Jump to content

I hate audible compression on acoustic guitars


Magpel

Recommended Posts

  • Members

...I am far from the geekiest engineering dude around here, but almost no single recording vice irritates me more than audible compression on acoustic guitar. I sometimes like the sound of audible compression on vox or drums, but on Ac. Guit? Just don't get it. People are too much in love with their LA2As and UAD models thereof.

 

Sure, I'll sometimes use light compression to wedge an acoustic into a busy mix, esp. if the guitar is functioning in a rather "treble percussion" mode, but I don't think any instrument, as a rule, takes compression more poorly than acoustic guitar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I hear ya... dynamics are all-important.

 

 

 

Just listening to a CD by my bandmate's "other" (and much higher profile) band. Very nice piece of work, and done DIY pretty much all the way through except for the mastering, which might be the weakest link...


Anyway, I am far from the geekiest engineering dude around here, but almost no single recording vice irritates me more than audible compression on acoustic guitar. I sometimes like the sound of audible compression on vox or drums, but on Ac. Guit? Just don't get it. People are too much in love with their LA2As and UAD models thereof.


Sure, I'll sometimes use light compression to wedge an acoustic into a busy mix, esp. if the guitar is functioning in a rather "treble percussion" mode, but I don't think any instrument, as a rule, takes compression more poorly than acoustic guitar.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just to clarify, you most likely mean the artifacts of the compression? For instance, you may be able to tell that acoustic guitars are compressed in a track, such as, say, Jeff Lynne's productions, but if there's no pumping and breathing, that doesn't bug you? I'm not trying to put words or your mouth or start a debate, I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah Mags, you may want to clarify that as being "overused" or "highly audible" compression.

 

A little touch of it can be pretty cool, depending on the application. Not that this is an acoustic track, but (just as an example) all those jangly 12-string guitars you heard on the Byrds' records were compressed to hell. And yet... :)

 

But I agree: I stay VERY light-handed with compression when recording my Martin D-18V.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I know what you mean. And that's usually just a hack setup. I like compression on acoustic guitars that sounds like the natural compression the box of the guitar itself is doing. Only it's being accentuated by electronic compression.

 

Like 'Wish You Were Here' or The Beatles' 'Hide You Love Away'. Those sound great and are compressed but setup nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This was just an impulsive post brought on by a particular instance of compressed acoustic guitars.

 

Subjectively, contrary to "breathing" and "pumping," I perceive over-compression impressionistically as a kind of asphyxiation, oxygen deprivation...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

On the compression on acoustic guitars thing -- a little can go a long way. I view it vaguely as I view the use of Autotune. If I don't notice it -- I'm fine with it. But as soon as it becomes an aesthetic issue, I'm troubled.

 

I'll admit -- I'm a bit of a natural guitar fascist in my old age. After decades of trying different boxes and effects on both electric and acoustic guitars I have to say that I'm really only comfortable as a rule (rules are made to be broken, of course, but to do it intelligently, you've got to know the rules in the first place) with naturalistic acoustic guitar sounds.

 

And even on electrics, I'm pretty iffy about a lot of fx. I hate chorus (yet I still like Lesley in very small doses in just the right place for "keyboard part" guitars) and I'm not crazy about heavy distortion. A good wah wah can be magical -- but that's a tiny slice of what's out there. For every Jimi or Curtis Mayfield, there are a thousand people with a "ham-fisted foot." And auto-wah and most envelope following is something that hits the mark so very infrequently as to be almost amazing to me when it actually works. (But, dang, every once in a while it does. So rare.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

IMHO, an example of a clean guitar that was completely ruined by overcompression can be heard on the intro to the Red Hot Chili Peppers tune "Under the Bridge". It's a cool tune, but the intro sounds so artificial that I can barely stand to listen to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

IMHO as always IT DEPENDS.

 

How much dyanmic is in the performance/on the track versus how much does the arrrangement/mix call for? A very sparse versus dense mix makes a big differnce in terms of the geetar dynamics that are called for.

 

Certainly the players technique is a big factor in determining the dynamics of the recorded track.

 

Then there is consideration of the instrument.

A big ole martin dreadnaught plays with much much more volume, and therefore much more dynamic range, than does my Taylor 612C Maple Concert . The Taylor records very well uncompressed and still can be baked into the mix.

 

Also, there are many flavors of compression and many settings.

 

IMHO: I would never say that any/all audible compression on any acoustic sounds bad.

Cause If it aint audible then its not doing anything... and sometimes the track needs some treatment.

 

Having said that, there can be very ugly sounding compression on guitars if you are not careful.

