LA2A + 1176 for lead vocals. Why use both?

[Dimension Zero]

I read a couple of years ago that the mixing engineer for Jewel's Album (0304) used two comps for the lead vocal. An LA2A followed by an 1176. I have read other mixing engineers doing the same thing.

Why use these two comps together or why use two comps on a vocal in the first place? What does it do to the sound?

I have used the LA2A a lot and the last thing I think after using it, "this needs even more compression!"

[ProTooler]

they both have very different attack and release characteristics.

[Andre Knecht]

There are many reasons to use multiple compressors on signals.

a) Split The Workload
Two compressors, each doing half as much work (i.e. gain reduction) as a single one asked to it all, will sound better.

b) Address Different Aspects Of Sounds’ Dynamics
This is what Bill alluded to with his response. In your particular example, a (UA LA-2A followed by an 1176) a first compressor is tasked with overall “smoothing” the dynamics of a vocals track. The best range of time constants (attack and decay) for this application tends to be on the longer side of things. Conversely, the 1176, with its faster range of time constants, is best suited to tame the remaining spikes, which were allowed to pass the first compression stage.

Furthermore, different compressors will exhibit different shapes in their response curves. Mixing and matching these is as wide a playground (and just as much fun) as matching mics with pres.

c) Add Color
Virtual or hardware? Optical or FET-based? Discrete or solid state? Tubes? Transformers? Like I said, lots of fun!

d) Any combination Of The Above


IHTH.
.

[Dimension Zero]

Andre,

Great response and makes perfect sense. Thanks! I will have to watch the LA2A's transients.

What else do you typically use multiple compressors on besides vocals? I've done it with drums but that's about it.

[Seeee]

I too use an la-2a followed by an 1176 almost as a matter of course. the 1176 is just too strong to take care of it all.

[Andre Knecht]

Andre,

Great response and makes perfect sense. Thanks! I will have to watch the LA2A's transients.

What else do you typically use multiple compressors on besides vocals? I've done it with drums but that's about it.

You’re welcome.

What else, besides vocals? Just about everything, really. There really are no rules, but the nature of a sound and its context are everything. (You don’t go spanking things into submission on an orchestral recording, for example.)

Nonetheless, things that can be addressed by dynamic processing are practically infinite. Listen to a sound and ask what — if anything — it needs. The answer will range from “nothing” to a list of things. That’s when you reach into your tool box.

IHTH.
.

[PTUser NYC]

There really are no rules, but the nature of a sound and its context are everything...

Listen to a sound and ask what — if anything — it needs. The answer will range from “nothing” to a list of things. That’s when you reach into your tool box.

This is the overall answer to every question on this baord. Learn what your gear does, and how it sounds. Sometimes a fuzz box acts as a limiter, and sometimes a limiter acs as a fuzz box. You can get more room (or less) with a compressor, not just a reverb. Distortion, and non linear characteristics of any piece of gear can work as EQ. Etc.

Here's a story to illustrate the point, no names.

There was a really great composer / producer guy. He was working on a tune that had a string section. The sampled strings weren't sounding the way he had imagined them in his head. He wanted them rounder, silkier, and they were bright, dry and harsh.

At that moment, in that key, on that song, with those samples, the composer asked himself what needed to change. He got a mental model of the changes, and asked himself what gear he had access to that day sounded that way.

What you do is to figure what needs enhancing, and what needs to be played down, and then look for something that would do that to a flat signal. In other words, think of all your gear as impulse filters, not just what they are designed to do.

So this composer ran the strings through a VOX AC-30, and used a little dirt, the speaker and general roundness of the amp, and the tremelo to get a much more organic sound. It did NOT sound amped, it sounded more like the real thing than the samples originally did. Fantastic.

Now, the next chapter of this story is that all the assistants at this production house began running their strings through the AC30 for the next several months. Not once did this help the sound, or acheive realistic results.

The point here is that there are no engineer by number methods. You need to listen to the source first. Then ask yourself what (if anything) needs changing. Then you define the changes you're hoping for, and then finally be creative in choosing gear that will make those changes sound as close to your mental image as possible. The tool you use is not always being used for what it was designed for. Here are some famous and obvious examples:

Using a tape machine for a slap delay is a great example of looking at what a piece of gear DOES instead of what it was designed to do.

Using an 1176 or Distressor on bass because it imparts some edgy distortion.

Using a Pultec with the EQ out, just for the sound of the amp and transformers.

Using a harsh clipping distortion as a peak limiter in mastering.

So the bottom line, which I have taken many paragraphs to describe, and which Andre already put so eloquently is:

Use your ears, not your brain.

Always listen like its the first time you're hearing it.

Make your engineering pallette the sounds in your head, not your list of gear & techniques.

Don't do anything until you know why you're doing it.

Ask yourself if the changes you made really sound any better.