Vokalzz
Hello all,
Ive been racking my brain trying to come up with a solution as to how to get my guitar track to be consistently one level. I recorded acoustic guitar track using 2 mics today, then panned one left and one right. It all actually sounds amazing. I'm loving the sound, but I notice the quiet parts are lower then the strummed rhythm parts. I know about automation and leveling out everything that way, but that takes like a hour to do for every track. Im kinda picky about stuff and need it to be perfect so its takes me longer then the average person. Plus im not as experienced as all of you amazing geniuses. Inst there a easier way of doing this? Any tricks one might share with me? There must be other options then automation...!!! huh!!! I just don't know. Any feedback from you experienced producers would really help a young lad find a solid footprint when tackling this in the future.

I use Hornet's Autogain Pro for this when I want it.
http://www.hornetplugins.com/plugins/hornet-autogain-pro/
 

Also take a look at Meldaproduction's MAutoVolume plugin. In my tests it did a much better job with far less fiddling than Autogain Pro. There are mainly just two sliders to tweak - sensitivity and speed - and then adjusting the output volume to compensate (it tends to make everything 3-12 dB louder depending on the settings).
 
 

gswitz
You know, distortion can help get a guitar to a consistent volume. (Electric)

Which is because, put simply, distortion is created by pushing a signal so hard through a suitable circuit that it compresses massively and clips off the wave form peaks.

Irrelevant to processing natural-sounding acoustic guitar though.

Two stage compression works well on acoustic instruments (and in general) without altering the sound as much as forcing it through a single compressor.
 
Basically you run it through one stage of light compression which brings up the lower levels/evens things out then you run it through a second stage of compression, again light compression, which evens it out even more.
 
Because both compressors aren't working too hard it prevents the "pumping" effect that makes heavy compression undesirable for natural sounding product like acoustic instruments.
 
You could also do some more general automation before doing this (instead of painstakingly automating every spike/dip). So if there is a section of the song that is quiet you could just turn up the section a little bit then let your two stage compression do the rest of the work.
 
You should also consider WHAT you want to automate to control levels. Gain automation is probably best because it controls the signal before it hits anything else (PC, FX bin, etc). That also leaves your fader free for track level changes (creating a Volume envelope will take over your fader and that sucks). There is also a neat trick where you could avoid both your Gain and Volume controls being overtaken by envelopes. Insert a PC module or Effect that has an output level control and that can output a completely dry signal (as in the effect can be set in such a way that the original signal is not affected at ALL except for the output volume). Then automate that instead of the Gain or Volume.
 
There is also limiting. Any limiter should do but they are not all created equally. Put the limiter at the start of your chain (it would usually go at the end) and set it so your peaks are being limited to match the quieter parts. This is far more inelegant than other solutions but is an option. If you own the Concrete Limiter it's a pretty nice option but the Sonitus stuff is good and precise (if not a little intimidating to use for a novice).
 
Just some options to try and consider.
 
I am not an expert on music production. I just play one on TV... er, the intertubes.
 
Cheers.

And cool thread. You got some sweet auto doohickeys suggested that I myself want to check out now.
 

Guys every response was amazing and is making me understand a little more about this process. What im gathering from all of you is this......
 
Make sure that whoever is playing the instrument makes sure they try and control the level before going in, Example: (strumming) (picking) (moving around) ect.. Try and control the sound beforehand so this way your sound can be more consistent. Even though we all get emotional while playing....lol.
Then, I can do automation, but would be a little painstaking if I have 4 guitar tracks. So going through each one with a finite comb might take awhile, so look at the clips and determine if I can automate with faders if need be. Once at this point I could use many of the techniques that you all offered. maybe use something like mautovolume which bitflipper mentioned or one of the others mentioned, Or I could then just use simple compression, double compression (light compression) that seemed interesting. I dont mind doing the work guys. Im just trying to see if I can achieve the same outcome with easier techniques. Work smarter not harder right? 
 
Someone mentioned why I would want everything one level. Well... the short answer is I do and I dont. I want everything to be consistent, I still want dynamics, but I dont want one part to be a lot louder then then the rest of the song.
 
Next question is should I use parallel compression or directly on the track itself. Create a bus and route the track to the bus.
 
Plus what are your thoughts related to chain plug ins. Eq first? this is how im doing it
 
LP64 EQ for high pass and low passing
sonitus EQ for frequency sweaping if needed
sonitus EQ for shaping the tone as needed
Noise gate
Route to bus:
delay
reverb
compression
 
what are your thoughts. I figure I ask cause i am getting a lot of great responses. Thanks so much guys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
 
 
 
 

You can sometimes add automation to MIDI controllers to control VST effects. This allows you to manually control the volume dynamics. Also there's that new group volume thing which allows you to dynamically shift all volume based on their input level differences (like an automatic mechanical mixer does).
 
Anyway that's a story for another day.

Another option.
 
Clone the track.
 
Now in the first track, mute the loud parts, preferably using a volume envelope so you can set suitable slopes.
In the second track, mute the quiet parts.
Now you have 2 tracks which will require minimum compression and you casn control the relative volumes simply using track faders

I wouldn't use the LP64 just for High pass and low pass. Your taking a huge cpu hit (not to mention latency) when the quad curve EQ or Sonitus can handle this easily and cost you almost nothing. What I like about Hornet's Autogain Pro is, they've added an internal reference now, so you can set it up the same for each track and the track will determine how it responds without having to side chain anything. It's very simple if you save this as a preset. You can also use a bus as a reference and it will follow that. Then it will write the automation for you. Mautovolume may do the same thing better and easier, but I have no experience with it so I can't comment. Bitflipper probably has both and his opinion is one I would value.

Vokalzz
Plus what are your thoughts related to chain plug ins. Eq first? this is how im doing it
 
LP64 EQ for high pass and low passing
sonitus EQ for frequency sweaping if needed
sonitus EQ for shaping the tone as needed
Noise gate
Route to bus:
delay
reverb
compression
 
what are your thoughts. I figure I ask cause i am getting a lot of great responses. Thanks so much guys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

If this is indeed the order in which you use your bus effects then you should consider placing your compression before the delays and reverbs unless there is a specific reason for compressing last. Compression will affect the delay repeats and reverb tails that gives you less control and any tweaks to the compressor will have an effect on those delays and tails.
 
Just something to consider.
 
Blues