| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Compression Settings For GUITAR & BASS
Hello again to everyone.
I previously posted here looking for a downloadable manual for my Ashly SC-50. (Thanks to those of you who helped me out!) It got me to thinking about something. When it comes to recording, everyone has opinions on just about EVERYthing. One area that I'm sure people have a lot of opinions on is compression. I am a serious hobbyist when it comes to home recording--definitely not a pro. One of the biggest mysteries to me when I got started was how/why to use a compressor for recording, and I'm still not sure I know all I need to know on this subject. I and others would be interested to hear from some of the more experienced members of rec.audio.pro on the subject of HOW and WHY you use a compressor on guitar & bass tracks. Some things that I would like to know: 1) Recommended compressor settings for electric guitar. 2) Recommended compressor settings for acoustic guitar. 3) Recommended compressor settings for BASS guitar. (PLEASE!) 4) Situations when a compressor IS recommended. 5) Situations when a compressor IS NOT recommended. 6) What to look for in order to get a great compressed sound. 7) Recommended compressors. Thanking everyone in advance... |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not an expert either but I did learn something reading this news group. When originally tracking, record the parts dry without compression or other effects. It is better not to apply compression or other effects when originally tracking because you only get one chance to get the settings right. Once you have it recorded, you can apply your effects, compression or whatever when mixing. Now you can experiment all you want. If you do something you don't like, it is easier to do it over while mixing. Have fun. Mark |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
EADGBE:
Hallo! At first, before to try to turn the knops, you need the idee what knop is for what. What does Ratio, Threshold, Attack, Relases mean. And what does the "gain reduction" LED-chain show. A compressor turn down loud levels and makes quieter signals louder. All levels above the threshold is reduced with the adjusted ratio. If threshold is set to -30dB and ratio to 2:1 a signal lower as -30dB is passed with out any processing(statically). A signal of -20dB is reduced to -25. (10dB over threshhold, Ratio 2:1 - 5dB over threshhold) so gain reduction is 5dB. A signal of 0dB is reduced to -15dB. And since a compressor has a output poti (also known as gain makeup) is makes also - indirectly - quite things louder. Attack says how fast the comp. should response and release how fast the gainreduction goes back. A short attack may couse harmonic distortion, when the attack is faster than the signal frequency. - use a slower attack on bass signals. A longer attack let the transients through without procession. You can use this to increase the attack. 1) Recommended compressor settings for electric guitar. None. On distorted or overdriven guitars because the amplifieres saturation works like a compressor. Maybe a litte bit multibandcompressor to handle the low mids at around 200Hz. 2) Recommended compressor settings for acoustic guitar. 3) Recommended compressor settings for BASS guitar. (PLEASE!) It is a good advice to record without compressor when you don't have a glue what to do. But, it sounds better to use more compressors with gentle setting that one with a more extreme setting. That's why I record bass and Vocals with a gentle compressor setting. Depends 2:1 - 6:1. Attack so fast that the transients sound good an theres no distortion, release relatively fast. Depends, how the singer or the player is. During mix it is different if the mix is very thin (like acoustic guitar plus singer) or very fat like metal guitar wall. A compressor changes the sound. Some aspekts of the sound will sound better, some worser. You have to decide. 4) Situations when a compressor IS recommended. When the player is inconstantly. But it is no magic bullet, I softer hidden drum will sound softe even with a compressor that equals the level. 5) Situations when a compressor IS NOT recommended. When the sound, will become worser. E.g. sometimes a comp makes the sound dull. When the signal is good enough and needs no compressor. Compressor is not a must. 6) What to look for in order to get a great compressed sound. A good compressor. A good adjustment of it. 7) Recommended compressors. Search this group with google. To name a not well known compressor: I like my Mindprint T-Comp. Another compressor that never sounds bad is the Wave Renaissance Comp Plugin. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mark" wrote:
I'm not an expert either but I did learn something reading this news group. When originally tracking, record the parts dry without compression or other effects. It is better not to apply compression or other effects when originally tracking because you only get one chance to get the settings right. Once you have it recorded, you can apply your effects, compression or whatever when mixing. Now you can experiment all you want. If you do something you don't like, it is easier to do it over while mixing. Have fun. Mark, Yes, and no. Sometimes compression can help during tracking (wild variations when recording vocals, bass, or acoustic guitar, for example). The trick is to use a little bit going in, and then add more if needed, during the mixdown. I try to avoid any compression when tracking drums, but I'll add some to the kick and snare during the mix session. I'd rather not use any compression during recording, but sometimes it's unavoidable. Harvey Gerst Indian Trail Recording Studio http://www.ITRstudio.com/ |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Grant wrote:
Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? ^^^^ "just" ? Yes, a 24 bit recorder would have far less need of tracking compression than a 16 bit recorder, but that's drifted away from the topic of how to use a compressor... Anahata |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 00:33:15 -0500, "David Grant"
wrote: I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? Dave I'm not Harvey (and I don't play one on TV), and I'll bet he presents a more concise answer than me, but since I'm still awake: Last things first; if you are working entirely in the analog realm, or at least until final mixdown, 'upping the bitrate' during tracking ain't really an option. IME, compressing whilst tracking _requires_ an intimate knowledge of the operation and effect of your available tools, a clear grasp of how the source material will be performed and how it should fit in the mix, and the experience and confidence to commit to your decisions. A side benefit for those with a limited 'toolbox' of compressors could be; if the tracking compression was proper/adequate during tracking, that same compressor would be available for other uses during mixdown. In other words, the more closely a track sounds, as recorded, to what it should sound like in the mix, the more you can concentrate on other elements of the mix. This, of course, also applies to mic choice/placement, preamp choice, blah, blah..... If you've ever heard the phrase "this tune practically mixed itself", you can bet that, besides fine talent and arrangement, a great deal of experience and knowledge went into the tracking. ==================== Tracy Wintermute Rushcreek Ranch ==================== |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you've ever heard the phrase "this tune practically mixed itself",
