View Full Version : problem
nije mi jasno ovo: kad slu?am neke druge produkcije vidim da signal ne ide nimalo preko nule, a pada samo jako malo ispod nje....a opet ni?ta nije u peaku....ja do toga nikako ne mogu doci...kad di?em cijeli master, opet postoji ne?to ?to bi moglo i?i preko nule, pa ga spu?tam i dobijem ti?i snimak....da li je to neki gate ili ?ta ve?...mo?da je trivijalno, al ne meni...
jo? jedan dodatak: zasad sam to sku?io samo na renderiranoj mp3-ci u wavelabu, idem vidjeti ostalo, pa javim :?
Stavis lepo neki limiter/compressor/finalizer da ti odradi...
Najprostiji nacin...uzmes Waves L1 i izaberes preset 16bit Final Master... :D
sa wavesom L1 ili L2 dizes RMS sto pojacava snagu pesme ali jednostavnom normalizacijom projekta na -0.1 ces dobiti trazeno
hvala....da li to mogu sa vstDynamicsom koji ima auto gate, auto level, compress, softClip i limit?... ne ku?im taj trigger frequency range :?:
Gate ti zatvara sve decibelaze koje su preko onih koje si mu ti zadao...znaci gate na masteru je nemoguc
Compresijom skidas peakove ali pazi i smanjujes dinamiku pesme tako da tu budi oprezan
Limiterom ces sve zarezati dobro ali se on iskljucivo koristi kada je kompresor neupotrebljiv
Softclip ti peakove koji prelaze preko 0 db pokusava odraditi bez distorzije ali mislim da to nije neko resenje jedino u slucaju da i limiterom i kompresorom ne mozes nista uraditi.Onda lepo odradi mix ponovo i malo iskompresuj.
hvala ljudi...Skin'o sam si classic master limiter i mislim da ce lijepo odratiti zadacu...
Ustvari, ovde se prica o "masteringu".
Kako god, da ne pisemo ovde sad cijelu teoriju o tome, nadji linkove na forumu (rumski forum o masteringu) i procitaj ono sto kaze cika Bob Katz.
Jos nesto - svi pokusavaju napraviti sto glasniji snimak (kao "loudness war), ali to stvarno nije bitno. Napravi dobar mix, ostavi par dana da odlezi i onda ga udari limitingom ili slicno - ili odnesi prijatelju koji ima dobre usi i monitore da ti to uradi (ima tu trikova sa kompresorima - ponekad i dva u lancu i equalizerima), L2 ili ME Loudness Maximizer ce uradit pravu stvar za pocetak, ali pazljivo i bez pretjerivanja (citaj Bob Katz-a), namjesti peak brickwall na 0, -0.1 ili -0.3 svejedno, samo pazi da ne spljostis muziku totalno itd. Ako imas RMS reader, potrudi se da prosjecna glasnoca muzike bude u zoni oko -12 do -7dB ili slicno. I jos nesto, pozeljno je da razlika izmedju gornje i donje vrijednosti peakova (pulsiranja muzike) ne bude manja od 6 dB (znaci izmedju tihih i glasnih dijelova o groove-u)... itd...
...ajd' da ne davim...
SandRob
30-05-2004, 10:05 PM
Gate ti zatvara sve decibelaze koje su preko onih koje si mu ti zadao...znaci gate na masteru je nemoguc
Compresijom skidas peakove ali pazi i smanjujes dinamiku pesme tako da tu budi oprezan
Limiterom ces sve zarezati dobro ali se on iskljucivo koristi kada je kompresor neupotrebljiv
Softclip ti peakove koji prelaze preko 0 db pokusava odraditi bez distorzije ali mislim da to nije neko resenje jedino u slucaju da i limiterom i kompresorom ne mozes nista uraditi.Onda lepo odradi mix ponovo i malo iskompresuj.
a sto si ti toliko nabrijan protiv limitera?! sa njim je vazno, ko i sa svakon spravom, ne pretjerat. sto fali, nakon kompresora dignut 2-3 decibela brzim limiterom? to ce se manje cut u konacnom snimku nego da te decibele dodatno komprimiras.
bob ketz bi reka "the best limiter i no limiter", ali to ne znaci da stvar ne treba 'limitirat'.
postoji trick kako to napravit i bez limitera ;)
idekius
30-05-2004, 10:07 PM
Ustvari, ovde se prica o "masteringu".
Kako god, da ne pisemo ovde sad cijelu teoriju o tome, nadji linkove na forumu (rumski forum o masteringu) i procitaj ono sto kaze cika Bob Katz.
Jos nesto - svi pokusavaju napraviti sto glasniji snimak (kao "loudness war), ali to stvarno nije bitno. Napravi dobar mix, ostavi par dana da odlezi i onda ga udari limitingom ili slicno - ili odnesi prijatelju koji ima dobre usi i monitore da ti to uradi (ima tu trikova sa kompresorima - ponekad i dva u lancu i equalizerima), L2 ili ME Loudness Maximizer ce uradit pravu stvar za pocetak, ali pazljivo i bez pretjerivanja (citaj Bob Katz-a), namjesti peak brickwall na 0, -0.1 ili -0.3 svejedno, samo pazi da ne spljostis muziku totalno itd. Ako imas RMS reader, potrudi se da prosjecna glasnoca muzike bude u zoni oko -12 do -7dB ili slicno. I jos nesto, pozeljno je da razlika izmedju gornje i donje vrijednosti peakova (pulsiranja muzike) ne bude manja od 6 dB (znaci izmedju tihih i glasnih dijelova o groove-u)... itd...
...ajd' da ne davim...
Samo nastavi da davis, pretvorio sam se u uvo... :wink:
@Benx:
Daj malo probaj shvatit sto covjek pita i koji je njegov nivo znanja. O kakvim ti dobrim miksevima pricas?! Pa ne zna one osnove i sad ce napraviti dobar miks. Tu smo da mu objasnimo stvari na nama mozda banalan nacin.
L2 naravno, al ima tu mnogo mnogo vise nauke nego sto ti mislis. Recimo za pocetak, neka ti final master bude do max -0.3 a da ti nivo kompresije ne prelazi 4db... sve preko toga "spljoshtava" snimak i dobija neprijatnu distorziju...
