If it's working for you and you are getting the sound you want then more power to you my friend!:)
 

If you like modern VSTs that give visual clues as to what's going on, check ouf FabFilter's offerings. The Pro-C2 is their compressor. But don't fall into the trap of "looking" for what it's supposed to do ;) 
Ears should always make the final call. 
 
FWIW I also really like parallel compression for the sound it gives you. But it's important to note that many of the traditional duties a compressor is supposed to do, namely evening out dynamics and shaping the transients (attack portion of a sound), only work about half as well if you leave the original untouched. So I agree with tenfoot - check some tutorials on proper compression technique. If you feel that you can never make regular compression sound good, you're probably not doing it right. P/C is simply a different effect that can sound nice but it doesn't exactly replace regular compression. 

after a weekend with this stuff, i am back to direct compression.
it took some digging and learning and LISTENING to truly understand the compression process.
 
feeling pretty comfy with it now.
 
thanks for the reply! hit it on the the peak!

here's my layout du jour - getting some great results!!!
 

 

Compression is one of those cases of simplicity on the far side of complexity.  It will become second nature,  but takes a lot of listening and learning along the way.  Michael Stavrou (Stav)  wrote an article in Audio Technology magazine quite a few years back that was a  great starting point,  but  I can't seem to find it online.  His approach is included in his book 'Mixing with your Mind',  which though not cheap is worth reading. 
 
http://www.mixingwithyourmind.com/index.php

looks good. yes, pricey.
 
i worked up a couple of mixes this weekend.
i've been forcing myself to start from scratch each session.
no templates.
 
makes me listen and think of solutions.
 
i was pleased with the first one. everything in its place. light compression and EQ. nice.
 
the second one, not so much. the levels were good. but it just wasn't happening.
i let it sit for a few hours and went back in.
 
i am a HUGE fan of EQ cutting rather than boosting now.
 
a simple cut of the slap bass line around 300hZ to 500hZ and the recording just POPPED!
suddenly i could hear the muted slaps and pops.
 
and the low rhythm guitar came through.
 
great fun!
 
... i called the first tune "Nyquist Blues".
 

hodshonf
looks good. yes, pricey.
 
i worked up a couple of mixes this weekend.
i've been forcing myself to start from scratch each session.
no templates.
 
makes me listen and think of solutions.
 
i was pleased with the first one. everything in its place. light compression and EQ. nice.
 
the second one, not so much. the levels were good. but it just wasn't happening.
i let it sit for a few hours and went back in.
 
i am a HUGE fan of EQ cutting rather than boosting now.
 
a simple cut of the slap bass line around 300hZ to 500hZ and the recording just POPPED!
suddenly i could hear the muted slaps and pops.
 
and the low rhythm guitar came through.
 
great fun!
 
... i called the first tune "Nyquist Blues".
 

Haha.  Cool -  after the engineer and not the horse I hope:)  I often find walking away from a mix for a while is the answer.

you made me google nyquist horse.
 
too funny. weird timing with that. synchronistic... ALIENS!
 
yes, the engineer.

Lol -  Indeed!  I happened to see a headline on google news and wondered at the time if they had named the horse after the engineer. 

Any reason your bass recordings are stereo tracks? Are they from softsynths?