Compressing an extremely fluid sound

Gloopikat

Gloopikat

New member
It appears I have a strong gap in theoretical knowledge, gentlemen. It concerns a musical part that is often prone to increases of decay and delay. I have a compressor setting which works perfectly on this plop-plop type of generic sine sound, but have no idea what to do when it starts over-compressing the sound as decay is increased sporadically. I'm guessing one way to avoid the squashed dynamics reaching the channel fader is to automate the output volume of the instrument (or one of its effects) before the compressor in the chain, so that every time the decay is turned up, the compression is still consistent. But this seems like too much mathematics for something very imprecise. So, effectively, it's two different sounds.

How do you stage your compression/volume-fading when in this situation? Perhaps adding another compressor after the initial effect chain, and automating the on/off switch during those heavily decayed moments?

Thanks guys.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if
A) your decays get squashed by the compressor as hard as the attacks and therefore don't appear as big as you want them to or
B) just the attack gets squashed while the decays start pumping or
C) the attack stays more or less unaffected while only the decay gets squashed.

In either case you should try different attack and release settings on your compressor. In case
A) try a shorter release time
B) try a longer release time
C) try a shorter attack time

I hope that helps. If it doesn't, load up an audio example, so we can hear what's going on.
 
Thanks for your reply. None of the above. I'm not looking for a particular effect, I'm just trying to understand if I need another compressor to automate on and off for those bits where the decay of the sound significantly raises its level. As I said, I see a problem with this, because the decayed, louder signal would still be going through the first compressor as well - the one intended for a much softer version of the sound. Was just wondering if it's a two compressor situation in terms of the workflow. Cheers.
 
Why do you need the first compressor? What needs doing to the generic sine sound?

Two compressors might be the answer- one with short attack/decay to shape each individual hit, and one with long attack/decay or using a RMS setting to keep all the separate hits at similar volumes.
 
Mhhh...ok...still not sure. Is your question purely theoretical?

For synth parts where the decay is increased for building up intensity, one compressor is enough in most cases. It's all about setting the attack and release time, as well as the ratio and threshold of the compressor, so that the sound doesn't get squashed too hard (unless you want it to).

If you have a synth sound with a fast attack, in most cases the attack is where the peak of the waveform is. So when you compress and don't compress too hard, it's the attack that gets altered (or if you prefer, squashed) by the compressor. With a long compressor release time, the decay should stay more or less unaffected by the compressor.

Having said that, all compressors behave a bit differently and you will have to experiment a bit with the settings to get your sound right.

Did that answer your question? Still not sure...
 
Scrapheaper and labeit - thank you for your answers, much appreciated. Yes, I do know what a compressor does, I just believe volume automation is much better in this case. The sound changes too much in volume when I increase the decay, and the first compressor with faster settings screws up the dynamics of the continuous sound (which is no longer plucky after the decay is increased). So, thanks again for your answers. I guess automation is the way to go here - not two compressors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top