that requires knowledge instead of recycling the same information from another youtuber 😂 the ones who actually share useful material will grow, but only if the other youtubers dont straight up steal their content
I usually like that a clipper reduces headroom. that's useful in the mixing stage. but i can see why sometimes it might be cool to keep the dynamics and only get the nice drive spectrally
That was my first thought too. I guess that's my perspective coming from mixing a bunch of loud genres though (heavier electronic / hard hitting hip hop). I could see this being particularly useful in more dynamic productions.
I think that everyone assumes loudness is "hard" to achieve when the method of making tunes everybody gets introduced to is "leave headroom, mix, master" - as 3 stages; where clipping/this stuff is done in the mix stage. I do believe that it will get to a point where you can achieve the loudness consistently much like with Baphometrix clip to zero strategy; and eventually you'll want to control where the dynamics ARE, rather than the concept of assuming everything needs to be squashed to achieve loudness :)
You should try using Melda MAGC - using the unclipped signal as a sidechain input to match the clipped signal's gain to. You have averaging time and gain range controls.
@au5music oh that’s sick thanks, looks like exactly what I need to do this in the simplest way, with the ability to drop in any distortion vst. someone else recommended hacking u-he Satin to achieve a similar thing, but this is way better and free!!
What you basically want to do is invert the gain reduction of a brickwall limiter set to the clipping threshold. You can build a pure Bitwig version of this that really exemplifies the power of the FX Grid by creating envelope followers of the pre- and post-clipping signals, subtracting the post-clipped follower from the pre-clipped follower, and amplifying the clipped signal by this delta. This will add exactly the missing dynamics back to the clipped signal. In fact, if you set the follower too fast you actually lose the distorted tone because you get closer and closer to adding back the actual per-sample signal delta (and a - b + b = a). You can retain the distorted tone by using Follower RF with minimum rise (to preserve the initial transient) and increasing the fall rate until you get enough distortion back. This is what the averaging time does in MAGC. (You should macro the two fall rates together to keep them in sync.)
As an interesting tidbit, good transient detectors tend to detect a change in energy, not level. Detecting a change in level is actually a lot more complicated than you might think. You need to set a threshold for how big the change can be, you need to make provisions to avoid retriggering, etc. It's very finicky. But with ftt analysis you can detect a change in energy, and that is a lot easier and more accurate.
Not all clippers increase headroom, and it’s important to remember that transient shapers are time based while distortion is usually dynamics related. my own practice is I distort-transient shape- clip is always at the end. There’s no right or wrong, but being aware of what the result of the effects you apply (hence having an oscilloscope) is my own takeaway from this video.
This is actually insane, perfect for the fat saturated kick drums that I love but I had clipping all the dynamics from them, still want that naturally smack, Thanks for this
a technique i came up with a while back is to divide a signal by an envelope follower output from it, giving you a roughly constant level. you can distort that however you want, then multiply by the envelope follower signal to get something to listen to again. the distortion then only acts on level changes faster than what the envelope follower reacts to, such as the start of a transient or the level changes that make up the waveform. the technique works well as long as you’re not doing reverb, delays, etc that last close to or longer than the envelope follower times.
@@morgan0 What do you mean by "separate level signal" ? It sounds like in your setup you used the same envelope to drive both the compressor (using division) and the expansion (using multiplication). You get the inverse gain reduction "graphs" by using division and multiplication, which are the inverses of each other.
@@SolarLiner yeah but my understanding is companders were invented for telephony and two separate things that each did the inverse of the other. so thinking about the signals sent between them, the first part (compression) gets the original signal, while the second part (expansion) needs the modified signal and the volume envelope from the first part.
@@morgan0 Yes, agreed on that point, and this all describes what you did in your message above. I'm not saying all of that to discredit you or anything, just in case that's what you might be getting out of my messages. It's pretty cool that you essentially independently rediscovered the technique of companding by yourself.
