Is there a reason we don't encourage the exaggeration of transients?

C

crimsonhawk47

New member
I know a few of you on here are advocates of not using compressors in a digital setting because a lot of sounds don't have dynamic range. But wouldn't a fast enough attack time and no make up gain with the right threshold bring out transients? And won't that add a great amount of impact to a track? I sometimes feel that I don't have enough transient information in my sources.

Are compressors shunned because they are often used to dull the transients? If so, then shouldn't we shun make up gains and bad attack/release controls more? I know Bruce Swedien talks about not using compressors, but that's because transients could be captured with the right mics in his collection. You don't necessarily have a way to capture transients in a digital setting.

Thoughts?
 
I don't think compressors are shunned at all, if anything, they are being heavily used almost everywhere which can lead to a lot of headaches when people overdo it to become to loudest track on beatport. I use compressor very subtly in my tracks for example, and I do that to bring sounds that would otherwise be completely buried within the mix more up to the surface.

Not having dynamic range in a digital setting is not really true in my opinion, I'm constantly working with somewhat complex arpeggiated synthlines that has great dynamics going up and down the bands with an lfo for example. In this case a Compressor (expander even) or a limiter is my go to solution to bring up the quiet parts of an otherwise dominating mid/high Peak in the sequence.

However if you want just want more transient info on your sounds alone, I'd probably resort to a transient designer plugin before a Compressor.
 
Last edited:
I mean shunned more by experienced engineers. Not popular opinion.

You could actually effect transients in sound design, but what if you wanted a piano sound and didn't think the transient was brought out enough for any of them.

I don't know enough about transient designers. I imagine they do something similar to what I'm describing though
 
Well, the one I'm using (spl transient designer) has a knob for attack, and one for sustain, it's simple enough and gets the job done if you are just looking for more or less snap as opposed to a Compressor.

I bet the experienced engineers use compression as well. But maybe not om every single sound just for the hell of it like many people tend to do nowadays.

The misconception has become that louder sounds better, if you adopt that logic you will overdo your compression constantly and that in turn leads to the pro's shaking their heads.
 
Last edited:
Well with a transient designer it's up to the plugin to define what the transient is as opposed to attack or release settings
 
Well ok, if you have the option to add more transient info to your sound at source level, like from a vst instrument, then yeah I would definitely rather do that for plenty more control. But for sampled drums, a transient designer works great.

I don't think many people really think there's anything wrong with using compression for certain things, just that there may be plenty other options to consider before resorting to it, lik velocity and your envelope settings etc etc.
 
I would say go with transient designers or fix it in the sample, but yeah you can use a compressor to boost a transient.
Set the threshold low, and use a slower release, all to maintain the original dynamic shape as good as possible. Dial in the ratio, and increase the attacktime until you have the snap you want. Then use the makeup gain to get it to the volume it were before, and A/B to make sure the sound got better.
 
The brickwall limiter is the only known transient killer. Any other dynamics processor featuring an attack setting can be used to shape the transients. Of course transients designers are the easiest to operate. This one is a freeware:
bittersweet-v3-full.jpg
Flux:: sound and picture development
 
crimsonhawk47 said:
I know a few of you on here are advocates of not using compressors in a digital setting because a lot of sounds don't have dynamic range. But wouldn't a fast enough attack time and no make up gain with the right threshold bring out transients? And won't that add a great amount of impact to a track? I sometimes feel that I don't have enough transient information in my sources.

Are compressors shunned because they are often used to dull the transients? If so, then shouldn't we shun make up gains and bad attack/release controls more? I know Bruce Swedien talks about not using compressors, but that's because transients could be captured with the right mics in his collection. You don't necessarily have a way to capture transients in a digital setting.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'd question your source.
I haven't seen anyone who is reputable shun the use of compressors.

As someone else mentioned in this thread by now,
you can actually use a compressor to exaggerate transients by setting a longer attack time.

-Ki
Salem Beats (+Reviews/Blog)
 
I think I may have figured out some of your confusion and some things you have misunderstood...



crimsonhawk47 said:
I know a few of you on here are advocates of not using compressors in a digital setting because a lot of sounds don't have dynamic range.
Click to expand...

You probably heard somebody say that you don't need compressors because there same dynamic range issues as exhibited in live instrument recordings do not exist.

For example, if you have a recording of a live hi-hat performance playing 16th notes, each hit will sound different and be of different levels since humans are human and a physical hi-hat is an organic physical thing...

But if you have a programmed hat line, the levels and sound will be consistent.

In the live performance, there are inherent dynamics and variations which are not present in a programmed track... there are dynamic variations to tame with a compressor, if desired.

you probably heard someone talking about "live" vs "programmed"...

And I am just guessing this is what you heard and misunderstood... I am not making any judgement on when compressors should be used on what... or why a compressor should be used... or the purpose of compression...

Because that is a whole other conversation.




crimsonhawk47 said:
But wouldn't a fast enough attack time and no make up gain with the right threshold bring out transients? And won't that add a great amount of impact to a track? I sometimes feel that I don't have enough transient information in my sources.
Click to expand...

