When we were still using DATs & TDM systems around "1999-2000ish" I wanted to create a homemade SSL style console so I purchased a Road traveled Midas XL4 that toured for 4 years with the Kentucky headhunters (rough but 100% worked) but I needed dynamics to simulate the SSL workflow. I did some research and found that the closest circuit to the SSL compressor on a budget was the circuit in the DBX 160X but I couldn't buy 40 of those at one time so I found the same 160X circuit was used in the USA DBX 1046 the 4 channel version with less controls. The Chinese version doesn't use the same VCA plus this was 20 years ago and build quality wasn't the same back then. So I went around picking up every 1046 and 1066 I could find. Lets just say that for a young guy with no real money I was able to simulate the simplest workflow possible and I built my client base with that set up.
@@diyrecordingstudio Haven’t even heard of the 163 until you mentioned it. Looks interesting, just a single control layout. The 166 is also worth a mention, it is basically two 160XT in one 1U enclosure.
8:00 I didn't understand what you meant by "Kick Crush" nor the circuit that this sound used. Is this the kick already processed once by the DBX 160x that you re-send again in the DBX 160x to only keep the attack this time??!
I have the 160X and it is a very good sounding device. Great on guitars but I use it currently on bass drum and it does a super job there too. It's always worth to give it a try on other sources, as usually it provides pleasing results. It provides the dbx (fat) sound by its very nature. Never would sell it.
I've had one since the early 2000's. As soon as I heard the Beastie Boys used it to record their live instruments on "Check Your Head", I gave it a shot and wasn't disappointed.
Hi! Excellent explanation. I wonder what kind of applications you use the dbx 266xl for. If there is, perhaps, something specific in which the difference is not so noticeable compared to the DBX 160x. Thank you!
Great question. So this compressor brings out the attack/tranisients in what you put through it, resulting in snappier drums or in your case pluckier basses. If you wanted to bring that sound and tonality out in your bass recordings then absolutely. Think like plucky 90s punk bass tones or metal music. Whenever you want the pick or the fingerpicking to be accented and more detailed.
I am here learning about how to gain more dynamics for drum sounds specifically TR-909ish bass drum kicks in hard abstract techno.. I have a 266 XL .. what do you use your DBX 266 XL for..?
Great question. I find the 266xl is mostly good for live as opposed to studio work. I have a couple that I’m going to mod to try and fix some issues with the clarity and gate controls. I find it darkens and can muddy the signal source. But I would try it as a drum buss compressor maybe in parallel. It might do something cool. Let me know how you go.
@diyrecordingstudio ..after doing a bunch of testing I think the 266XL doesn't excel (punchy) with analog electronic bass drums kicks.. I have an Erica Synths Drum Mixer Lite (has a fairly aggressive compressor built in) that I am happy with for its size that's adding punch .. what I would now like to use the 266XL for an end of chain compressor to glue a track together.. the tracks I am trying to compress will be quite full bass, mids, highs with every sound deep in effects .. is there any general setting suggestions you can offer for this on the 266XL..?
hi, I want to buy a compressor for dark, bass heavy Techno kick (Im making Raw techno) till now I was using the NI vst version of the 160 but i want to go analog. Which version of the dbx would you recommend?
Great question, it all depends on your budget. A real 160 vu can cost many thousands of dollars. The 160x is much cheaper. Theres a 160a and a 160xt, get the 160x if you can!
So did you send the kick return and what else to the kick crush? That part was unclear. Is the kick crush your kick bus with both kick out and kick in? I cant tell if you just sent the kick return though the dbx a second time or what.
Hey dru! From memory it is parallel compression on the kick crush. So a send and return setup like you’d use for reverbs and delays. Then just send the kick in and out to the crush bus in parallel.
Great question. This comp adds to the bite of guitars in a similar way to a tube screamer. So funnily not a compression pedal but that particular overdrive/distortion pedal at low gain settings is very similar
Great question. Some people like it on vocals. This compressor is great at bringing the early transients and attack out in a sound source. So I find it great on drums in particular. On vocals it can sometimes bring out too much ess and hard consonant sounds. The dbx 163 is great on vocals though. Very simple compressor. Both of these can be great on bass too
Yeah I good point. I would usually do some slight editing at least, but this was a live recording from a gig, which may be synced to video, so had to avoid that on this particular track.
Those plugins are pretty good for sure. You might be interested in the video i did comparing their LA2a Plugin Vs. the hardware. Very different results even though its the same company.
Serious question. How does the waves dbx 160 compare to your hardware? Also- did you record the kick out and kick sub or no? Man that made a huge difference on our kicks. The studio I went to used a speaker from an ns10. That gives me sub for days. He said the speakers go pretty cheap too.
