NY compression vs Send compression.

[Undrig]

Just curious if any knowledgeable heads can clue me in on any sonic differences between these two methods.

Obviously NY compression is stacking a duplicate channel with one squashed and the other dry. The squashed copy being adjusted to taste in the mix.

Wouldn't one get the same results putting a compressor (with slammed settings) on a send channel and using the send amount on each respective track based on how you want it to cut through a mix compared to the other sounds routed to the same send? It's essentially sending the signal the same way as parallel compression is it not?

Are there any obvious advantages or differences between one method or the other?
Curious what people think who have experience with both.

[Eat Bass]

i have also been wondering the same thing. I'm not too knowledgable on parallel compression, but also wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room? sorry if thats a dumb question its just always something i've wondered. also sorry if i hijacked your thread.

[Basic A]

i have also been wondering the same thing. I'm not too knowledgable on parallel compression, but also wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room? sorry if thats a dumb question its just always something i've wondered. also sorry if i hijacked your thread.

You would compensate, thats what the volume fader is for, turning things down.

[Eat Bass]

i have also been wondering the same thing. I'm not too knowledgable on parallel compression, but also wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room? sorry if thats a dumb question its just always something i've wondered. also sorry if i hijacked your thread.

You would compensate, thats what the volume fader is for, turning things down.

durrrrr haha wow

what about phasing issues, nothing of that sort?

[Today]

i thought they were the exact same thing
And yes, with a send channel you can mix all into one compressor and adjust the compressed mix with lots of flexibility
use pre-fader so you can also freely adjust the faders on the dry channels and the sends independently of one another

[legskeattch]

The way i set up NYC in logic is with a bus channel.... so kick/snare/hats all sent to the compression channel using the bus sends, and turning the knob to what ever sounds best for the individual channel.

[Today]

and as per phasing, i always hear that it should cause phasing, but it never does for me. Reason being, i believe, because the processing on the send channel changes the waveform enough to where it's not at all close enough to the dry waveform to cause phasing.

[wub]

i have also been wondering the same thing. I'm not too knowledgable on parallel compression, but also wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room? sorry if thats a dumb question its just always something i've wondered. also sorry if i hijacked your thread.

You would compensate, thats what the volume fader is for, turning things down.

durrrrr haha wow

what about phasing issues, nothing of that sort?

Most DAWs have delay compensation factored into them now...FL Studio has had it since 9, I think?

[Sharmaji]

wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room?

no.

parallel comp is best done on a send, or using a compressor or plug in that has a wet/dry balance. the nice thing about a send is that you have 1 more stage where you can choose how hard to drive the input; the nice thing about the wet/dry one is that you don't have to worry about that.

another trick, especially for balancing songs that go from really quiet to really loud (think of the drums in "Smells like Teen Spirit") is to then route both the compressed and dry signal to the same bus, and put a compressor in that one-- that way, the overall level is tamed in, and you get the big, sucking compressed sound taking over in the loud sections, and the smaller, dry sounds in the quieter sections-- without huge jumps in level.

never a bad idea to have a really funky compressor-- or a couple-- set up as sends in a mix session. that way you can send any # of elements to them, have things push and pull against each other, and bring those vibin' relationships into the mixdown.

pre-2006 or so this used to be a real pain in the DAW world, but as multi-core processors came out, delay compensation issues have largely gone away... unless you're on protools

[Basic A]

i have also been wondering the same thing. I'm not too knowledgable on parallel compression, but also wouldn't having a duplicate channel and having one non compressed and one compressed version eat up a lot of head room? sorry if thats a dumb question its just always something i've wondered. also sorry if i hijacked your thread.

You would compensate, thats what the volume fader is for, turning things down.

durrrrr haha wow

what about phasing issues, nothing of that sort?

Most DAWs have delay compensation factored into them now...FL Studio has had it since 9, I think?

http://dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=230000

[jrisreal]

what about phasing issues, nothing of that sort?

I'm pretty sure you would get more phasing issues with the other method due to he way pdc works.

[wub]

Ah, knew we discussed that recently. Much obliged fella

[Undrig]

This is all great info. Much appreciated.

[VirtualMark]

To the OP - new york compression is send compression or parallel compression. Just different names. The benefits of parallel compression are that it is more subtle than normal compression. Instead of limiting the peaks it makes the quieter bits louder - upwards compression instead of downwards compression.

There really isn't much difference if you used a plugin with dry/wet control, or used sends and returns, or you could even duplicate the track and have one with a plugin on it, and one without. Different methods give you different levels of control, as someone else said if you have a send effect set up you have the advantage of being able to send multiple tracks to it, which also saves cpu.

This is similar to other threads asking about various parallel techniques(i.e parallel distortion and filtering). I think all daws now have plugin delay compensation, so you shouldn't get phasing issues at all.

Sharmaji - interesting technique, i'm going to have to try that one!

[Basic A]

I think all daws now have plugin delay compensation, so you shouldn't get phasing issues at all.

The first half of the statement, is basically true, the part pre-comma.

The second part isnt. PDC is never going to be perfect.

[jrisreal]

^^ too true. I get a bit plugin delay when mixing down tracks all the time...until I render it atleast...seems it's all taken care of once it's rendered

[Eat Bass]

^^ too true. I get a bit plugin delay when mixing down tracks all the time...until I render it atleast...seems it's all taken care of once it's rendered

so i don't understand, how do you avoid phasing when using parallel compression techniques, more specifically busses?

[Today]

i've never experienced it... but in older versions of my DAW there was a plugin called "delaycomp" which would compensate for plugin latency. you entered the number of plugs on a track and it would do the math to sync everything up on playback

[VirtualMark]

The second part isnt. PDC is never going to be perfect.

do you have phasing issues then? which daw are you using?

i'm using cubase, and it seems to always work. i'd have thought any phasing issues would be caused by other stuff, such as a heavily distorted sound that has had its phase changed by the processing, rather than a problem with aligning the tracks in the daw.

theoretically it should be a feature that works 100%. i.e if you have a compressor on a send bus, and that compressor takes 10 samples to process a sound, then the daw should delay all other tracks by 10 samples so they align.

i suppose in practice there may be a few glitches due to dodgy software.

[jrisreal]

^^ too true. I get a bit plugin delay when mixing down tracks all the time...until I render it atleast...seems it's all taken care of once it's rendered

so i don't understand, how do you avoid phasing when using parallel compression techniques, more specifically busses?

Honestly I've never used parallel compression. But I guess you could use some plugin to create intentional delay on the uncompressed track...but before you render, then you take that thing out.