I've tried to find what albums Bobby Owsinski is credited on and I don't seem to come up with anything.  I always hesitate when I see someone who is considered an expert and I don't have concrete results to judge them by.  It's kind of like a clairvoyant that can't hit the Lotto.


It's like the guys who are putting the hits on the charts aren't talking and the guys who are the "also ran" types have all kinds of advice to teach how to get the results they get.  Is that what I want?

Not to degrade this guy's instruction - just an observation.  I welcome any enlightenment I can get.

"If we start w/ a signal that already peaks near 0db, of course there's not much we can do unless we tame those peaks/transients too - but, unless you set the attack time to 0, something will get through, no?"

The answer will always be related to the placement of the threshold and of course the ratio.

But it general something like 1 to 10 milliseconds is faster than a fraction of the fastest note you are ever going to hear... and so for all intents and purposes, not much gets through before the compressions starts... if you are using an attack time under 10ms.

For example; A 1/32nd note in 4:4 at 180BPM is 41.67milliseconds long.

Consider that a 1176 has a 20-800 microsecond attack range and it's easy to see that it is really a limiter that just happens to also be a favorite *compressor*. 20-800 microseconds is 0.020 to 0.800 milliseconds. That's fast. way faster than you need to tame most peaks, but that particular device was designed for dense program material rather than instrument tracks. After it was designed people started using it on instrument tracks... by making good use of the ratio and threshold characteristics.




I think if there is something really valuable to learn from the demonstration mentioned in the OP it will be to relate the settings recommended by Mr Owinski to the actual and specific material he is working with.


best regards,
mike

"I've tried to find what albums Bobby Owsinski is credited on and I don't seem to come up with anything.  I always hesitate when I see someone who is considered an expert and I don't have concrete results to judge them by."

I sort of do the exact opposite... I simply consider the validity of the actual information.

I can't see how reputation or credits has anything to do with validity of information.

I feel that the very best information is anonymous.


all the very best,
mike

TBH, I've always worked the opposite way and started w/ the shortest attack times and increased them until it was just enough to my ears, and rarely used the make up gain, so Owsinski's method did seem counterintuitive to me as well. 

As you stated, whatever goes through uncompressed will dictate how far you can go w/ the make up gain anyway, and a certain ratio between those peaks and the rest of the signal will prevail since the make up affects the whole signal, not just the compressed portion. 

I guess it depends on what you're trying to do - put the emphasis on peaks or create a certain sustain.

To me, it often seems more desirable to use as little of every sound as needed in the context of a mix and to use compression to push things out of the picture or just below the radar. His approach seems to be the opposite - to use everything to its maximum potential.

But then again, I don't have his credentials and I'm still trying to figure it all out, so I may very well be wrong.

mike_mccue


"I've tried to find what albums Bobby Owsinski is credited on and I don't seem to come up with anything.  I always hesitate when I see someone who is considered an expert and I don't have concrete results to judge them by."

I sort of do the exact opposite... I simply consider the validity of the actual information.

I can't see how reputation or credits has anything to do with validity of information.

I feel that the very best information is anonymous.


all the very best,
mike

How do you evaluate the validity of the information (unless you know the answer) if there hasn't been a track record of success that shows that someone can do the job?

That said, there are different levels of good information.


When I was trying learn how to be a motocross racer, I bought a bike that matched the requirements I needed.  I hung out with guys that had the same sort of bike.  If they told me to crank the bike up in order to win the race, well, I could evaluate that technique pretty quickly and judge it as gospel.  If they told me to go as fast I can around the track until I fall off and then ease off the gas a fraction, that would help me at my current experience level.  But they couldn't tell me how to get to Roger Decoster's level because they couldn't keep up with him if they were pushed out the backside of a cargo plane with him.

Once again, I don't mean to cast doubt on the author's instruction.  I would guess that he would base his information on his contact with top notch engineers and their information or his observation of their techniques.  Very valid, IMHO.  And more than likely, he's making a boatload of money doing instructional videos, books and teaching so why go into the jungle and battle it out with the others for a limited number of good paying projects? 


EDIT: ( I never did get anywhere with that Motocross thing.  I couldn't get past that falling off bit.)  

mike_mccue



"If we start w/ a signal that already peaks near 0db, of course there's not much we can do unless we tame those peaks/transients too - but, unless you set the attack time to 0, something will get through, no?"

The answer will always be related to the placement of the threshold and of course the ratio.

But it general something like 1 to 10 milliseconds is faster than a fraction of the fastest note you are ever going to hear... and so for all intents and purposes, not much gets through before the compressions starts... if you are using an attack time under 10ms.

For example; A 1/32nd note in 4:4 at 180BPM is 41.67milliseconds long.

