 2500 are off to the point I'd rather just use something else purely digital or like have any hardware printed that's 1) working (🖕 to warm 76) 2) not a pedal, 3630, or Behringer Composer. Interesting. Not much of a Warm presence here on RGO |
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Mar 1, 2024 14:12:13 GMT -6
They just generally don't market themselves enough. |
|
|
|
Post by brenta on Mar 1, 2024 14:34:15 GMT -6
Some do. The only way to tell is to look at the impulse response of the plugin to see the preringing from linear phase anti-alias filters at 44.1 or 96 kHz because so many have lookahead.
Their dbx 160 oversamples to 88.2/96 kHz so is more accurate than the UAD which doesn't upsample. The free Softube one goes to 176.4/192 kHz and has some cool features like the high frequency expander (from the Drawmer DL251, Aphex Expressor, and u-He Presswerk) to compensate for the high end loss from dug in RMS compression and older VCAs. The Waves BSS DPR 402 oversamples to 192 kHz but still is pingy to me.
Some other waves plugins have other ways to smooth the response. Attack / release are low pass filters to slow down the application of the ratio. Then lookahead slows down the attack time giving it a finite time it has to attack for instead of just a slower rate. Renaissance Compressor has a 64 sample lookahead. The delay sees the signal in advance and then ramps the attack to get where it is supposed to over that length but it must attack for at least the length of the lookahead. It's not just a simple sidechain delay like the dbx supergate. Do some basic math and you find out how fast it can modulate the volume:
64 samples / 44100 samples to get the minimum attack time and it's 0.001451 seconds. Let's convert that to frequency: f = 1 / t. f=1/(64/44100) and we end up with 689 kHz as the fastest the attack can modulate the signal. That means it stops being able to distort any frequencies faster than that because the attack and release of the compressor is slower than the signal. This means it cannot track high and midrange frequencies and will turn them down slower than they are. This will either push them down in volume (it's ramping them down ahead of time and keeping them down for too long) or pull them up in volume (when everything else gets distorted by the compressor). So it cannot really alias but it can only ramp midrange and high frequency events down. This still sounds better than crazy wild misfires like the CLA-76 or what comes with your DAW.
haven't read the whole thing, but wait...I thought all the UAD plugs were upsampled - that not the case? One of the main differences between the UAD mk1 and mk2 plugins is the MK2 are oversampled. Somewhere in the UAD manual they list the plugins that have anti-aliasing filters. Dan can correct me if I’m wrong, but I think all the plugins with anti-aliasing filters are oversampling. |
|
|
|
Post by brenta on Mar 1, 2024 14:36:04 GMT -6
Are there any DBX 160 plugins that model the X/XT/A instead of the VU? I know the VU is the more scarce and vintage piece, and therefore more expensive. But I find the X/XT/A more useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Mar 1, 2024 15:16:01 GMT -6
Are there any DBX 160 plugins that model the X/XT/A instead of the VU? I know the VU is the more scarce and vintage piece, and therefore more expensive. But I find the X/XT/A more useful. Why don't you just use any RMS compressor then? The hardware is good because it's cheap, widely available, and consistent. The older DBX hardware uses dirtier VCAs and opamps so more "tone". Not just the VU, the X and XT too versus the A and the 560. So use something like Kotelnikov GE, which is 10 bucks on sale, everyone has it, and it's better than anything DBX if you care to set it how you want it, certainly the DBX 560, which is under 200 bucks used with cleaner modern THAT analog engine IC and junky 4580 opamps if you really want it. |
|
|
|
Post by brenta on Mar 1, 2024 15:21:17 GMT -6
Are there any DBX 160 plugins that model the X/XT/A instead of the VU? I know the VU is the more scarce and vintage piece, and therefore more expensive. But I find the X/XT/A more useful. Why don't you just use any RMS compressor then? The hardware is good because it's cheap, widely available, and consistent. The older DBX hardware uses dirtier VCAs and opamps so more "tone". Not just the VU, the X and XT too versus the A and the 560. So use something like Kotelnikov GE, which is 10 bucks on sale, everyone has it, and it's better than anything DBX if you care to set it how you want it, certainly the DBX 560, which is under 200 bucks used with cleaner modern THAT analog engine IC and junky 4580 opamps if you really want it. Because I like the sound of those X/XT compressors for certain applications. I have the Kotelnikov and when I’ve used it it didn’t remind me of the 160 X/XT compressors at all. Maybe I missed a setting, but it sounded much cleaner to me. The Waves PYE compressor can kinda do the dbx thwack thing on drums. Closer than the VU emulations I’ve tried. Usually I end up just using SSL plugs when mixing. If I’m tracking I use my XT in the way in but I only have one. Should probably get more. |
|
|
|
Post by doubledog on Mar 1, 2024 15:40:53 GMT -6
Because I like the sound of those X/XT compressors for certain applications. I also always go for the one (be it hardware or plugin) that gets me the sound I like. Specs be damned lol. |
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead89 on Mar 2, 2024 6:36:23 GMT -6
The UAD is a bit rounder. Little more accurate to the VU I feel. The Waves does a snappier thing. I use both for different things.
|
|
