Demonstration of Compression

[Morganized]

This is a link to thread on another channel.....

Compression

I found this to be an interesting demonstration of something we reference here frequently.

[Jim Alfredson]

I thought we might be talking about data compression (mp3s). Thankfully, the "loudness wars" are mainly centered around popular music. That stuff is so slammed the waveform looks like a big rectangular block. It's horrendous and sounds terrible.

I disagree with the poster in the other thread about Kind of Blue. He needs to research Columbia's echo chambers before saying the reverb is "unnatural".

[Jim Alfredson]

In fact, to expound on this a bit more, compression was devised because of the dynamic limitations of the mediums of the day (AM radio, vinyl and tape). With today's 24bit recordings, that have a theoretical dynamic range of 144db (which is greater than what our ears can ever hear), there is really no need for compression at all.

But... we're so used to the sound within certain genres that recordings without it sound dull, flat, and non-professional, especially at low volumes (at higher volumes our ears tend to "naturally" compress things in the way that they react to certain frequencies.)

Like any other tool, compression itself isn't the enemy. It's the people that over-use it.

[Shawn]

There is also the issue that mastering engineers are very aware of the mediums they are producing for. The general population doesn't have audiophile stereo gear, they're listening on iPods, car stereos, little boom boxes from Wal Mart and cheap home surround systems.

When mastering you always have to check playback on a variety of different devices and try to find a happy medium that sounds good on all. The iPod generation is dealing with more compression than ever before, but the general public wouldn't understand dynamic range if they tripped over it on the street. They only understand "loudness".

Of course this also creates the market for audiophile labels like Classic Records, etc who have the freedom to produce geared towards high end equipment.

[Chuck Nessa]

I disagree with the poster in the other thread about Kind of Blue. He needs to research Columbia's echo chambers before saying the reverb is "unnatural".

Probably no "echo chamber" on Kind of Blue. The 30th St studio was a very resonant room - that's why most people loved it.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

There is also the issue that mastering engineers are very aware of the mediums they are producing for. The general population doesn't have audiophile stereo gear, they're listening on iPods, car stereos, little boom boxes from Wal Mart and cheap home surround systems.

When mastering you always have to check playback on a variety of different devices and try to find a happy medium that sounds good on all. The iPod generation is dealing with more compression than ever before, but the general public wouldn't understand dynamic range if they tripped over it on the street. They only understand "loudness".

Of course this also creates the market for audiophile labels like Classic Records, etc who have the freedom to produce geared towards high end equipment.

And quite right, too. Berry Gordy hired a schoolgirl to do quality control for Motown in the early days. She got the engineer to make a record player that sounded like a car radio, so she could listen to stuff on that. And, of course, it worked a treat.

So it's all HER fault

MG

[Sundog]

There is also the issue that mastering engineers are very aware of the mediums they are producing for. The general population doesn't have audiophile stereo gear, they're listening on iPods, car stereos, little boom boxes from Wal Mart and cheap home surround systems.

Heard a very interesting discussion with Butch Vig on this very topic a couple of weeks ago on the syndicated radio show Sound Opinions. Follow the link to show #123 below. Butch also had some interesting recollections of working with the "Pumpkins" (#120)

Sound Opinions Website

[jazzhound]

compared an original pressing of Saxophone Colossus with a cd version. cd was more compressed. not a good use of the medium.

[Chuck Nessa]

compared an original pressing of Saxophone Colossus with a cd version. cd was more compressed. not a good use of the medium.

Which cd? I've had at least 3 different versions.

[Jim Alfredson]

I disagree with the poster in the other thread about Kind of Blue. He needs to research Columbia's echo chambers before saying the reverb is "unnatural".

Probably no "echo chamber" on Kind of Blue. The 30th St studio was a very resonant room - that's why most people loved it.

Ah, it slipped my mind that it was recorded at 30th St. Of course. Which itself was a converted church. So that makes the guy's "unnatural" comment even more nonsensical.

[AllenLowe]

I hate compression - I've made 6 cds without using it at all -

keys are:

1) a good room with decent but not over-live acoustics

2) condenser microphones

3) a good engineer who can do it live or

4) a multitrack recording made with a natural spread of the band, permitting leakage but allowing levels to be adjusted -

5) get good max levels -

I recorded Roswell Rudd "live" to 8 track in Verna Gillis's storage room using a Beyer M500 ribbon and NO compression or limiting and he told me afterwards that it was the best anyone had ever captured his sound - the reason is because prior engineers have tended to compress him to death because he plays with such a broad dynamic range -

want good band recordings? Sorry to sound righteous, but I think it can only be done without isolation, no overdubs, no "tracking" no guide tracks, in real time - put the band in a circle and play - UNLESS you are Brian Wilson or Phil Spector and like to use the studio like a canvass - but that's a totally different technique -

[Jim Alfredson]

Again, compression in and of itself is not evil, it's the over-use of it. It can be used, very transparently, to make things "glue" together better in a mix.

For my own recordings, the way I see it is that any plays on radio are going to be compressed any way (radio, with the exception of some classical stations, compress the living bejesus out of the audio before it is transmitted), so there is no reason to smash the crap out of the recording in mastering.

Trying to convince other engineers of that, however, is sometimes an uphill battle.

[Chuck Nessa]

All tools are in service for the desired effect. Nothing should be ruled out.

[Jim Alfredson]

Amen!

[Jim Alfredson]

For instance, on the mixes I've been doing of the new organissimo stuff (for my own pleasure... we're heading into a pro studio on Monday to mix the album), I've been using compression mainly on the drums and organ / Leslie bass. The top mics on the Leslie are totally natural (no EQ even), as is the guitar so far.

I have been compressing the bass drum slightly, to tame some peaks. I also added a bit to the toms, to make them sit better in the stereo spectrum. And finally, I've been sending the entire drum submix to an SSL-style bus compressor and mixing that in with the uncompressed submix, just underneath, which gives the drums a nice, full sound, without hurting the original dynamics.

My use of compression is to be as transparent as possible, because that sound fits this type of music.

And not to nitpick, but the original post in this article and the links are really referring to extreme limiting, which is a bit different than compression.

[AllenLowe]

compression doesn't kill music, engineers kill music -

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I thought it was downloading...

MG