I always liked your Logic Pro x tutorials - no nonsense, to the point, and really really useful. Enjoying the new ones even more as more of your personality is coming across. Funny :-) TY
17th century GUI 's only remain useful when you mix it up with a spare Pince-Nez from the 1800's. Only then can you make certain that every mix is a winner! Apple knew this. A fine tutorial Jono and glad to see more of your humour popping into the lessons. Keep 'em coming. Cheers.
Even though I have been working in music production sicnce 1996, I never miss a video about compression. It's one of the most difficult topics IMO. Thanks Jono, I loved your view on this
Thank you, Jono. I've been riding on the multipressor info from your Guildhall masterclass for some time, but had well-deserved imposter syndrome when using it. This fleshed things out for me, thank you.. No presets, promise! 🖖. I legit fell asleep on the mix part and woke up when you asked if we were still awake. It wasn't boring, though! Just good timing for the notification - broken sleep, and that track was smooooth. 😴🌙🎵 Back to bed now. Happy solstice from Canada, everyone!
Really useful. It makes total sense to me that compression on the master track should use one of these. If a bass has a loud moment it doesn’t mean that I want to bring down the ride cymbals at that time. What I don’t fully understand is why use this as opposed to simply putting compressors on each track. I guess that gets complicated and hard to adjust a total mix. Perhaps some individual tracks even contain a broad range of frequencies and so it could be useful there. But it seems to me that in many cases track-by-track compression is a more precise way of doing this. Great video. Thank you.
Hi Andrew. Thanks so much, as ever. Yes, in a sense, the way you've answered your own question is correct! Multiband Compressors become useful in a mastering context because the individual needs of, for example, a Kick Drum and a Bassline - from an individual track Compression perspective - might differ in the context of 'Bass' (as a broad term) at the mastering/output stage. In other words, all kinds of instruments might contribute to a frequency area (in fact, they almost always do) and what might be needed at the mastering stage is some gentle band-specific dynamics control to bring problem frequency areas into line. That said, you're also right that Multiband Compresion isn't always needed - frequently, a Stereo Compressor at the output stage will more than suffice, without the need to split a signal into bands. The SSL G Buss is a famous example of a stereo compressor which is widely trusted 'across' the output channel, for instance. Whilst this would certainly mean that dynamics have been adequately handled on a per-instrument basis at the mix stage, it's definitely not a failing of a mix if Multiband Compression presents the best option to your ears when mastering. Another way of thinking about this is that what you might use a MB Compressor for is to tame dynamic range but then subtly raise the volume of a particular frequency area to give that band a little more presence. I hope that answers your question.
Such a great way to explain the magic of compression - and very entertaining, thank you! Question: is the mutipressor mainly used on the stereo output channel? Is that overkill to use it on a single track?
Hi Didier. Thanks so much - I'm glad it was helpful. Any time you want to make frequency-specific compression choices, multiband compression is worth considering. So, you're right, it tends to be used on groups of sounds or across the output channel most regularly, as frequency content tends to build up most quickly when several sounds play together. But it could be just as effective on a single track playing back an entire drum kit, for example. Whenever you want to apply different compression choices to bass, mid-range and treble, the Multipressor is a good option.
Great, yes that makes sense, I like to layer synths tracks, blending various types of timbres and this quickly can add lots of ‘muddy’ areas. I’ll try your method. Thank you, carry on the fab work you put up there :) @@jonobuchananmusic
Thanks so much. I tend to write the musical examples just to demonstrate the technique which is the subject of each video but I might develop some of the tracks in the future. My main job is composing for TV and writing Production Music.
Hi Brian. I haven't... yet. The best option for Additive Synthesis in Logic is probably Alchemy. I'll happily add this to the list. Thanks for the suggestion.
I hear that Noah loved a bit of drum and bass, it may have even been jungle, boom boom ! In all seriousness, I have always been a bit afraid of this plugin,. I'll revisit it though the next time I'm looking at doing some track level compression. Thanks Jono.
Apologies if I forgot to do so. This sets a buffer time, to allow Multipressor to 'think about' how to process incoming audio without having to do it immediately, in real-time (as hardware would have to). Theoretically, a longer lookahead time will produce a more natural result, as Logic has more thinking time to apply processing. The downside is the introduction of latency - the longer the lookahead, the more this will be introduced, so it's a choice to weigh up, depending on where you are in the creative process. I hope that helps.
