Yes… this is an excellent function. But beware of loading it up with plugins. Once you set it set up, it is ON by default until you turn it off.
I ended up making a preset FX chain for monFX. I open monitor fx only when I need it and load the chain in a few clicks/seconds.
have fun
rich
yes I have a few fx chains set for just certain functions even tho its globel you still can turn it off and on.
Yup… it’s just that you can forget to turn it off… ask me how I know… 
I only had it set up with a bunch of meters and analyzers but it could have been a mess if it was comp/verb/delay. I only realized that it was on when I checked the performance meter for some reason.
have fun
rich
[quote=“CCbro, post:20, topic:426”]
- if its so minor a setting why spend the money on one? [/quote] Because the same compressor can be cranked up if you need more compression?
[quote]
2) if its not a great comp, probably degrading the sound source=remove crap from chain. [/quote] …or don’t buy a bad one to begin with.
People expect to hear compression and a lot of it when they press the play button. Uncompressed recordings sound bizarre. Like they’re missing something. Just for shits and giggles, try and mix a song without compressing anything lol.
lol…I can mix a song with only compressors and no EQ.
Using only 1 reverb, 1 delay, an autotuner and overdrive. Like if you don’t believe me, and I’ll prove it.
Actually…I’m gonna take to a new thread.
A few years ago I did an album where I deliberately separated my process into phases - first faders, then panning, then compression, then EQ. I’m a lot more haphazard and do things as they occur to me now, but I did think it was interesting how much of the sound of the mix happened in the compression stage. I think by doing all the compression before I started touching EQ I used the compressors to pull things forward or push them back into the mix, found it quite instructive.
The problem with not compressing things at all is that I think compression imitates the way our ears work at high volume - so an uncompressed drum kit recording sounds great if you play it back really loud, like the real drums were, but if you turn them down to normal music listening volume they just sound flat and unexciting. Compression re-injects some of that excitement back into the sound at sensible volumes.
2 Likes
Well said. Totally agree with this.
1 Like
I always use hardware compression when recording my vocals.
I use the RNP from FMR audio along with the RNC hooked up to it and it has a super nice setting so it handles getting close to the mic well.
http://www.fmraudio.com/rnp.html
http://www.fmraudio.com/rnc.html
It’s a very transparent setup so I don’t feel like I’m singing through a compressor.
I tend to use my LA-610 for a vocal pre, and I like to dial in a bit of that compressor during tracking, but it’s because I like the character of it. I’m not using so much that it is noticeable.
yeah but what settings and if its transparent what is the point? cant a person just lower the volume and do the work to the track during mix down?
other than a Fuzz-FX I dont see the reason to compress while recording vs ITB during mix stage.
seems like one of those "I cant hear it do anything so thats good."
my own little tests once the comp was at 2:1 4:! max it was pretty invisible.
reading the Dr.Pepper setting on the LA2A types for the first time is interesting, but that was all the Tape Reel to Reel days.
Its interesting how much thought and massive amounts of gear can go into a Vocal channel strip.
Because compressing while recording may not startle you if you all of a sudden get loud.
Very cool. Were you happy with the final product? Would you do it again?
Curious to listen to the specimen too.
CCbro:
if its transparent what is the point?
It is attenuating the signal, keeping the loud parts down a bit and the soft parts up a bit, just a little help right off the bat.
Lot more to do to it after it gets in the box.
Sounds a lot better with it than without it so I guess it’s not transparent in that sense but it doesn’t add any coloring or artifacts so it still sounds like my voice, only better.
Just run it through waves voice channel then melodyne for a tune up and “voila”, I can sing.
1 Like
I was then. There’s a lot wrong with it that I hear now, but that’s learning I suppose.
I don’t think I’d do it again just because it’s a bit counter to how I think now. If pull up the faders and hear an EQ issue I don’t think I’d be happy to say “right, let’s ignore that and do ALL the channel compression first” because resolving the EQ issue will probably influence how I balance and compress everything.
I’m not sure that it’s actually on the internet anywhere apart from the single! “The Specimen” is definitely going to be my next album title though. 
“The Light”;
1 Like
I don’t know if other DAWs allow for this, but Cubase allows for plugins on the input signal channel, so when they are applied there they are destructive and whatever processing happens is done. I use this occasionally when I know I’m going to do something. putting the plugin on the track itself or through the headphone mix will not destructively affect the source signal.
[quote=“tacman7, post:33, topic:426”]
It is attenuating the signal, keeping the loud parts down a bit and the soft parts up a bit, just a little help right off the bat.
[/quote] Sure, reading a Bruce Swedien article he says when it was invented, the idea was just a robot-fader tool. Instead of riding faders, someone invented this tool to do it automatically.
I get that.
The OP title is “while recording”, as I understand that to mean using Compression while tracking which means its on there permanently. I dont think its needed so much anymore in theory, and when the compression is clean/ invisible and not doing some kind of FX (which is questionable too) the cost seems wasted.
Doesnt it come back to ITB Compression or Hardware Compression…or ITB “real time compression” processing… which seems more and more common?
Im just skeptical on the Hardware Comp going in on Vocals and having a 1176 set for fast attack and fast release, and keeping it clean. I tried the Lindell, RNC,Symetrix,JoeMeek and those didnt do much with the fast settings. …at least nothing the software couldnt do (+10db and Klanghelm).
with that said, I guess I feel like Im missing something because almost all the big names have this Mic>Neve>1176 Vocal chain they use and love.
I have a not so poor mans version and yes I love it. if you don’t or never used it you aren’t missing it, but I would have a hard time going without it.
Im just skeptical on the Hardware Comp going in on Vocals and having a 1176 set for fast attack and fast release, and keeping it clean. I tried the Lindell, RNC,Symetrix,JoeMeek and those didnt do much with the fast settings.
Make sure you understand the 1176, as the Attack and Release controls of the 1176 work in the opposite direction of what you would think… (turning the knobs toward their higher values actually shortens attack and release times). I did not realize this when i first started and never liked using the compressor because i found out i was using it all wrong…
This is the typical settings for an 1176 on vocal which is actually a slow attack (still pretty fast though) and fast release:
attack: full counter-clockwise
release: full clockwise
ratio 4:1
gain reduction 5-7 db
Whats your version of it?
WA87>GAP73>Hairball 1776
WA87>WATB>WA1776
U87ai>BAE1073>UA1176
[quote=“tacman7, post:33, topic:426”]
just a little help right off the bat.Lot more to do to it after it gets in the box.
[/quote] thats what I was wondering …how much cash do you spend on something that does a little bit? I get the impression all this 1176 boner buzz is a revelation, but I’ve not heard it.
I tried the Lindell and its a 1176 plus, and I was trying to get some Wow! but I dont know, I didnt hear anything Wow!..it was a nice unit and pricey and based on the 1176. Hes a mod on Gearslutz HiEnd so I assume he made something decent (its China built and the knobs were kind of thin plastic feeling but not a sound killer.) I had it in my cart again for another try almost.
Then I started thinking maybe this is all nutz? spending $1000 for something I set on 2:1?
lol
This is a pretty solid setting.
Even at it’s slowest, the attack is still less that 1ms, which is really fast.
But, the thing that blew my mind;
The reason it sounds punchy DESPITE having an attack so fast it’ll act on transients almost immediately is that when it clamps down on a signal, the ratio changes - it starts at the ratio set by the user, then gets a bit more squashy if the signal stays over the threshold after that, so you get a punchy attack/decay envelop rather than the signal just being flattened.