If you pay attention to your recording levels there should be no reason to prefer a hardware compressor on the way in rather than a software version once it's recorded, other than a perceived difference in sound* due to hardware/emulation differences.
 
If you're using an outboard compressor to catch transients to prevent distortion then you're just fooling yourself, as the gain reduction itself is distorting the input you're trying to record.  Just turn it down.  With 24bit recording it's not a problem.
 
If you're using an outboard compressor to create the sound you want to record, say compressing a bass to make it punchy, then say so.
 
 
* you get a greater difference in sound between different hardware units than between a specific unit and it's emulation.  The quality of software FX today means they can be as good or better than the hardware they're emulating.  For example, of the many 76 type compressors available, most people would agree that the original hardware sounds "best",  but I would say they all sound slightly different while trying to behave the same way.  Even the original hardware version is limited by component tolerance so you can't claim it sounds the way the designer intended, though it should be very close. A software emulation can remove the issue of component tolerance and produce the sound exactly as designed.  This is not "better" or "worse",  just different.

I imagine you can do some of what you want, with that then. Hope you get it.
 
RE Tracking with comp.
     I haven't used any "on the way in" for so long, that I don't see the point to stop. I do intend to try this new WA76 on some stuff, but will do tracks of (whatever); One with and one without it.
    Back when I tried tracking with, say bass through my (then)dbx DDP, I didn't get much I was happy about. I didn't know enough. Since I didn't need to "pack the tape" any longer (with DAW), I just did lower levels or for worst case scenarios, 2 tracks of things, with one at my normal level and one even lower for a "safety" track.
    In 2000, I tracked Rachael Davis' Minor League Deities, I did the "extra safety track", because she could zip from soft to "holy crap!", very fast! LOL      She only wanted (or needed) to do one take of each track. She knew her vocals inside out, but I didn't. I tried to "ride the gain", but it was ridiculous to attempt! LOL
 
Michael
 

Jeff Evans
Software compressors are smarter as they can look ahead.

but, they cannot look ahead of the convertor.
 
and yes,
once you print, you have what you have,
so you better know what you are getting on the front end,
just like the pros used to have to do.
 
and i've definitely screwed up tracks in the past,
running my preamps into compressors before the convertor,
but not so much anymore,
and it's part of how i get MY sound.
 

Hi, Karyn (and everyone). I certainly appreciate that sentiment and 99% of what I'll be doing (and am doing) is in the box type stuff. However after the past year of trying out all my various input methods using the hardware I have on hand there are a couple things that aren't QUITE where I'd like them to be and some of the routing deficiencies/inconveniences are spurring the purchase as well. I think I'm also experiencing a bit more line level noise than I need to with some of the wacky set ups I've concocted. I am extremely happy with the direct inputs on the Focusrite Scarlett 18i6 I own but it's not perfect. It needs something else to just give it a bit of a quality nudge and I need some simpler/more flexible routing options.
 
The unit I'm looking at (the MP/C) is actually being considered for other purposes but the fact it has a compressor adds to its appeal for me (there are much better units for this type of stuff BUT most cost way more and/or I would have to purchase multiple units to acheive the same thing... which I will eventually now that I've been made aware of the "Lunchbox" style stuff).
 
To describe the initial problem... well I was having a bit of a hard time driving certain equipment and software/getting the sustain I want from my straight guitar signal. I do not use or own active pickups which might help in this regard but after playing around a bit I realized my old MXR Gain booster pedal worked pretty good for that "in betwixt the guit and the gear" signal boosting I needed. Not great though and it's a little noisy. I also don't have an adapter for it (batteries are expensive/I drain them quickly) and there is obviously very limited routing/uses with it.
 
So that got me looking at similar items like high quality DI boxes and that got me looking at tube pres for instruments and that got me looking at multi use pres and that led me to the ART stuff (again thanks to bats...). Unfortunately most of those MP series units do NOT handle guitar signals but work for bass and vocals (did I mention I REALLY need something to tweak up my dynamic mics? Well I do). So as I was digging around at those and about to give up I saw the MP/C unit which has a high Z scheme but also just happened to have a compressor as well.
 