Taj L2 je cesto mac sa dve ostice. Vrlo cesto se moze desiti da se poptuno unakazi mix i dinamika.
pozzz
Gate ti zatvara sve decibelaze koje su preko onih koje si mu ti zadao...znaci gate na masteru je nemoguc
Compresijom skidas peakove ali pazi i smanjujes dinamiku pesme tako da tu budi oprezan
Limiterom ces sve zarezati dobro ali se on iskljucivo koristi kada je kompresor neupotrebljiv
Softclip ti peakove koji prelaze preko 0 db pokusava odraditi bez distorzije ali mislim da to nije neko resenje jedino u slucaju da i limiterom i kompresorom ne mozes nista uraditi.Onda lepo odradi mix ponovo i malo iskompresuj.
a sto si ti toliko nabrijan protiv limitera?! sa njim je vazno, ko i sa svakon spravom, ne pretjerat. sto fali, nakon kompresora dignut 2-3 decibela brzim limiterom? to ce se manje cut u konacnom snimku nego da te decibele dodatno komprimiras.
bob ketz bi reka "the best limiter i no limiter", ali to ne znaci da stvar ne treba 'limitirat'.
postoji trick kako to napravit i bez limitera ;)
Nisam nista rekao protiv limitera, uzgred, u zadnje vreme ga nesto i koristim vise samo sto opet vidim da mi je neptreban pored kompresije(valjda copresor odradim valjano, a i mix mi valja).
@Benx
RMS treba biti od -11 do -9 i onda se najbolje prenosi i na radio i na druge spravice.
Limiter inace koristim za kada mi mix nije dobar a ne vraca mi se nazad da ga ponovo sredjujem jer se nesto zakomplikuje. NPR> kada moram kompresiju na nekom kanalau da menjam zbog nekog drugog kanala i tako lancano se citava stvar menja. Tu mi dobro dodje limiter zbog nekog peaka. Ustvari limiter dodje kao precica do krajnjeg resavanja mixa.
postoji trick kako to napravit i bez limitera ;)
Znam ga, cini mi se da si ga slucajno negde ispricao :wink:
@Benx:
Daj malo probaj shvatit sto covjek pita i koji je njegov nivo znanja. O kakvim ti dobrim miksevima pricas?! Pa ne zna one osnove i sad ce napraviti dobar miks. Tu smo da mu objasnimo stvari na nama mozda banalan nacin.
Da istina je....da sam dobio taj odgovor prije...ne bi ga ku?io ni?t'.....al' sad mi je jasno....ako pretjerujem sa tim limiterom...sve ?e mi se di?i na istu razinu i izpeglati, a to nije dobro nikako....koristit ?u ga i kod snare-a i vokala, kicka i jo? nekih pojedinih kanala (ako kompresija ne uspije izjedna?it), i naravno u masteringu...Istina je da kompresor jo? uvjek nisam sku?io...npr. gitare....mi uvjek zvu?e lo?ije sa kopresorom, nego bez....a stavim ga na preset za gitare...i jo? se igram sa kompres. smanjim ili dignem attack(ovisi o pjesmi)...mislim da se u ovom slu?aju(metal\punk\rock)ni ne trebaju koristiti kompresori...jer su to sve distorzirani zvukovi(pa time i djelomi?no jednaki) pa i "oscilacija" zvuka treba ovisiti o gitaristu\ici....a sa kompresorom bi se samo dobio neprirodan dojam(+ ?to je i distorzija ve? tu da napravi to)...
SandRob
31-05-2004, 11:58 AM
a stavim ga na preset za gitare...i jo? se igram sa kompres. smanjim ili dignem attack(ovisi o pjesmi)...
ako si vec izabra preset, onda je prva stvar koju moras nastimat treshold, pa eventualno ratio, pa sve ostalo...
zapamti da je kompresor nuzna alatka i nije potreban ako je instrument dobro usnimljen
ali kako ?u razlikovati dobro od lo?eg.......you will know....when you are passive, relax....but be ware of the dark side :lol: ...ne, ozbiljno.....neki ljudi su mi rekli da uop?e ne koriste kompresore....meni je logi?no da vokal ne mo?e pro?i (mo?e al...) bez njega....al ga ne znam osjetiti...i ne ku?im ?ta on radi....?ujem ja da on nekako do izjedna?i...ispegla...al to mi onda zvu?i lo?ije.....
SandRob
01-06-2004, 11:08 AM
kompresor ti je najvaznija alatka. bez njega zaboravi posal. imas na internetu tutorijale u kojima judi objasnjavaju kako radi kompresor, kako i di se koristi.
kompresor je izmisljen iz praktinih razloga, jer dynamika koja je u prirodi nemoze stat na medij (tada na traku) zato je treba smanjit.
dakle, da se tonski snimatelj nebi priznojava i tresa od muke kad ce orkestar opizdit na svu forcu i kad ce mu sve poc u crveno i distorziju, pametni judi su se sitili i ucinili kompresor.
vrlo brzo kompresor se poce koristit i kreativno, a imaju kompresori (i busilice) sto se snjima raskopavaju puti, ali to je nisto drugo ;)
kako kompresor radi?!
namistis mu prag (treshold) i sve sto je preko njega (sto je glasnije) kompresor 'komprimira' (stisava) u omjeru (ratio) koji je zadan.
ako je, recimo, treshold (prag) namisten na -10db, a ratio (omjer) na 2:1, onda to znaci da ce kompresor sve sto je glasnije od -10db duplo stisat.
ako je ratio veci od 10:1 (mislin da je toliko... ili nesto manje) onda je to limiter.
brickwall limiteri reagiraju jako brzo i ne propustaju nista iznad tresholda.
brzina kojon ce se kompresor ukjucivat (otkad muzika predje treshold) je attack, a koliko brzo ce se kopresor iskjucivat otkad nivo padne ispod tresholda je release.
ako je attack prebrz moze sjebat prvih nekoliko miliskundi tona (recimo udarac trzalice ili nokta na zici akusticne gitare), a ako je prespor onda gre u peak (recimo vokali zahtjevaju brze attacke).
