If your EQ comes after the compressor, the two processes don’t affect each other. If you EQ before the compressor, then the compressor will further affect the tonality of your signal.
The entire post:
In the book The Mixing Engineers Handbook by Bobby Owsinksi, the author interviews several prominent audio engineers on a variety of topics. On the topic of “Compression as an Effect” Andy Johns is quoted as saying:
I use compression because it’s the only way that you can truly modify a sound because whatever the most predominant frequency is, the more you compress it the more predominant that frequency will be. Suppose the predominant frequencies are 1k to 3k. Put a compressor on it and the bottom end goes away, the top end disappears and you’re left with “Ehhhhh” [makes a nasal sound]. So for me, compressors can modify sound more than anything else. If it’s a bass guitar, you put the compressor before your EQ, because if you do it the other way around, you’ll lose the top and mids when the compressor emphasizes the spot that you EQed. If you compress it first, then add bottom, then you’re gonna hear it better.
What Johns is saying is that if your EQ comes after the compressor, the two processes don’t affect each other. If you EQ before the compressor, then the compressor will further affect the tonality of your signal.
from last century
this is simply b…it we talk about live sound,
then sometimes it is way more important to have an uncompressed but EQ’ed signal for monitors
some things are more pragmatic then you think
if your compression is not usable because it introduces feedback then you can’t use it
on the other hand on the more expensive desks it is switchable as you like,
but this requires knowledge how to handle this
There is a new kid in town which allows you to reorder the input channel processing individual and provides, beside high and low cuts and a six band eq, an additional three band EQ for the pre fader busses. Such a concept might not be a blue print for a feature for the QU, which has an already mature design. But probably it would be something for the SQ but for shure for the Avantis and the dLive.
The QU is what it is, a more or less simple entry level console for users which do not dive so deep into all the concepts of so called pro audio consoles. And for me the console should stay as simple as possible for that type of users.
In a live sound situation, more often than not you want the EQ first so that you can reduce or eradicate frequency issues which cause tonal problems, THEN compress so that you keep a more consistent level for your audience to be able to hear that instrument and to even out performance variations.
If you compressed first you’d be compressing on frequency elements which are then filtered out afterwards which would sound very odd and lead to non-correlated pumping.
Studio sound is a different thing with few constraints. But you wouldn’t be using the SQ channel for that, you’d be in the box.
If you’re doing parallel compression you’d need a second channel anyway? And if you have too much Dynamic Range, surely upward compression will make that worse? Or have I missed something obvious? That wouldn’t be my first time ?
I wondered about that which is why I googled for more info.
I had also hoped to find info on what happens to the freq response when you compress but did not find any info on that.
What I found was not a lot but that one article did say to EQ after Compress.
I thought it was so you could fix any problems compression might cause.
Are you saying that info was wrong.
That may well be.
Please give some technical details why it is wrong. Thanks.
I want to do upwards compression aka NY or parallel compression.
two different things in one statement mixed together…
there is no general rule what is compression doing to the frequency response
it highly depends on what kind of compression technique is used
there are some different ways to attach a dynamic reduction (compression) to a signal
opto compression, Variable MU, tube compression, VCA’s and tape compression
all these alter the frequency response different and it also depends on the time constants (attack and release, some introduce a hold time as well)
on of the best videos about compression:
this is part one, that describes a bit how difficult it is to discuss compression
NY compression is parallel compression… first introduced in some NY studios in the 1970’s
but sidechain compression and upward compression are totally different
parallel compression discribes the mix of a compressed signal and an uncompressed signal with the same origin
upward compression is compression that applies under the threshold and is very rarely used
I only know one device/plugin that does this the Eventide Omnipressor
sidechain compression describes the ability to control the compression with an external signal “brought in to the detector from the side”
this is not possible with all the above mentioned compressors
since not all of them have a separated detector
But UPwards compression is the type we need for the problem we have.
Pretty sure that is what I said.
At least that is what the vast majority of sites say about it.
And actually it was used by dolby before NY made it popular.
Sidechain compression is NOT NY/UPwards/parallel compression although it has some similarities.
Guarantee that we either need upwards compression or AH gives us an AGC fx on one mike to use.
Why you cant buy mikes with AGC built in is a mystery. This is a common problem with amateurs and over emoters.
If you have another solution to a speaker that goes from very very soft to VERY VERY LOUD VERY fast please let us know.
Riding the faders is not feasible although it helps some, but there are still annoying spots that are too loud or too soft.
Hmm, some thoughts.
First, the only true remedy for such speaker is a good speaker training. There is no technical tool available which can compensate this bad behavior without leaving „annoying spots“ and/or audible disadvantages.
Second, sidechain compression is completely different to Upward or Parallelcompression since sidechain defines to use a different signal for controlling the compressor. All others defines how the compressor works based on any controlling signal. So you can used Upward compression with side chain usage.
As far as I know is Upward compression closer to a downward expander, something I personally miss on A&H consoles.
And last but not least, @BRS: in the past, when we are used to work with analog consoles, it was usual that the channel insert point was either fixed before the channel EQ (A&H GL or ML series for instance) or switchable (E.g. Midas Heritage). So we were used to run channel compressors before the EQ in those days. It might be true that nowadays we are used to run more extreme compression and EQing on digital consoles, and thats the result of the changed order. Nevertheless it would be nice to give us the opportunity to choose.
Yeah. I guess that’s why they have an increasing range of mixers getting more expensive and more complex as you go up. On QU series I definitely don’t think that kind of flexibility is helpful for the target users - that’s why you can’t remap faders to other channels etc.
Hmm, do you know the reason why this is only possible for the show and not for the scene? Is this done by reconfiguration similar to the mone-stereo channel thing on the FPGA?
You cant train the speakers. They are what they are. Some are ours, but some of the worst were special guests.
AGC and UPwards compression would fix the problem.
Sidechain was created to cause confusion in one poor article that tried to explain things.
It is useful for ducking type applications not the problem that NY/UPwards compression addresses.
I would have to check on downwards expander. Not sure what they does.
Choosing would be nice but the cost would limit that to the very high end units.
Qu is very good but not where choice like that makes sense to include.
I would be happy if we could choose AGC and AH gave us an upwards compressor ap.
The newer compression aps let you dial the amount of NY style compression using only one channel to achieve it.
But UPwards compression is the type we need for the problem we have.
WOW…you have given up on that yet! You seem to have forgotten EVERYONE who told that would not fix your problem when you first posted that a year or so ago.
Let me see…In running live sound when packing up at the end of night I have
never thought if only I have had an upwards compressor the event would have been successful.
Maybe the system deployment and operators are your issue…we all told the first time this topic came up as well.
On QU series I definitely don’t think that kind of flexibility is helpful for the target users – that’s why you can’t remap faders to other channels etc.
Actually if your using a stage box as the input source you can patch those inputs to any fader position, as well as the outputs can be patched to any mix source.