THAT got me thinking about how great my bass sounds going direct using various sources (like through the line outs of my amps or even just straight into the interface) but the unevenness of the levels was problematic and I was going to start getting into manually adding gain automation to control such things (and not just for bass... essentially manual limiting/boosting so it all hits the other effects properly which is probably better than just letting a software limiter handle it all).
 
So really the main thing I was originally considering was just adding a real tube drive/gain boost to my input to add a touch more complexity and sustain to my "dry" signals (which I handle pretty well in the box already). Being able to START with a nice even waveform (and of course I can adjust how even it is... don't want to kill my dynamics right out of the gate) so I can save myself some work/annoyance of trying to limit/compress using plugins before I even starting trying to polish/mix the signal (which I am also getting good at but it's an extra step and I have a feeling I might get better results having this done before it hits the converters as bats is mentioning). Since the box acts as a DI and has phantom power and can be used for reamping and can be used with NO drive/compression and effect at all then it solves some routing annoyances (for example right now I've got cables running all over my little studio from my amps to my mixer to the interface and in all sorts of wacky configurations it gets annoying and even painful due to my crippled up back to set this crap up just right) so I can plug straight into the interface, send one cable out to the interface and go nuts OR I can plug into the box, then out to my nice Mackie mixer (which I really like) then out to the interface (I cannot plug my bass or guitar straight into the mixer... I've always wished I could so this is a good solution for that).
 
If my little daydreams, schemes and hopes for this thing don't work out at the very least it should help me get better use out of the mics I have for the voiceover/lesson/video stuff I've been plotting for quite some time. I have some interesting mics around that sound really good BUT they are kind of weak and erratic as far as level management. I think they could be great with a little bit of extra help and of course an input compressor/limiter could help things from getting too hairy (thus saving me from having to excessively edit/treat simple voice over tracks).
 
So, yeah. I get it and I am a little disappointed that I can't just take my inputs as is and totally make them golden easily inside the computer but it's darned close. With a better mixing board (there is no dynamics section on the Mackie nor proper intrument ins) or if I had a proper soundroom and proper mics I likely would do stuff like this and certainly for recording a band it would be a little dangerous treating signals on the way in (due to my lack of experience)... however it's just me in my little room. I can experiment and retrack to my hearts content so I have no worries goofing around with a little bit of compression. It will probably be good for me anyway to start dinking around with controlled outboard dynamic stuff like this even if it is in it's most basic form.
 
Just my thought process. Of course the warnings are appreciated and beneficial to others. I mostly posted this to figure out why someone would make the 4:1 statement and the answer of "probably so a n00b could hear it without killing it TOO much" seems to be the most logical answer. I generally keep my thresholds low and in two stages (one to tame/even the signal a bit, then eq, then the REAL compression to sweeten ) unless doing something specific. I think I'm a stage 2 n00b at this point really.
 
/yammer yammer yammer
//lol
///cha-cheeers

Sounds like you're good to go.
Which Mackie did you get? I'm considering one but have to figure out where to put it, first!
Michael

I've actually owned the Mackie for quite a few years now. I used to use it with my old DAW in my bandroom (but did not allow it to be used as the rehearsal workhorse... I had some beater mixers for that).
 
It's a Mackie CR-1601 but it's the old, pre-Onyx era, American made one that has the modular "pod" design. It came with the extra mic pre pod so instead of just the standard 8 XLR ins I can hook mics up to all sixteen channels. It's pretty sweet and I got it for a decent price (but they seem to be goign for a little less these days.
 
It's built like a tank to the point I can barely lift it (due to my bad back) but it has direct outs on the first 8 channels (which I can hook up to the line ins on the interface) as well as a pretty nice aux in/out scheme. It was pretty much in new condition when I got it and I try to take good care of it (I cover it with a towel when not in use).
 
Nice clean/crisp signal and the EQ section is sweet. No dynamics section though (so no compressor) and no Inst/Hi-Z ins like some newer boards have which is why I need something a little extra to run into it.
 