Thanks for the question. I can’t think of too many times I’d use a Multiband Compressor on a lead vocal unless I was using a single band as a De-Esser. Otherwise, EQ and regular single-band Compression should almost always be enough. Generally speaking, I think Multiband Compression comes into its own on sounds which are rich in frequency content from bass through to treble and which have different dynamic needs in those frequency bands. So they’re great on the 2-bus Stereo Output channel, particularly.
@@jonobuchananmusic That's true. HoRnet plugins are ugly but also very good, precise and have good algorithms. Unfortunately, they are ugly :), but I use a few and I'm happy. I wrote a letter to Saverio to do something about it, I'm sure sales would increase. In addition to the effectiveness of plugins, we also look for beauty and readability. We come into contact with the beauty of music every day, so the beauty of what we look at also matters.
![Полный обзор Logic Pro 11 [Logic Pro Help]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tNIwhQrWzmc/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't tell whether this tutorial was more instructive or more funny but either way it's a gem
Thank you! Glad it was helpful.
I always liked your Logic Pro x tutorials - no nonsense, to the point, and really really useful. Enjoying the new ones even more as more of your personality is coming across. Funny :-) TY
Thank you so much!
Really struggled with the concept of compression, until now. Excellent tutorial, provides a clear explanation of how this plugin works. Brilliant.
Ah, that's great. Thanks so much Paul - glad it was helpful.
Still blown away that they haven’t updated the UI in 15 years
Or indeed since 1685... ; ) It does sound good, though. And when Apple do update it... we might even miss its old-school charm!
17th century GUI 's only remain useful when you mix it up with a spare Pince-Nez from the 1800's. Only then can you make certain that every mix is a winner! Apple knew this.
A fine tutorial Jono and glad to see more of your humour popping into the lessons. Keep 'em coming. Cheers.
Thanks so much.
Even though I have been working in music production sicnce 1996, I never miss a video about compression. It's one of the most difficult topics IMO. Thanks Jono, I loved your view on this
Thanks Donnie. Glad to hear it was of value, even to a man of your experience. Much appreciated.
Thank you, Jono. I've been riding on the multipressor info from your Guildhall masterclass for some time, but had well-deserved imposter syndrome when using it. This fleshed things out for me, thank you.. No presets, promise! 🖖. I legit fell asleep on the mix part and woke up when you asked if we were still awake. It wasn't boring, though! Just good timing for the notification - broken sleep, and that track was smooooth. 😴🌙🎵 Back to bed now. Happy solstice from Canada, everyone!
Huge thanks, Jennifer! Glad I sent you to sleep too... ; )
Really useful. It makes total sense to me that compression on the master track should use one of these. If a bass has a loud moment it doesn’t mean that I want to bring down the ride cymbals at that time.
What I don’t fully understand is why use this as opposed to simply putting compressors on each track. I guess that gets complicated and hard to adjust a total mix. Perhaps some individual tracks even contain a broad range of frequencies and so it could be useful there. But it seems to me that in many cases track-by-track compression is a more precise way of doing this.
Great video. Thank you.
Hi Andrew. Thanks so much, as ever. Yes, in a sense, the way you've answered your own question is correct! Multiband Compressors become useful in a mastering context because the individual needs of, for example, a Kick Drum and a Bassline - from an individual track Compression perspective - might differ in the context of 'Bass' (as a broad term) at the mastering/output stage. In other words, all kinds of instruments might contribute to a frequency area (in fact, they almost always do) and what might be needed at the mastering stage is some gentle band-specific dynamics control to bring problem frequency areas into line. That said, you're also right that Multiband Compresion isn't always needed - frequently, a Stereo Compressor at the output stage will more than suffice, without the need to split a signal into bands. The SSL G Buss is a famous example of a stereo compressor which is widely trusted 'across' the output channel, for instance. Whilst this would certainly mean that dynamics have been adequately handled on a per-instrument basis at the mix stage, it's definitely not a failing of a mix if Multiband Compression presents the best option to your ears when mastering. Another way of thinking about this is that what you might use a MB Compressor for is to tame dynamic range but then subtly raise the volume of a particular frequency area to give that band a little more presence. I hope that answers your question.