you can bet that, besides fine talent and arrangement, a great deal of experience and knowledge went into the tracking. Highly Suggested Reading... http://marsh.prosoundweb.com/index.p...875/#msg_24875 |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
.. If you have a noisy environment (or a noisy mic or preamp) that you really can't get away with compressing heavily, by compressing what you're monitoring, you can hear that in real time and solve the problem before it comes around to bite you. since the compressor comes after the mic pre...if the environment, mic or mic pre is noisy, compressing the pre output won't make it any better, in fact it will probably make it worse... no? If you could compress the audio BEFORE it goes into the mic, that would help, that's what a good performer can do.... no??? Mark |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
.. If you have a noisy environment (or a noisy mic or preamp) that you really can't get away with compressing heavily, by compressing what you're monitoring, you can hear that in real time and solve the problem before it comes around to bite you. since the compressor comes after the mic pre...if the environment, mic or mic pre is noisy, compressing the pre output won't make it any better, in fact it will probably make it worse... no? If you could compress the audio BEFORE it goes into the mic, that would help, that's what a good performer can do.... no??? Mark |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Grant wrote:
I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? He's talking about dynamic compression, NOT lossy compression. Which probably shouldn't even be called compression. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mark wrote: . If you have a noisy environment (or a noisy mic or preamp) that you really can't get away with compressing heavily, by compressing what you're monitoring, you can hear that in real time and solve the problem before it comes around to bite you. since the compressor comes after the mic pre...if the environment, mic or mic pre is noisy, compressing the pre output won't make it any better, in fact it will probably make it worse... no? If you could compress the audio BEFORE it goes into the mic, that would help, that's what a good performer can do.... no??? Mark Mike, my bad...I misread what you wrote as: "really can't get away withOUT compressing heavily" we are in agreement, compressing a noisy mic signal is NOT a good thing. Mark |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'd rather not use any compression during recording, but sometimes it's
unavoidable. Harvey Gerst I find it's mostly dependant upon the players and the equipment. If, for instance, a really good player is playing a POS precision or jazz bass (whatever), then it's going to be necessary to do a little compression on the way in to compensate for the inability of the instrument to play evenly. Even a really good player can and will fall victim to this problem, although a real recording pro may compensate. But my liver transplant friend ended up over here on Saturday and his Alembic through a Behringer (both the SVT and Peavey CS400 weren't needed) came through just fine without any compression. Good instrument and good player. Vocalist with knowledge of proper mic techniques are the easiest to record. They are spot on whenever they sing. Those whose tendencies are to move around and forget where the mic is need some compression so that you can increase the gain on the mic to get them somewhat off axis and still get usable volume. Then it becomes a problem with EQing on mixdown to fix. With those that know and understand where the mic is at all times (Ray Charles comes to mind) then you don't need to worry. I'd rather err in favor of natural recording if the players and instruments are a known quality. Trusting the players is the first choice. If you know a musician isn't trustworthy in how they handle the recording process, well, that's part of being an engineer. It's not about having every possible solution on tap at the push of a button. It's about being a part of the experience of making the music. Most musicians don't realize how important the engineer is to the making of music during a recording, but then that's not their job. What our job entails IS knowing that we're part of the music without letting the musicians know we are. It's like an offensive lineman in football. The only time you hear their names is when they are called for a foul. Musicians are a fragile bunch of people, always needing reinforcement on their abilities, on their performance on a particular passage they find difficult, whatever. By taking that point of possible contention out of the process, an engineer has done their job. Whether it includes compression on the way in or not is all part of the engineer doing their job, based on the knowledge they have of the players, the room, the mics and placement and the quality of the instruments. From there on it's the musician's responsibility to supply the music. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Harvey Gerst" wrote in message ... "Mark" wrote: I'm not an expert either but I did learn something reading this news group. When originally tracking, record the parts dry without compression or other effects. It is better not to apply compression or other effects when originally tracking because you only get one chance to get the settings right. Once you have it recorded, you can apply your effects, compression or whatever when mixing. Now you can experiment all you want. If you do something you don't like, it is easier to do it over while mixing. Have fun. Mark, Yes, and no. Sometimes compression can help during tracking (wild variations when recording vocals, bass, or acoustic guitar, for example). The trick is to use a little bit going in, and then add more if needed, during the mixdown. I try to avoid any compression when tracking drums, but I'll add some to the kick and snare during the mix session. Indian Trail Recording Studio http://www.ITRstudio.com/ |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
And how do you see using compression on the way in freeing up headroom?