I love this channel so much, the clarity of informations want to put in the video, getting to the point, showing examples clearly and simply, thank you for that
honestly this is great as fuck to know and big W for youtube to recommend buuuuut i have used a different method when trashing around with plugins. fruity peak controller -> distortion of liking -> use the peak controller on a volume amplifier. there is some goofy ahh lag but my hard techno sessions dont really care about percussion being dynamic that often lol :) great vid
I use a chain EQ>Distortion>EQ First EQ massively increases high frequencies, like a big soft shelf or even a tilt filter, like +12 or even +18 DB (sometimes a little if I want a little effect overall) and also I set output gain on that EQ just before clipping on a distortion plugin, or if it is a hard clipper, I set it on my taste. The second EQ makes the exact opposite curve, lowering exact amount of high frequencies. For distortion I usually use GClip or REAPER'S Waveshaping Distortion. Sometimes if I drive the vocals, right after distortion I place a de-esser plugin set on a wide band mode. This chain makes sound really fat and warm, and also reduces dynamics of some instruments in a gentler manner than any compression or limiting, or other kinds of distortion.
A good way to do this as well, is to boost high frequencies (around 2500) with a bell shape, since transient frequencies are high, they are boosted. You can visualise it easily if you boost high frequencies on an image as well: contours will be more visible. It's a guitar trick, learned it trying to recreate Kyuss's guitars tone. It works best when the source signal is low while sustaining though (kyuss tune to C standard so that helps).
This is super sick. Do using the MSaturartor method mess with the phase of the sound? I assume not but im wondering if this would be cool for like, mastering stuff :)
This is so awesome! Since you're kinda the guy for this type of stuff I have a question: Is there a way to REMOVE the quietest parts of a signal? Like say you have a high noise floor, instead of gating or de-noising could you just clip off everything below a certain threshold? is this even a thing?
@djdeathcore5731 maybe check out a video about bitwig’s loud split device? it splits the signal up into hundreds of bands and lets you set some thresholds to apply fx to just the quiet frequencies, mid-level frequencies and loud frequencies. if you just turned down the volume of the quiet chain you’d get a cool spectral gate. I think this would give you what you’re describing, at least in the spectral domain.
Hey! Great video, and you made pretty tricky concepts very easy to follow :) I'm very excited about eventually jumping ship from a Pro Tools/Cubase DAW duo. A DAW that seems to focus so much on workflow is very enticing. How viable is Bitwig as both a MIDI orchestrating/composing tool? & as a sound editing tool? Sorry if these questions are kinda mundane, i'd love for u to point me in the direction of any independent material out there for learning the DAW. Thanks,
@andaroo.j hey, sorry I'm late to this. I recommend watching some @PolarityMusic, he has lots of long and short form content about bitwig. in general, bitwig isn't very well known for its midi workflow, though if you're into modular stuff it has hands down the best tools for randomized/generative music, lots of cool tools for doing crazy midi stuff programmatically. making ambient/generative patches and such. the piano roll overall is kind of mid, despite having a few cool features like midi note expressions. if you spend a lot of time composing by drawing in MIDI, you'll probably have more fun in FL's piano roll. it's the nicest one out there for sure. if you're big into the audio engineering side of things bitwig is a dream come true. at least it was for me. it gives you so many tools to fine tune signals and create your own devices that do literally anything imaginable. the most obvious case is bitwig's "The Grid" - one of bitwig's key selling points. it's a drag and drop block editor able to create essentially any audio effect imaginable. or you can make full songs in it if you have a bit of experience. in my mind "The Grid" is essentially an easier to use and more capable version of FL's "Patcher", but you don't need a PhD like you do with Max for Live, since Max is basically computer programming. yes, I agree with you in saying I find bitwig to focus heavily on workflow, meaning it gives you all the necessary tools to create your own workflow. not in a clunky way, I find it to be a really freeing thing. when I want to do something really specific or complex, I rarely need to google around for a 3rd party, probably not free plugin that does the job. there's always a stock tool for anything you might want to do in audio. you just mix and match. for example, I've even basically ditched serum because the stock "Polymer" synth has a great wavetable oscillator you can load up, and it does everything serum can do (and more!?). and also I'm currently making a "soothe2" clone and it's like 90% accurate. you can do some crazy stuff really easily. anyway, if these things sound exciting to you I recommend checking bitwig out and getting the trial, but if that all sounded like a bunch of nonsense, bitwig's features might not be up your alley. not sponsored I don't care.
