# Parallel Compression - Orchestral Music



## Mark Stothard (Aug 22, 2021)

Hi,

Sorry if this has been posted already, but I couldn’t find an answers to this.

I use cubase and regarding parallel compression for orchestral music, is it best to send individual group tracks to individual FX tracks (that has the compressor), or send all group tracks to one FX track with the compressor? Or even send each individual instruments to their own FX track?

Also, are there any good tutorials on how to do this properly with orchestral music?

Thanks


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 22, 2021)

What are you trying to accomplish?

Parallel compression is normally an effect used for adding slam while maintaining some dynamics. Compressing the whole mix to add density and smooth it out, sure, but parallel compression for orchestral tracks...

...well, I don't want to say it's unusual, because16 people will respond that they do it all the time. But it seems unusual.


----------



## Mark Stothard (Aug 22, 2021)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What are you trying to accomplish?
> 
> Parallel compression is normally an effect used for adding slam while maintaining some dynamics. Compressing the whole mix to add density and smooth it out, sure, but parallel compression for orchestral tracks...
> 
> ...well, I don't want to say it's unusual, because16 people will respond that they do it all the time. But it seems unusual.


Hi Nick,

I’ve just discovered Anne-Kathrin Dern on YouTube and in the link below at 11:18, she talks about it and how it creates a bigger sound. Although Anne is fantastic at explaining everything, I couldn’t get my head around it.


----------



## kgdrum (Aug 22, 2021)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What are you trying to accomplish?
> 
> Parallel compression is normally an effect used for adding slam while maintaining some dynamics. Compressing the whole mix to add density and smooth it out, sure, but parallel compression for orchestral tracks...
> 
> ...well, I don't want to say it's unusual, because16 people will respond that they do it all the time. But it seems unusual.


+1 Agree
I generally associate Parallel Compression with Drum and Bass in Rock,Funk and Pop music. The idea of using Parallel Compression with Orchestral based music would never have entered my mind. This looks like an interesting concept & video from Anne-Kathrin Dern, I will definitely check it out.
Thanks


----------



## CATDAD (Aug 22, 2021)

This is definitely a good situation for experimentation I think, as they would all certainly produce different results. Having them in a large group could be harder to control if your group has a lot of low-end and the compressor doesn't have a sidechain signal filter. 

Doing them in a group would help "unify" the group to sound as one, which is something you might want, or may also NOT want, depending on the dynamics you're trying to achieve.

If you wanted to do them individually just to draw out some extra oomph and texture, you could also put the compressor directly on the instrument track if your compressor has a dry/wet function and use that to dial in a small amount of the compressed signal.

The application of something like this could be useful if you were say, going for a sound more akin to the Metropolis Ark style but didn't necessarily have that kind of sound on-demand. Or if your track is a hybrid with orchestral elements, and you want to be sure your orchestral sounds carry a heavy weight to compete with something like Damage 2, or some big synths.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 22, 2021)

Mark Stothard said:


> I couldn’t get my head around it.


The setup is very simple.

Instead of running the entire signal through the compressor the way you normally do with signal processors, you treat it as an effect just like reverb or delay. You're mixing the compressed signal back in with the "dry" one.

So you could put the compressor on an aux channel and use a send from the main channel strip to feed it. It's a separate submix (or infdividual channel) going to the compressor.

There are other ways to set it up, in fact some compressors these days have a built-in wet/dry control for just this application. 15 years ago that would have been very unusual.


----------



## jcrosby (Aug 22, 2021)

I actually do compress my orchestra this way. I don't do it to create a slammed effect at all, I set the compressor as I normally would for compressing orchestral instruments, but ease the mix back in order to let some of the original dynamics slip through.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Aug 22, 2021)

While I don't make orchestral music, parallel compression isn't about adding slam, it's about adding control of dynamics in a way that easily allows said control because it's easier to blend. I'd think this would be common, since you don't just want to slap a compressor on some violins unless maybe trying to make them fade into the background a bit as being less dynamic.