ako je release presor onda se kompresor ne uspije 'iskjucit' do slijedeceg udarca i tako sjebes dinamiku.
ako je release prebrz onda zvuk pumpa ili distorziraju basevi.
postoji jos 'knee', ali to mi je vako tesko objasnit. u svakon slucaju postoji soft i hard knee (ekstremno). soft knee se koristi na vokalima tako da kompresija ne bude pre ostra nego postepena (u grafickemu prikazu se to vidi kako parabola) da vokal zvuci prirodno, a hard knee se stavje, recimo na bass gitaru u funku (slap bass) i zescim rock stvarima, na brassevima i sl.
ma sve zavisi sto zelis dobit ali neka osnovna pravila i principe moras znat.
najbolje ti je nac na internetu neki tutorial o kompresorima, oli kupi neku knjigu. tun ti je sve lipo objasnjeno i nacrtano.
kompresor ti je najvaznija alatka. bez njega zaboravi posal. imas na internetu tutorijale u kojima judi objasnjavaju kako radi kompresor, kako i di se koristi.
ne zajebaj sandro, nije bas najvaznija :wink: "alatka"
Kompresor ne koristis na svakom instrumentu vec tamo gde je potrebno kada imas peak zbog koga moras stisati instrument, a tako stisan instrument se ne moze ubaciti u mix i onda ulece kompresor. Skines peak sa kompresorom i efektivni deo zvuka ostaje koji mozes kontrolisati pojacavanjem ili stisavanjem kako zelis.
SandRob
01-06-2004, 07:11 PM
jebate, pa valjda se kompresor koristi i radi kreativnih razloga?!
osin tega, kompresor se koristi i u snimanju a ne samo u mixu i masteringu. neznan koji je instrument u modernoj produkciji uopce moguce snimit a da se pri tom (ili barem u mixu) ne koristi kompresor?!
kad su gotovi sampleovi u pitanju, onda vjerojatno neces bas na svaki kanal stavit kompresor (iako ni to nije iskjuceno), ali na vecini hoces, a na grupama i masteru pogotovo.
zamisli kako bi zvuca bubanj i drum-loop bez kompresora (ne mislin na gotovi loop), ili kako bi zvucale akusticne ritam gitare ili vokal ili bas ili backovi... bez kompresora!?
i kompresoron neces skidat peakove, nego limiteron.
a koja je vaznija alatka od kompresora, izuzev instrumenata?!
produkciju bez reverba mogu zamislit, ali bez kompresora?! ... mislin...
ovo mi je bilo zanimljivo i pou?no...dajte mi jo? :D
a koja je vaznija alatka od kompresora, izuzev instrumenata?!
produkciju bez reverba mogu zamislit, ali bez kompresora?! ... mislin...
E tu se slazem!
jebate, pa valjda se kompresor koristi i radi kreativnih razloga?!
osin tega, kompresor se koristi i u snimanju a ne samo u mixu i masteringu. neznan koji je instrument u modernoj produkciji uopce moguce snimit a da se pri tom (ili barem u mixu) ne koristi kompresor?!
kad su gotovi sampleovi u pitanju, onda vjerojatno neces bas na svaki kanal stavit kompresor (iako ni to nije iskjuceno), ali na vecini hoces, a na grupama i masteru pogotovo.
zamisli kako bi zvuca bubanj i drum-loop bez kompresora (ne mislin na gotovi loop), ili kako bi zvucale akusticne ritam gitare ili vokal ili bas ili backovi... bez kompresora!?
i kompresoron neces skidat peakove, nego limiteron.
a koja je vaznija alatka od kompresora, izuzev instrumenata?!
produkciju bez reverba mogu zamislit, ali bez kompresora?! ... mislin...
Apsolutno se slazem i ne govorim protiv kompresije vec da covek ne pomisli da ih treba koristiti na sve strane.
Pa iskreno receno i bez reverba nisam bas cuo produkciju. Mozda sam prevideo nekada nesto. Kompresor sam stavljao na svaki kanal kada sam to radio bez nekog razmisljanja i dobio FLAT mix. Po meni licno bolje je ostaviti nekada i "cist" zvuk ako naravno nije neophodno kompresovati, jer je dinamika veca bez kompresije. Da u pravu si "ujedinjavanje" drum instrumenata a i nekih akusticnih ili synthova nije nikada na odmet kompresorom. Ja sam puno koristio kompresore i dobro sam ih prostudirao a u zadnje vreme ih pokusavam izbegavati sto vise mogu naravno u granicama normale.
SandRob
02-06-2004, 08:44 AM
naravno, svak ima svoje nacine i cake.
bitno je da se shvati kako radi alat tako da se moze koristit po potrebi.
ljudi znaju zbog cega koriste reverb i kakav ce bit njegov efekat, a kompresor insertiraju a da cesto neznaju sto uopce snjin zele dobit.
ja bi fileu i svima koji dvoje oko vakih stvari toplo priporuci knjigu od vladimira rackovica - muzicki tonski studio (http://www.knjizara.com/index.php?gde=http://www.knjizara.com/glavna/muz_ton_stud.html). napisana je na srpski 'da ceo svet razume' (sva srica da ni cirilica jerbo ja prvi nebi razumi :oops:), u knjizi ima stvari koje danas mozda spadaju u povijest i vise nemaju prakticnu pripremu, ali su svejedno zanimljive (barem meni jesu) za procitat.
naravno, u knjizi su razjasnjeni svi alati koji se u studiju koristu, pa tako i kompresor.
znam dosta ljudi koji stavljaju reverb u funkciji velike prostornosti i samo to.
Kada im objasnis da on ima svoju funkciju i kada je wet veoma mali onda se otvara citava dimenzija rasprave.
Delay je takodje jedan od neophodnih efekata koji se nekada i ne cuje onako kako bi trebao jer ga mnogi ljudi znaju postaviti skladno u mix a ustvari veoma idealno
Citiracu sebe. "Najbolji kompresor je covek" :lol: :lol: :lol:
LM, bez dobre/pametne kompresije naravno nema ni dobrog mixa. Nema puno rasprave na ovu temu, jer se opet sve na kraju svodi na usi, ali naravno ne treba preterati sa kompresovanjem posto se moze mnogo vise izgubiti nego dobiti. Ako je u samom startu snimak lose odradjen nijedan kompresor nece od go*ana napraviti tortu.