@@jshstuff Yo! Thanks for such an in depth response. You've definitely piqued my interest and I'm excited to give it a go for the trial period at the very least :) Keep it up with the fantastic content! Looking forward to more from ya. Cheers 🤘
Cool video, thanks. Some more examples would have been nice, especially how it sounds on breaks or bass drums (lots of dynamic range, and often employed with distortion)
I've been playing around with companding with different saturators last few months. I use satin by uhe which has 4 settings. You bypass the tape and only turn the encoder on one put a saturator then another satin to decode
thanks for sharing, this seems cool! I just tried the satin demo but am confused & didn't get it working immediately. are you saying you load up 2 instances of satin which only act as the compression/expander, not the actual saturation? then you put a saturator plugin in between the two satin instances? or do you mean something else?
ok cool that makes a lot of sense! seems really convenient since you can drop any plugin into the compander chain. and would work in any daw. lots of possibilities…
Distortion that preserves dynamics is really cool, but I'm not sure that I understand the point of purported Benefit #1 @2:21 ...Wouldn't any / all distortion plugins get more "heavy" or present at 100% mix? (vs something closer to Dry or 0% mix.) Surely I'm missing something here, right?
Quite some misconceptions in here : you are confusing distortion with waveshaping ; the way you are describing transient shapers is wrong too, albeit they can be used to restore some dynamic to a squashed signal it is not what a transient shaper is designed for
I use the terms waveshaping, clipping, saturation and distortion interchangeably when referring to processes that add harmonics and reduce dynamics. but I think I see your point. there can be differences between them, and not all distortion does these 2 things. though I don’t think any use of these terms in this video were misleading, let me know if you disagree. and I think we are actually in agreement - the reason this video exists is to argue that transient shapers do not restore dynamics. they just change dynamics. let me know if I’ve misunderstood anything you said :)
@@jshstuff I am not trying to discredit you, just offering some clarification. Distortion is a result of clipping since the squaring of a signal introduces harmonics, but distortion and saturation are not the same as clipping at all. The same goes for dynamics control : for example you can clip the transient of a signal without reducing the overall dynamic of the sound if you do it properly. About restoring the volume envelope of a signal that went above the 0 dB FS threshold ( digital clipping ) you cannot do that with transient shapers nor expanding but only with complex algorithms that try to estimate the " path " the signal would have taken before being squared by the digital resolution threshold, just a few very specific plug ins can do that like the RX declipper and those plugins are very CPU intensive for a reason. The way you are dealing with this topic in the video is just not accurate in terms of digital signal processing technology. Thanks for the polite reply by the way and keep digging 💪
you can kind of see an example of this in the green chain in this video. I had the “clip” checkbox on, so when the transient happened it sharply boosted the volume, but you can see a hard clipper completely flattens it for the first few milliseconds. that’s transient shaper -> hard clip
yes you can get a very similar (but not same) result with parallel processing. the main difference with parallel processing is that you can’t get 100% mix on the distortion. of course. since you’re mixing some dry signal and some wet. with parallel, it’s a tradeoff - the more you mix in the saturated signal, the more dynamics are lost. companding doesn’t suffer from this tradeoff.
the minimum chain you need for this is: 1. envelope detection 2. saturation 3. volume automation based on envelope from step 1’s detection. just a gate into a saturator does not do the same thing as what I show in the red chain in this video. you need a way to restore the dynamics post-saturation.
@@jshstuff It might not restore things exactly, but does it really need to be? Half of what we like about saturation generally speaking comes from the change in dynamics as well as the added harmonics. All you really need is a means to control the harmonics and dynamics independently. Matching the dynamics exactly to the pre-saturated source is definitely cool, but is it definitely necessary for a good result?
I agree! most of the time I prefer clipping to preserve dynamics and add harmonics. but if you consider a sound that swells over a longer period of time, like the first two swells in this video’s example, or the vocal example in my first companding video, something totally different than simple clipping is going on, and I think it can be a uniquely good thing. the added harmonics/distortion on these sounds get sustained for the whole duration of the sound, but the volume swells up and down greatly in level. the harmonics are not only added at the sound’s loudest moment.
yes the compander is doing clipping, but after the clipping it’s restoring the sound’s original volume envelope. so if by “without clipping” you mean that the resulting waveform is not flattened then yep!
