Jump to content

Difference between parallel compression and the mix slider?


Recommended Posts

What's the difference between Parallel Compression and simply mixing the wet/dry signal within the compression plug-in?

 

cheers

 

Simpler routing, but hardly any (finer) control. True parallel compression/processing is much more versatile and controllable than just using the wet/dry slider. I see the w/d option as either a quick 'n dirty fix, or for individual tracks/insruments only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality it's often better to do parallel compression by pre-fader sending at unity to a bus. This way you can linear phase equalize the parallel signal and shape the result on the aux.

 

thanks for this - gonna use it as a chat-up line..

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

define true parallel compression?

 

Where you route your complete mix or submix to (at least) two Aux Channels. One without, and one with compressor; you know, dry and wet. Only this time you can treat the outputs of both compressed and uncompressed signal with different plugins (EQ as the most common one) and you have control of the amount of signal of each individually, instead of that somewhat crude d/w slider that uses the akward "percentage" scale...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will need two aux'es if you're talking about submixes, but parallel processing isn't specifically related to submixes, though it works very well on e.g. a drum sum.

 

One regular channel in the mix + a pre-fader send to an aux will do when parallel processing a track in the mix. Then blend in the aux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...