Using Compression in conjunction with this – my “Ultravoice” approach

As I played around with this, I got into a new working technique that really is only possible with a DAW like Pro Tools, and assuming you have reasonable computing capacity. I call it the “Ultravoice.”

The question often comes up: should I compress or EQ first? The answer is, as usual, it depends. And here’s where Tom’s approach really opened a door for me.

When we EQ to fix problems, we’d like to have as much effect on the “bad” resonances as possible. For this reason, I would tend to EQ before compression (which would tend to make the bad resonances a little harder to extract from the signal). Further, once we’ve done the corrective EQ, the compression won’t really damage our efforts. However, if we boost EQ before we compress, the compressor will then react primarily to our spectral boosts (which are enhancements, remember), and will turn them down. Not good.

So I put the compressor between two equalizer sections, in the following flow:

Corrective EQ by cutting narrow bands

Compression

Enhancement EQ by boosting broad bands

This wouldn’t be practicable in the analog realm. However, in a DAW such as Pro Tools it’s usually pretty straightforward. Think of it this way:

• First, we get rid of any problem resonances, by subtractive EQ.
• Second, we get dynamics of the track under control through compression.
• Finally, once these spectral and dynamic problems have been dealt with, we EQ for sonic effect and balance in the mix.

	Figure 7. The Ultravoice. Here, we’ve pulled apart the EQ into two separate sections, separated by a compressor. We cut first, then we compress, then we boost. Got it? Good!

Ahhh, the UltraVoice!

How you set the compressor is food for a different article. As you might have guessed by now, Tom has a LOT of interesting thoughts about that as well. To be continued . . .

Happy Qs.