I wish more smarty pants sound design videos like this were on RUclips
that requires knowledge instead of recycling the same information from another youtuber 😂 the ones who actually share useful material will grow, but only if the other youtubers dont straight up steal their content
remember: music & sound is only something you look at and those who can't do, teach
I usually like that a clipper reduces headroom. that's useful in the mixing stage. but i can see why sometimes it might be cool to keep the dynamics and only get the nice drive spectrally
*adds headroom by reducing peaklevels
That was my first thought too. I guess that's my perspective coming from mixing a bunch of loud genres though (heavier electronic / hard hitting hip hop). I could see this being particularly useful in more dynamic productions.
I think that everyone assumes loudness is "hard" to achieve when the method of making tunes everybody gets introduced to is "leave headroom, mix, master" - as 3 stages; where clipping/this stuff is done in the mix stage.
I do believe that it will get to a point where you can achieve the loudness consistently much like with Baphometrix clip to zero strategy; and eventually you'll want to control where the dynamics ARE, rather than the concept of assuming everything needs to be squashed to achieve loudness :)
You should try using Melda MAGC - using the unclipped signal as a sidechain input to match the clipped signal's gain to. You have averaging time and gain range controls.
@au5music oh that’s sick thanks, looks like exactly what I need to do this in the simplest way, with the ability to drop in any distortion vst. someone else recommended hacking u-he Satin to achieve a similar thing, but this is way better and free!!
@@jshstuffIt's an extremely versatile utility I'm sure you'll discover brilliant uses for.
What you basically want to do is invert the gain reduction of a brickwall limiter set to the clipping threshold. You can build a pure Bitwig version of this that really exemplifies the power of the FX Grid by creating envelope followers of the pre- and post-clipping signals, subtracting the post-clipped follower from the pre-clipped follower, and amplifying the clipped signal by this delta. This will add exactly the missing dynamics back to the clipped signal. In fact, if you set the follower too fast you actually lose the distorted tone because you get closer and closer to adding back the actual per-sample signal delta (and a - b + b = a). You can retain the distorted tone by using Follower RF with minimum rise (to preserve the initial transient) and increasing the fall rate until you get enough distortion back. This is what the averaging time does in MAGC. (You should macro the two fall rates together to keep them in sync.)
As an interesting tidbit, good transient detectors tend to detect a change in energy, not level. Detecting a change in level is actually a lot more complicated than you might think. You need to set a threshold for how big the change can be, you need to make provisions to avoid retriggering, etc. It's very finicky. But with ftt analysis you can detect a change in energy, and that is a lot easier and more accurate.
Always wondered what the compander setting was doing. This is a hot tip for bass and drums sections. Thank you!
Clean and straight to the point..
I might consider adding a Compander to your video 🤔.
Not all clippers increase headroom, and it’s important to remember that transient shapers are time based while distortion is usually dynamics related.
my own practice is I distort-transient shape- clip is always at the end.
There’s no right or wrong, but being aware of what the result of the effects you apply (hence having an oscilloscope) is my own takeaway from this video.
Great video, i appreciate that you explained everything so clear, simple, and to the point.
:D !!
This is actually insane, perfect for the fat saturated kick drums that I love but I had clipping all the dynamics from them, still want that naturally smack, Thanks for this
you are welcome :)
Shoutout to the gvst suite, absolutely goat-ed bunch of utility plugins
great video! glad you also gave the khs distortion a shout
shoutout to the guy in the frank pole discord who told me about it
a technique i came up with a while back is to divide a signal by an envelope follower output from it, giving you a roughly constant level. you can distort that however you want, then multiply by the envelope follower signal to get something to listen to again. the distortion then only acts on level changes faster than what the envelope follower reacts to, such as the start of a transient or the level changes that make up the waveform. the technique works well as long as you’re not doing reverb, delays, etc that last close to or longer than the envelope follower times.
Your setup is the simplest form of a compander actually, so it's the same setup but the compressor and expander parts are simplified.
