Favorite settings for vocals on 1176
Rob Adelman
work best for most folks as a good starting point. Looking for that in
your face vocal with good consistancy.
I thought I had it down but I am still not satisfied with my result on
tape. Maybe I just need singing lessons?
Rob Adelman
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
proaudio101
ratio, and I have found that I am not happy with just "one" time. IMO,
it needs to be placed on a little bit for tracking and a little bit for
mix. That way the levels to tape are pretty solid, and you can
concentrate on the mix placement settings after. Usually with me it
ends up getting a little faster more "persussive" (faster attack and
faster release at 8:1) and then slower/med attack, med/fast release(ya
know 10 o'clock 2 o'clock) for mix...usually 8:1, sometimes 4:1.
In article <955170$qnb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Ted Spencer
that were shown to me by the other engineers at the Hit Factory back then:
Ratio: 4:1
Attack: fully CW
Release: 5
Output gain is usually around -15 for a +4 chain. Use the input gain to control
compression amount (of course you know this). I generally want to see -3 to -5
average compression on average peaks with the meter not deflecting at all about
half of the time and maximum GR of about -10 on the loudest peaks. This should
give you a relatively "hi-fi" result. I generally reserve the "set to stun"
concept (if ever) for the mix, preferring to get a clean intial recording.
Your problems may be due to excess compression at the recording point
especially since you are singing and are thus not able to clearly hear the
results as you do so.
You have a world class compressor there. It should serve you very well.
> Rob Adelman <r...@skihappy.com> wrote:
>> I know it is very subjective, but it would help to know what seems to
>> work best for most folks as a good starting point. Looking for that in
>> your face vocal with good consistancy.
>>
>> I thought I had it down but I am still not satisfied with my result on
>> tape. Maybe I just need singing lessons?
Ted Spencer, NYC
"The R.A.F would never allow chickens at the controls of complex aircraft!"
From "Chicken Run"
Mixerman
if I'm looking for a slower attack, I'll choose another limiter. The
release setting often times is fast too, but I'll play with that setting a
bit.
Mixerman
"Rob Adelman" <r...@skihappy.com> wrote in message
news:955170$qnb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Rob Adelman
comp. attack on 2, and release on 3).
I will try your settings tonight!
Rob Adelman
In article <20010129210817...@ng-cg1.aol.com>,
LS1productions
work best for most folks as a good starting point. Looking for that in
your face vocal with good consistancy. >>
This is my absolute favorite vocal compressor. I like to really push it, most
compressors I will only knock off a few db on the peaks and go harder in the
mix, but with this boy I like to slam it to tape and then slam it to the mix.
I would put the attack as fast as can be, and release around medium, 8:1, and
then push it until the meter is peaking at -15 around. If you have access to
another one, two 1176s with first one on fastest attack and second on a
SLIGHTLY slower attack, first 8:1, second 4:1, both knocking down 10dbs, you'll
have a silky, smooth, in your face vocal (assuming the rest of your chain is up
to mark).
Jeff Jasper
>If you have access to
>another one, two 1176s with first one on fastest attack and second on a
>SLIGHTLY slower attack, first 8:1, second 4:1, both knocking down 10dbs,
>you'll
>have a silky, smooth, in your face vocal (assuming the rest of your chain is
>up to mark).
I too have done the double-compressor routine, albeit with somewhat lower
ratios (6:1 then 2:1), and while it sounded great in the studio, it sounded
like doggy-do on the air.
To each his own, of course, and that may be just your cup-o-tea sometimes. But
I suspect that after you have compression on...
the mic
the mix
the mastering, and
The Orban....
you might just have enough. YMMV. Just a thought. Remember, it's not just
*your* chain.
Jeff Jasper
Resident Party Pooper
Results Video, El Paso TX
Ty Ford
>I know it is very subjective, but it would help to know what seems to
>work best for most folks as a good starting point. Looking for that in
>your face vocal with good consistancy.
>
>I thought I had it down but I am still not satisfied with my result on
>tape. Maybe I just need singing lessons?
>
>
>Rob Adelman
Rob,
I know I do.
A friend did a search recently on "1176" and found at least 3 different
rebirths of the box. Can we expect them all to sound the same........the
same as the original in good working condition? Inquiring minds want to know.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty Ford's audio equipment reviews and V/O sound files can be accessed at
http://www.jagunet.com/~tford
LS1productions
ratios (6:1 then 2:1), and while it sounded great in the studio, it sounded
like doggy-do on the air. >>
Well when you do the two 76 thing it becomes an effect rather then a vocal
leveler, as for the air thing, if you follow it up with a nice touch of eq, you
can compensate a little for the "sucked in" effect.. I find that the mix buss
compressor will be the guy that determines if its going to sound like doggy do
on the radio. When I did my first mix on an SSL, I got so trigger happy with
the quad compressor, it sounded so good, then a few months later the band
called me and told me the song was airing on some college stations, and sounded
like crap. Lesson learned.
Ted Spencer
>When I did my first mix on an SSL, I got so trigger happy with
>the quad compressor, it sounded so good, then a few months later the band
>called me and told me the song was airing on some college stations, and
>sounded
>like crap. Lesson learned.
