Change order of Eq and Compress

Forums Forums Qu Forums Qu feature suggestions Change order of Eq and Compress

This topic contains 105 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Mfk0815 Mfk0815 5 months, 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 106 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #93023
    Profile photo of Mike C
    Mike C
    Participant

    I know why you use the AMM, not sure I would use it for lead singers, it does work for some choir uses.

    I wanted you to tell me what it’s actually doing.

    Unless I can get them to use a couple of more channels and do it correctly with what Qu does provide.

    You didn’t answer the question of what you wanted to do with more channels.

    #93024
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    Raising low levels while pushing high levels down can not.

    this is not exactly the definition of upward compression
    upward compression is raising low levels, that’s it
    the problem is that the ambient noise level will increased as well

    can you give us the name of a device that is doing upward compression?
    Please?

    #93028
    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H
    Moderator

    Technical discussion and debate = good.
    Any personal comments that could cause offence = bad.

    Please let’s not let this thread go the same way as the other one did!

    A quick comment on the original post.
    There is no ‘correct’ order for EQ and Compression (as mentioned in the article), though with the fixed architecture in the Qu we had to decide one way or the other.
    EQ first is almost always considered more useful in a live situation where EQ is often used to ‘fix’ signals then a compressor brings the ‘fixed’ signal to a good place in the mix regarding dynamics.
    With a compressor first and without sidechain/filter, especially with something like voice with quick bursts all over the frequency range, the compressor would be reacting to frequencies you might then want to remove with the EQ. This can sound very weird/fun/wrong/bad.
    As mentioned in another post, there are also the tap-offs for monitoring to consider, as these signals include all processing pre-tap-off and it is far more common to send only EQ’d signal to monitors than to send only compressed signal.

    Andy Johns was a fantastic studio engineer so I imagine he’s talking about the benefits of EQ’ing compressed sound when mixing in a studio (though I could be wrong).
    Sound is always sound whether live/studio/other, so sure, the theory applies, but in the same way as you don’t see LDC’s and pop-shields being used on stage for vocals, the best option for one aspect is not always the best for the whole situation.
    I’d therefore suggest this topic has a lot to do with practical application vs theory and that all knock-on effects must be considered (along with how the majority of engineers use the desk of course).
    It cannot be a case of ‘X sounds better that Y, so it must be changed’.

    If using the Qu for mix downs in a studio btw, it’s very easy to apply compression before sending signals out to the Qu. You can also experiment within the Qu by use of a group to get EQ>Comp>EQ>Comp.

    Cheers,
    Keith.

    #93034
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @SteffenR

    Recent modern compression plug ins do it.
    I could google for hardware for you if you really need that help.

    ————-

    @mikec

    I would have to look at the Qu itself again.
    I know they use it with all the choir mikes.
    Did not verify they use it with other singers along with the choir.
    Do not think they used it with just singers using the hand held RF mikes.

    With more channels I could do UPwards compression correctly by applying to two channels with different amounts then feeding them into the LR. It is normally the pastor which is speaking that is the problem with voice intelligibility. I computed for our background noise level (HVAC etc) what level and DR would make him most understandable. But without the upwards compression we can never achieve that goal.

    #93035
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @KeithJ A&H

    I would agree with you a priori. At least until I take time to study the details deeper.
    I could envision situations where EQ after is more useful other than upwards compression.

    But if you know you need upwards compression then EQ should come afterwards not before.

    #93036
    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H
    Moderator

    @volounteer ,

    Another experiment for the next time you are working with the Qu and have somebody speaking quietly, or if you have access to the mixer and can play back a recording to have a play.

    Send the microphone to two groups instead of the LR mix. I’ll call them group A: clean, and group B: ‘extra’ signal.
    You can then heavily compress group B and blend it in with group A for straightforward parallel compression.
    To go a step further, you could reduce or even remove the compression on group B and make use of the ducker triggered by the vocal input instead.
    In this way, the level of group B will only be added in when the vocal input is quiet.
    When the vocal input is loud enough, the extra signal will not be added to the mix and you will preserve dynamics in the ‘now-you’re-speaking-loud-enough’ range.
    By playing with the depth, threshold and envelope you should be able to get a similar effect to an upwards compressor.
    Though not ideal, it might give an idea about whether the noise floor and possible feedback/ringing that’s been mentioned would cause an issue.