Many compressors let you use a mix knob, but I'd think it easiest to do it as a send, instead.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Aug 23, 2021)

Here is my contribution to the topic

*Compression & classical music*
In general, on the subject of compression and classical music, one must know that there is everything from absolute opponents to proponents.
The opponents may be right to a certain extent when it comes to recording a solo instrument or perhaps a quartet. If they had to prepare a recording of a symphony orchestra together with a soloist in such a way that the recording could be heard normally in the living room (as we are used to), then I don't know how you could do that without any compression. Well, you could maybe make a recording far far away from the orchestra... but that's just not how we are used to professional recordings sounding... So much for compression in classical music as I see it. 

*Parallel compression... *
...was considered THE compression for classical music for a long time, because it does not cut the loud peaks, but raises the quiet parts of the music. At the time of analogue technology and the vinyl records, this was a way of getting away from the dreaded background noise (vinyl & tape & amplifiers &...). Although quiet passages were played louder with parallel compression, this was not particularly disturbing because we listen with our brains and not with the dynamics meter. Fortunately, our brain also recognises from the sound of an instrument whether it is playing softly or not. If this is not extremely exaggerated, we perceive loud and soft playing even without the original dynamics (volume).
So much for the theory of parallel-compression and classical music.

Today, noise in recordings is only a minor issue. But what is still an issue, for example, is how to stage solo instruments well next to large orchestras. Personally, I often use parallel compression. For example, the quiet parts in a piano concerto are raised by the piano to such an extent that the piano stands out a little better from the orchestra. Especially with a piano, you can't brighten up the sound at will, because actually it also gets darker and darker the quieter the piano plays. Well, fortunately there is the possibility of parallel compression.
Now, one could argue that the piano sound could be turned up a little louder in quiet passages. Yes, but... With parallel compression, the sound also becomes denser and is generally more effective than with "making it louder". 

All the best
Beat


----------



## GNP (Aug 23, 2021)

kgdrum said:


> +1 Agree
> I generally associate Parallel Compression with Drum and Bass in Rock,Funk and Pop music. The idea of using Parallel Compression with Orchestral based music would never have entered my mind. This looks like an interesting concept & video from Anne-Kathrin Dern, I will definitely check it out.
> Thanks


Yes, same here.

Actually, it depends on what you're looking to make a "bigger sound" out of. If you have no clue, then I suggest it's best to stay away from it. I once tried parallel compressions on percussion against my orchestral stem, and it was a disaster. I thought I wanted to have the "biggest percussion ever" like a fuckin noob, but I was wrong. The truth is in mixing, the little things you care about makes the biggest difference. If your percussion is "heard" enough, leave it. You only engage special techniques like parallel compression if you REALLY need to up the levels of a certain thing. But if they're okay alongside your orchestral elements, best is to use things like subtle manual volume.


----------



## Stephen Limbaugh (Aug 23, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> but raises the quiet parts of the music.


This is why I have done it! Cool! Didn’t know that it was common though 🤙🏻


----------



## FireGS (Aug 23, 2021)

Think of it like wet/dry for reverb. 100% wet is 100% of whatever compression settings you've chosen are applied. 100% dry is 0% of the compression settings you've applied. Mixing the two gives you a blend of the two sounds in parallel with each other.

Time to opine; Parallel compression is simply another way to apply compression in a mix.

The more I learn and experiment with sound processing in general, the less I'm finding that the holy rules of "genre-specific" techniques apply. Simply learning more about compression, EQ, dynamics, limiting, gates, expanders, harmonic distortion/saturation, stereo imaging/mono compatibility, etc, outside of the genre you're working in already becomes a huge boon to your understanding of how to work with audio and sound in general.

I find myself learning new things from death metal mixing artists to rap and hip-hop recording engineers to location sound artists, and back to classic rock band mixing tips -- and it all still adds to my work in classical/orchestral work because the tools are (more or less) the same across the genres. It's just how you apply those tools to your work that makes the difference.

