ASK US ANYTHING [NO SUBJECT IS STUPID / ALL QUESTIONS WELCOMED]

[over9000]

i have another problem/question regarding this:
Whats the best way to get rid of too big transients on kicks?
or on drums eg lowmidrange percussions.
cant really get it right with compressors, it never really reduces the transient the way i do it.
or do i need a compressor with really fast attack? FET compressors? dont have any of those..

[dubdub]

i have another problem/question regarding this:
Whats the best way to get rid of too big transients on kicks?
or on drums eg lowmidrange percussions.
cant really get it right with compressors, it never really reduces the transient the way i do it.
or do i need a compressor with really fast attack? FET compressors? dont have any of those..

Regular Compressor need time to react to the signal and will never catch the entire sound.

One way is to load it into a sample editor use one of those sidechain volume things like Shaperbox and take off the transient manually.

You can also use a compressor with lookahead time, which will catch the entire transient.

Limiters and clippers can also work sometimes.

[Lost to the Void]

i have another problem/question regarding this:
Whats the best way to get rid of too big transients on kicks?
or on drums eg lowmidrange percussions.
cant really get it right with compressors, it never really reduces the transient the way i do it.
or do i need a compressor with really fast attack? FET compressors? dont have any of those..

In short. Clippers, or clipping.
And good metering.
A good quality clipper prior to compression or limiting on your kick/drums will give you more control, and will also allow the compresdor/limiter to do its job properly.
Some compressors have clippers in them too, and you can clip in various ways, ie clipping converters, or analogue clipping.
I prefer to use a dedicated clipper.

[ndrf]

That sounds super convoluted and overly processed way of doing what can be done with one compressor.

Thought so. Figured out that I needed more low-end material in my source material, which reduced the need for crazy amounts of processing. Thanks for the reality check .

Tried a lot of compressors (Ableton stuck, glue, waves SSL, TDR Kotelnikov, Limiter no.6 etc.), but I can not get the results im after transient wise as with the trans-x -> limiter trick.

That`s not the compressors fault, without trying to be spiky, that`s a skillset problem.
Your average 909 kick has plenty of transient, a simple stock compressor can enhance this to almost ridiculous levels. If you are multiply going from transient shaper to limiter, you are adding distortion and harmonics, not transient, as all you are doing with your method is adding and removing transients over and over again.

Thank's a lot. Figured it out with the stock compressor, some gentle clipping and saturation. So no, wasn't a skillset problem in terms of using compressors. More like a problem of perspective on how to approach the transient in the kick-drum. Nevertheless you made me achieve my goal.

[mervv]

Is there any reason to avoid parallel saturating an entire mix? I was recently playing around and put a new saturation plugin on a return channel. I then sent all of the channels to it, cranked the settings, and turned down the return channel until it was barely audible, but seemed to be contributing something nice to the mix. It made the whole mix sound beefy and even seemed to enhance the front-to-back space of the mix, although it did leave things sounding a tad overcooked.

I know that if it sounds good then it is good, but I wondered if there was any reason that I should avoid such a brute-force tactic. Would something like this annoy a mastering engineer, for example? Or is there potential for it to introduce phasing problems?

[buffered]

Is there any reason to avoid parallel saturating an entire mix? I was recently playing around and put a new saturation plugin on a return channel. I then sent all of the channels to it, cranked the settings, and turned down the return channel until it was barely audible, but seemed to be contributing something nice to the mix. It made the whole mix sound beefy and even seemed to enhance the front-to-back space of the mix, although it did leave things sounding a tad overcooked.

I know that if it sounds good then it is good, but I wondered if there was any reason that I should avoid such a brute-force tactic. Would something like this annoy a mastering engineer, for example? Or is there potential for it to introduce phasing problems?

It is a common technique. Just dial it in till it sounds good. Take a 20 min break, come back and listen again. If it doesn't sound strange, it's good.

[Lost to the Void]

Is there any reason to avoid parallel saturating an entire mix? I was recently playing around and put a new saturation plugin on a return channel. I then sent all of the channels to it, cranked the settings, and turned down the return channel until it was barely audible, but seemed to be contributing something nice to the mix. It made the whole mix sound beefy and even seemed to enhance the front-to-back space of the mix, although it did leave things sounding a tad overcooked.

I know that if it sounds good then it is good, but I wondered if there was any reason that I should avoid such a brute-force tactic. Would something like this annoy a mastering engineer, for example? Or is there potential for it to introduce phasing problems?