Apparent quiet passages of music may well eat up headroom, whilst loud passages of individual instruments may leave a significant amount of headroom. One can't look at things being as simple as one part being recorded in what appears on the waveform as quiet because it may well be lots of energy recorded low. Once one brings it up in the mix, it eats the headroom up anyway AND you may have noise becoming part of that headroom that's eaten up. Bitrate (word depth is the correct way to look at it) is a matter of going down from 0 dBFS. 24 bits of TRUE dynamics would result in the quietest point being 144 dB down from 0 dBFS. But the maximum output sans distortion is still 0 dBFS, so you don't gain headroom by going to 24 bits unless you adjust your thinking to equalling something like -18 or -20 dB down as the realistic 0 VU that one would find within an analog environment. That would give you about 20 dB of headroom. The average decent console would have somewhat of 24 dB of headroom prior to unusable distortion. If, for instance, one recorded all tracks at -10 dBFS and wanted to mix it, they'd probably be required to turn each track DOWN in order to maintain headroom. Trying to record any track at a greater word depth and then fill it up with recording is a good example of not understanding just what the word depth does in terms of digital recording. In realistic terms, one needs to establish a set point that equals a reasonable headroom recording without trying to use all the bits. First of all, it's impossible because converters have thermal noise, and second of all, it's not a natural method of instruments to supply a certain input signal that equals other naturally louder instruments. By looking at input strictly as input signal, one is ignoring the input's characteristics, such as dynamic attack, like the difference between a kick drum and a snare, or the difference between a well strummed guitar vs a shred lead guitar attack. Tools don't make these judgements. People do. Trying to manipulate the recording environment based simply on technical specs doesn't do any person you record justice. It simply makes problems in the recording apparent. To go back to a greater word depth, recording at 24 bits or 16 bits doesn't make a difference at the top end of 0 dBFS. The difference occurs at just how quiet the particular track can become without going into thermal noise of the converter. Beautiful records were recorded using about 75 dB (max) of dynamic headroom. And that's the high point where the needle, on playback, would probably jump out of the groove, depending on bass content, etc. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "David Grant" wrote in message ... Mark, Yes, and no. Sometimes compression can help during tracking (wild variations when recording vocals, bass, or acoustic guitar, for example). The trick is to use a little bit going in, and then add more if needed, during the mixdown. I try to avoid any compression when tracking drums, but I'll add some to the kick and snare during the mix session. I'd rather not use any compression during recording, but sometimes it's unavoidable. I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? Dave |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Olhsson has said a number of times that a well tracked tune practically
mixes itself, primarily because a number of mixing decisions are already made due to the LACK of their necessity to be addressed during the mixing process. It's the difference of being proactively involved with the tracking as opposed to the oft used passive tracking where all tracks are represented at their maximum values sans distortion, but don't represent where the music was going at the time. On mixdown it can be severely misinterpreted what the music wanted to do at the time. By paying attention to the music at the time of the performance and gaining a recording that recognizes what the engineer realized was needed, the tracks then become apparent as to what the music was trying to say. And if one doesn't realize that the music is actually trying to tell you, the engineer, what it wants means that you aren't actually an engineer yet. I can give you an example in the video world of live concerts. A director may be good at calling shots and setting up the next image, but if he's focusing on the piano player and the guitar is doing it's lead, he doesn't get it. And a really GOOD director will understand the music well enough to come up with who's going to be doing their solo next and have the proper camera on the correct player. We just need to understand where the correct player is and then all the rest of the stuff falls into place. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Tracy Wintermute" wrote in message ... On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 00:33:15 -0500, "David Grant" wrote: I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? Dave I'm not Harvey (and I don't play one on TV), and I'll bet he presents a more concise answer than me, but since I'm still awake: Last things first; if you are working entirely in the analog realm, or at least until final mixdown, 'upping the bitrate' during tracking ain't really an option. IME, compressing whilst tracking _requires_ an intimate knowledge of the operation and effect of your available tools, a clear grasp of how the source material will be performed and how it should fit in the mix, and the experience and confidence to commit to your decisions. A side benefit for those with a limited 'toolbox' of compressors could be; if the tracking compression was proper/adequate during tracking, that same compressor would be available for other uses during mixdown. In other words, the more closely a track sounds, as recorded, to what it should sound like in the mix, the more you can concentrate on other elements of the mix. This, of course, also applies to mic choice/placement, preamp choice, blah, blah..... If you've ever heard the phrase "this tune practically mixed itself", you can bet that, besides fine talent and arrangement, a great deal of experience and knowledge went into the tracking. ==================== Tracy Wintermute Rushcreek Ranch ==================== |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