@@SolarLiner oh yea it is a compander, although i thought companders usually didn’t have a separate level signal, just inverse volume curves
@@morgan0 What do you mean by "separate level signal" ? It sounds like in your setup you used the same envelope to drive both the compressor (using division) and the expansion (using multiplication). You get the inverse gain reduction "graphs" by using division and multiplication, which are the inverses of each other.
@@SolarLiner yeah but my understanding is companders were invented for telephony and two separate things that each did the inverse of the other. so thinking about the signals sent between them, the first part (compression) gets the original signal, while the second part (expansion) needs the modified signal and the volume envelope from the first part.
@@morgan0 Yes, agreed on that point, and this all describes what you did in your message above.
I'm not saying all of that to discredit you or anything, just in case that's what you might be getting out of my messages. It's pretty cool that you essentially independently rediscovered the technique of companding by yourself.
I love this channel so much, the clarity of informations want to put in the video, getting to the point, showing examples clearly and simply, thank you for that
you are welcome
This is just insane. Thank you sm!
yw!!
honestly this is great as fuck to know and big W for youtube to recommend
buuuuut
i have used a different method when trashing around with plugins.
fruity peak controller -> distortion of liking -> use the peak controller on a volume amplifier.
there is some goofy ahh lag but my hard techno sessions dont really care about percussion being dynamic that often lol :)
great vid
I’ve only gotten bad results with fruity peak controller :’(
just made a video about this in action cuz i was bored :))))))
how do i spoiler in youtube D:
ruclips.net/video/qEwgCYZ5xgs/видео.html
I use a chain EQ>Distortion>EQ
First EQ massively increases high frequencies, like a big soft shelf or even a tilt filter, like +12 or even +18 DB (sometimes a little if I want a little effect overall) and also I set output gain on that EQ just before clipping on a distortion plugin, or if it is a hard clipper, I set it on my taste. The second EQ makes the exact opposite curve, lowering exact amount of high frequencies. For distortion I usually use GClip or REAPER'S Waveshaping Distortion. Sometimes if I drive the vocals, right after distortion I place a de-esser plugin set on a wide band mode.
This chain makes sound really fat and warm, and also reduces dynamics of some instruments in a gentler manner than any compression or limiting, or other kinds of distortion.
loved both videos! you're also great at explaining! keep it up :) ♥
:)
Wow what a nice and helpful video
A good way to do this as well, is to boost high frequencies (around 2500) with a bell shape, since transient frequencies are high, they are boosted. You can visualise it easily if you boost high frequencies on an image as well: contours will be more visible.
It's a guitar trick, learned it trying to recreate Kyuss's guitars tone. It works best when the source signal is low while sustaining though (kyuss tune to C standard so that helps).
such a clear, helpful video
On point and useful. What else could I want
ahhhh new jststuff upload its all over... how do u always upload exactly what i need
finally someone who uses bitwig :D
:D
Never heard of a compander, but makes sense the way you explained it. I'll have to see if my daw has one built-in and play around with that.
This is super sick. Do using the MSaturartor method mess with the phase of the sound? I assume not but im wondering if this would be cool for like, mastering stuff :)
not at all!! well maybe the harmonics module does but it’s just compression and clipping!
What's up Nire!
great video as always!
My man
This is so awesome! Since you're kinda the guy for this type of stuff I have a question: Is there a way to REMOVE the quietest parts of a signal? Like say you have a high noise floor, instead of gating or de-noising could you just clip off everything below a certain threshold? is this even a thing?
@djdeathcore5731 maybe check out a video about bitwig’s loud split device? it splits the signal up into hundreds of bands and lets you set some thresholds to apply fx to just the quiet frequencies, mid-level frequencies and loud frequencies. if you just turned down the volume of the quiet chain you’d get a cool spectral gate. I think this would give you what you’re describing, at least in the spectral domain.
excellent video. instant new sub
:)
Commenting for the algorithm. Same!!
Yes more videos like this pls short informative and to the point
Dope video. Cool that you used free plugins as well to demonstrate your point. Well done!
Hey! Great video, and you made pretty tricky concepts very easy to follow :)
I'm very excited about eventually jumping ship from a Pro Tools/Cubase DAW duo.
A DAW that seems to focus so much on workflow is very enticing. How viable is Bitwig as both a MIDI orchestrating/composing tool? & as a sound editing tool?