I think your understanding of how compressor attack works is backwards.



crimsonhawk47 said:
Are compressors shunned because they are often used to dull the transients? If so, then shouldn't we shun make up gains and bad attack/release controls more? I know Bruce Swedien talks about not using compressors, but that's because transients could be captured with the right mics in his collection.
Click to expand...

not sure what you are trying to say here



crimsonhawk47 said:
You don't necessarily have a way to capture transients in a digital setting.
Click to expand...

Of course you can capture transients in a digital setting.

I think this is more stuff based on what I believe to be that misunderstood stuff from above with the "sounds in a digital setting don't have dynamic range."
 
yeah, it is probably because I keep saying that in most cases a suggestion to compress a sound is probably not the first thing to be doing to tame the dynamics (if there are any to begin with), of programmed sounds

I usually suggest that
- you can go in and edit the velocity data first to bring everything back into the same dynamic area
- you can apply randomising/humanising routines to the data to create an approximation of the way a human being plays the instrument
- you can even edit the velocity data to create that "big" hit that people are constantly asking about

Once the sound is in the ball park then applying your tools such as eq and compression may be appropriate to sculpt that sound into what works for you

I can see how that can be misinterpreted

As for transients they are the actuating energy that tells us most about any sound (this conceptualisation was part of the basis for LA synthesis and AWM synthesis in the late 80's) so we want to hear them without distorting them (imo)
 
I regularly use compressors to exaggerate transients... It's a time based dynamic processor, you can shape sounds how you like.

A great misconception is that compressors make things louder. RUBBISH. They reduce dynamic range, then if you want to you can add make up gain and maintain the same amplitude. Big difference.

A compressor is a tool, you just have to know when and how to use it... and more importantly when NOT to use it ;)
 
agreed and that is why I question anyone who begins by telling others to stick a compressor on a channel without having even heard if a compressor is necessary - most questions about how to do something are woefully free of audio examples: justify this suggestion without resorting to because big-name/well-known-youtube-producer says to do it for everything and I might think you know what you are talking about
 
Alright. I've been dead for a bit but now I've resurrected.

Salem Beats said:
As someone else mentioned in this thread by now,
you can actually use a compressor to exaggerate transients by setting a longer attack time.

-Ki
Salem Beats (+Reviews/Blog)
Click to expand...

Err ya I'm the one that said that.

dvyce said:
I think I may have figured out some of your confusion and some things you have misunderstood...





You probably heard somebody say that you don't need compressors because there same dynamic range issues as exhibited in live instrument recordings do not exist.

For example, if you have a recording of a live hi-hat performance playing 16th notes, each hit will sound different and be of different levels since humans are human and a physical hi-hat is an organic physical thing...

But if you have a programmed hat line, the levels and sound will be consistent.

In the live performance, there are inherent dynamics and variations which are not present in a programmed track... there are dynamic variations to tame with a compressor, if desired.

you probably heard someone talking about "live" vs "programmed"...

And I am just guessing this is what you heard and misunderstood... I am not making any judgement on when compressors should be used on what... or why a compressor should be used... or the purpose of compression...

Because that is a whole other conversation.






I think your understanding of how compressor attack works is backwards.





not sure what you are trying to say here





Of course you can capture transients in a digital setting.

I think this is more stuff based on what I believe to be that misunderstood stuff from above with the "sounds in a digital setting don't have dynamic range."
Click to expand...

I must've been really tired that night...

I meant to say slow enough attack for one.

And two, I shouldn't have said digital. I don't mean to make this digital vs analog. I did mean live vs synth/vst/whathaveyou. And I did mean exactly what you said in the hi hat analogy.

When I say capture transients in a digital setting, I meant creating transients with a programmed instrument. That's where I was touching on compressors or transient masters, whether or not that's considered mixing, etc.

With Bruce Swedien I was talking about how live instruments can affect transient based on how they are recorded, but you may not have the right programmed piano transients.

bandcoach said:
yeah, it is probably because I keep saying that in most cases a suggestion to compress a sound is probably not the first thing to be doing to tame the dynamics (if there are any to begin with), of programmed sounds

I usually suggest that
- you can go in and edit the velocity data first to bring everything back into the same dynamic area
- you can apply randomising/humanising routines to the data to create an approximation of the way a human being plays the instrument
- you can even edit the velocity data to create that "big" hit that people are constantly asking about

Once the sound is in the ball park then applying your tools such as eq and compression may be appropriate to sculpt that sound into what works for you

I can see how that can be misinterpreted

As for transients they are the actuating energy that tells us most about any sound (this conceptualisation was part of the basis for LA synthesis and AWM synthesis in the late 80's) so we want to hear them without distorting them (imo)
Click to expand...

GREAT NOW PEOPLE KNOW I LISTEN TO YOU.

So is it technically creating dynamic range if you are exaggerating a transient and lowering the sustain? Because in this thread it seemed like the only use of compression you were endorsing was to create dynamic range. https://www.futureproducers.com/for...s-compression-mainly-drum-compression-484947/

Since that thread I've been thinking a lot about transients and it's getting obsessive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top