I don't get compressors

[Ghost_Bass]

1 hour ago, GisserD said:

(...)

I have some experience with studio production and know how ESSENTIAL it is to compress a bass track. Its for the same reasons that i use a compressor on my board. To even out the dynamics, and bring out the subtleties in the playing. Anyway...Ive been reliably informed that every pop/rock recording from the last 40 years has compression applied to the bass track (by professionals), and who am i to argue

Those particular genres of music aren't known for having dynamic bass lines so it's natural that compression is used to achieve a uniform bass track. Try apllying the same compression to a classic band or a Richard Bona (i.e.) recording and they wont be happy with the end result as they use dynamics as way of expression in their music styles.

[GisserD]

25 minutes ago, Ghost_Bass said:

Those particular genres of music aren't known for having dynamic bass lines so it's natural that compression is used to achieve a uniform bass track. Try apllying the same compression to a classic band or a Richard Bona (i.e.) recording and they wont be happy with the end result as they use dynamics as way of expression in their music styles.

Yes of course individual artists might have preferences not to compress. 

But if the compression aplied is killing the dynamics, then its being overused. 

[Al Krow]

I think the point is that in studio recording you get everything 'perfect'. And I'm very happy to submit to an expert sound engineer to get this right.

BUT frankly NO pub audience is ever going to notice whether a bass player is using compression or not. (Can I suggest that folk who disagree simply switch their compressor off mid track and see if anyone in the audience notices?). In that context it's pointless.

[GisserD]

2 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

I think the point is that in studio recording you get everything 'perfect'. And I'm very happy to submit to an expert sound engineer to get this right.

BUT frankly NO pub audience is ever going to notice whether a bass player is using compression or not. (Can I suggest that folk who disagree simply switch their compressor off mid track and see if anyone in the audience notices?). In that context it's pointless.

i play for the pub 2nd.

I play for me 1st

[Al Krow]

Actually, Darren, fair enough mate. At the end of the day if gear makes you happier with your bass tone even though no one else gives a **** then that is justification enough for it! No disagreement from me on that score.

The thing that gives me the greatest pleasure is being tight with my band and seeing the audience in front loving our set! Bass compression would not make one jot of difference either way in a live pub setting to that.

And let's face it yours is considerably bigger than mine** 

 

**I'm talking about pedal board size here, for the avoidance of doubt, and deciding what gets to go on it!

[Ghost_Bass]

Well Al... fortunately i don't slap the hell out of my bass but if i did and i switched off the Multicomp mid song people would notice the difference and cover their hears as my sound, as i described earlier, has a bit of gain for headroom and i use a flat EQ on a TRB stringed with fresh Prosteels. The peaks in some highs would be unbearable if the comp wasn't decaying them.

EDIT: but all is fine because i don't really slap a lot...

Edited March 2, 2018 by Ghost_Bass

[Al Krow]

Yup, agreed, if you did slap or use certain filter pedals then a limiter (or possibly a compressor) makes sense to limit the peaks and protect your cabs. And when I do start doing either live regularly, I'll make sure to use the "free" (in terms of marginal cost and additional pedal board space) limiter patch on my MS-60B.

But as you don't...

 

Edited March 2, 2018 by Al Krow

[GisserD]

40 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

 

The thing that gives me the greatest pleasure is being tight with my band and seeing the audience in front loving our set! Bass compression would not make one jot of difference either way in a live pub setting to that.

 

There are many who would disagree to that, as it entirely depends on the genre you play and the volume you play at, as well as many other factors such as quality of PA etc.

Compression plays a key part in making a band sound cohesive from the listeners perspective.

I take your point however that playing covers in a pub might not have any requirement for a Cohesive, well mixed sound. At the end of the day the punters go home happy after dancing the hell outa some rendition of Uptown funk, and you go home happy having provided said funk. i get that.

But not all of us play pubs. My usual venues are Music Clubs/bars playing original music. Agreed that the number 1 priority is always to be "tight" but Its also important to create a sound that is enjoyable to listen to, not the "wall of sound" you hear in most pubs today. Well used compression and EQ are the cornerstones of achieving this. 

[Al Krow]

6 minutes ago, GisserD said:

There are many who would disagree to that, as it entirely depends on the genre you play and the volume you play at, as well as many other factors such as quality of PA etc.

Compression plays a key part in making a band sound cohesive from the listeners perspective.

