Compress then EQ or otherwise?

Posted on

The Quiet Minded
Member Since: Jan 01, 2003

What should come first compression or EQuing? Why?

[ Back to Top ]


Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


May 27, 2003 12:15 am

hmm..

i really don't know for sure, but i'll say EQ first, because equalization may introduce additional peaks and valleys in amplitude that you'll want to try and control. If you compress first you might defeat the purpose.

Bane of All Existence
Member
Since: Mar 27, 2003


May 27, 2003 02:26 am

eq first.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


May 27, 2003 04:57 am

Eq first

The Quiet Minded
Member
Since: Jan 01, 2003


May 27, 2003 11:26 am

why?

Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


May 27, 2003 11:36 am

because equalization may introduce additional peaks and valleys in amplitude that you'll want to try and control. If you compress first you might defeat the purpose.

Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


May 27, 2003 11:40 am

no seriously, i'm not sure what software your using, but open a recording of a guitar or vocals or something dynamic like that and compress it real good. now boost a relevant frequency band and notice how the waveform envelope changed shape. it adds new ups and downs in amplitude, therefor the signal is no longer properly compressed that way you wanted it.

you can compress firt if you want. personally i think i'd probably prefer to 1. lightly compress on the way into my computer 2. EQ it the way i want 3. compress again

you can do it however you like

The Quiet Minded
Member
Since: Jan 01, 2003


May 27, 2003 11:41 am

what about other possible plugins in the chain, where should I put the compression? Like reverbs, delays etc.

Contributor
Since: Sep 09, 2002


May 27, 2003 11:46 am

it all depends on the effect you're going for. do you want a compressed signal delayed, or a delayed signal compressed?

you can compress before alot of reverb and it will add new dynamics to your recording with all the extra amplitude you added. you can compress after and it does the opposite, it will control and excess volume you've created.

alot of people seem to have "rules" on this sort of thing but i think it's more fun to experiment and try all sorts of combinations.

a.k.a. Porp & Mr. Muffins
Member
Since: Oct 09, 2002


May 27, 2003 01:43 pm

I usually put the reverb after the compression and the eq before the compression (when using plug-ins) The compression can kind of do some weird things to the reverb sound, but if that's what you're going for, then go for it.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


May 27, 2003 01:47 pm

In general I compress last. There are odd moments where it doesn't work, but that is my personal rule of thumb as I am looking to compress the final signal control it before hitting the tape, and as Jamie said earlier, other effects run after the compressor then need to be watched closely to not reintroduce the problems you were using a compressor to fix.

Member
Since: Jun 28, 2002


May 27, 2003 02:31 pm

db do you compress after reverb to ?

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


May 27, 2003 02:36 pm

well, that depends, if I add reverb while tracking, yes, it's before compression, but often I add tweaks of reverb while mixing down as well...and then I may or may not be using compression. During the actual recording tho, yes I reverb before I compress.

Bane of All Existence
Member
Since: Mar 27, 2003


May 27, 2003 05:01 pm

in my perception, it seems like compressing after reverb would move the new "room" sound around along with the adjusted peaks.

my perception of an ideal setup places an instrument as it sounds "complete" (compression, eq, phaser, flanger, wah, etc) all before the reverb in order to get exactly how that instrument would sound in that room.

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002


May 27, 2003 05:29 pm

Thats fine, as we have stated many times at HRC, there are no rules, it's whatever you are going after.

One of the most common things to do while mastering a recording is overall compression, which by your perception would be moving you to a new room as well, but it is very common.

Bane of All Existence
Member
Since: Mar 27, 2003


May 27, 2003 05:53 pm

that's true. the difference must be negligible. seems like compressing after reverb would give you plenty of control over levels as well.

Contributor
Since: Dec 30, 2002


May 27, 2003 06:36 pm

Compressing after reverb will also change the characteristics of the reverb - and will ofen make the reverb appear bigger (as the reverberated "tail" is compressed making it appear longer).

As for the original question, well, on a mixing desk you will have the insert points before the EQ - suggesting compression then EQ, but I generally EQ first then compress for the reasons stated above.

jues.

Member
Since: Dec 16, 2002


May 28, 2003 07:48 am

Hmmm, I was surprised by your responses, though I bow to your greater knowledge as I am a beginner.

I record using a multitracker so mayeb that changes things? I record each instrument 'as is' using compression as necessary to get a nice even signal. Then in the mixing process I EQ it.

Like someone said though, the trick is always to get the instrument/voice recorded as close to 'perfect' as you like it in the first place, then there's need for minimal processing afterwards.

Member
Since: Nov 24, 2002


May 28, 2003 04:15 pm

I also record with a multitracker. I record each instument with compression only. Then I add the other effects as I mix. My compressor is first in my chain. Keep in mind that in some multitrackers (like mine ) the effects loop affects all tracks. I mean i can adjust the amount to each track but each track is affected with the same effects. What I find myself doing quite often is bouncing tracks so that I can use certain effects with certain instuments.

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.