How it StartsEvery multiband compression tutorial starts the same way. "The first time I tried multiband compression, it completely ruined my mix. It sounded awful!" They don't even tell you what was bad about it. The message is simply: beware of multiband compression, the great mix killer.  You know, as opposed to all those other audio tools that only make your mix better. Take a saturation plugin for example. Slap it on your mix buss, turn the distortion to 11 and viola! You definitely did not just ruin your mix. Had you tried that with multiband compression, all your hard work would be in shambles. Okay so here's what I'm saying. Multiband compression is an audio tool, just like all the other audio tools. Which is to say there's a time and place to use it. If you don't need it, don't use it. But if you do need it and you don't use it because you're intimidated by it? Well then you're not doing yourself any favors. So when does multiband compression come in handy? Let's see a few examples. When to Use Multiband Compression Example 1 - De-Essing Sibilant Vocals I'm not even going to explain this because you already know how valuable a vocal de-esser can be. And yes a de-esser is an example of multiband compression. Because it only compresses select frequencies rather than the whole signal. So multiband is already less evil than we thought! Example 2 - Scooping mud out of a flabby bass sound Synth bass patches are notorious for too much sauce in the low mids. They muddy up the whole mix. Using multiband compression, you can rebalance the sound a bit. Maybe the signal under 100hz is inconsistent, so smoothing out the subs and boosting them a couple dB will give it a more proper weight. Maybe in the 800-1200 range there's a big drop off in signal. But if you can pull that up a little bit, there's suddenly more clarity. Instead of having a big hump in the frequency spectrum around 250hz, the sound is more balanced now. And will hopefully sit better in the mix. That's the goal after all. Example 3 - Slap bass that POPS Compressing slap bass is tricky. Similar to the previous example, there's important frequencies far apart in the spectrum. The low thump is vital to preserve, and the high pops equally so. And in this case especially, you want don't want to lose the dynamics of the performance. So say you dial in a regular compressor to accentuate the hi popping notes. You find that as a result, you've completely squashed the low notes. They were louder after all, and were more greatly affected by the compressor. If only there was a way to have separate compressor settings - one set appropriate for the high notes, and another appropriate for the low notes. Oh right, that's the very definition of multiband compression. Example 4 - Unruly Multi-Layer Synth Patches Imagine a layered, full spectrum synth patch. The kind that sounds like a whole song in one note.…

A Look at Reference Data from 10+ Classic Electronic Albums Do you ever wonder, "how loud should my master be?" Or, "how compressed is my track compared to the pros?"  Well, I have news for you. There is no right answer.  But you already knew that. So let me tell you something you don't already know. And it'll be up to you to use it wisely.  The overall loudness of ROYGBIV is -13.4 LUFS and it's loudness range is 10.7 LU. What?... That didn't answer your question? Reference tracks are everything. They are the answer key. You just have to do a little reverse engineering. But you're right, looking at a couple stats from one song isn't going to help you much. Even if it is one of the best sounding songs out there. Love you ROYGBIV. Every song has a unique purpose and context within it's album as a whole. Looking at data from one random song is insufficient. No, worse. It's misleading. Because then you'll be trying to model every song you make to that one reference, whether it is a relevant comparison or not. What a disaster! But what if we looked at data for an entire album? Or a bunch of albums? Wouldn't that be more informative?  So check it out: here's a couple EPs worth of data just to start. Notice the Integrated LUFS, that's how loud the song is overall. The closer the value is to zero, the louder it is. Then look at Dynamic Range. A lower value here indicates more compression. Lastly, the Loudness Range is the difference between the loudest parts of the song and the softest.  See you on the other side. Trickfinger She Smiles Because She Presses the Button Aphex Twin Collapse 01 AMB Integrated LUFS: -14.6 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -11.6 LUFSTrue Peak: -0.1 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 11.4 DRLoudness Range: 5.2 LU  02 BRISE Integrated LUFS: -12.2 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -10.1 LUFSTrue Peak: -0.2 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 9.9 DRLoudness Range: 4.0 LU  03 NOICE Integrated LUFS: -14.8 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -11.3 LUFSTrue Peak: -0.2 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 11.1 DRLoudness Range: 17.1 LU  04 PLANE Integrated LUFS: -15.6 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -13.8 LUFSTrue Peak: -0.2 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 13.6 DRLoudness Range: 2.0 LU  05 RHYME FOUR Integrated LUFS: -13.4 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -10.2 LUFSTrue Peak: -0.2 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 9.6 DRLoudness Range: 18.7 LU  06 SEA YXS Integrated LUFS: -13.0 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -9.7 LUFSTrue Peak: 0.1 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 9.5 DRLoudness Range: 6.3 LU1 - T69 COLLAPSE Integrated LUFS: -9.6 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -6.9 LUFSTrue Peak: 0.7 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 6.7 DRLoudness Range: 4.3 LU  2 - 1ST 44 Integrated LUFS: -10.4 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -8.3 LUFSTrue Peak: 1.5 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 8.1 DRLoudness Range: 5.4 LU 3 - MT1 T29R2 Integrated LUFS: -11.0 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -7.9 LUFSTrue Peak: 1.2 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 7.7 DRLoudness Range: 5.6 LU  4 - ABUNDANCE10EDIT[2 R8'S, FZ20M & A 909] Integrated LUFS: -10.8 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -7.3 LUFSTrue Peak: 1.0 dBTPPeak: -0.2 dBDynamic Range: 7.1 DRLoudness Range: 7.0 LU  5 - PTHEX Integrated LUFS: -11.7 LUFSShort Term LUFS: -9.2 LUFSTrue…