I za kraj. Text iz SOS-a o kompresorima (pa ko ima vremena i zivaca neka cita) :):
Most of you probably know that a compressor is a device for automatically controlling the level of an audio signal. More specifically, a compressor 'turns down' the audio when the level exceeds a threshold set by the user. The amount by which the gain is turned down depends on the ratio of the compressor ? for example, if a ratio of 5:1 is set, an input signal exceeding the threshold by 5dB will be output with a level of only 1dB over the threshold. Once the signal falls back below the threshold level, the gain returns to normal. It's exactly the same as manually turning the level down with a fader whenever it gets too loud, but it's much faster to respond than any human and it's totally automatic.
To make the effect of compression smooth and natural-sounding, compressors often allow attack and release time parameters to be set by the user, but just occasionally these are fully automated. The attack time determines how long the compressor takes to reduce the gain once the input signal has passed the threshold, while the release time determines how long the gain takes to return to normal after the input signal has fallen back below the threshold. If the attack and release are too fast, rapid changes in gain cause an effect known as 'pumping'. All that pumping means is that the compressor action is clearly audible rather than subtle. Because compressors work by reducing level, most models have an output control called 'gain make up' or something similar. This control is simply used to restore the peak level of the compressed output signal to that of the uncompressed input signal. In effect, this means that compression makes low-level signals louder if the peak level is returned to its former value.
The last concept to explore before moving on to the more advanced stuff is that of the 'knee'. A basic compressor does nothing to the input signal until it reaches the threshold, then the full amount of gain reduction is applied as fast as the attack time will let it. This is good for assertive level control, but can be a little too obvious when a lot of compression is being applied to critical sounds within a mix ? or to complete mixes for that matter. A gentler-sounding compression can be achieved by using a so-called soft-knee compressor, where the compression ratio increases gradually as the signal approaches the threshold. Once the signal passes the threshold, the full ratio as set by the user is applied, but, because some compression is applied to signals approaching the threshold, the transition from no gain reduction to full gain reduction is far smoother. Figure 1 shows graphs of input level versus output level for both hard-knee and soft-knee compressors.
So, if soft-knee compressors are so smooth and cuddly, why don't we use them all the time? Firstly, it's sometimes nice to use compression as an effect, in which case a fairly hard compression tends to work best. A little deliberate gain pumping can give the impression of loudness and hard-knee compressors pump more readily than soft-knee types. The second reason is that, at higher ratio settings, the hard-knee compressor provides firmer gain control, so if a signal is varying in level to an excessive degree, a soft-knee compressor might not produce the required degree of levelling. The choice of which to use has to be made by ear, especially as every soft knee compressor behaves differently. Some have a relatively small knee, where the ratio increases over an input range of just a few dBs, whereas some start compressing at very low signal levels and then gradually increase the ratio over a range of 20 or 30dB. In fact some of these compressors are not so much soft knee as soft leg!
As if hard-knee and soft-knee compressors didn't confuse the picture enough, there are other 'control law' effects to consider. In a theoretically perfect compressor, once gain reduction is applied (in other words, once the input is above the threshold), the response is reasonably linear, so no matter by how much the input exceeds the threshold, the output level increase will always be the fraction of that amount determined by the ratio control. Both hard-knee and soft-knee compressors settle down into this type of linear response above the threshold. However, there are some compressor types that don't exhibit a linear response above the threshold, and it's not uncommon for the amount of gain reduction actually to reduce at very high signal levels. In effect, this means that at very high signal levels the compression ratio tends to fall to a lower value, as shown in the graph of Figure 2.
Compressors that use lamps and photocells are notoriously non-linear but, rather than this being deemed a fault, it is acknowledged as one of the factors that gives them their distinctive sound. Compressors using valves within the gain-control circuitry may also be non-linear. It's not important to know a lot about the technicalities of such non-linearities ? just be aware that this factor contributes to audible differences between models of compressor that might otherwise appear to have the same broad technical specification. As is so often the case in audio, 'theoretically perfect' doesn't always equate to the most musical sound.
Basic compressors are little more than automated faders, but sometimes their action is at odds with the way audio behaves. It's well-known that you need a lot more energy to make a loud bass sound than a loud high-pitched sound, so it comes as no surprise in pop music to discover that most of the sound energy in a mix comes from the kick drum and the bass guitar or bass synth. When you compress a mix, it stands to reason that the compressor will respond mainly to the levels of these instruments so that, whenever a loud kick drum comes along, the level of the whole mix will be reduced for a few moments. Unless the amount of compression is quite modest, this can lead to an audible pumping of the high frequencies in a mix as they are reduced in level needlessly. Setting an attack time long enough to allow high-frequency transients to pass before gain reduction occurs can help in some cases, but this isn't always successful. Furthermore, there are occasions on which a fast attack time is necessary to achieve the right overall effect.
As we shall see later, the best solution to this problem is to use a multi-band compressor, but the designers of conventional compressors have also come up with some ingenious solutions to lessen this problem. For example, some designs use circuitry that allows a small amount of high-frequency signal to bypass the compression process so that, when a loud bass sound causes a drop in the overall level, the high end doesn't get killed. Once again, the technicalities aren't as important as the results, and what I'd like to get over to you is that, when trying out any compressor, you ought to listen to the way the high end changes when heavy compression is being triggered by low-frequency sounds. The variety is enormous ? some compressors sound quite dull and choked while others maintain the high end very effectively
Going back to the 'compressor as a fader' analogy, the side-chain of the compressor is that part of the circuitry that listens to the incoming signal to see if it needs turning down or not. Most often, compressor side-chains are designed to respond pretty much like the human ear, which means that short duration sounds aren't perceived as being as loud as longer sounds of exactly the same level. This is called an RMS response (an abbreviation for 'Root Mean Square'), a mathematical means of determining average signal levels. The implications of using a compressor with an RMS control law are that the compression will sound natural, but short duration, high amplitude sounds may pass through at a higher level than you expect. One solution when feeding digital systems that can't tolerate overload is to use a fast acting peak limiter after the compressor.
