# Compressor before or after reverb?



## maestro2be (Nov 28, 2014)

In terms of strings, is it better to put the compressor after the panning and reverb, or after the panning but before the reverb in the group buss channel?

Thanks!


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 28, 2014)

Depends on whether or not you want the reverb compressed. Sorry, but that's really the best answer. Try both, and see which works better for you.

Cheers.


----------



## Rctec (Nov 28, 2014)

Unless you have an extraordinarily good compressor, don't use it on strings. Why would you?


----------



## givemenoughrope (Nov 28, 2014)

Rctec @ Fri Nov 28 said:


> Unless you have an extraordinarily good compressor, don't use it on strings. Why would you?



To make them louder? Alan Meyerson has been asked this and said (in a round about way) that he uses compression. He even said that it gets used on string reverb, which makes me think that he is compressing in parallel and sends the original signal to reverb which may also get compressed. Maybe I'm guessing or just read incorrectly though. 

I've been using frequency-specific Upward Compression in parallel on some strings and riding all the settings (as if its just part of the sample parameters) and getting some promising results here and there but I'm not ready to commit to that way of working just yet. 

How do you make strings louder without compression then? EQ? Saturation? Re-amp? Limiting (which is compression just like espresso is coffee)? Bc I really have no idea.


----------



## dgburns (Nov 28, 2014)

comps should be about creating movement in the audio,not so much about controlling level imho.Actually,even more specifically about altering the envelope of the audio,which is why they are a treat on percussive things.
the strange thing about daws is that they are so good at allowing you to control level by volume ,very precise volume changes re automation,that controlling level is a done deal.so why use a comp that can possibly destroy the natural shape of the sound?well if you want to mangle the strings,ok,but maybe distortion might be better.anything from clip distortion to flat out throwing up a marshall stack or whatever to get some colour.
I do compress real strings,but only if close mic'd,and through a neve or something that doesn't kill the top end too much like distressors or 1176.but if the question is before or after verb,then ask yourself if you want more room sound or not,because flattening a string sound will bring out more of the background sound if set to a fast release,and that will bring in the room up front.if the room sounds shitty,well.....and if you set the realease slow,then you run into the problem of the low end causing some imbalances to the higher stuff,as low end will hit the detector and cause the sound to suck down.i think it's called intermodulation distortion,and you can hear it on plenty of old bbc orchestra recordings of the 40's etc.mow we have multiband comps,that don't cause this as much,but really,you risk unbalancing the sound if set to compress too strong.
but,really,play around with it and see what you like.just remember that if it's about volume,work the faders and midi cc to get you there first again imho.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 29, 2014)

dgburns @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> comps should be about creating movement in the audio,not so much about controlling level imho.



Not sure what you mean when you say 'movement', but a compressor's purpose is to reduce the dynamic range between the loudest and softest parts of audio signals. 

Cheers.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 29, 2014)

Rctec @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> Unless you have an extraordinarily good compressor, don't use it on strings. Why would you?





givemenoughrope @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> To make them louder? Alan Meyerson has been asked this and said (in a round about way) that he uses compression.



I am sure Alan Meyerson has an extraordinarily good compressor...

Cheers.


----------



## dgburns (Nov 29, 2014)

maybe Kush explains it better then me.check out his UBK video,as this explains it well.trying to use a comp for dynamic control is a fool's errand.If the comp reduction meters are not moving,but are pinned down all the way all the time,it is nothing more then a volume control.the secret to using a comp,good or bad quality comp,is to make the meters"dance" and are always moving,so not staying static .this way you impose an envelope to the audio.Also check out Jack Joseph Puig or Chris Lord Alge videos,as they maybe explain enveloping better then me.Jack J talks about how a comp is used to create audio waveforms that are taylored to have a certain shape,usually with a high point,fading down as the sound rings out,to maintain a consistent shape.They take alot of time to make the attack part work in the context of the tempo of the song,cue whatever.The ability to alter the actual nature of the sound by imposing a "knee" on the sound is what it's all about.This is useful mostly for percussion stuff,but also for accoustic gtr,bass.
I don't think this is all that applicable to strings as an ensemble,personally.

again check out the UBK Kush video as he explains it well.