Consider that a 1176 has a 20-800 microsecond attack range and it's easy to see that it is really a limiter that just happens to also be a favorite *compressor*. 20-800 microseconds is 0.020 to 0.800 milliseconds. That's fast. way faster than you need to tame most peaks, but that particular device was designed for dense program material rather than instrument tracks. After it was designed people started using it on instrument tracks... by making good use of the ratio and threshold characteristics.




I think if there is something really valuable to learn from the demonstration mentioned in the OP it will be to relate the settings recommended by Mr Owinski to the actual and specific material he is working with.


best regards,
mike

I'm not disagreeing here - just curious. :) But whatever you set the threshold and ratio to - the attack is the time it takes for the compressor to react once that threshold is met so even if it's only a few ms, you will have something that peaks through And whenever you push the make up gain, those few ms will be enough to maybe generate clipping, no?

Mod Bod


I've tried to find what albums Bobby Owsinski is credited on and I don't seem to come up with anything.  I always hesitate when I see someone who is considered an expert and I don't have concrete results to judge them by.  It's kind of like a clairvoyant that can't hit the Lotto.


It's like the guys who are putting the hits on the charts aren't talking and the guys who are the "also ran" types have all kinds of advice to teach how to get the results they get.  Is that what I want?

Not to degrade this guy's instruction - just an observation.  I welcome any enlightenment I can get.

I did manage to find a list of credits.


http://albumcredits.com/Profile/227439


I'm sitting on a fence there. If I listen to someone working on a mix and achieving good results, I'll try and grab whatever bits of knowledge I can. That was the case w/ those videos - what he did seemed to work as far as I'm concerned.


BUT I'll never take any of that too seriously because my own tastes in terms of production usually differ quite a bit from anything conventional or mainstream (like, I probably dig room mics on a drum kit way too much for Owsinski's taste - but then, I'll take Jimmy Page's advice anyday before Owsinski's). 

( I never did get anywhere with that Motocross thing.  I couldn't get past that falling off bit.)  

I can't get past Mr. O's EQ technique of boosting a 200hz shelf EQ 5db on an acoustic guit in a dense mix. 
I don't know. Maybe that's why I'm not rich and famous:)


Hey Rain. I apologize man. I'm not trying to rain on the thread so to speak. 
I would just like to finally get a grasp on what everyone is talking about when it comes to compression.


Mike, your time (ms) references are very enlightening. Thanks

"How do you evaluate the validity of the information (unless you know the answer)"

My approach is to slowly try to get first hand experience while continuing to seek out more information. I endeavor to actually understand the information by making opportunities to have first hand experience specific to the the application of the information.

People that have shared experiences may think some infomation is contextual while people who haven't shared the experience may think any number of things.

So, just as arts and sciences are practiced all over the world.. I try to replicate the results of some procedure and then go from there.

I have found that I learn in stepping stones... one realization eventually leads to another... so I am generally eager to consider information at its face value.


best regards,
mike

timidi

( I never did get anywhere with that Motocross thing.  I couldn't get past that falling off bit.)  

I can't get past Mr. O's EQ technique of boosting a 200hz shelf EQ 5db on an acoustic guit in a dense mix. 
I don't know. Maybe that's why I'm not rich and famous:)


Hey Rain. I apologize man. I'm not trying to rain on the thread so to speak. 
I would just like to finally get a grasp on what everyone is talking about when it comes to compression.


Mike, your time (ms) references are very enlightening. Thanks

No worry Tim, really! :)


I brought this one here so people would chime in. In fact, after watching the whole thing, I came to the exact same conclusions as you.


When I started out back in the days, it seems that all I heard was "beware of compression", don't overdo it, cut instead of boost, etc...

The funny thing is that now, whenever I watch people working, most of the time, I'm surprised by how much processing they use and how radical their settings are. I guess there's a whole bunch of aspiring engineers out there who's been intimidated out of using compression and EQ. :s

I will add to that (in regards to his credits)...
First time I've heard about him was when he published his book about T-Racks. Now, I'm one of the guys who isn't all that amazed w/ T-Racks. IMHO, those processors put a lot of emphasis on distortion but do little in terms of actual dynamic control compared to other models of the same devices. You may have read of my misadventures w/ their Black-76 on the software forums last spring.

Now, Owsinski praises the quality of those plug-ins - and he has a more impressive credit list than I have, so my natural reflex is to yield, take a step back and check out what he has to say, to see if I did miss something. 

Well, whatever it is, no matter how wrong I may be, I still just don't get T-Racks - most of the dynamic processors, anyway. Even after reading his book, even after reading how X and Y love T-Racks, my own ears still tell me that it exaggerates the most obvious traits (distortion) but does little in terms of dynamics.


So in the end, it's not a matter of his ears or mine, whether he is entirely wrong or entirely right. I've learned a few tricks watching his vids - stuff I had probably read a thousand time before but just didn't assimilate. His mixes seem to work, so he must know what he is doing to an extent - though that doesn't mean it'd work for me.