A short attack may couse harmonic distortion, when the attack is faster
than the signal frequency. - use a slower attack on bass signals. A longer attack let the transients through without procession. You can use this to increase the attack. Is this because the compressor will start compressing on both sides of the waveform? kevin |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Matrixmusic wrote: A short attack may couse harmonic distortion, when the attack is faster than the signal frequency. - use a slower attack on bass signals. A longer attack let the transients through without procession. You can use this to increase the attack. Is this because the compressor will start compressing on both sides of the waveform? kevin It's because the compressor gain changes so fast it will actually follow the low frequency waveform and reduce gain during the peaks of the sine wave (both + and - peaks) and increase gain during the trough of the sine wave. This "compresses" the sine wave just like odd order distortion does. Mark |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is one of those "I don't know why" questions. You can't compress
before a pre. The word "pre" means BEFORE. It's necessary to take the minimal signal coming from a small amount of movement of a diaphragm affecting a magnetized structure (in terms of dynamic mics) or the fluctuation of juice flowing through a backplate in a condensor mic, and amplify it via a pre (there IS a Pre-pre in the mic, but it only raises the signal to a recognizable signal level for the actual external PRE (some newer digital mics work slightly different, but not enough that you'd know it other than sending out a digital signal). If you were to try to compress prior to making it a workable signal, you wouldn't be doing anything, which is why we don't do it that way. If a "pre" has a compresser built in, it's still POST the pre. With the exception of the actual pickup element, EVERYTHING is POST to the pre. That's why we have mic trims (pre gain) on consoles. You can't turn it up if what's coming in isn't matched up to the gain structure of the rest of the unit. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Mark" wrote in message oups.com... . If you have a noisy environment (or a noisy mic or preamp) that you really can't get away with compressing heavily, by compressing what you're monitoring, you can hear that in real time and solve the problem before it comes around to bite you. since the compressor comes after the mic pre...if the environment, mic or mic pre is noisy, compressing the pre output won't make it any better, in fact it will probably make it worse... no? If you could compress the audio BEFORE it goes into the mic, that would help, that's what a good performer can do.... no??? Mark |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"David Grant" wrote:
Mark, Yes, and no. Sometimes compression can help during tracking (wild variations when recording vocals, bass, or acoustic guitar, for example). The trick is to use a little bit going in, and then add more if needed, during the mixdown. I try to avoid any compression when tracking drums, but I'll add some to the kick and snare during the mix session. I'd rather not use any compression during recording, but sometimes it's unavoidable. I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? Dave, When I track, I try to optimize my gain structure as much as possible for dealing with the lowest possible signal level I'm likely to encounter during a song. With some of the low ouput mics I use (like the SM7 or some of the ribbons), it means not adding more noise from added gain, so my low level signals might be hitting at -20dB or so, but there's not much noise. When a shouting part comes along (that threatens to come close to, or top out at 0), I reach for a compressor to provide a little safety margin. Since I now know the singer's gonna be all over the place, I know I'll need to add compression during mixdown, so I'll give it a touch of compression going in, rather than waiting till I mix. It also helps me know that an untrained singer ain't gonna get too loud and mess up a decent take by creating some digital clipping cuz I didn't allow enough headroom. Harvey Gerst Indian Trail Recording Studio http://www.ITRstudio.com/ |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave, When I track, I try to optimize my gain structure as much as possible for dealing with the lowest possible signal level I'm likely to encounter during a song. With some of the low ouput mics I use (like the SM7 or some of the ribbons), it means not adding more noise from added gain, so my low level signals might be hitting at -20dB or so, but there's not much noise. When a shouting part comes along (that threatens to come close to, or top out at 0), I reach for a compressor to provide a little safety margin. Since I now know the singer's gonna be all over the place, I know I'll need to add compression during mixdown, so I'll give it a touch of compression going in, rather than waiting till I mix. It also helps me know that an untrained singer ain't gonna get too loud and mess up a decent take by creating some digital clipping cuz I didn't allow enough headroom. Harvey Gerst Indian Trail Recording Studio http://www.ITRstudio.com/ Okay, I see what you're saying. But theoretically speaking, if you had infinite bitrate then adding compression beforehand vs. afterwards would make no difference, correct? |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Really good compressors are excellent friends. A crappy compressor is
