To all the people who ever advised me on my long banters on improving my vocal tracks who told me to use compression, a huge THANK YOU!! 
I confess that I used to hate compression and couldn't understand why anybody thought it made anything sound better.  That was before I finally decided to take the time to actually LEARN how to use it!!  I've been recording digitally now with software DAWs for 11 years and I only ever either used presets or moved knobs not knowing what they did but turned them until the sounded good enough.  I swear, only since this past May did I finally, during a prolonged writer's block, learn to research and learn about how tools like EQ and compression work.  I also learned how to set up reverb and delay to get the best out of a track, especially vocals.  These past 2 weeks I revisited 2 projects from the past two years that I thought the vocals kind of sucked on and went in and remixed them with the new knowledge and better tools and now they sound great!!  I now understand how compression works to make a vocal sound better.  I'm so glad I listened to you folks here.  You are a big reason why I made such an improvement.  BTW, My main compressor go-to is the Red Compressor that comes with Focusrite interfaces.
 
John B.

Cool 😎 compressors are awesome. There are lots of different ones and ways to use them. Definitely try parallel compression if you have not.
Also drag eq before and after the compressor to hear cool differences.

gswitz
 Definitely try parallel compression if you have not.

Yeah, I tried that. But I don't know if I did it right because I didn't hear any difference.  What I did was insert another audio channel and brought a second copy of the vocal into it.  Then I set up the processing to match the first vocal track but compressed the crap out of the second one.  Truthfully, I heard no difference in the result.  I must've done it wrong because everybody says it's the way to go.
 
JB

That's awesome! I love those tools, I definitely use EQ the most above all else, and then compression. There are so many possibilities!

IIRC that compressor has a wet/dry mix knob. If I'm right about that, you can set up parallel compression much more easily than the traditional parallel bus method. All you have to do is play with the wet/dry control.
 
Parallel compression is challenging for the same reason compressors are challenging generally: it's difficult to hear what's happening when you're taking something away from the track. How can you hear something that isn't there?
But once you grasp what parallel compression is actually doing, you'll then know what to listen for.
 
In a nutshell, parallel compression makes the quiet parts louder.
 
Call it "upward compression" if you want to sound smart. All that means is that the quiet parts aren't so quiet. Imagine what that might do on a vocal, bass or lead guitar track, if the quiet bits were turned up. 

do what the pros do.

Better yet, spend a little money on a good old DBX 160A (or two of them for stereo) and use it on your board's channel inserts so you won't overload the signal going into your DAW. Plus, compressors just sound better there rather than applying them after a track has already been recorded.
 
Bill

Wayfarer
Better yet, spend a little money on a good old DBX 160A (or two of them for stereo) and use it on your board's channel inserts so you won't overload the signal going into your DAW. Plus, compressors just sound better there rather than applying them after a track has already been recorded.
 
Bill

IF YOU ARE MIXING IN THE BOX...
 
this would not be the way.
 
 
that said, i always track with external compression,
a dbx unit, by the way.....
but you have to understand how this colors sound,
as well as controls level.

I don't always track with it. Like I don't have a need for it with my guitar synth or with a mic'ed electric guitar cab. If I want compression on electric, I'll use a stomp-box, but I seldom use one. Compression tends to sound lousy on classical guitar, so I don't use it there, plus there's just no need as classical guitars seem to have such an even sound without it. Steel string acoustic is hit and miss---depends on the guitar and how I'm playing it. I would tend to use it more on a dreadnaught for instance because they can be a little boomy. And with some steel string acoustics, compression really brings them to life, but I've had others where it didn't.
 
Also, DBX units all sound different to me. I don't think a 166 or 266 sound very much like a 160. I also had an old 163 decades ago and didn't think much of it. The 160 and its variants (I have the 160XT) was the great one in my opinion. I know there are compressors costing a few thousand bucks. I've never used anything in that league, so I don't know how they compare to something like a 160, but in the $500 and under range, I think the 160A or 160XT are hard to beat.
 
I also currently have cheapo Behringer Composer Pro-XL. It's a stereo compressor / limiter that I mostly use just once in a great while for limiting. It's not much of a compressor, but it's very quiet, and any limiter that's quiet and has a quick response time is fine with me. Limiting is easy---compression is hard.
 
Dang it. No world series game tonight....
 
Bill

bitflipper
IIRC that compressor has a wet/dry mix knob. If I'm right about that, you can set up parallel compression much more easily than the traditional parallel bus method. All you have to do is play with the wet/dry control.
 

You DO remember correctly.  It has a wet/dry as well as an input control. This is interesting.  You're telling me that the wet/dry control essentially makes this parallel compression?  Is it really that easy?
 
JB