For compressors, I almost always prefer hardware over software. Software seems to lose detail with compression and even though it's "close" in sound, I hear a almost gated effect in a lot of compression plugins that imitate the hardware. The longer tails and room is still retained in the hardware versus the software. For kick out, i usually use a large diaphragm condenser, but I've been thinking about building a kick sub. You can use any speaker for it. Doesn't have to be anything expensive!
Maaaaan... I recently took my Black Lion B172a out of my vocal tracking chain and dedicated it to mixing only. I've been tracking through the dbx 286a compressor. It just works. Turn the knob until it sounds good and move on.
If it works, then it works! haha. Thats cool man, thats a simple cheap chain if it sounds good!I'm all for working fast too. My chain at the moment is my micparts t67, into the soundskulptore mp573 preamp and eq (neve1073 clone) into the lin76 into the igs one la. Unbeatable for rappers and rock stuff i have in here atm.
Maybe not on the whole mix, definitely on kick, snare, and busses for kick, snare parallel comp. For boom bap you cant go past an ssl g buss comp. That's the sound.
Why not just use the WAVES DBX160 plugin? It sounds great and it would avoid all the physical patching and real-time bouncing (which can get VERY time-consuming!!!) I have an original DBX 166 2-channel that sounds fine but I only really use it during tracking (so I don't get any latency). Once ITB, it's all WAVES DBX 160. Thoughts on why not?
Yeah lots of thoughts on analog vs digital when it comes to compressors. I always prefer analog comps over digital ones. I thought the waves dbx sounded good until I compared it to the analog ones. Even against the dbx 160x which is still different to the 160vu which the waves emulation is, the analog 160x comes off better to me. With analog I find I can compress harder and it still has punch and energy in a mix and doesn’t sound over compressed. With plugins they sound almost gated a lot of the time. Detail is lost in the sustain and decay of the sound source. To my ears anyway.
Why would you use an emulation software when you have the real thing,currently I have 3 dbx160x 1 dbx 160a 1 dbx 165a among others sitting in my rack...
@@Tenna880 Using the ITB emulation gives a MUCH faster workflow for mixing and producing stems and final mixes for Mastering. I can generate TEN versions with digital mix down in the time it would take to make ONE outboard/hybrid version since the hybrid mixes most be performed in real-time. So a 5-minute song takes 5 minutes to export each stem while the ITB export takes ~1 minute to deliver the final mix and 8 stems. (So Total Time for Mix + 8 Stems is ~1 min ITB, ~45+ min Hybrid)
@@sijel You have some valid points, recall is no where near as easy with analog gear. But it is a worthy sacrifice to me. I think you are missing out on something awesome. I was an "in the box" guy for 10 years. I changed my mind when I heard a real comparative recording in person between analog compression and saturation and "in the box" compression and saturation. What most people don't realize that mixing "in the box" is fine as long as the recording has analog saturation baked in to the tracks. My first mix recording/mixing session with analog gear that I wasn't familiar with at all completely blew away anything I'd ever done in the box. I now have a Cranborne 500r8 which allows 28ch in and 30 ch out simultaneous multi channel summing and my mixing job is so much faster because my tracks already sound good going in. I have much less work to do when mixing and everything important has it's own analog chain. Plus if something needs an injection of analog gooeyness, then I just patch whatever I need in. Oh and my analog gear will be worth basically the same and still useable in 10-50 years.
@@dudemcgee256 I agree with your assessment that a good deal of analog “goodness” is needed. Ans I mentioned I use my DBX166 during tracking . I also use analog BAE 1073 preamps, Warm Audio 76 & 2A compressors and well ART ProVLA compressors and MPA tube preamps (as well as a few one off tube mini-preamps). So I have plenty of analog baking in the ovens. 😉 My reply was to clarify to someone who asked “why bother using emulation instead of mixing down in hybrid mode.” It’s just too much of a time soak when I’m creating and wanting to get a rapid turnaround on a product.
Cool vid! Not sure the 160x is a « pro-secret » tho’. I’ve seen the A and X in a lot of studios, but I have rarely seen them used. Especially when DBX 160VU or 161 are available instead. I didn’t know J.Joshua used the 160x. I thought he used the VU. I’ve never been a big fan of the 160x/160a sound (it often sounds a bit « rough » to me, like a live compressor would be). But the negative ratio on that thing is darn insane. I am thinking of grabbing a 160a or 560a just for that. Very useful (I showcased it on one of my crappy videos on this channel). Cheers 🤝.