Using sends and returns to do it could introduce phase issues, I would do it on the master buss and set your wet/dry there.
You could also get a similar but less damaging effect using upward compression on the mix, dialing it in so it is a littler over the top, and then using wet/dry to take it down to a subtle level.
Saturation can really clag up a mix, especially in the low mids, so be careful.

[gedda]

What exactly is going on in these omega transformers plugins? What's under the hood?

https://thehouseofkush.com/products/omega-bundle

It sounds like eq > compression> eq > maybe more compression, then eq. I just stick crap inside of those plugins (N, and A are my favorites) and it sounds good all of a sudden. It feels like I'm using them as crutches, but they just sound so damn good. I want to know what's under the hood so I can just add more flexibility to my game. Thanks.

[mervv]

Using sends and returns to do it could introduce phase issues, I would do it on the master buss and set your wet/dry there.

I'm curious, can using sends and returns introduce phase issues because of possible latency? Or is it some other reason?

Also thanks for the upwards compression tip. I've never really used it besides occasionally playing around with Ableton's multiband dynamics. I will try it out to that end on the mix buss.

[Lost to the Void]

What exactly is going on in these omega transformers plugins? What's under the hood?

https://thehouseofkush.com/products/omega-bundle

It sounds like eq > compression> eq > maybe more compression, then eq. I just stick crap inside of those plugins (N, and A are my favorites) and it sounds good all of a sudden. It feels like I'm using them as crutches, but they just sound so damn good. I want to know what's under the hood so I can just add more flexibility to my game. Thanks.

They have almost no effect on dynamics until they start clipping. It's all colour (saturation)

[Lost to the Void]

Using sends and returns to do it could introduce phase issues, I would do it on the master buss and set your wet/dry there.

I'm curious, can using sends and returns introduce phase issues because of possible latency? Or is it some other reason?

Also thanks for the upwards compression tip. I've never really used it besides occasionally playing around with Ableton's multiband dynamics. I will try it out to that end on the mix buss.

It can yeah, and you are adding in another layer of summing. Even with latency correction it still can hit. Of course you can add channel delay etc.
The idea of sends and returns came from the limitations of the mixing desk and outboard creating the need to have one fx unit serve a number of channels. You no longer need to do that in vst land.
I really very rarely use sends and returns unless I want to specifically do something to the signal that requires the fx being on a separate buss for processing. Channels and groups/busses all the way, it seems less troublesome that way, in mix terms, for me.

[subvers^v]

Man... summing is not something I ever fully considered with sends and it's so basic and fundamental now that you point it out. Thanks for explaining. I get caught up with the whole phase thing, it's a bit like a Dali painting to me, trying to think about shit inside-out!

[mervv]

Yeah, thanks for the explanation. I've actually gravitated more to using sends over time, because I like the cohesion that it can bring with reverbs, delays, and things like that. It now makes sense why you wouldn't want to use them for other kinds of processing.

[Mslwte]

what's the right way to check my mix in mono? So far all I've done is whack a utility plug at the end master chain and set it to mono. Is this correct way or do I need to consider something else?

[Ben Kohonays]

what's the right way to check my mix in mono? So far all I've done is whack a utility plug at the end master chain and set it to mono. Is this correct way or do I need to consider something else?

I use the free DFX Monomaker that way and have never (to my knowledge) had any problems.

[Mslwte]

what's the right way to check my mix in mono? So far all I've done is whack a utility plug at the end master chain and set it to mono. Is this correct way or do I need to consider something else?

I use the free DFX Monomaker that way and have never (to my knowledge) had any problems.

Thanks Ben. I downloaded it and had a play. Unfortunately I had a couple of crashes while moving the sliders back and forth quickly. I guess there isn't much science behind mono-ing a mix. Good news is my mix i checked sounded good in mono.

[Lost to the Void]

Utility should be fine for mono test. I hit a button on my monitor controller but it's the same thing.

[Be without]

This is a stupid question but here we go.

Can distortion be used as a send effect or can send effects only be delays or reverbs which can be set 100 percent wet so no dry signal is mixed back in?

[speen]

Simple answer: if it sounds good it is good.

Technical answer will follow once someone with actual knowledge of the stuff comes online

[Lost to the Void]

This is a stupid question but here we go.

Can distortion be used as a send effect or can send effects only be delays or reverbs which can be set 100 percent wet so no dry signal is mixed back in?

As Speen said, if it sounds good.
I don't see any issues in particular with using distortion that way. You may or may not have some phase issues. But if you are using a distortion as a common tonal thing for the track, it makes sense to use sends in some circumstances.
So. Yeah, if it works for you, keep doing it.

I rarely use sends for anything personally.