YMMV ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## A.Dern (Aug 27, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> Here is my contribution to the topic
> 
> *Compression & classical music*
> In general, on the subject of compression and classical music, one must know that there is everything from absolute opponents to proponents.
> ...



THIS! Way better explanation and background than I gave in my video.


----------



## A.Dern (Aug 27, 2021)

FireGS said:


> Think of it like wet/dry for reverb. 100% wet is 100% of whatever compression settings you've chosen are applied. 100% dry is 0% of the compression settings you've applied. Mixing the two gives you a blend of the two sounds in parallel with each other.
> 
> Time to opine; Parallel compression is simply another way to apply compression in a mix.
> 
> ...



Also this! "Genre-specific" is such a tricky thing when it comes to film music because it taps into any genre it needs at all times. On one score I might use techniques I learned from a pop-rock engineer, on another score I might use techniques I saw done on classical music. And on yet another I might use both at the same time. Film music transcends the rules of any genre and bends it so the more techniques one knows, the more creative one can get.


----------



## Mark Stothard (Aug 27, 2021)

Thanks for all the information and insight guys and sorry for the late reply (been crazy busy with work). I think I understand it much better now and will be experimenting on my days off.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 28, 2021)

I missed Beat's post, which has a lot of good info, especially the part about density. It's not a secret, but I get the impression that that's an aspect of compression that many people don't pay attention to - i.e. compression raises the floor, it doesn't just lower the ceiling.

But the second quote is news to me - not that I'm disagreeing.



Beat Kaufmann said:


> If they had to prepare a recording of a symphony orchestra together with a soloist in such a way that the recording could be heard normally in the living room (as we are used to), then I don't know how you could do that without any compression. Well, you could maybe make a recording far far away from the orchestra... but that's just not how we are used to professional recordings sounding... So much for compression in classical music as I see it.


No question, it would be very hard to fit an orchestra - or most pop singers, for that matter - into the dynamic range of an analog recording without it.





> *Parallel compression...*





> ...was considered THE compression for classical music for a long time, because it does not cut the loud peaks, but raises the quiet parts of the music. At the time of analogue technology and the vinyl records, this was a way of getting away from the dreaded background noise (vinyl & tape & amplifiers &...). Although quiet passages were played louder with parallel compression, this was not particularly disturbing because we listen with our brains and not with the dynamics meter. Fortunately, our brain also recognises from the sound of an instrument whether it is playing softly or not. If this is not extremely exaggerated, we perceive loud and soft playing even without the original dynamics (volume).
> So much for the theory of parallel-compression and classical music.



I've never been a classical mastering engineer, so again, I'm certainly not disagreeing, but the first I heard of *parallel* compression was when the "New York" drum sound became popular in the '90s. Compressors and limiters were always considered signal processors, meaning they were used inline.


----------



## Dietz (Aug 28, 2021)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> the first I heard of *parallel* compression was when the "New York" drum sound became popular in the '90s. Compressors and limiters were always considered signal processors, meaning they were used inline.


The professor who influenced me most during my audio engineering studies has been working as a sound engineer for Philips, Deutsche Grammphon and the like since the late 1950s. He explained to my co-eds and me in the early 80s already how the technique of parallel compression has become the standard procedure, especially during recordings for broadcasting companies. 

BTW: Another popular "Tonmeister"-technique was to manually ride the gain pre-mixbus insert (read: the Fairchild compressor) to always stay in its sweet spot. Yes, while reading the score.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Aug 28, 2021)

A.Dern said:


> THIS! Way better explanation and background than I gave in my video.


Thank you for this nice feedback, dear Anne-Kathrin. 
As a fossil in the mixer family, I've been through many technologies (I bought my first synthesizer, a Roland SH7, in 1975). So logically a lot of knowledge accumulated in all that time. It's nice that "getting older" doesn't only have disadvantages, isn't it? 

Thanks for all your contributions and videos. They are obviously inspiration and pleasure for many.
Keep it up and good luck!

Beat Kaufmann


----------



## Faruh Al-Baghdadi (Sep 5, 2021)

I would also add a few points, hope that helps or at least entertaining 💀 

1)Remember that parallel compression is often used with automation, so, used wisely, it's another expression tool. For doing this make sure you have enough headroom. It can by applied on any level - per track, per (sub)group, per mix(during "mastering" and/or on master channel). Probably it is a good idea to pick up appropriate processor for every level. For example, for tracks I would use simple and clean compressor(believe it or not, but often your standard DAW compressor would be enough; the king of "clean" compressors is probably DMG Compassion - if you want something more comprehensive); for (sub)groups I would use either some classic heavily coloring compressors(like LA2A) or multiband compression(these days it is no longer a problem as there are some greats tools, for convinience let's stick to one developer and use DMG Multiplicity as example of such a tool), it's also relatively common to use two compressors in chain, where mixing engineer decides functions by one way or another(for example, first one is clean and controls dynemic changes with automation, and the second one is coloring compressor; they can be swaped for different effect); and for our "whole mix" situation I wouldn't go with anything but good, clean and precise multiband(Multiplicity will fit well for this task as well). 
In most cases people automate only one parameter - the level of wet/send signal. Sometimes, purely for creative reasons, people can automate other parameters. 

2)It's worth considering "compression" as broad as possible. This way we will see that, for example, de-esser is nothing but specific compression of chosen frequency range and of specific part of the signal - sibilants. It means that we can try to use de-esser in place of parallel compressor for hi end part of the mix, as it'll create a much softer result, while for low end we can create a copy of the de-esser, but with broad band or with different frequency range. 

3)We also can consider all dynamic processors for this purpose, and not just compressors and their MB versions. For example, distortion/saturation is also a form of compression. Don't forget about transient shapers as well. 

4)Finally, while we are at the subject of Multiplicity. This plugin separates signal into two parts - transients and dynamic(and it also has transient sharper), processes them independently, and then mix them back together. Inside this plugin we have dedicated controls for both sections. And what's more important, unlike previous attempts to create MB dynamic tool, modern versions like MC don't ruin the sound and work very transparent. 

I'm very faaaaaar from being an expert in the subject and in the process of learning and trying all those details, but as you see these things have huge potential and worth experimenting with for a while, especially with modern abilities we acquired with all those DAWs, plugins and so on.


----------



## Dietz (Sep 5, 2021)

Faruh Al-Baghdadi said:


> for (sub)groups I would use either some classic heavily coloring compressors(like LA2A) or *multiband compression*


When using a MB compressor in the parallel bus, it is highly advisable to make sure that it either uses linear-phase crossovers, or to use the same MB with a ratio of 1:1 in the actually uncompressed bus as well. Otherwise there is a risk of severe phasing problems.


----------



## Faruh Al-Baghdadi (Sep 5, 2021)

Dietz said:


> When using a MB compressor in the parallel bus, it is highly advisable to make sure that it either uses linear-phase crossovers, or to use the same MB with a ratio of 1:1 in the actually uncompressed bus as well. Otherwise there is a risk of severe phasing problems.


Yep. Good MB compression, as I understand, practically impossible without lpc and this is exactly how that Multiplicity plugin works.


----------



## SlHarder (Sep 5, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> But what is still an issue, for example, is how to stage solo instruments well next to large orchestras.


This thread sent me back to a 6 month old abandoned project mix that just wouldn't come together for me. I now think I Heart NY vst parallel compressor may get me to the finish line.

I Heart NY vst was a freebie this summer on PlubBou. It has a simple interface on top of some complex processing. Grab it if you see it for free.

A review quote that sums up my use experience so far, "And what I came to love about it is that you know within 30 seconds whether it's the right tool for the job. When it doesn't work, there's no temptation to think 'Wait, if I just adjust that and twiddle that...' because, well, there aren't any more parameters to adjust. And when it does work, it's really easy to find the sweet spot where the compression is adding something good to the sound without overwhelming the dry signal."


----------

