Parallel compression - one track or two?

Wondering how you guys add parallel compression - add a compressor on the vocal track then add another compressor on that track, or.....add compression to the track, copy it to a second track then add compression to that.....or are those two ways just the same thing?

Two, and you blend them. One you squash like almost all the way and the other you compress normally.

Thanks Dej, but you missed the question......two compressors on the same track or one on the track and one on a copied track

My bad, two tracks. But the easier way to do that is to use a bus. I just use a bus I don't even use two tracks.

Two compressors on the same track is not parallel compression as far as I understand. You're just compressing the same signal twice as opposed to mixing two identical signals with different levels of compression. Edited April 15, 2021 by déjàrêvé

Thanks for that Dej.....this is starting to make sense, but doesn’t having two compressors on the same track with different settings do the same thing as copying the region to another track and adding a compressor? I know I’m missing something here - I can see that, for example you had a vocal track and wanted to thicken it you might copy the track, add a little chorus or whatever but I’m talking only compression and still confused about if you used a second compressor on the same track how that would be different adding it to the copied track?

I hear what you are saying about using a bus but to be honest I’m moving very slowly and haven’t tried using busses yet (don’t want to confuse myself more, but I do understand the concept of using busses, just never tried it yet.

Cheers

I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy here. Failing thus far.

 

But to answer the question without a learning aid, what happens is you process a single signal twice—you're compressing it and then compressing it again. With parallel compression, you want two instances of the recording processed once, with discrete settings for each (or alternatively with one compressed and the other just left alone), which you can then blend together.

Hey Looka, no analogy needed - I just had my “aha” moment when I read that - concise and you explained it perfectly - thank you!

Actually no need to do this now - most compressors (including the Logic compressor) have a 'mix' control to do exactly this.

Actually no need to do this now - most compressors (including the Logic compressor) have a 'mix' control to do exactly this.

 

Oh, look at that, a Mix knob! I never really use that side of the compressor for my own work… always looked right through it.

 

Still, I suppose it's good to know the concept behind it…

Actually no need to do this now - most compressors (including the Logic compressor) have a 'mix' control to do exactly this.

However, should you need more flexibility, using two channel strips give syou more options: the ability to EQ the compressed signal, or to have easy access to the dry/compressed level balance (and or automation) without having to open a plug-in. For example sometimes I may parallel compress a vocal and use a little bit more of the dry and less of the compressed during the verses, then a little more of the compressed and a little less of the dry during the choruses.

Yeah please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the "Mix" feature just wet/dry balance? So ultimately one of the signals remains uncompressed?

Yeah please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the "Mix" feature just wet/dry balance? So ultimately one of the signals remains uncompressed?

Yes, that's correct. Not sure if my idea came through: what I was saying is that you don't always want to open a plug-in to access those levels. Depending on your workflow preferences, it can be useful having a channel strip for your dry signal, and another for your wet signal, so that you can adjust them directly in your Mixer, automate them independently, and even process independently, rather than a (limited) wet/dry slider that requires to open a plug-in window to access.