Some compressors offer switchable RMS/Peak operation, and in Peak mode, the gain control responds more accurately to brief signal peaks than in the RMS 'averaging' mode. This ensures peaks are more accurately controlled, but at the same time introduces a greater risk that the broadband audio will be squashed unacceptably whenever a loud, short transient sound occurs. For this reason, it may be most effective to use Peak compression when treating individual drum and percussion sounds prior to mixing.
Just like our hypothetical engineer controlling levels with a fader, a compressor can't take action until it 'hears' something that's too loud. To put it another way, a basic compressor's level corrections inevitably come slightly late. If a compressor is set to have a very fast attack time, the signal level can be brought under control before it overshoots, but even then the rise of an attacking sound will be distorted slightly by the compressor action ? though, fortunately, very short periods of distortion during transient sounds are not generally audible.
One way of getting around the 'too late' problem is to use a so-called 'look-ahead' compressor, where the side-chain is allowed to see the input signal a fraction of a second before it arrives at the gain-control stage. To do this in real time would require circuitry that could see into the future, so a more practical ploy is to delay the audio passing through the gain-control stage by just a few milliseconds while the audio feeding the side chain remains undelayed. In normal situations, a delay of three or four milliseconds is insignificant to a signal, but you should be aware that any hardware look-ahead compressor will introduce a tiny delay. Figure 3 shows the block diagram of a look-ahead compressor.
Software plug-ins used to process audio that's already been recorded fare somewhat better than hardware, because they can often get a chance to read an audio file slightly in advance of playback, therefore enabling them to work without introducing any delay. It's for this reason that look-ahead functionality is far more common in software compressors than in hardware. Many traditionalists don't like look-ahead compressors, because they don't give the same result as the analogue compressors they are derived from, but in situations where transients with extremely fast attack times are present, using a look-ahead compressor may be the only way of bringing peaks under control fast enough
We are often told that a limiter is simply a compressor with an infinitely high ratio, so that once a signal reaches the threshold, it is prevented from exceeding it. This is pretty much true, but in this digital age where even very short periods of clipping may not be acceptable, a regular compressor is unlikely to be able to act fast enough to function as an effective limiter ? fast transients can pass through a system before your compressor is able to react, and this can result in clipping at your A-D conversion stage. In the days of analogue tape, this didn't matter so much, as short periods of analogue overload tended to be inaudible, but some digital systems can't cope with any clipping at all, however brief. In such situations, a dedicated, fast-acting limiter is the best bet.
In order to control signal peaks without affecting a sound's subjective level, some digital limiters may be programmed to allow a certain number of samples to clip before the level is reduced. In situations where the equipment next in line doesn't object to short periods of clipping, this can actually make the material seem much louder, though, as a rule of thumb, the period of clipping should be less than 1mS, which is equivalent to 44 consecutive samples at the sampling rate of CD-quality audio. However, if frequent clipping is expected, then the maximum length of clipped signal should be reduced to below 10 samples, as research indicates that repeated clipping within a short space of time is more audible than widely spaced instances of clipping. Some limiters emulate analogue soft clipping, where the top few dBs of any peaks are rounded off rather than clipped. Soft clipping can also help preserve the impression of loudness, though the effect can be audibly unpleasant if the signal is forced into limiting for more than very brief periods of time
The first use of compression is for controlling signal peaks, so if you want to reduce peak levels without affecting the dynamic range of the rest of the recording, the usual approach is to set a threshold that's just above the average music level. This way only the peaks are subjected to gain reduction, and the more compression you wish to apply to those peaks, the higher the ratio you'll need to set. As a rule, ratios of between 2.5:1 and 8:1 are used for this kind of work.
It is sometimes easier to set up the threshold control using a high ratio along with fast attack and release settings, as the gain-reduction meters will kick in very obviously whenever a signal peak exceeds the threshold. Simply reduce the threshold until the gain-reduction meters start to show a significant amount of gain reduction between peaks, then bring it back up until only the peaks are affected. Once you've adjusted the threshold so that only peaks are being affected, you can return the attack and release settings to more suitable values and then work on the ratio control. A practical way to set the ratio control is to watch the gain-reduction meters as you vary the ratio and aim for a maximum gain reduction of between 8dB and 10dB. However, it's still vital that you listen carefully to the processed signal to see if it sounds the way you want it to ? meters can only tell you so much, and if the peaks start to sound squashed, you'll probably need to either reduce the ratio or increase the compressor attack time. As a rule, a hard-knee compressor will give the most positive results in situations where the signal peaks are in need of assertive control and, as explained last month, a compressor with a peak-sensing side-chain mode will track peaks more accurately.
Even though you are, in effect, compressing the signal peaks, it is important to keep in mind that, unless you are using a very fast compressor set to its fastest attack time, there may well be signal overshoots that the compressor can't catch. In a situation where overshoots can't be tolerated, it's safest to follow the compressor with a dedicated peak limiter. In a CD mastering situation, following compression with limiting is standard practice ? it's unreasonable to expect a compressor to prevent digital overloads on its own.
The second basic way in which you can use a compressor is for compressing the dynamic range of an entire signal, not just the peaks. In this case, it's usual to set a very low ratio of between 1.1:1 and 1.4:1 and to set the threshold at around 30dB below the peak level. Soft-knee compressors work well in this role and gentle overall compression is commonly used in mastering or for processing submixes. Conventional RMS, rather than peak, sensing would be the norm for this type of job, though don't let that put you off experimenting, as different makes of compressor can behave very differently.
Mastering The Art
One question I frequently hear is, 'Why should we need to compress at all during the mastering stage if individual tracks have already been compressed during recording and mixing?' The answer is that not all material will need compressing, but the application of a little overall compression can help the sounds within the mix to gel more effectively, even in cases where every track was compressed flat at the time of mixing. Just because individual tracks have been compressed doesn't mean the mix is always going to be at the same level throughout ? vocal lines will still have gaps between phrases, and instruments may come and go according to the arrangement of the song. The outcome is that the overall level of a typical pop mix still fluctuates according to what is and what is not playing at any given time.
