![]() ![]() Not to be harsh- if you want to do extreme compression, your method is a good one, and I've done similar things to it in the past. When you compress that in order to make it appear to be "louder", it doesn't make it sound more natural- how could it? It has a start, and a decay, and things happen in between those. ![]() In the real world, sound isn't compressed. You are making them sound more artificial. It just doesn't really mean anything.Īnd for the record, though, by compressing things over and over, and removing the natural transient peaks that are the basis of not only every musical event you've ever heard, but every sound event that has ever occurred in real life, you are hardly making things more "transparent". It's no more accurate than if you said you wanted your music to sound more "peppery". Since you are discussing audio related things, use terms that apply to hearing. But, if you are chasing that dragon, your music is likely forgettable anyway.īut "transparency" is a term that is used for a different sense: sight. I think if your overall strategy is to make your record appear to be "louder"- it only is "louder" on average, anyway- then you are doing yourself a disservice. I'm not a mastering engineer- I don't have a dog in that fight. That's up to you- maybe you want to put your songs up on Myspace or something, where dynamics aren't going to help you anyway. ![]() I mean, I don't care if you want to compress your tunes until you sound like Nickelback or whatever. "Louder" I can go with, but "more transparent"? How are you adding "transparency" to a mix by compressing the transient peaks out of it? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |