|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 13, 2014 20:42:32 GMT -6
...if you find the bass gets too pinched on a(ny) compressor, you simply need to slow down the attack. Low frequency waves take longer to evolve. Which is why I love VCA type units for bass--I can set their attack really slow and release med/fast so that every note's attack dynamic is left alone while the sustain is suppressed and evened out. "two knob wonder" compressors for bass are generally only good for one type of sound--that sound where you just get a non pushing wall of low end. That's a popular sound, but as a bass player--not what I want. I want the kick and bass PUSHING together...they are the pulse. If you do that to the bass, now you have to get more lows in the kick because it's the sole pulse while the bass functionally just fills out low frequency RMS for the kick to pulse through. That's not "wrong"--like I said that's a popular sound, too. Just not one I like to go for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 13, 2014 22:28:26 GMT -6
Great post, thanks for that Popmann. That concise explanation was something I could wrap my head around.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2014 18:32:18 GMT -6
So Pop, how do you go about doing that which you like to hear?
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 14, 2014 20:03:08 GMT -6
How do you play what you want to hear on your instrument? Probabaly the same way. If you're asking how to learn to set a compressor?
Use full control ones for everything. Define what you're engaging a compressor FOR...do you need to get low level details heard. Do you need to chop off some occasional transient peaks? Do you want to enhance the attack of an instrument? Or make the level super consistent? Do you want to raise the RMS?
Step one is defining in your own terms "what do I want this to do".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2014 20:35:11 GMT -6
You made a great comment about bass working with kick.
Thought you might offer explanations on bussing them a certain way, types of compression used or a EQ trick you employ but no worries. I'm not asking you to teach me compression or mix my song. I have that covered.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 14, 2014 23:05:23 GMT -6
That's the bass compression I mentioned....so it's in the concept that low frequencies need longer to evolve...thus if you want a low end PUSH...you've got to make sure your attack is slow enough on compressors. The together comes (for me) from the bass settings-and obviously part...but, I don't do much to kicks in terms of dynamics except make sure they're nice and even but still dynamic enough to push. If the grace note of the Bap....bu-bap is too compressed, it screws up the groove. So, I can tell you how I compress MY bass tracks...meaning ME as a player--because what I need to do on a client mix may be totally different...but, I take a full control compressor...I set the attack on like 35ms...release on 120ms...ratio 4:1. Then I back the threshold down until I'm getting between 1-3db of gain reduction on most plucks. Occasionally some note may pull 4 or 5...but, then I set the make up gain for 3db--kind of the average reduction. The idea is I should be able to by pass it and it's not really much "louder". So, I start there...and the attack becomes a method of tightening the low frequencies (faster)...or letting more push through(slower)....release should be tuned to shoot for one of two things--being back to no GR either at every pluck...or every kick hit...really depends on the groove and part which of those is more appropriate. If I make some adjustment that pulls more GR, raise the threshold until it's back to that 1-3db. What it's basically doing is making the bass attack push more..."punchier" if you want a rock and roll-y term, I guess...but, it's allowing my finger dynamics through to push the groove along...but, leveling the sustain behind them so it doesn't overwhelm the band. Client stuff might take different settings...a pick just isn't going to HAVE the low end push of fingers...so, it will need an even longer attack time and likely a higher ratio (thus likely more GR) to get that low end PUSH through. The key is letting the low frequencies push through. Two knob wonder compressors are pretty bad at that. You need to be able to vary the attack and release times pretty granularly...ratio to a lesser degree (a few settings is ok for that)... Hope that helps. I'm not sure that counts as any "trick"....I've played with various side chaining kick and bass...but, nothing works as well as just enhancing what the players laid down rather than trying to reimagine or recreate it. IME, obviously....but, you know..bass player...and master air drummer (I can't keep a beat) on a kit with four limbs. I'm in constant awe of those guys.  |
|
|
|
Slate VTM
Feb 14, 2014 23:11:03 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 14, 2014 23:11:03 GMT -6
Maybe I'm the only one, but I just don't find myself using this one nearly as much as the UAD Ampex. It seems to add lo-end, but I don't really hear much of a difference between the tape types or the 16 & 2 tracks. I find the UAD much more flexible. Ya not knocking vtm some love it but i started with ua ampex and if i switch in vtm it just doesn't seem to happen in comparison to ampex: prefer ua studer as well |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 14, 2014 23:18:26 GMT -6
 Right to the left of the wow: Oh come on ?!! Right to the left ?? How bout bottom left hand side !! Forgive me , my mom taught english, grammar and journalism and stressed clear communication . |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 15, 2014 9:17:07 GMT -6
I keep wanting to go for the VTM again, because I have a $50 Slate coupon, so on sale at $99, I would only have to pay $50 ! BUT….. `I had VTM, and a long time back, it was so buggy, Slate actually exchanged it for me, and I got FG-X instead, (boy, that was a great idea, not !!!).