Because the dynamic characteristics of a complex mix can vary considerably over the period of a track, a compressor which automatically sets suitable attack and release times is often easiest to use in this application. If your compressor doesn't have an auto mode, try an attack time of around 20mS and a release time of around 300mS, but experiment with these values, because every make of compressor responds differently. Use a low threshold in conjunction with a low ratio to trim a few dB off the original dynamic range and you should find that the impression of energy and mix integration increases. What's really happening is that the pauses between vocal and instrumental lines, as well as the gaps between drum beats, are compressed just a little less, which means that the level of the backing track is constantly adjusting itself to maintain a more even overall level. If this were overdone, there would be audible gain pumping, but kept down to two or three decibels, the subjective result can be very musical and can often help prominent parts, such as vocal lines, sit better within a mix.
Many Bands Make Light Work
When processing complex mixes using a conventional compressor, you can easily reach the point where gain pumping becomes audible, with high-energy, low-frequency sounds affecting the gain of the whole mix. Multi-band compressors were designed to avoid this problem, by treating different sections of the frequency spectrum independently. In such systems, the audio is split up into separate frequency bands, usually three, by means of a crossover circuit, each band then being treated with a separate compressor. At the output, the various bands are again combined to provide a full-range signal. Figure 2 shows a block diagram of such a setup.
The clear advantage of this system is that a loud, low-frequency sound will only instigate gain reduction in the low-frequency compression band, so any mid-range and high-frequency sounds occurring at the same time will be unaffected. This is in contrast to the conventional full band compressor where a loud kick drum will pull down the level of any simultaneous hi-hat and snare beats. Essentially, the ability to apply more compression without audible side effects is the main benefit of a multi-band compressor.
However, in a system where each band's compressor can be adjusted separately, there's a lot more you can do. For a start, the output gain of each compressor can be adjusted to alter the overall tonality of the mix. For example, if you feel the mix needs more mid-frequencies, you can simply turn up the output level of the mid-band compressor by a few decibels. You can also increase the perceived bass level by using more compression in the bass band than in the mid and high bands ? just set a higher ratio or a lower threshold. If you use the make-up gain control to compensate for this extra gain reduction, the average level of the bass will have been increased without increasing the peak levels, therefore making the mix sound more powerful at any given playback level. Similarly, if the top end needs a bit more sizzle or enhancement, it can be compressed a little harder too, in much the same way.
Most multi-band compressors also allow you to move the crossover points, and in most circumstances these need to be set in such a way as to separate the main bass and treble sounds from the mid-range. Kick drums and bass instruments need to be mainly in the low band while the mid band should be wide enough to accommodate the entire vocal range except for perhaps the highest harmonics and breath noises. This is important, as placing the crossover point of a multi-band compressor in the middle of the vocal range can compromise the vocal sound. In the top band, you should be aiming to capture cymbals, the bright edge of acoustic guitars and so on. For a pop mix, a low crossover point of 150 to 200Hz and a high crossover point of 5 to 8kHz would be typical.
When working with other material, listen to the mix and try to pick out the different ranges covered by the various instruments and sounds, then adjust the crossover points accordingly. Choosing the right compression settings when mastering takes a little experience, but the first step is always to identify the problem ? is it just a question of balance or is part of the mix more dynamic than it needs to be? Once you've pinpointed the problem, try to fix it using the least amount of processing.
EQ Before Compression Or After?
Compressors are often used in conjunction with equalisers, especially in mastering applications. However, there's a big difference in the results achieved, depending on whether you put the EQ before or after the compressor, especially if the compressor is a full-band type. Let me give you an example: let's assume that a mix needs more low-end energy, so we add some bass boost at 80Hz. If we then feed the EQ'd signal through a compressor it will respond most to the loudest signal peaks, which in all probability will occur exactly where we applied the boost ? in other words the compressor will attempt to turn down the level of the sounds we've just tried to emphasise. Sometimes this will produce a musically useful effect, but where you want the EQ to be unaffected by the compressor, you're better patching the compressor first in line. If you have a hardware EQ and a compressor, or corresponding plug-ins, I'd recommend you try a few experiments to demonstrate just how great a difference can be made simply by moving the EQ before or after the compressor.
In a mastering situation, having independent control over each band can really help to sort out a problem mix. One popular strategy is to use a higher ratio and higher threshold to sort out low-end peaks while using the gentler low-ratio and low-threshold approach in the other frequency bands. On the other hand, using more compression in the mid-band can often help lift the vocals out of a problem mix. Some multi-band compressors, such as TC Electronic's Triple*C, don't have independent control over the bands other than for level, but they do provide templates for different types of music where these more advanced settings are preset within the templates. In most cases, the appropriately named template will be the right one for the job in hand, but don't let that put you off trying different templates to the obvious ones just to see what happens.
However, even if your mastering compressor provides full and independent control over each frequency band, it's usually a good idea to use similar attack and release settings across the three bands unless you have a very clear reason for doing otherwise. Generally the attack will need to be as fast as possible without making the compression process sound too obvious, though in some situations, you may want to increase this a little to allow brief transients to stand out a little more. If the attack and release times are set too differently, then the attack of a transient sound may be disturbed, with some parts of the spectrum coming in before others or coming in with more initial intensity. In extreme cases, badly mismatched attack and release settings can even have a detrimental effect on the apparent timing of the music.
The Final Word
Compression is a much more subtle process than adding an effect such as delay or reverb, so you may have to play around more before you feel you have enough experience to get the results you want. Dynamic control is a key element in modern music production, whatever the style, so give yourself time to learn, and be aware that different types of compressor can produce very different subjective results. If you have a digital compressor with factory presets, look at the way the presets are set up and try to figure out why the designers chose those parameter values ? can you imagine what effects those settings will have on the type of signal they were designed for. You can also learn a lot from listening to commercial records to see how they were mixed and mastered. Most importantly though, learn restraint. Overprocessing is almost always more damaging to a piece of audio than underprocessing.
... :D
Pedja
03-06-2004, 12:17 AM
Kol'ki tekst :roll: posle ovolikog citanja treba osvezenje :pepsi: :D
presvega
03-06-2004, 12:54 AM
brb :shock:
Pa sta da vam kazem. Mislim da vredi procitati... :?
dobar je tekst, samo brate impozantno :D
Pedja
03-06-2004, 11:50 PM
Pa sta da vam kazem. Mislim da vredi procitati... :?