----------



## wst3 (Nov 29, 2014)

the order of processing has a HUGE effect on the final sound. Placing the compressor before the reverb will sound very different than placing it after. Same goes for EQ and Compressor, EQ and reverb, delay and reverb, etc. Each combination, and order creates a different effect.

The points made about controlling volume with DAW automation vs a compressor are worth consideration. 

In the old days - pre console automation - it was quite common to use a compressor as a means to smooth out the high and low points in a performance. With practice they can be quite effective for that application. I still use a compressor to record acoustic guitar parts for that reason - although these days I often do so non-destructively using a software compressor.

One of my favorite tricks used to be placing a reverb in the sidechain of a compressor... a very cool effect! Not so easily accomplished in a DAW, but with more plug-ins sporting sidechains it could come back!


----------



## Greg (Nov 29, 2014)

Why not both


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 29, 2014)

dgburns @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> maybe Kush explains it better then me.check out his UBK video,as this explains it well.



Got a link? Unless you man this?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkCyM85OUfw

I watched it, and although I am very impressed by the compressor itself, he didn't go into the type of explaining you seem to be on about. Maybe he does elsewhere?



dgburns @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> trying to use a comp for dynamic control is a fool's errand. If the comp reduction meters are not moving,but are pinned down all the way all the time,it is nothing more then a volume control.



Incorrect on both points.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 29, 2014)

Greg @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> Why not both



You_ could_, but if you overdo the compression, you are going to wind up with a bit of weirdness.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Nov 29, 2014)

Here's another way of looking at it.

Compression can do several things, depending on how you use it. Here are some of them, in no particular order. It's more than just a volume fader that works faster than the hand:

- Even out dynamics to create a smooth, even sound;

- Restrict the dynamic range of an individual part (especially a pop vocal) to keep it at the right level relative to other things in the mix;

- Prevent overload, i.e. a soft limiter;

- Change the envelope of a sound, for example Paul McCartney-ish no-attack bass sound - or with strings to emphasize/deemphasize the bow rosin attack. Or just to control the transients;

- Keep a whole mix within the right dynamic range, give the whole mix a smooth sound;

- Pump in rhythm to something that eats up a lot of VU like the bass drum (this is a "vintage" effect);

- Add density by bringing up the lower-level details (either to a mix or to an individual part);

- Combinations of the above, just adding a color.

So if you want your reverb to sound smoother and denser without having individual elements cause it to jump out of control, for example, maybe you'd compress the reverb send.

***
Mr. Rctec, I think the answer is probably that we're dealing with samples here, and then all bets are off.


----------



## dgburns (Nov 29, 2014)

hey Jeff,

http://youtu.be/OWNR0MrYYr4

try at around the 3min mark.It's just a bad exmple,but there are others.Try also the JJP waves videos where he talks about the same concepts.I think this is important because sound shaping using a comp is one of the secret tricks that the majors know.I realize it might sound counter intuitive,but this is a big secret to getting that "big" sound.

Maserati also talks about this enveloping effect.He uses UA ,Neve and Chandler comps,and talks extensively about using them for color,not level control.I also have many hardware comps, and share these guys' approach to comps.

overusing a comp in series or inserted 100 percent wet(not parallel) results in a smaller sound,not a bigger one.And yes,using a comp and having it pinned is nothing more than a volume control.


----------



## gsilbers (Nov 29, 2014)

maestro2be @ Fri Nov 28 said:


> In terms of strings, is it better to put the compressor after the panning and reverb, or after the panning but before the reverb in the group buss channel?
> 
> Thanks!



depends if you want to compress the reverb and make the tail of it longer/more lush. 
or if its just compres the strings for a more uniform performance..."for us, on our professional level" :mrgreen: 

if you want to bring in more the tail or lush-ness then have a buss with reverb then compression and have a slow attach and long release and adjust the threshhold. 
EQ also adds the depth if you need to control freq. but normally verbs come with on board eq. 

if you want to control the strings and reverb only for the early reflections then i would say still have the compression before. you can try after, but again, having it after will change the envelope of your strings and this will change or be exaggerated with compression or molded differelty. so depends on what you are after and also the experiments you can do.


