is there a plug-in or compressor setting that can do this?

[Seth McKinley]

I use any one of several SW programs to process/ transfer music to CD,
mp3, wave, whatever. I often like to augment and compress the lower
volume segments, but I am often then left with way too much compression
for the same song on the loudest part of the track. What I'd like to do
is raise and compress the volume of the fainter parts of the song, but
leave the louder parts alone and untouched.... sort of like a threshold
control but in reverse where compression only affects the fainter
volume. I have been unable to find any adjustment in my normal SW
compressor to achieve this and I am looking for suggestions.

Thank you, Seth M

[[email protected]]

This is called upward compression, versus the usual downward compression. I don't know of any specific plug-ins that do this, but now you at least know what to type into Google.

--Ethan

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:01:45 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> This is called upward compression, versus the usual downward compression. I don't know of any specific plug-ins that do this, but now you at least know what to type into Google. --Ethan

it is also called "New York style" compression.

You can create is using an ordinary compressor as follows:

Set the compressor for high ratio like 10:1 or more. Set the threshold very low so that almost everything is squashed. Set attack and deacy per taste. Now here is the key. Take the output of the compressor which is a squashed to H and back version of the audio, and ADD (or mix it with) it to the uncompresed input. Just like you combine the dry and wet versions of an effect. When the original is loud, the original will dominate the output. When the original is soft, the compressed version will dominate. This works very well on vocals.

CAUTION. Take care that the delay through the direct path and the compressed path are matched or you will get unwanted comb effects. This is usually not an issue with a real hardware box but can be an issue with a software compressor.

Also there are SW compressors that allow you to basically draw the curve that you want. So you should be able to do this directy with one of those. See N tack studio. But it is much less intuative. The New York way of doing it is very intuative but watch out for the comb effects.


But to tell you the truth, do you really want to add more compression to a commercial CD?

Mark.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 2:01:45 PM UTC-5,
> wrote:
>> This is called upward compression, versus the usual downward
>> compression. I don't know of any specific plug-ins that do this, but
>> now you at least know what to type into Google. --Ethan

> it is also called "New York style" compression.

> You can create is using an ordinary compressor as follows:

> Set the compressor for high ratio like 10:1 or more. Set the
> threshold very low so that almost everything is squashed.

Squashing is not a requirement, it is one of the choices, quite possibly not
the first choice, 1.4 to 1 or 2 to 1 is more like it for dynamic range
reduction of classical music, the net outcome is that the compression ratio
is about halved. A descriptive wording is to call it parallel compression
because that is what it is. In some applications also the compression panel
has a wet to dry ratio setting ... set it midway and hey presto, there you
are.

> Set attack and deacy per taste.

Good taste is decay 10 times attack, 30 to 50 milliseconds attack for analog
compressors usually works well without causing too much bass distortion.
Very short attack times and preemptive action are possible in off-line
digital processing because it allows the processor a preview of the file but
can sound unnatural if you get them wrong.

> But to tell you the truth, do you really want to add more compression
> to a commercial CD?

No, he needs software that can match average levels for entire songs,
compression is not the correct tool. Which is why you were the first to
suggest parallel compression.

> Mark.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

Seth McKinley > wrote:
>I use any one of several SW programs to process/ transfer music to CD,
>mp3, wave, whatever. I often like to augment and compress the lower
>volume segments, but I am often then left with way too much compression
>for the same song on the loudest part of the track. What I'd like to do
>is raise and compress the volume of the fainter parts of the song, but
>leave the louder parts alone and untouched.... sort of like a threshold
>control but in reverse where compression only affects the fainter
>volume. I have been unable to find any adjustment in my normal SW
>compressor to achieve this and I am looking for suggestions.

Compress it and then normalize it? Or use a typical AGC compressor set
up as an "upward compressor?"
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Seth McKinley > wrote:

>> I use any one of several SW programs to process/ transfer music to
>> CD, mp3, wave, whatever. I often like to augment and compress the
>> lower volume segments, but I am often then left with way too much
>> compression for the same song on the loudest part of the track.
>> What I'd like to do is raise and compress the volume of the fainter
>> parts of the song, but leave the louder parts alone and
>> untouched.... sort of like a threshold control but in reverse where
>> compression only affects the fainter volume. I have been unable to
>> find any adjustment in my normal SW compressor to achieve this and I
>> am looking for suggestions.

> Compress it and then normalize it? Or use a typical AGC compressor
> set up as an "upward compressor?"

I used to use parallel compression, now I draw a transfer characteristic
that fits the actual music or use a very modest slope and a low treshold,
some of the time on a multiband on the mix bus. Nowadays I do almost all
processing in the multitrack view of A3 to keep the number of DSP stages
low. I like to think that I get cleaner sound by doing it so even a two
track stereo recording goes that route to CD.

Some of the time the classic DBX ploy of using 1.1 or 1.2 to 1 is what works
best - adding a low treshold helps keeping the mush out of the sound. I
think the OP could be using say 5:1 with a -10 dB treshold and should be
using 2:1 or 1.4 to one, a (much) lower treshold and parallel compression if
using a hardware compressor.

Actual "best" settings depend on music, intented result and operators whim
and preconceived opinions. Twiddle some knobs until it sounds "right",
whatever that is.

> --scott

Kind regards

Peter Larsen