Wonderful video, Jono, thanks!
You're very welcome.
Another superb tutorial! Thank you 👍👍👍
You're welcome, Peter.
Well done. Informative and quick to the point, that is so helpful. Very nice presentation. New subscriber.
Thanks so much Christopher and welcome! There’s a new episode on this channel each Wednesday and a new Short every Saturday.
2:13 👍👏 In fact, I almost never use it just for the interface... 😢
Understandable. But it's definitely got some great stuff going on underneath the dated graphics!
Brilliant video! made things so simple !
Great, so glad it was helpful.
Such a great way to explain the magic of compression - and very entertaining, thank you!
Question: is the mutipressor mainly used on the stereo output channel? Is that overkill to use it on a single track?
Hi Didier. Thanks so much - I'm glad it was helpful. Any time you want to make frequency-specific compression choices, multiband compression is worth considering. So, you're right, it tends to be used on groups of sounds or across the output channel most regularly, as frequency content tends to build up most quickly when several sounds play together. But it could be just as effective on a single track playing back an entire drum kit, for example. Whenever you want to apply different compression choices to bass, mid-range and treble, the Multipressor is a good option.
Great, yes that makes sense, I like to layer synths tracks, blending various types of timbres and this quickly can add lots of ‘muddy’ areas. I’ll try your method. Thank you, carry on the fab work you put up there :)
@@jonobuchananmusic
Sounds like a cool section in that song Jono. Do you release your music anywhere I can find it?
Thanks so much. I tend to write the musical examples just to demonstrate the technique which is the subject of each video but I might develop some of the tracks in the future. My main job is composing for TV and writing Production Music.
Have you done a video on additive synths in Logic and just in general I want to learn some ways to really apply this in a Practical way thanks
Hi Brian. I haven't... yet. The best option for Additive Synthesis in Logic is probably Alchemy. I'll happily add this to the list. Thanks for the suggestion.
@@jonobuchananmusic thanks Sir appreciate that God Bless and keep safe
I hear that Noah loved a bit of drum and bass, it may have even been jungle, boom boom ! In all seriousness, I have always been a bit afraid of this plugin,. I'll revisit it though the next time I'm looking at doing some track level compression. Thanks Jono.
Ha! You're welcome. Thanks as always!
Thanks for the tip "No presets with the Multipressor!!" I am guilty of using them
Absolutely - you know your music better than any preset ever could! ; )
@apple need to update the GUI of many plugins in Logic! 🤨
Some are definitely better than others!
Did you mention the Lookahead parameter ?
Apologies if I forgot to do so. This sets a buffer time, to allow Multipressor to 'think about' how to process incoming audio without having to do it immediately, in real-time (as hardware would have to). Theoretically, a longer lookahead time will produce a more natural result, as Logic has more thinking time to apply processing. The downside is the introduction of latency - the longer the lookahead, the more this will be introduced, so it's a choice to weigh up, depending on where you are in the creative process. I hope that helps.
Would you use this multi presser after having compression already on your vocals...
I use LA2A and 1176 together
Thanks for the question. I can’t think of too many times I’d use a Multiband Compressor on a lead vocal unless I was using a single band as a De-Esser. Otherwise, EQ and regular single-band Compression should almost always be enough. Generally speaking, I think Multiband Compression comes into its own on sounds which are rich in frequency content from bass through to treble and which have different dynamic needs in those frequency bands. So they’re great on the 2-bus Stereo Output channel, particularly.
@@jonobuchananmusic Thanks for your detailed reply. 👍
Yup, the GUI sucks. 1685, lol :-)
Bad interface, great plug-in. Glad it's not the other way around!
Hello my master😊. You are absolutely right. The gui in this plugin is terrible. Its ugliness even beats the graphics in HoRnet plugins.
Absolutely, but well worth looking past the GUI because good stuff lies beneath!
@@jonobuchananmusic That's true. HoRnet plugins are ugly but also very good, precise and have good algorithms. Unfortunately, they are ugly :), but I use a few and I'm happy. I wrote a letter to Saverio to do something about it, I'm sure sales would increase. In addition to the effectiveness of plugins, we also look for beauty and readability. We come into contact with the beauty of music every day, so the beauty of what we look at also matters.