    Cheers,
    Keith.

    #93037
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @KeithJ A&H

    Thanks for the idea. That would certainly be another way to do the same thing.
    I am not sure if we have any unused groups. I will check the Qu tonight.

    I think I might be able to find a couple of channel strips, or a mix pair, I could use but would have to check the block diagram to see if that could be done.

    There is no noise problem with the electronics. The SNR is good.
    Our main noise is HVAC and we need to be higher than that with our LR SPL output.

    #93038
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    @keithjah
    he has no groups
    QU16 I think

    @williamadams

    Recent modern compression plug ins do it.

    name them please… I’m searching for years

    I could google for hardware for you if you really need that help.

    please I’m very interested

    #93046
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    Answered twice
    Both disappeared

    no más

    #93048
    Profile photo of Mike C
    Mike C
    Participant

    I think I might be able to find a couple of channel strips, or a mix pair, I could use but would have to check the block diagram to see if that could be done.

    For a single input a Y cable could be used to split that input source into two separate input channels for parallel processing.

    If you use groups be sure to un-assign any channels assigned to a group from the LR mix.
    That is if the group is assigned to the LR mix.

    If you do not un-assign a channel from the LR mix while it is assigned to group that is feeding the LR mix you will get some phase issues from the combining of the direct channel to the LR mix and the group combining together in the LR mix due to the very slight latency difference in the two signal paths.

    All told someone actually running the sound making needed adjustments based on the person speaking at a given moment is the soultion, it’s why they call it “running sound”.

    #93049
    Profile photo of Mike C
    Mike C
    Participant

    All told someone actually running the sound making needed adjustments based on the person speaking at a given moment is the solution, it’s why they call it “running sound”…….
    and I wanted to add but ran out of edit time……….make the need adjustments when your HVAC kicks in.

    Post a picture of the church sanctuary!!!

    #93050
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    @williamadams

    nah what are the hardware units?

    #93051
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @mikec

    Our speakers change faster than our volounteers can make adjustments.

    Some of them slowly get louder and we can handle that.
    But some of them emote constantly with way up and then way low.
    No way we can adjust them in real time.
    But why should we when electronics could do it automatically faster better .

    #93054
    Profile photo of volounteer
    volounteer
    Participant

    @AH

    Posted my answer two more times.

    Neither appears here.

    Bug in wordpress?

    Sometimes it says I move too fast.
    WTF?

    Sometimes it just vanishes.
    This message got the too fast message twice.

    #93058
    Profile photo of Mfk0815
    Mfk0815
    Participant

    Hmm, your approach is still interesting for me. Let‘s recap
    There are speaker with less or non existing speech training or microphone technique.
    There are volunteers wit more or less experience in running a sound system, but they a in fact running the system
    There is a HVAC which causes disturbing noise.
    And there is a entry level mixer with entry level features and a mature firmware, which is not no bad designed for the indented users.
    And guess, what is the only thing you try to change?
    Training speaker needs approx 5 minutes each. I did this several times successfully with kids from the primary school or above.
    Educating the volunteers is more complex but possible and highly recommended to avoid damage on people and things.
    Repairing, tuning or replacing the HVAC or simply stop it during the ceremonies would be helpfull.
    If the entry level mixer is not suitable it can be replaced by one which fulfill the needs.

    But no, the only thing which is in your mind is to change the firmware.
    Hmm, interesting.

    BTW. My Experience over decades is that doing automatic level changes in a live system, especially when the situation is not well prepared before (good microphone practice, low background noise, perfect tuned sound system and so on) is very risky. Especially if you allow the automatic to raise the volumn will almost always cause feedback. Ok, I do not have articles or academic studies to prove that, only my experience.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 106 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.