I really love this mixer though. Being able to line in from my guit/bass to it would be freaking brilliant.
 
The newer Mackie pres (Onyx) are SUPPOSED to be nicer but I seriously like what this mixer does with a mic signal. The design is certainly piggish compared to the newer, lighter CR series but this thing is definitely built to last. Gotta love old school US engineering for that. Since it's reasonably simple, modular and likely all handwired (sans tons of circuit board tomfoolery) if something DOES go wrong it should be relatively easy to repair. The newer stuff all seems like it's begging to break down and require special parts. I hate that.
 
Cheers!

Oh and since it has all the connections and strips I could technically use it (and have attempted to in the past) use it as an 8 track split channel setup. First 8 channels as tracking inputs, the next 8 for returns/monitoring/mixing.
 
It of course has insert points (well they are multi purpose jacks which I won't describe in detail... it's a complex but brilliant scheme though) and all the other goodies you need for decent demo studio stuff.
 
I abandoned my dreams of being an outboard live fader tweaking lunatic ages ago though once I realized how much better and easier that can all be done inside the DAW. Still kind of a romantic ideal I'd like to try but on a MUCH bigger board I think and really just for fun/experience. Not much you can REALLY do with 8 channels anyway and even if I set it up to use all 16 for a live mix export (which would be a PITA to wire up but I COULD technically do it by daisy chaining my old Layla box to the Scarlett and making liberal use of my little short run snakes) it would still be a little lacking I think for what I do.
 
There isn't any real bus section either aside from the main and aux busses and the aux busses don't have faders... just knobs. Keeps it compact (fits in a nice tight little corner on one of my homeade desks) but definitely not a live mix/export board except for bandroom demos.
 

Ah. I've had the CR and a vlz Pro 1604, but I've been thinking of the 1642 and looking for a vlz4. I imagine a vlz Pro would do, and am gun shy of the vlz3 series.
My last big home set up had a 24-8 and a pair of patchbays, so it was all ready to go or change quickly. I still think an outboard mixer is easier for me.
 
Have you seen this article on the original CR1604?
http://www.silentway.com/recording-tricks-mackie-cr-1604-mixer
Michael

Thanks for that. Obviously this is woefully off topic but I'm going to post the bulk of that article here (my script blockers were mangling that site in an unreadable way so I ctrl + a'd into note pad and edited it for posting here...).
 
Recording Tricks: Mackie CR-1604 Mixer

These Audio Recording Guides and Tips are courtesy of Silent Way Remote Recording and Media Asset Management in San Francisco.

Mackie CR-1604 mixer

(original version, not the 1604-VLZ or 1604VLZ-pro unless noted)

    The main outputs are wired "Ring Hot"; wiring details on the insert jacks; pre/post modifications

The popular original Mackie CR-1604 mixer is everywhere you turn, but few engineers know to watch out for a major wiring issue. The original Mackie 1604's BALANCED (TRS) main outputs are wired "Ring Hot" as follows:
Tip = - (cold)
RING = + (HOT)
Sleeve = Ground

NOTE: The CR-1604 was replaced by the much-improved 1604VLZ, then the VLZ PRO, then more versions, all of which fixed this problem. The VLZ improved almost everything about the mixer, including real direct outputs, inserts on every channel, sweepable EQ, 4 busses, better monitoring control, and cleaner signal-to-noise specs. Then the VLZ PRO version came out which improved the mic preamps again.

(If you think I'm crazy, here's a second opinion from Sweetwater.com.)

This "ring hot" wiring is completely backwards but thankfully this is the only time I've ever seen this! Therefore, if you use a TRS--> XLR cable to run a mix from the 1604, double check that it is wired correctly for your standard (ie. tip-->pin 2 or 3). A cable wired "tip-->pin 2" would actually be running the hot signal to pin 3 and vice-versa. No matter which device is receiving your mix, check how the cables are wired and be prepared with phase reversal adapters.