Ma odlicno :wink: , samo sto Eon rece impozantno :)
Radio sam sa kompresorom na glasu(spika) i uspio sam dobit da su svi glasovi sli?ni, bez padova i uspona....(ne znam objasnit :oops: )...ali mislim da sa limiterom bolje mogu izjedna?it tiho i glasno na istu glasno?u....zadam neki prag....(u ovom slu?aju je to nula)...i onda teram gain tako da preglasno ne dobije izobli?enje, a da ono ti?e do?e do te nule....dali to mo?e i kompresor....ili je najbolje to dvoje kombinirati......
pazi prag na nuli ti je bitan samo da budes siguran da ti zvuk ne ode preko. Ako ga postavis manje na -1 ili jos manje onda ces u zavisnosti od toga koliko je zvuk glasan moci sredjivati zvuk i onaj najefektniji deo zvuka ces najbolje iskoristiti. Ustvari logika kompresora je u tome da one peakove skreses sto profesionalnije a ostavis cist zvuk sa sto vecim RMS-om.
Kombinacija limitera i kompresora ti nije potrebna jedino u slucaju da kompresorom nisi resio neki peak i posle njega stavis limiter, ali pazi tu mozes sjebati zvuk opasno
SandRob
06-06-2004, 07:58 AM
Citiracu sebe. "Najbolji kompresor je covek" :lol: :lol: :lol:
:shock: meni je ovo isto kako da si reka da je najboji reverb covik :shock:
meni je ovo isto kako da si reka da je najboji reverb covik
a ne.. najbolji reverb je pravi prostor... :wink:
Citiracu sebe. "Najbolji kompresor je covek" :lol: :lol: :lol:
:shock: meni je ovo isto kako da si reka da je najboji reverb covik :shock:
da, mislim da se odnosilo na uvo i osecaj slusljivosti zvuka
Pa jesam malo davio, ali sta cu... kad me krene...
:oops: Puknes neki limiter - pa kad zazvuci - trci da pustis prijateljima
@Benx:
Daj malo probaj shvatit sto covjek pita i koji je njegov nivo znanja. O kakvim ti dobrim miksevima pricas?! Pa ne zna one osnove i sad ce napraviti dobar miks. Tu smo da mu objasnimo stvari na nama mozda banalan nacin.
Da istina je....da sam dobio taj odgovor prije...ne bi ga ku?io ni?t'.....al' sad mi je jasno....ako pretjerujem sa tim limiterom...sve ?e mi se di?i na istu razinu i izpeglati, a to nije dobro nikako....koristit ?u ga i kod snare-a i vokala, kicka i jo? nekih pojedinih kanala (ako kompresija ne uspije izjedna?it), i naravno u masteringu...Istina je da kompresor jo? uvjek nisam sku?io...npr. gitare....mi uvjek zvu?e lo?ije sa kopresorom, nego bez....a stavim ga na preset za gitare...i jo? se igram sa kompres. smanjim ili dignem attack(ovisi o pjesmi)...mislim da se u ovom slu?aju(metal\punk\rock)ni ne trebaju koristiti kompresori...jer su to sve distorzirani zvukovi(pa time i djelomi?no jednaki) pa i "oscilacija" zvuka treba ovisiti o gitaristu\ici....a sa kompresorom bi se samo dobio neprirodan dojam(+ ?to je i distorzija ve? tu da napravi to)...
Pa i ne trebas kompresor na distorziranim elektricnim gitarama u 90% slucajeva, a ni na bubnjevima ako su semplovi u pitanju. Doduse, ako radis na semplovima akusticnog bubnja, narocito ako su napravljeni u dva programa - jedan close miking a drugi ambience - koji treba da sviraju zajedno, ili pak na oprave akusticnom bubnju (close miking i overheads i ambience mikrofoni - zvuk sobe, sto je vrlo vazno), mozes sve to izbalansirat, panovat, eq-ovat i kompresovat pojedinacne kanale na insertima da izdignes virblove na doboshu i da izbjegnes radikalne peakove pa onda sve to posaljes na stereo grupu i stavis jedan dobar lampas kompresor (waves renaisance ili slicno na kompujterima) cijeli drumset dobije meso, muda, cohones... kontash, a i cinelice reaguju zajedno sa kickom i doboshem pa dubijes onaj mocni rockerski pumping. Ima jos par slicnih trikova. Posaljes ambience mikrofone na poseban group kanal i kompresujes samo njih i dodajes ih da popune zvuk. Slicno mozes uradit ako posaljes cijeli mix bubnja na grupu kroz kompressor pritisnes ga malo vise i dodajes ga postepeno u mix sa kanalima sa kojeg si izvuko signal dok ne "zazvuci dobro". To je jedan starinski nacin koji je cudan jer kompresor znaci ne ide serijski preko cijelog bubnja nego ide sa splitovanog signala i miksa se paralelno sa vec postojecim zvukom u mixu.
A sto se tice compova na pojedinacnim kanalima i onog na finalnom mixu kroz master fader ili na masteringu to su totalno razlicite stvari.
nestalo mi vise inspiracije... pauza... stay tuned.
ne mislim koristiti semplove...nego bubnjara.....u nesavr?enosti je ljepota :P ...al zanimljivo mi je ovo ?to si rekao....al me zbunjuje to ?to spominje? ambience mikrofone.....da uvate prostor....koji prostor? kad je gluh...overheadi da...al radi se o vrlo nabrijanoj, posebnoj i delikatnoj produkciji...i sam smatram(+ ?to sam ?uo o puno ljudi) da bubanj treba snimiti ?to suvlje a sa prostorom se igrati jedino virtualno ( u mixu ), jel ?u puno lak?e dobiti i na?i prostor sa pluginom, nego da ga tra?im u 3d-u :)
@File
Kad bi usnimio cijeli bubanj "u suho" zvucalo bi grozno. To bi ti zapravo znacilo da snimas bez overhead mikrofona (ona dva iznad cinela). Nema sanse da onda dobijes takav prostor u snimci kad bi tome samo dodao neke virtualne jeke. Opet bi to bila totalna plastika. A ti mikrofoni koji hvataju ambience su zapravo ono sto vecinom nazivamo overhead. Fora je samo gdje ces ih postaviti. Ako ih malo udaljis od bubnja, oni ce promijeniti zvuk - nece vise toliko do izrazaja dolazit cinele u odnosu na ostale elemente. Inace su overhead-i kljucni kod dobre snimke bubnja. U njima se cuju svi elementi. Oni daju sirinu bubnja u miksu. Dosta ovise o prostoriji jer ne postoji "gluha" prostorija. Prostorija ti (iako kratko) uvijek malo odzvanja na odredjenim frekvencijama. Da nije tako, onda ti uopce nebi bilo razlike izmedju mikrofona direktno na snare-u ili onog koji je udaljen 2 metra. Zvuk bi bio isti (dobro, mozda s manjim bas frekvama - vidi pod proximity efekt). Al s obzirom da prostorija daje svoj odjek, snima se i to.
Fora dobre snimke bubnja je u par kljucnih faktora.
Prvo i osnovno - bubanj mora biti dobar. Dobro ustiman kvalitetan bubanj jer svetinja.
Zatim bubnjar - budale nece dobro snimiti ni na najvrijednijem bubnju! I nakon toga dolazi raspored mikrofona.
Na kraju tek ide raspored mikrofona. Kad hoces dobru snimku mikrofoni se postavljaju i po dva sata. Malo pomaknes i imas drugaciji zvuk. Posebno overhead!
I kad to imas sve, onda jos u miksu picajzlis po svemu i na sve dodajes atmosferu.
pa rekao sam overheadi da....al nema smisla stavljati "ambience" mikrofone ....NEGDJE.....u prostoriju da vata zvuk....mislim da je to onda preterano......
nadji na internetu nesto o Steve Albini-ju. On je radio Nirvanu (bubanj) na tri mikrofona, ali mislim da ima razgovora sa njim u Sound on Sound magazinu i sl.. Naci ces mnogo toga o raznim nacinima snimanja bubnja. Takodje pronadji interviewe sa Bob Ezrinom, Alan Parsonsom (Pink Floyd)i Chris Kimsy-em (Rolling Stones - Steel Wheels). Tu se moze pokupit dobrih trikova.
SandRob
13-06-2004, 07:11 PM
koju nirvanu? koliko su oni ploca uopce snimili? zar onu 'glavnu' nije radi onaj bubnjar iz garbagea?!... kako se ono zove... uf, uf... nemogu se sad sitit :oops:, ali san jedanput cita kako je radi tu plocu i bas je prica kako je radi bubnjeve. prica je o mikrofonima koje je koristi i znan da je sve snimano digitalno na adatima a kasnije je sve prebaceno na magnetofonske trake i mixano na 'engleskim pultovima iz sedamdesetih'.
siti san se. zove se butch vig :roll:
a jest albini krckao nesto sa garbage, ali mislim da je david grohl svirao sve od nirvana (ma nisu mi nesto drag bend bili nikad). On sad svira i vodi Foo Fighterse (kao gitarista - pjevac). da se vratim na ambience mikrofone: da oni se koriste bas kao ambience mikrofoni (pored overheadsa) i stoje malo dalje od drumseta. njihova svrha je da uhvate onu reverberaciju sobe a ne bubanj i cinele (overheads) direktno. to se koristi umjesto digitalnih reverba a i doda debljinu cijelom setu. da bi se to uradilo potrebna je povoljna prostorija za bubanj - veca soba sa difuznim povrsinama od kamena, drveta i mjestimicna apsorpcija. svjestan sam da je to skoro nemoguce uraditi u nasim uslovima zbog nedostatka sredstava za veliki studio ili mikrofone, ali tako rade visokobudgetne projekte na kojima se zahtijeva ogroman zvuk bubnja. to u kombinaciji sa close miking ili loose mikingom (ovo loose sam ja izmislio kao naziv za manji broj mikrofona na setu - 3 do 4 mikrofona) daje dobre rezultate. znaci, za bubanj su potrebne prilicno akusticne prostorije sa dobrim izbalansiranim prirodnim reverbom koji daje onaj decay na bubnjevima. uostalom, close miking je tako tesko uraditi jer su tu cesto prisutni fazni problemi zbog curenja izmedju kanala, "gluhe" i male sobe samo jos vise otezavaju posao, narocito zbog rezonantnosti u zoni izmedju 300Hz i 400Hz koje stvara "kutijast" zvuk bubnjeva tipican za niskobudgetne produkcije, ali uz malo truda u nekoj vecoj javnoj prostoriji - recimo nosenje drumsa i opreme u neki dom kulture da se iskoristi veliki prostor zbog akustike, mogu se dobiti dobri rezultati uz malo vise muke i truda. upravo planiram to nagovorit prvi sljedeci rock band sa kojim budem radio jer mi je dosadio kutijasti zvuk ili samplovi koji cesto ogranicavaju daljnju doradu projekta..... opet davim... javimo se
SandRob
16-06-2004, 09:36 AM
neki dan san cita intervju sa brianom willsonom. on je uvijek bio osjetljiv na jeke, pa je jos daleke 1967. cuvenu plocu good vibrations snima u nekoliko studija, upravo zbog njihovih razlicitih akustika prostora.
ok, tada umjetne jeke nisu bilo sofisticirane ko danas, ali je zanimljivo da brian willson do dana danasnjeg nikad u svojoj produkciji nije upotrebi digitalni reverb, cak ni na zadnjoj ploci od prije 2-3 godine.
jos uvik iskjucivo koristi prirodnu jeku prostorije, eho sobu i eho plocu.
ali je zanimljivo da brian willson do dana danasnjeg nikad u svojoj produkciji nije upotrebi digitalni reverb, cak ni na zadnjoj ploci od prije 2-3 godine.
jos uvik iskjucivo koristi prirodnu jeku prostorije, eho sobu i eho plocu.
Ionako je lud...
SandRob
16-06-2004, 10:09 AM
a to je... za rec pravo :wink:
vBulletin® v3.8.12 by vBS, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.