Ahh well if you didn’t know they used the 160x, maybe it is a secret then? 😜 they use both of course but the 160x is often on bus duties for snare and or kick. There’s heaps of info about it online. www.soundonsound.com/techniques/secrets-mix-engineers-jaycen-joshua?amp The 160x is far better than a standard live comp. Does the attack thing. Does some cool stuff. Mostly use it to add to the transient.
@@diyrecordingstudio Hehe, I don't think there are much secrets in this industry hehe ^^. But actually the info are a bit contradictory, as they say it's the B.Power thing, which, from everywhere else I could read about it it says 160VU. Anyway, I am sure the X works. I wasn't a big fan of the crunchy quality of the XT I tried in comparison to the VU, but maybe the X is different. Although for negative ratio I think they absolutely rock!
When we were still using DATs & TDM systems around "1999-2000ish" I wanted to create a homemade SSL style console so I purchased a Road traveled Midas XL4 that toured for 4 years with the Kentucky headhunters (rough but 100% worked) but I needed dynamics to simulate the SSL workflow. I did some research and found that the closest circuit to the SSL compressor on a budget was the circuit in the DBX 160X but I couldn't buy 40 of those at one time so I found the same 160X circuit was used in the USA DBX 1046 the 4 channel version with less controls. The Chinese version doesn't use the same VCA plus this was 20 years ago and build quality wasn't the same back then. So I went around picking up every 1046 and 1066 I could find. Lets just say that for a young guy with no real money I was able to simulate the simplest workflow possible and I built my client base with that set up.
Very, very interesting. Thanks for the info!
Omg I love stories like that 👏👏👏
@@mthomas1091 Those were the good ol' days!! LOL Cheers!
I use mine on vocals and it sounds amazing !! Haven’t seen many people using it just for vocals but is killer !! Very underrated for vox
100% agree with you. It’s very good on Vox. I used it for ages as my “fast” vocal comp and my opto as my “slow/smooth” comp.
I have a 160A that lives in my bass guitar chain. Such a great device.
Yeah very nice. I agree great on bass too. Have you tried the dbx 163 it’s like the 160 x/a but a bit fatter sounding. Love that on bass and kick too
@@diyrecordingstudio Haven’t even heard of the 163 until you mentioned it. Looks interesting, just a single control layout.
The 166 is also worth a mention, it is basically two 160XT in one 1U enclosure.
I have a 166 as well. Awesome on overheads.
Hows the bass sound with 160/166? Is it more snappy and punchy?
Awesome demo and tutorial! Thank you! Great slamming, rock snare sound!
Thank you! Yeah this is definitely one way to get that happening. These comps get used all the time.
8:00 I didn't understand what you meant by "Kick Crush" nor the circuit that this sound used. Is this the kick already processed once by the DBX 160x that you re-send again in the DBX 160x to only keep the attack this time??!
I have the 160X and it is a very good sounding device. Great on guitars but I use it currently on bass drum and it does a super job there too. It's always worth to give it a try on other sources, as usually it provides pleasing results. It provides the dbx (fat) sound by its very nature. Never would sell it.
Yeah I love them. I have 3 160x's a 166 stereo comp and a pair of 163's. They all have a slightly different vibe.
I've had one since the early 2000's. As soon as I heard the Beastie Boys
used it to record their live instruments on "Check Your Head", I gave it a
shot and wasn't disappointed.
My favorite channel.. Thanks mate
Thanks so much man. Means a lot to hear that, especially coming back after a bit of a break.
Hi! Excellent explanation. I wonder what kind of applications you use the dbx 266xl for. If there is, perhaps, something specific in which the difference is not so noticeable compared to the DBX 160x. Thank you!
Hey the 266 comps are not used at the moment, I am about the mod them extensively though. Then I'll probably start using them on drums/toms.
@@diyrecordingstudio If you’re going to do a mod I will be interested because I own five of them 😊
Yes..how about on bass guitar? Picked bass guitar? Like if Chris Squire asked do you think this would enhance my sound; what would you tell him?
Great question. So this compressor brings out the attack/tranisients in what you put through it, resulting in snappier drums or in your case pluckier basses.
If you wanted to bring that sound and tonality out in your bass recordings then absolutely. Think like plucky 90s punk bass tones or metal music. Whenever you want the pick or the fingerpicking to be accented and more detailed.
I am here learning about how to gain more dynamics for drum sounds specifically TR-909ish bass drum kicks in hard abstract techno.. I have a 266 XL .. what do you use your DBX 266 XL for..?
Great question. I find the 266xl is mostly good for live as opposed to studio work. I have a couple that I’m going to mod to try and fix some issues with the clarity and gate controls. I find it darkens and can muddy the signal source. But I would try it as a drum buss compressor maybe in parallel. It might do something cool. Let me know how you go.