not your friend. Spend time with a really good compressor and your work will benefit. Compression is an important part of the craft. It can make your job as an engineer considerably easier. Learning about them takes years of fiddlin' and diddlin' (as Johnny Most used to say). The key to using them is not some magic setting, but using and trusting your ears. If you own a nice compressor, jump in the water with it and get wet. Don't be stupid, but don't be a pussy either. Trust your ears more than your eyes. David Correia Celebration Sound Warren, Rhode Island www.CelebrationSound.com |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Grant wrote: Mark, Yes, and no. Sometimes compression can help during tracking (wild variations when recording vocals, bass, or acoustic guitar, for example). The trick is to use a little bit going in, and then add more if needed, during the mixdown. I try to avoid any compression when tracking drums, but I'll add some to the kick and snare during the mix session. I'd rather not use any compression during recording, but sometimes it's unavoidable. I've been wondering about this lately actually Harvey. Why should it make any difference whether compression is added after/before tracking? Using it before could free up some headroom I agree, but could you not alternatively just up the bitrate of your recording? Compression brings up the noise floor, so if you know that you going to be adding substantila compression, say for an effect on drum room mics, I'd do that going to tape, so that you don't bring up the tape hiss during the mix. Also, if the amount of gear is limited you can stretech it further. Suppose you had one stereo compressor, use it on the drums rooms, then on vocal overdubs then on the stereo buss during mixing. That's mostly relevant to analog oriented recording. If you tracking into and then mxing in a box, you might want to track with it so you get a device, not a plug-in. Say, a real LA-2A or a Distressor and then skip the plug-in. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
David Grant wrote:
Harvey Gerst: When I track, I try to optimize my gain structure as much as possible for dealing with the lowest possible signal level I'm likely to encounter during a song. With some of the low ouput mics I use (like the SM7 or some of the ribbons), it means not adding more noise from added gain, so my low level signals might be hitting at -20dB or so, but there's not much noise. When a shouting part comes along (that threatens to come close to, or top out at 0), I reach for a compressor to provide a little safety margin. Since I now know the singer's gonna be all over the place, I know I'll need to add compression during mixdown, so I'll give it a touch of compression going in, rather than waiting till I mix. It also helps me know that an untrained singer ain't gonna get too loud and mess up a decent take by creating some digital clipping cuz I didn't allow enough headroom. Okay, I see what you're saying. But theoretically speaking, if you had infinite bitrate then adding compression beforehand vs. afterwards would make no difference, correct? Remember, too, that Harvey was working back when bitrates weren't relevant and a lot of us got used to making sonic decisions early on, putting on tape what we wanted to come back off of it or as close as we could get, commiting to a mix right at the tracking stage. Having an infinite bitrate and having a big mental aural picture of finished product are different things. g -- ha |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Harvey Gerst" wrote:
[...] Since I now know the singer's gonna be all over the place, I know I'll need to add compression during mixdown, so I'll give it a touch of compression going in, rather than waiting till I mix. What he said. Like I always say, "Compress early and often!" A few stages of light compression are (usually) less offensive than one big squish. -- "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!" - Lorin David Schultz in the control room making even bad news sound good (Remove spamblock to reply) |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:46:38 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote: Highly Suggested Reading... http://marsh.prosoundweb.com/index.p...875/#msg_24875 Good link, thanks JV! The language is a bit of a colorful/regional dialect kinda thing, but the content certainly illustrates the point I was trying to make. ==================== Tracy Wintermute Rushcreek Ranch ==================== |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Newbie Subwoofer questions | General | |||
| Newbie Subwoofer questions | Tech | |||
| accurate bass from 6" monitor? | Pro Audio | |||
| advice on >30hz bass on track | Pro Audio | |||
| 5 String Bass Suggestions? | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