I take your point however that playing covers in a pub might not have any requirement for a Cohesive, well mixed sound. At the end of the day the punters go home happy after dancing the hell outa some rendition of Uptown funk, and you go home happy having provided said funk. i get that.

But not all of us play pubs. My usual venues are Music Clubs/bars playing original music. Agreed that the number 1 priority is always to be "tight" but Its also important to create a sound that is enjoyable to listen to, not the "wall of sound" you hear in most pubs today. Well used compression and EQ are the cornerstones of achieving this. 

For sure, few folk want an unbearable "wall of sound". And we play functions too. We do a sound check and make sure that the drummer and guitarist are not too loud vs the vocals. It's as simple as that. 

Fannying about with bass compression is extremely marginal in the scheme of things. There are PLENTY of experienced bass players in very good bands on BC who would agree.

Edited March 2, 2018 by Al Krow

[dave_bass5]

3 minutes ago, GisserD said:

There are many who would disagree to that, as it entirely depends on the genre you play and the volume you play at, as well as many other factors such as quality of PA etc.

Compression plays a key part in making a band sound cohesive from the listeners perspective.

I take your point however that playing covers in a pub might not have any requirement for a Cohesive, well mixed sound. At the end of the day the punters go home happy after dancing the hell outa some rendition of Uptown funk, and you go home happy having provided said funk. i get that.

But not all of us play pubs. My usual venues are Music Clubs/bars playing original music. Agreed that the number 1 priority is always to be "tight" but Its also important to create a sound that is enjoyable to listen to, not the "wall of sound" you hear in most pubs today. Well used compression and EQ are the cornerstones of achieving this. 

There are those who feel a compressor is essential to get a good, tight sound, and there are those that have a good tight sound without using a comp. Surely both cant be right lol.

 

[Al Krow]

2 minutes ago, dave_bass5 said:

There are those who feel a compressor is essential to get a good, tight sound, and there are those that have a good tight sound without using a comp. Surely both cant be right lol.

 

Haha - actually those two statements are not mutually exclusive  

[dave_bass5]

1 minute ago, Al Krow said:

For sure, few folk want an unbearable "wall of sound". And we play functions too. We do a sound check and make sure that the drummer and guitarist are not too loud vs the vocals. It's as simple as that. 

Fannying about with bass compression is extremely marginal in the scheme of things. There are PLENTY of experienced bass players in very good bands on BC who would agree.

Agreed (and im not one of the many you mention lol). Ive seen loads of bass players that dont use compression on bass, unless for effect. I get that in a large PA rig most things will have it, and i understand why, but thats not really what we are talking about here.

To get a good tight bass tone you need many things, but if some people can do it without using compression then that shows compression isnt always needed. If it sounds good to your ears, no harm in using it of course, but its not esential to sounding good and tight.

 

[dave_bass5]

8 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

Haha - actually those two statements are not mutually exclusive  

Very true.......i should know

 

[Ghost_Bass]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

Yup, agreed, if you did slap or use certain filter pedals then a limiter (or possibly a compressor) makes sense to limit the peaks and protect your cabs. And when I do start doing either live regularly, I'll make sure to use the "free" (in terms of marginal cost and additional pedal board space) limiter patch on my MS-60B.

But as you don't...

 

I prefer the comp over the limiter because of the way it decays the peaks instead of just cutting them out abruptly, makes the note sound more natural. The way i use my comp makes it useless in 90-95% of my gig but in those couple of harder moments when i kick in the B3K at full drive or push the odd pop it's reassuring to know that i won't be blowing anybody's hears or my tweeter.

[51m0n]

Seriously, compression, again....
And not a single new point either, who'd have thought it.

OP,  search for a few recent compression threads, there is at least one where I bothered to spell out a bunch of reasons why compression isn't doing nothing even if you struggle to hear it in your bedroom, and also possible reasons you might want to use one in a pub, and a way to set one up such that it might help you etc etc

Enjoy, I'll get me popcorn

[Al Krow]

33 minutes ago, Ghost_Bass said:

I prefer the comp over the limiter because of the way it decays the peaks instead of just cutting them out abruptly, makes the note sound more natural. The way i use my comp makes it useless in 90-95% of my gig but in those couple of harder moments when i kick in the B3K at full drive or push the odd pop it's reassuring to know that i won't be blowing anybody's hears or my tweeter.

I would have thought that your B3K drive would already be compressed - maybe you just need to turn the volume down? 

@51m0n - some of your 'best work' on this thread below. Still unrivalled for wit and wisdom  

 

[Ghost_Bass]

5 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

I would have thought that your B3K drive would already be compressed - maybe you just need to turn the volume down? 