Anyway, on Cowboys advice I tried UAD's Ampex, and damn, it was in another league. It felt like their EMT 140, spookily like the real thing. Now, I've used Ampeg and Studer tape machines, and I absolutely LOVED the Studer, and considered it much better than the Ampeg. So, I really would like a Studer plug, but just can't see my way to $299 for it, when I have the Ampeg, and a Waves Eddie Kramer Tape, which I've only used once an a single track. The consensus a year back was Studer on tracks, Ampeg on the mix bus, but lately I've been hearing murmurs of the Studer sounding better than the Ampeg on the 2 bus. Hmmm.. the plot thickens.
But, back to Slate's VTM. I just didn't feel it, and recently asked Steven Slate if he was planning to upgrade the sound in any way as he ports to 64 bit, and he said absolutely not, that many top engineers love it as much as he does. So, even at $50, I think I'll pass on it. That says "buyer beware" to all my RealGear brothers, I think.
Get the demo, use it enough to get past the initial excitement before making it permanent.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchtower on Feb 15, 2014 9:45:06 GMT -6
Steven matched the sound of the tape machine that he modeled. Why would he "upgrade" the sound? That doesn't make much sense to me. Plus, imagine all the people who would lose continuity with their old projects if he suddenly changed how VTM sounded. Changing plug-ins after they're released is a big no-no, unless you're adding new features that don't break backwards compatibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 15, 2014 10:39:34 GMT -6
When Slate upgrades an older plug design, he keeps the original available, as a Legacy setting, so no one loses anything, they get more options.
In various posts, he's promised an upgrade of quality in the FG-X when it finally is made to run at 64 bits. There's no reason he couldn't improve the VTM if he thought it needed improvement. Maybe I just don't like the Studer they modeled. I've used 3 different Studer 24 tracks and loved them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchtower on Feb 15, 2014 11:04:46 GMT -6
I think there lies the difference. FG-X is not a model of anything, whereas VTM is intended as an exact model. FG-X is their own algorithm. Thus, they can update it as much as they want (not that they have yet since the very beginning when it was distorting too much).
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 15, 2014 12:30:30 GMT -6
You're right Watchtower, but of course it can be improved, (or changed might be a better word). UAD's updated 1176's and LA2's made the plugs go from nice to holy $hit. Slate's happy with the VTM as is, and that's fine by me, I just didn't feel the magic, and believe me, for $50 I wanna feel it ;-)
I was forced to find another limiter plug when Slate's FG-X lagged behind at 32 bits and I switched to Logic X, which is 64 bit only. I paid $199 for FG-X, and wish I hadn't, as I haven't had use of it for over a year now. That's one reason why I have a $50 Slate coupon, they're great guys and try to make it right if they can.
In searching for a limiter I happened upon A.O.M, a Japanese company, and their limiter sounded better than any other I'd heard. They have a wonderful policy I wish other major players would adopt. They allow you to buy a license for one year at about 33% of the cost of the lifetime purchase, and allow you to pay the difference at the end of the year if you want to keep it. I'd have saved a lot of money if UAD had a similar policy. Steven Slate has promised an improved FG-X, so I really hope it's a big improvement, otherwise I have a $200 digital doorstop, the A.O.M's that good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2014 19:43:31 GMT -6
Thanks Pop. I know about wavelengths and have considered that with sub placement in live sound. I hadn't considered it regarding compression so thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I too have come away from "trickery" though I don't share your level of experience. What changed that for me was watching a DVD of Shane Wilson and someone else record a project. I was floored at how little processing was done. In fact, I was convicted about how much I tweaked things from their original style and strength.
All that to emphatically agree with your statement to enhance a tracks natural strengths.
Sorry for the OT.
|
|