Sorry if these questions are kinda mundane, i'd love for u to point me in the direction of any independent material out there for learning the DAW.
Thanks,
@andaroo.j hey, sorry I'm late to this.
I recommend watching some @PolarityMusic, he has lots of long and short form content about bitwig.
in general, bitwig isn't very well known for its midi workflow, though if you're into modular stuff it has hands down the best tools for randomized/generative music, lots of cool tools for doing crazy midi stuff programmatically. making ambient/generative patches and such. the piano roll overall is kind of mid, despite having a few cool features like midi note expressions. if you spend a lot of time composing by drawing in MIDI, you'll probably have more fun in FL's piano roll. it's the nicest one out there for sure.
if you're big into the audio engineering side of things bitwig is a dream come true. at least it was for me. it gives you so many tools to fine tune signals and create your own devices that do literally anything imaginable. the most obvious case is bitwig's "The Grid" - one of bitwig's key selling points. it's a drag and drop block editor able to create essentially any audio effect imaginable. or you can make full songs in it if you have a bit of experience. in my mind "The Grid" is essentially an easier to use and more capable version of FL's "Patcher", but you don't need a PhD like you do with Max for Live, since Max is basically computer programming.
yes, I agree with you in saying I find bitwig to focus heavily on workflow, meaning it gives you all the necessary tools to create your own workflow. not in a clunky way, I find it to be a really freeing thing. when I want to do something really specific or complex, I rarely need to google around for a 3rd party, probably not free plugin that does the job. there's always a stock tool for anything you might want to do in audio. you just mix and match. for example, I've even basically ditched serum because the stock "Polymer" synth has a great wavetable oscillator you can load up, and it does everything serum can do (and more!?). and also I'm currently making a "soothe2" clone and it's like 90% accurate. you can do some crazy stuff really easily.
anyway, if these things sound exciting to you I recommend checking bitwig out and getting the trial, but if that all sounded like a bunch of nonsense, bitwig's features might not be up your alley. not sponsored I don't care.
@@jshstuff Yo! Thanks for such an in depth response. You've definitely piqued my interest and I'm excited to give it a go for the trial period at the very least :)
Keep it up with the fantastic content! Looking forward to more from ya. Cheers 🤘
Cool video, thanks. Some more examples would have been nice, especially how it sounds on breaks or bass drums (lots of dynamic range, and often employed with distortion)
new subscriber🔥🔥🔥🔥
great demo, thanks!
yw!
doing gods work
good idea but it might be harder down the line to tame the true peaks
I've been playing around with companding with different saturators last few months. I use satin by uhe which has 4 settings. You bypass the tape and only turn the encoder on one put a saturator then another satin to decode
thanks for sharing, this seems cool! I just tried the satin demo but am confused & didn't get it working immediately. are you saying you load up 2 instances of satin which only act as the compression/expander, not the actual saturation? then you put a saturator plugin in between the two satin instances? or do you mean something else?
@@jshstuff yes exactly that
ok cool that makes a lot of sense! seems really convenient since you can drop any plugin into the compander chain. and would work in any daw. lots of possibilities…
i’ve been trying to figure out why when i distort stuff everything kinda sounds like mush and this might have just changed my entire mixing workflow
you are back
u too!
great video!! Thank u for this. Surely gonna try this
:D
Distortion that preserves dynamics is really cool, but I'm not sure that I understand the point of purported Benefit #1 @2:21 ...Wouldn't any / all distortion plugins get more "heavy" or present at 100% mix? (vs something closer to Dry or 0% mix.) Surely I'm missing something here, right?
yes but you get that benefit #1 without missing out on #2 and #3
@@jshstuff that makes sense, thank you for responding so quickly!
nice, thanks
nice video
Really cool easy to follow tutorial. Sick! You know if any of the UAD comp/saturators have this?
no idea! but I just learnt you can do it with any plugin using a sidechain input into the free melda MAGC plugin after your saturator plugin
you are the best man thank you
no u are the best !!