The key lesson here should be level matched a/b comparisons. When you compress
a signal and apply make-up gain it gets louder, and louder sounds "better" all
else being equal. If you had compared the compressor's output to the
uncompressed signal at matched levels you probably would have caught the
problem right there in the control room before the radio embarrassment could
happen.
Innermusic
<B033C25B31542096.283CC9A9...@lp.airnews.net>,
this particular unit do not seem to make as huge a difference as the
numbers would imply. Should I be listening for something more subtle?
--
Steve Holt
INNER MUSIC
http://www.inner-music.com/
Ted Spencer
>this particular unit do not seem to make as huge a difference as the
>numbers would imply. Should I be listening for something more subtle?
>--
>Steve Holt
You probably already know this but the ratio means the number of db over the
compression threshold a peak would have to be to result in a 1 db level
increase. So 4:1 means a 4 db peak above threshold results in a 1db peak. 8:1
means an 8 db peak above threshold is required to produce a 1 db level
increase, and so on. This should be clearly audible as a level difference
compared to the uncompressed signal.
Two other points:
The 1176/1178 are very transparent units compression-wise (they have an overall
sonic color unrelated to the compression though) which is one of the reasons
why they're so well regarded. If you're used to using lesser units that have
more audible side effects you might think your 1178 isn't doing as much. It is
- it just sounds less obvious.
Lastly 1176s that have been abused (and unfortunately I've seen many like this
in major studios) get wacky with the detection circuit or something and show
very erratic meter ballistics when displaying gain reduction. They're very hard
to use as the meter will show no GR and then suddenly go whacking down to the
bottom pin on a peak that would not seem to justify that much GR. I don't
really know the reason for this misbehavior and I hope it's not the problem
with your unit.
I've always been curious about this particular problem though. Does anyone have
an explanation for it? Like what breaks inside that causes this and what is
needed for the fix?
LS1productions
>When I did my first mix on an SSL, I got so trigger happy with
>the quad compressor, it sounded so good, then a few months later the band
>called me and told me the song was airing on some college stations, and
>sounded
>like crap. Lesson learned.
The key lesson here should be level matched a/b comparisons. When you compress
a signal and apply make-up gain it gets louder, and louder sounds "better" all
else being equal. If you had compared the compressor's output to the
uncompressed signal at matched levels you probably would have caught the
problem right there in the control room before the radio embarrassment could
happen.
Ted Spencer, NYC
>>
Of course you're absolutely right, that is exactly what I did after that
incident, this happened years ago, I wasn't even of legal drinking age...
Everyone has to remember the first time they tweaked an SSL, that damn quad
comp is just so damn tempting... Like I said, lesson learned.
Jeff Jasper
>that damn quad
>comp is just so damn tempting...
Yes, with fairly heavy compression twice thru a pair of 1176s it's bound to
turn into an effect. And not that that's a bad thing either, I'm sure it
sounds awesome. Depending on the program material of course, I love mammoth
compression.
I was very surprised when it came back bad on the radio on the series of
contest promos I tried it on. Of course, I was trying it on a compressor far
cheaper than an 1176, and sure as hell not thru anything as fine as an SSL.
The DBX Type 1 to cart probably didn't help it either. Nor the Optimod set to
maximum squash.
Now that more care is being taken on your stereo bus compression, I'm glad it's
playing back right for you! I'll certainly keep that in mind, and thanks for
the advice!
Take care,
Jeff Jasper
pe...@3-cities.com
> Ratio: 4:1
> Attack: fully CW
> Release: 5
Hi Ted,
For us non 1176 owners, attack fully clockwise means slowest attack?
And release at 5 means medium? Just curious!
Thanx,
Perry
Rob Adelman
This is my first time with an 1176 and I don't have a manual, and in
fact, one of the problems I was having was that I had it BACKWARDS!
I thought I had dialed in the shortest attack when in fact I had been
using the longest. DOH!!
It is sounding much better now, thanks guys.
Rob Adelman
In article <95825v$eis$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Ted Spencer
>And release at 5 means medium? Just curious!
>
>Thanx,
>Perry
Fully clockwise is fastest. The scale goes to 7 so 5 is on the fast side too,
about 2 o'clock on the knob.
Tim Farrant
I have always used ATTACK full CW, RELEASE full CW (ensures no pumping)
RATIO 20:1, for that "in yer face" vocal sound. With a singer that has
large dynamic range, the VU meter (in GR) can sometimes be pinned -20VU.
For less "clampage", I would generally use a lower ratio. Hope this
helps.
Tim Farrant.
--
Buzz Audio. New Zealand.
http://www.buzzaudio.co.nz
mailto:buzz...@xtra.co.nz
pe...@3-cities.com
> Fully clockwise is fastest. The scale goes to 7 so 5 is on the fast
side too, about 2 o'clock on the knob.
Hey Ted,
Ah Ha, fully clockwise is fastest and the scale goes to 7....I like
that! I was going to say your setting makes sense if fully clockwise
was fastest and the scale only went to 7! Ok I'm lieing, but the
settings did seem odd.
Tommy B.
"Innermusic" <simpli...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:956r9s$a37$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...