Mackie tech support says that changing the jacks' wiring is not an easy modification to make, as the jacks are board-mounted. If you use unbalanced plugs in this jack, it is wired "tip hot," and the output is 6dB lower than the Balanced output.

The 1604's Mono Main Out is similarly capable of either Balanced or Unbalanced output (and the unbalanced signal is also 6dB lower). It combines the Right and Left Main Channels and, according to the manual, "the polarity is reversed" (with respect to the main outs). This means that this output is correctly "tip hot," but is out of phase with the stereo output (meaning the stereo output, if summed to mono, would be out of phase with the mono output.) ...Whew!

The 1604VLZ's mono output is AFTER the main fader. Here's the signal flow: Main insert-->Main fader-->mono out-->main out. (Not sure if this is the same as the original 1604.)
    
.

The original CR-1604 with XLR-10 mic pre expander and rotopod



Mackie 1604-VLZ PRO Mixer

Get a deal on the current version of this mixer

at Zzounds.com

The 1604's Mic inputs are wired correctly, pin 2 hot:
Pin 1 = Ground

Pin 2 = + (hot)

Pin 3 = - (cold)

The 1604's Balanced TRS Line inputs (Channels 1-6) are also wired correctly:

Tip = + (hot)

Ring = - (cold)

Sleeve = Ground

To use the 1604's Channel Access (on channels 1-8) as a direct out without signal interruption to the master, insert an unbalanced 1/4" plug to the "first click." This is a POST-Fader, POST-EQ feed, useful for sending channels to a multitrack. If you insert a unbalanced cable all the way, it will interrupt the signal to the main mix bus.

See the Mackie Mixer Applications Guide, 2nd Edition for modifications to make the Channel Access points Pre-EQ/Pre-Fader or Pre-Fader/Post-EQ. This also shows how to make the Aux Sends into Monitor Sends with or without EQ, how to make the Aux Sends ignore Mute/Alt status, and mentions a mod to tie the Solo together on two or more 1604s.

To use the 1604's Channel Access (on channels 1-8) as a send/return patch point, use a TRS cable wired as follows:

Tip = Output (send to external device)

Ring = Input (return from external device)

Sleeve = Ground

By the way, HOSA STP-201 Send/Return cables (TRS--> two unbalanced 1/4" Plugs) are wired so that the Orange plug is the Tip (send) and the Grey plug is the Ring (return).

    Mackie Tech Support: 1-800-258-6883
    Mackie's download page with manuals for most models
    Back to the List of Tips
    Silent Way Audio Consulting
    Silent Way Audio Rentals


Beepster again...
 
That's good to know and I think it is mentioned in the manual (as a "feature" of some sort... the plugs on the thing do all sorts of crazy things which apparently is undesirable for some folks... meh).
 
This does not really affect me though right now with the way I use the Mackie. I do not use the Main outs at all. I just use it to run my signal into the first 8 channels and then tap the direct outs to the interface.
 
However this might explain why some of my monitoring/live mix experiments failed so miserably. I was getting some bizarre "PWONG" type sound (like the sound you get when you tap a basketball). I chalked that up to me not knowing how to route things to and from my Layla but maybe this was the issue.
 
Either way it works fine for what I am currently doing but I will take a closer look at what this strange wiring means for my purposes. As I said I think there is something in the manual about this wiring scheme but it was above my head last time I read it.
 
For now I monitor through the outs on the interface and usually through headphones so the board outs never come into play. If I decided to do some board out wackiness though then obviously this is something to be concerened about. I'm assuming it's just a matter of buying/wiring up some cables to deal with it.
 
Thanks.

I've been trying this for bass...
http://distorqueaudio.com/plugins/vitamin-c.html
into this...
https://www.tseaudio.com/software/tseBOD
and finally into MixIRII using a simple Ampeg 8X10 IR with a 57 2" off the cap.
Sounds good.
 
As for compression on buses I always start with 1 X 1.5 ratio. I don't compress much more than a db or two.
Of course Danny, Jeff and Bats know what their doing and I'm a hack...so?