Quite some misconceptions in here : you are confusing distortion with waveshaping ; the way you are describing transient shapers is wrong too, albeit they can be used to restore some dynamic to a squashed signal it is not what a transient shaper is designed for
I use the terms waveshaping, clipping, saturation and distortion interchangeably when referring to processes that add harmonics and reduce dynamics. but I think I see your point. there can be differences between them, and not all distortion does these 2 things. though I don’t think any use of these terms in this video were misleading, let me know if you disagree.
and I think we are actually in agreement - the reason this video exists is to argue that transient shapers do not restore dynamics. they just change dynamics.
let me know if I’ve misunderstood anything you said :)
@@jshstuff I am not trying to discredit you, just offering some clarification. Distortion is a result of clipping since the squaring of a signal introduces harmonics, but distortion and saturation are not the same as clipping at all. The same goes for dynamics control : for example you can clip the transient of a signal without reducing the overall dynamic of the sound if you do it properly. About restoring the volume envelope of a signal that went above the 0 dB FS threshold ( digital clipping ) you cannot do that with transient shapers nor expanding but only with complex algorithms that try to estimate the " path " the signal would have taken before being squared by the digital resolution threshold, just a few very specific plug ins can do that like the RX declipper and those plugins are very CPU intensive for a reason. The way you are dealing with this topic in the video is just not accurate in terms of digital signal processing technology. Thanks for the polite reply by the way and keep digging 💪
@@cuevable you don't know wtf you're talking about, yet you're so over-confident its so funny, typical NPC moment.
Great video dude!!! 🎉
🙂
im not sure if you noticed but you were clipping at the end with the compander.... your signal was over 0.
unsure if sarcastic comment
nice video, i have bitwig full version and cant seem to figure it out like fl studio although ive made alot of short loops in bitwig
watch some of @PolarityMusic’s videos
thanks bro i subscribe to both of you @@jshstuff
love you
I love u too gay lord
love you more
What if you add compander / transient shaper before clipping/saturation ?
you can kind of see an example of this in the green chain in this video. I had the “clip” checkbox on, so when the transient happened it sharply boosted the volume, but you can see a hard clipper completely flattens it for the first few milliseconds. that’s transient shaper -> hard clip
You get the same result with parallel compression/distortion, or not?
yes you can get a very similar (but not same) result with parallel processing. the main difference with parallel processing is that you can’t get 100% mix on the distortion. of course. since you’re mixing some dry signal and some wet.
with parallel, it’s a tradeoff - the more you mix in the saturated signal, the more dynamics are lost. companding doesn’t suffer from this tradeoff.
@@jshstuff Ah ok, I will try both variants, thanks!
This guy sounds like the Nile Red of sound desighn..... x3
I think he sounds like a cross between Nile Red and MinutePhysics
Hate to be that guy, but can't you just put a gate before your saturator to give the same effect?
the minimum chain you need for this is: 1. envelope detection 2. saturation 3. volume automation based on envelope from step 1’s detection.
just a gate into a saturator does not do the same thing as what I show in the red chain in this video. you need a way to restore the dynamics post-saturation.
@@jshstuff It might not restore things exactly, but does it really need to be? Half of what we like about saturation generally speaking comes from the change in dynamics as well as the added harmonics. All you really need is a means to control the harmonics and dynamics independently. Matching the dynamics exactly to the pre-saturated source is definitely cool, but is it definitely necessary for a good result?
I agree! most of the time I prefer clipping to preserve dynamics and add harmonics. but if you consider a sound that swells over a longer period of time, like the first two swells in this video’s example, or the vocal example in my first companding video, something totally different than simple clipping is going on, and I think it can be a uniquely good thing. the added harmonics/distortion on these sounds get sustained for the whole duration of the sound, but the volume swells up and down greatly in level. the harmonics are not only added at the sound’s loudest moment.
Compander?
barely know her
So, that's a compander without any clipping involved ?
yes the compander is doing clipping, but after the clipping it’s restoring the sound’s original volume envelope. so if by “without clipping” you mean that the resulting waveform is not flattened then yep!
@@jshstuff got it 👍 thank you !
Call it off, call it off...
Bro sounds like Adobe in a Minute
woah we do sound similar
is this reaper??
bitwig
🎉🎉🎉❤❤❤😂😂😢😢😮😮😮😮😮
FIRST
lol wrong
moterbike