I play at a very sensible volume but with a bit of gain in the amp and use a TRB wich has presence in the mids and highs with some very bright prosteels (can you tell i don't like thump?) When switching OD/Fuzz on the highs can mess with the guitars. In reality the B3K is the best OD i've found that doesn't get the highs sounding over the top (i.e. i had the Pickle Pie B that was fuzz heaven but managed to blow a tweeter in my cab in a wreckless night). In any case it's nice to have the reassurance that any unwanted peaks are taken care by the comp, should they appear. 

[Cuzzie]

https://reverb.com/news/videos-the-basics-of-using-a-compressor-pedal-with-origin-effects

4 lots of videos

[Owen]

I have always hated compressors. But I needed one to put after FX. I bought a TC Spectracomp and found a preset that made me go "Oh......... I get it". I no longer hate them.

[dave_bass5]

Ive already commented on my change from Cali to Spectracomp, but today we had a rehearsal and i took both. Now, i know the Cali has more knobs, and has some sort of ‘magic’ in it, (apparently), but the Spectracomp blew it away, at least for my tone. 

Just using the TC tone print Rockwall brought everything to life. I know the Cali is a more than capable comp, and it was the fact that it has more knobs that made it appealing, but ive really struggled to get it to work to a point where i need it. Maybe the Spectracomp having so many parameters does make more of a difference. The fact tha tit has one knob was the thing that sent me looking for something that was more tweakable in a live situation, but its also the feature that means in not always playing with it.

i can see the Cali working better for me in a recording situation, it does sound warm and less aggressive, but as i dont plan on doing any of that then its off the board. 

[TrevorG]

On 03/03/2018 at 19:27, dave_bass5 said:

Ive already commented on my change from Cali to Spectracomp, but today we had a rehearsal and i took both. Now, i know the Cali has more knobs, and has some sort of ‘magic’ in it, (apparently), but the Spectracomp blew it away, at least for my tone. 

Just using the TC tone print Rockwall brought everything to life. I know the Cali is a more than capable comp, and it was the fact that it has more knobs that made it appealing, but ive really struggled to get it to work to a point where i need it. Maybe the Spectracomp having so many parameters does make more of a difference. The fact tha tit has one knob was the thing that sent me looking for something that was more tweakable in a live situation, but its also the feature that means in not always playing with it.

i can see the Cali working better for me in a recording situation, it does sound warm and less aggressive, but as i dont plan on doing any of that then its off the board. 

My take on it is the Cali is a studio engineer's problem solver. In the studio there are way more problems that only an engineer can solve. Sticking the circuitry in a (really well made) box makes it hard to ignore but I don't have any group tracks coming out my bass that would justify blending my dry signal with my compressed signal. Excuse the layman's example but even average equipment is so good these days that I can understand players wondering if they should have a compressor!!

Edited March 5, 2018 by TrevorG

[dave_bass5]

Well i do agree with you, i think, I’m not sure what the opening sentence is actualy saying. My point was more that the Cali seems quieter than the Spectracomp, and its easier to sit and tweak the knobs in a studio or at home. With the Spectracomp its quite fiddly to adjust IMO, but it also means its not being played with all the time. The Cali can be tweaked to work with a recorded track a lot easier.

I’d always expect a studio to prefer to use their own comps, which will be more adjustable than any box i could take in, but given the choice of my two it would be the Cali. 

[Al Krow]

24 minutes ago, dave_bass5 said:

Well i do agree with you, i think, I’m not sure what the opening sentence is actualy saying. My point was more that the Cali seems quieter than the Spectracomp, and its easier to sit and tweak the knobs in a studio or at home. With the Spectracomp its quite fiddly to adjust IMO, but it also means its not being played with all the time. The Cali can be tweaked to work with a recorded track a lot easier.

I’d always expect a studio to prefer to use their own comps, which will be more adjustable than any box i could take in, but given the choice of my two it would be the Cali. 

So in summary: Cali for studio and Spectracomp for live?

[Cuzzie]

Nope

Whichever mode or equipment to give compression which works for you when and wherever

Edited March 4, 2018 by Cuzzie

[dave_bass5]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

So in summary: Cali for studio and Spectracomp for live?

Sort of. I was just saying that i think the Cali would work better in a non live setting FOR ME, due to one being set and forget, and the other easily adjustable for when it really matters, and only if I owned  both.