I learned the hard way not to compress my Taylor.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Compression should never be audible on anything, at least not audible as compression.

 

 

Aren't specific compressors, such as the 1176LN, used because of the distinctive sound that their compression imparts?

 

Ringos drums were compressed. You can hear it easily on many of the cymbal crashes. They swell in a very pleasant way.

I consider that this was a creative choice.

Those Fairchild compressors go for $30K apiece cause nothing sounds quite like them.

 

With this in mind Im not sure I understand the above point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

 

Aren't specific compressors, such as the 1176LN, used because of the distinctive sound that their compression imparts?

Yes, but often as not it's not the dynamic range reduction that you're hearing as a distinctive sound, it's the change in attack or sustain, or the sound of your audio going through a transformer.

 

I suppose that's a picky distinction between the sound of "compression" and the sound of "a box that processes audio that says 'compressor' on the label."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Compression should never be audible on anything, at least not audible as compression.

 

 

Sometimes I want "transparent" compression. Sometimes I want something utterly crushed. Sometimes I want to tame peaks invisibly. Sometimes I want to bring up the room in a most unnatural way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yes, but often as not it's not the dynamic range reduction that you're hearing as a distinctive sound, it's the change in attack or sustain, or the sound of your audio going through a transformer.


I suppose that's a picky distinction between the sound of "compression" and the sound of "a box that processes audio that says 'compressor' on the label."

 

 

 

Well- I'd agree that the tranny doenst count as a compression attribute. Its independant of compression.

 

However, the attack and sustain characteristics are clearly an outcome of the compression applied. (such as Ringos cymbal crash swells).

 

These are key audible characteristics of compresison that I'd argue do have a valid place in the production toolkit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well... if the changes we make aren't audible... why would we make them? :D

 

But, seriously, I think the thing is that there are times when you want an obvious effect and times when you want the illusion of a rich, clean, intimate sound -- and compression can give that.

 

I do find some over-compression troubling... but I'm at that quirky part of my dotage where I think guitars just sound good and electric guitars just sound good with a nice, warm, but not crackly/crunchy mild saturation... after years spent looking for magic combinations of fuzz pedals, flangers, choruses, and so on I finally decided I don't much like any of it... for every Hendrix you get 10,000 lead-footed pedal stompers who let their FX boxes drive their sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

...I am far from the geekiest engineering dude around here, but almost no single recording vice irritates me more than audible compression on acoustic guitar. I sometimes like the sound of audible compression on vox or drums, but on Ac. Guit? Just don't get it. People are too much in love with their LA2As and UAD models thereof.


Sure, I'll sometimes use light compression to wedge an acoustic into a busy mix, esp. if the guitar is functioning in a rather "treble percussion" mode, but I don't think any instrument, as a rule, takes compression more poorly than acoustic guitar.

 

 

 

It dosn't take a geek or a non-geek to dislike the over-use of compression or limiting on muscal sound sources. Or indeed any over-use or over modification of musical sound in music recording.

 

I have always very much disliked the sound of audible compression. But then that's just me....

 

Bruce Swedien

(The Platinum Viking!!!)

 

P, S. Does that mean "i am a Geek-In-Waiting???"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If something does sound bad, it does sound bad. Period.

However, it may sound right for others...

 

Quoting the Platinum Viking, I guess it is kinda right when "there is an artistic reason for it". When it sounds bad because it was used the wrong way (say, no or little knowledge about compression parameters), it is simply horrible.

 

As usual, it all depends in the music. The most of the times the music and the track itself demands for an specific effect but overusing it may lead to great or terrible results.

 

Me? I do compress acoustic guitars to make them sit tight into a mix of rhythm, danceable tracks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most of the time, I try and use compression so it's not "audible" (in the sense that there are no artifacts and it sounds "natural" - you know what I mean). But there's times when I want to utterly abuse a vocal or an instrument with my compressor. This has been done artistically from The Beatles to Nine Inch Nails and beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

I disagree. Sometimes you just have to abuse that 808 kick with as much compression and resulting distortion as you can manage.
;)

II don't disagree with that (and other "messing up" uses of a compressor). But you don't really need compression - the dynamics are perfectly controlled right out of the box. In fact, too perfectly controlled. So you can use a compressor with a slow attack to emphasize the attack of the beats. That, however, is not compression. You don't really care about smoothing out the dynamics, in fact you want to make them rougher.

 

So you're using an AUDIBLE ARTIFACT of your compressor, you're not using compression. Kind of like if you pass a track through a tape recorder because you like the tape distortion. You're not really using it as a recorder, you're using an artifact of the recording process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...