Parallel Compression ( processing ) kinda reminds me of Image Stacking in photography ( HDR ). Stacking adds intensity to the definition. Sidechain Compression ( ducking ) great shortcut! Pro stuff right there. Thanks you for sharing!
in the actual new york compression, you would add an eq to increase the lows (up to 100hz) and highs (from 10khz) with a 3db shelf, and also have the bass on the same channel. this is just parallel comp
Very cool, thanks for sharing! I haven't heard of having the bass on the same channel being a defining feature, but that sounds like a remnant from the tape era, when people had to bounce tracks together when stopped by a track limit. Do you think it's from that? From my experience, most people nowadays are teaching NY compression as being the same thing, with the added eq as an option, but not a defining feature. I wonder if it's one of those interesting linguistic things whereby a technique or term changes a bit over time?
@@CatoNoisei think it was convenient: it sounds good on the bass too, and ensures a coherent processing on the whole rhythm group. if they initially made a virtue out of necessity, i don´t know, but it would make sense to do it that way either way. regarding the semantics I would argue that in this case the defining features are what the actual technique included when it got it´s name, but yes, over time terms lose connection to their origin, so it will probably one day be, or already is, synonym with parallel compression. i am pedantic however and like to think it´s beneficial to our communication to use too different terms to describe the original NY comp as a subset of parallel comp.
@@CatoNoise This is just a presumption on my side, because I also tried to google why it's called "Key". I had the chance for a couple of months to access a patch bay in combination with effect racks, Pro Tools and an Audient ASP4816. A lot of those racks have that "Key" input and output thingy because this is still one of the remnants of the analog era and somehow a lot of those companies sticked with it. Considering the fact that Pro Tools tries to replicate a analog mixer workflow the most as they can might be the reason why it's called "Key" in there. I know that Cubase has just a simple "Activate Side-Chain" button and a lot of other DAWs like Ableton, FL Studio and probably Logic as well don't call it Key. But like I said: This is just an assumption of mine. Don't take my words for granted. If you find out why it's called this way, please let me know.
@@MerlinErdogmus Oh ok, yeah, that makes total sense! I bet that's the right path to figuring it out. I'll definitely let you know if I figure out anything else about it. It's interesting and funny how much stuff is a carry over from analog!
No, it should be up there! I made a post on the Patreon feed (the post was on July 1st), and that links to the PDF, which is under the "Resources" tab on my website (catonoise.com). Let me know if you're still having trouble finding it?
omg i'm an idiot. whenever i setup parallel compression i would route the tracks to 2 different aux tracks, i didn't even think just setting up two aux tracks that take the same bus as the input. wow.
Very refreshing to know someone can explain this. You covered all aspects, and the radio example is an excellent example of ducking.
Thanks man! Glad you liked it ^_^
Parallel Compression ( processing ) kinda reminds me of Image Stacking
in photography ( HDR ). Stacking adds intensity to the definition.
Sidechain Compression ( ducking ) great shortcut! Pro stuff right there.
Thanks you for sharing!
Hey Beau, nice to see you here! haha, and yeah, it sounds like it is similar to image stacking. Very cool! Thanks!
You have such a nice manner for explaining things and the informal "outtake" bits at the end are always fun. I hope your bunny feels better soon!
haha, thanks! She's all better now, it was just that one day she was feeling a little under the weather. Now she's back to her sassy self! ^_^
Hey Cato, Great job explaining things. I titaget it. Another radio engineer
Thank you
Hi Cato! hx again for your awesome videowork! Greetings Chris
Hey Chris, glad you liked it! ^_^
Great, easy to understand explanation of a pretty advanced topic, and the examples really made it clear. Nice job!
Thanks! ^_^ I hope it helps!
Really awesome and knowledgable video! thank you so much for making this one!
thanks! I'm glad you found it helpful - nice to see you here on YT too, btw!
And you solo safed the drum buses, which was an earlier lesson. Cool!
haha, yeah, good eye!
You put the key, wich you define as the plugin and put in the the right door, which you also define here as Bus 65 i think
I think you're talking about the section on sidechaining, yeah? But, I'm a bit confused by this comment, can you re-word?
nice explains 😍
Thank you! ^_^
in the actual new york compression, you would add an eq to increase the lows (up to 100hz) and highs (from 10khz) with a 3db shelf, and also have the bass on the same channel. this is just parallel comp
Very cool, thanks for sharing! I haven't heard of having the bass on the same channel being a defining feature, but that sounds like a remnant from the tape era, when people had to bounce tracks together when stopped by a track limit. Do you think it's from that? From my experience, most people nowadays are teaching NY compression as being the same thing, with the added eq as an option, but not a defining feature. I wonder if it's one of those interesting linguistic things whereby a technique or term changes a bit over time?
@@CatoNoisei think it was convenient: it sounds good on the bass too, and ensures a coherent processing on the whole rhythm group. if they initially made a virtue out of necessity, i don´t know, but it would make sense to do it that way either way.
regarding the semantics I would argue that in this case the defining features are what the actual technique included when it got it´s name, but yes, over time terms lose connection to their origin, so it will probably one day be, or already is, synonym with parallel compression. i am pedantic however and like to think it´s beneficial to our communication to use too different terms to describe the original NY comp as a subset of parallel comp.
AFAIK it's called "Key" because effect racks started to call it "Key" as trigger signal back in the analog days.
oh, interesting! Why did they call it that? Something about the physicality of it?
@@CatoNoise
This is just a presumption on my side, because I also tried to google why it's called "Key".
I had the chance for a couple of months to access a patch bay in combination with effect racks, Pro Tools and an Audient ASP4816.
A lot of those racks have that "Key" input and output thingy because this is still one of the remnants of the analog era and somehow a lot of those companies sticked with it.
Considering the fact that Pro Tools tries to replicate a analog mixer workflow the most as they can might be the reason why it's called "Key" in there. I know that Cubase has just a simple "Activate Side-Chain" button and a lot of other DAWs like Ableton, FL Studio and probably Logic as well don't call it Key.
But like I said: This is just an assumption of mine. Don't take my words for granted. If you find out why it's called this way, please let me know.
@@MerlinErdogmus Oh ok, yeah, that makes total sense! I bet that's the right path to figuring it out. I'll definitely let you know if I figure out anything else about it. It's interesting and funny how much stuff is a carry over from analog!
I can't find the PDF
Ooops at the end you said it's not ready yet okay sorry nevermind I'll check back
No, it should be up there! I made a post on the Patreon feed (the post was on July 1st), and that links to the PDF, which is under the "Resources" tab on my website (catonoise.com). Let me know if you're still having trouble finding it?
omg i'm an idiot. whenever i setup parallel compression i would route the tracks to 2 different aux tracks, i didn't even think just setting up two aux tracks that take the same bus as the input. wow.
haha, yeah! Either way should work! ^_^ Happens to all of us sometimes!
Confusing for me
AS A PRODUDER MY DREAM IS TO MARRY A ENGINEER WOMAN LIKE THIS LADY I THINK THAT WOULD BE COOL BEANS