compression:downward comp,upwards comp,downward expansion,upwards expansion??

[FabienTDR]

BTW, all reasonable sounding saturation devices (without exception!) aren't static either. Only the worst sounding ones are.

Can you elaborate ?

Yes. Download "FuncShaper". It supports every static curves one could imagine, including oversampling, pre-processing filters and a nice UI. No matter what you try, it will never sound like an overdriven tube circuit or tape or whatever cool thing. It will just sound flat and boring. These static curves are just meant to visualize approximations of real world events. But they don't help to describe anything that sounds really musical. It's all about timing (at different scales)! Sadly, these things are much more difficult to draw.

[Tp3]

BTW, all reasonable sounding saturation devices (without exception!) aren't static either. Only the worst sounding ones are.

Can you elaborate ?

Yes. Download "FuncShaper". It supports every static curves one could imagine, including oversampling, pre-processing filters and a nice UI. No matter what you try, it will never sound like an overdriven tube circuit or tape or whatever cool thing. It will just sound flat and boring. These static curves are just meant to visualize approximations of real world events. But they don't help to describe anything that sounds really musical. It's all about timing (at different scales)! Sadly, these things are much more difficult to draw.

I know this VST for, like, ages.

To me it just looks like a mathematical equation wrapped in a VST gui

I had given up on trying to understand transfer curves and mathematical equations as means to describe MUSIC (read: EMOTIONS).

I just turn knobs and if it will evoke something emotionally, then me happy

FET, opto, VCA, optical, tube, vari-mu, OTA, Feed FW/BW

Sometimes I get the feeling people simply enjoy using these terms as they are
(first time I ever hear about OTA. is it like PITA ? )

Sadly, these things are much more difficult to draw

Sadly, we keep on trying to draw things that are just "undrawable"

[Debutante]

FET, opto, VCA, optical, tube, vari-mu, OTA, Feed FW/BW

Sometimes I get the feeling people simply enjoy using these terms as they are
(first time I ever hear about OTA. is it like PITA ? )

"OTA stands for Operational Transconductance Amplifier, which is a chip like a VCA except its output is variable current, not voltage."

[dalor]

I'll give it a shot to clear it up:

In general, compression reduces dynamic range or is not necessarily focused on increasing dynamic range. Expansion is always about increasing dynamic range.

How do they do it?
Compression normally reduces peaks above a certain threshold so that your average to peak ratio or crest is reduced. Hence, the reduction of dynamics.

Expansion normally takes the low level stuff of a signal and further reduces their level below a certain threshold; this gives the impression of a larger signal to noise ratio.

Typically, when we mention these terms, these are the functions we refer to:
Compression = "downward compression"
Expansion = "upward expansion"

Upward compression is a way of fitting in more information into a given signal by increasing low level stuff without touching the peaks, which is why I mentioned before "not necessarily focused on increasing dynamic range".
Flavors of upward compression are NY Compression and Parallel Compression.

Upward expansion once again being part of the expansion family, increases dynamic range by making loud parts or peaks louder. It "grows" the peaks above a certain threshold.


Does this help?

Great summary and kick starter! And now off for 10 years develop an ear to know which compression technique to use for which sounds and when to use what and why

[kylen]

Audio is kinda like confirming your Ancestry... be sure to double-check and triple-check what appear to be facts...

[metamorphosis]

I prefer sideways compression, where the transients of the instrument start to bleed into the other microphone.

[kylen]

...speaking of dynamics [compression and expansion], especially 'upwards compression' I was pretty amazed to find Harbal3 with a Dynamics processor and, even better, the ablity to make upwards compression that actually sound good to my ear. I'm still getting comfortable with the feel and documentation (it's standalone, not vst) but I'm pretty excited about it (it's been out about 8 months - where have I been!). Harbal3 allows setting multi-point dynamics nodes against a histogram (calculated when it initially reads in the audio file) instead of setting points directly on a transfer curve. It takes a session or 2 to get used to how to set it but I am Psych'd! More info here:

http://www.har-bal.com/ipw-web/bulletin ... 4a79997e1e

Just when I though I could never make 'upwards compression' go...

[bmanic]

EDIT: All my images and audio demos from all my 2013 posts should be working again! Let me know if something is missing.

[AlienForce]

EDIT: All my images and audio demos from all my 2013 posts should be working again! Let me know if something is missing.

Thanks a lot! Awesome refresher

[jens]

Flavors of upward compression are NY Compression and Parallel Compression.

Sorry, but that is clearly wrong, even though people keep spreading this completely nonsensical misinformation.

First of all, "NY compression" and "parallel compression" mean the same thing - it simply means summing variable amounts of both the dry signal and the compressed signal. This is of course possible with both upward and downward compression.

As your otherwise correct explanation already shows, upward compressors and downward compressors do not even compress the same part of the signal. While the conventional downward compressor works by decreasing the amplitude level of the loudest bits in the program material, the more esoteric upward compressor on the other hand works by increasing the amplitude level of the most silent bits in the program material.


edit: as had to be expected, Bmanic beat me to it....

[jens]

B.t.w.: here's a great article on a very early (maybe even the first) usage of parallel compression:

http://www.recordinginstitute.com/R2KREQ/excomp.htm

Maybe I should once try how this sounds when using upward instead of downward compression.

[TMaudio]

Flavors of upward compression are NY Compression and Parallel Compression.

Sorry, but that is clearly wrong, even though people keep spreading this completely nonsensical misinformation.

First of all, "NY compression" and "parallel compression" mean the same thing - it simply means summing variable amounts of both the dry signal and the compressed signal. This is of course possible with both upward and downward compression.

As your otherwise correct explanation already shows, upward compressors and downward compressors do not even compress the same part of the signal. While the conventional downward compressor works by decreasing the amplitude level of the loudest bits in the program material, the more esoteric upward compressor on the other hand works by increasing the amplitude level of the most silent bits in the program material.


edit: as had to be expected, Bmanic beat me to it....

It is not clearly wrong. On basis of function, in essence ny or parallel compression raise low level stuff, precisely what upward compression does. One can describe technical upward compression as that with a different knee and perhaps slightly different sound but their functions remain the same. That's like saying one compressor is not a compressor because of its difference with another compressor. The rest of your post hyperbole in describing it as "nonsensical information" is first a ridiculous smugness that is generally spreading across the internet these days and unnecessary hair-splitting that is finding its way around the internet in defining this type of compression.

And yes "ny" and "parallel" mean the same thing, very good. I included them as semantics used indicating the same type of compression.

[jens]

I think henceforth I'll use the terms "chorus" and "flanger" interchangeably... on basis of function and in essence both do the same thing.

B.t.w., just to remind you of what you wrote:

"Flavors of upward compression are NY Compression and Parallel Compression. ", which is utter nonsense as in false and misleading information.
(Also, "flavors" clearly indicates that "NY" and parallel are two distinct things, else you'd have written "a flavor".)

You did not write "upward compression is somewhat similar to parallel compression in that it raises low level-signals.", which would make some sort of sense.

[TMaudio]

rigggght, have fun with your nit-picking, semantic game dude, very productive
you internet warrior you

[jens]

Someone needs to do the dirty work...