----------



## gsilbers (Nov 29, 2014)

givemenoughrope @ Fri Nov 28 said:


> Rctec @ Fri Nov 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you have an extraordinarily good compressor, don't use it on strings. Why would you?
> ...



theres never an easy answer in this field. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPNWAG7rzzA


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 30, 2014)

dgburns @ Sun Nov 30 said:


> hey Jeff,
> 
> http://youtu.be/OWNR0MrYYr4
> 
> try at around the 3min mark.It's just a bad exmple,but there are others.Try also the JJP waves videos where he talks about the same concepts.I think this is important because sound shaping using a comp is one of the secret tricks that the majors know.I realize it might sound counter intuitive,but this is a big secret to getting that "big" sound.



Hey man

Ok, so he is talking about this "pushing and pulling" that he gets from using compressors. Ok, fine. But how is the compressor doing that? By reducing the dynamic range between the loudest and softest parts. Which goes back to what I said earlier. 

And yes, you can absolutely help shape the sound of something with a compressor. 

Cheers.


----------



## JacquesMathias (Nov 30, 2014)

maestro2be @ Sat Nov 29 said:


> In terms of strings, is it better to put the compressor after the panning and reverb, or after the panning but before the reverb in the group buss channel?
> 
> Thanks!



Yeah, sometimes, I think it's a good idea to compress a Reverb bus.
Why? 
I'll have more reverb in pp passages and less reverb in ff passages. Of course, one can just print the reverb and automate it, or automate the FX channel, or anything else. Millions of ways of doing...

Also, tweaking compressor's attack/release will make the reverb respond in ways it wouldn't without a compressor. That is why I think you need to know exactly what you want from this technique, otherwise you'll ruin your reverb :lol: 

Also, a multi-band compressor is useful for eliminating specific frequencies that might be bothering you --> in ff passages. Either on your reverb bus or the strings buss. 

maestro2be, do you watch Pensado's Place on YouTube? Great place to learn.

My 2 cents anyway.
J


----------



## Lupez (Dec 1, 2014)

As far as I know Meyerson uses saturation on strings.


----------



## maestro2be (Dec 2, 2014)

Thank you all for so many great answers. I know there is no real "right" choice and my ears are most important but maybe I should have said what I am trying to achieve.

I want my strings to come closer to me, in my face much larger than life. The problem I find is that as I increase the volume to make them come closer, they hurt much more (especially LASS and VSL) dry samples.

I am trying to keep that dry sample quality, but when I apply a reverb it washes them and pushes them back to far. If I turn down the volume, it pushes them back. If I EQ them, it pushes them back. It seems like a never winning battle to just take that pristine VSL sample, and smear it across the stage without losing quality from it.

So while trying anything (guessing really as I am no pro at this) I tried putting on a compressor with a preset from VSL and it brought them closer to my face but didn't bring the pain and I didn't really notice any squashing of them.

This is what triggered the question. I am working daily trying to get this right but not there yet. This field is so enormous and full of hidden information that it seems impossible to filter through it all at times to find what you need. Especially when you are more of a hobbyist with no serious deadlines.


----------



## RiffWraith (Dec 2, 2014)

have a look here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwsvL3OiEFo

Should help a bit.


----------



## Dan Mott (Dec 2, 2014)

I still don't see why you would even compress string samples.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 2, 2014)

For one or more of the reasons I listed, Dan.


----------



## Hannes_F (Dec 3, 2014)

Interesting thread. What would be a good (enough) compressor for this?


----------



## RiffWraith (Dec 3, 2014)

Hannes_F @ Wed Dec 03 said:


> Interesting thread. What would be a good (enough) compressor for this?



Personally, I am not a fan of sw compressors; they can work here and there, but they don't do what hw comps do.

Any really good hw comp would work well here - assuming you know how to properly use it. :idea: 

Cheers.


----------



## Markus S (Dec 3, 2014)

If you are compressing a signal, in short, you are making the quiet sound louder, so you are reducing the overall dynamics of the reverb tail.

Use compression *before* the reverb to keep the natural decay/color of the room/reverb

Use compression *after* the decay to create specific, sound design-ish effects with the reverb tail (the reverb tail gets compressed and dynamics altered)


----------

