Forgive me for posting here, but can anyone tell me where to find the button with which to start a new thread? I know I'm ADD and all, but this is always seems to be a great mystery on every forum I join.
 
Thanks,
John

Hi John. It is pretty easy. Once you Log in go to thread of interest eg the 'Techniques' thread. Do not go into any of the threads under the 'Techniques' area. Stay outside of those but just inside the main 'Techniques' menu area.
 
Right towards the top is a button marked 'Post New Thread' Click on that and you are away. Create a new subject and then your post and submit post.

It has to be said that a lot of these types of things should optimally be built into the composition and performance. It's not like players are limited to a single volume. If the composition is well worked out, then given instruments should naturally come up between vocal phrases or trade off with other instruments just naturally as played. And it's a lot easier and more natural (more like music than data processing) than doing lots of automation curves.
 

I think Dean what you are saying is a given and obviously the best way for sure. When lots of overdubs are done though the session players may not do this sort of thing so much but keep a little more even and it is up to us to a certain extent to make the dynamics happen here and there. I do like it a lot when the band can do all that naturally, it saves a lot of time later in mixing too.
 
It is one of the reasons I am not in a hurry to put headphones on everybody when tracking necessarily. With care it is very possible to record in a lot of situations without any headphones involved. (All in the same room, remember that!) With careful setting up everyone can hear each other and with careful mic placement etc you can still capture very good recordings of individual instruments with little or no spill on those tracks. Saves time too because a lot of time can be spent on headphone mixes in many situations where they are not needed at all. This is one area where the technology can intrude into the creative playing experience a bit.
 
It is possible to set up a small PA for guide vocals to be heard and still reject most of that sound in the mics.  Some engineers are going straight for the headphone mix first off but I look it the other way and see if it can be done without first. When the headphones are not so involved the musicians tend to do what Dean was referring just more naturally.

Whenever I learn about a useful technique like this, I always want to go back and remix everything I've ever done.
 

 
If you are running a compressor with a slow attack you are already doing it.
 
:-)
 
 

If you are running a compressor with a slow attack you are already doing it.....No Mike this is not the same thing at all. A compressor even with a very slow attack may allow a sound to rise up in level in its attack portion for only a relatively small time. What we are talking about here does involve the word attack but in this context we are talking about several seconds of a part being louder before bringing it back down. ie a much longer attack. 'Attack' is not a good word to use in this situation. More like the start of any given part.
 
In fact for this technique to be effective it would have to involve the start of the part being louder for at least a few seconds. The sort of attack Mike is talking about would not even be noticeable in this situation. Effective yes for increasing the short term attack of a sound (initial rise time) for sure but not for this technique I don't think.
 
Besides the video does not mention a compressor anywhere it talks about editing automation, a very different thing. What if you did not want the attack portion of a sound to be louder at all or remain completely unaltered but just wanted the first few seconds to be louder in general. The compressor won't do it in that situation. But editing automation will. It is not the sort of effect that can be created by slapping a compressor over and expect to solve your problems. It is something that needs to be done by hand. And I can imagine that there would be no set time to return a part back to its normal level either. That would need to be evaluated for each given situation and adjusted accordingly to be most effective. In one case it might only be 2 seconds but in another it might be less or much longer.

 
I'm just gonna disagree Jeff. ;-)
 
Using a compressor with a slow attack setting highlights the front end of the transient.
 
It's the same exact principal.
 
You garner some attention with the transient but you don't block up the mix with the bulk of the signal. People have been using the technique for decades. 
 
The presenter of the "mixing with the Attack principle" refers to his principle as the "Attack Principle" for a real good reason.
 
 
 
all the best,
mike
 
 
 
 

You're both right, but the OP is describing longer timeframes than we'd normally set a compressor's attack time to. A slow attack setting on a compressor might mean 100-200ms. To draw focus to a musical passage we'd usually be talking 10 or 20 times that.

Yes,
 In the example shown in the OP video the attack is approximately 800ms.
 
 It is certainly different than simply using a compressor.
 
 I am simply pointing out that we have been using the "attack principle" for about as long as we have been using a compressor.
 
 
 
 
 all the best,
mike