@diyrecordingstudio ..after doing a bunch of testing I think the 266XL doesn't excel (punchy) with analog electronic bass drums kicks.. I have an Erica Synths Drum Mixer Lite (has a fairly aggressive compressor built in) that I am happy with for its size that's adding punch .. what I would now like to use the 266XL for an end of chain compressor to glue a track together.. the tracks I am trying to compress will be quite full bass, mids, highs with every sound deep in effects .. is there any general setting suggestions you can offer for this on the 266XL..?
Can you connect a dbx 160x to a vintage home audio system with other dbx units? (10/20 EQ-Spectrum Analyzer, 4bx, 224x, 120x)
Yes in theory you could, however what is it you're trying to do/achieve exactly? Can you give me some more detail?
hi, I want to buy a compressor for dark, bass heavy Techno kick (Im making Raw techno) till now I was using the NI vst version of the 160 but i want to go analog. Which version of the dbx would you recommend?
Great question, it all depends on your budget. A real 160 vu can cost many thousands of dollars. The 160x is much cheaper. Theres a 160a and a 160xt, get the 160x if you can!
@@diyrecordingstudio thank you!
Excellent! Made a translation from English to UAD
So did you send the kick return and what else to the kick crush? That part was unclear. Is the kick crush your kick bus with both kick out and kick in?
I cant tell if you just sent the kick return though the dbx a second time or what.
Hey dru! From memory it is parallel compression on the kick crush. So a send and return setup like you’d use for reverbs and delays. Then just send the kick in and out to the crush bus in parallel.
Which could be the most similar compressor pedal?
Great question. This comp adds to the bite of guitars in a similar way to a tube screamer. So funnily not a compression pedal but that particular overdrive/distortion pedal at low gain settings is very similar
cool man. I've got one 160a pretty cheap. What about this 266xl? How does it sound like? saw one for sale
Would this be good for tracking vocals?
Great question. Some people like it on vocals. This compressor is great at bringing the early transients and attack out in a sound source. So I find it great on drums in particular.
On vocals it can sometimes bring out too much ess and hard consonant sounds. The dbx 163 is great on vocals though. Very simple compressor. Both of these can be great on bass too
Good capture and mix. Maybe some gridding of guitar/drums.
Yeah I good point. I would usually do some slight editing at least, but this was a live recording from a gig, which may be synced to video, so had to avoid that on this particular track.
Comparing to the DBX 160 vintage? I have the UAD version ...It works more or less the same?
Those plugins are pretty good for sure. You might be interested in the video i did comparing their LA2a Plugin Vs. the hardware. Very different results even though its the same company.
@@diyrecordingstudio I will watch it now ...Thank you
i have a 160A i thought that was the one to get. not sure what difference the XT is
Theyre pretty much the same, the XT has a different output transformer. Apart from that not much difference.
@@diyrecordingstudio no output transformer on the XTs. They are the same
What's the difference vs. the 160a ?
pretty much the same. same circuit, just the 160a is newer.
Serious question. How does the waves dbx 160 compare to your hardware?
Also- did you record the kick out and kick sub or no? Man that made a huge difference on our kicks. The studio I went to used a speaker from an ns10. That gives me sub for days. He said the speakers go pretty cheap too.
For compressors, I almost always prefer hardware over software. Software seems to lose detail with compression and even though it's "close" in sound, I hear a almost gated effect in a lot of compression plugins that imitate the hardware. The longer tails and room is still retained in the hardware versus the software.
For kick out, i usually use a large diaphragm condenser, but I've been thinking about building a kick sub. You can use any speaker for it. Doesn't have to be anything expensive!
good to read the opinion of an expert so I can learn@@diyrecordingstudio
Maaaaan... I recently took my Black Lion B172a out of my vocal tracking chain and dedicated it to mixing only. I've been tracking through the dbx 286a compressor. It just works. Turn the knob until it sounds good and move on.
If it works, then it works! haha. Thats cool man, thats a simple cheap chain if it sounds good!I'm all for working fast too. My chain at the moment is my micparts t67, into the soundskulptore mp573 preamp and eq (neve1073 clone) into the lin76 into the igs one la. Unbeatable for rappers and rock stuff i have in here atm.
On a whole mix (boom BAP hip hop) is it the good tool or not?
Maybe not on the whole mix, definitely on kick, snare, and busses for kick, snare parallel comp. For boom bap you cant go past an ssl g buss comp. That's the sound.
@@diyrecordingstudio thanks!
Why not just use the WAVES DBX160 plugin? It sounds great and it would avoid all the physical patching and real-time bouncing (which can get VERY time-consuming!!!)
I have an original DBX 166 2-channel that sounds fine but I only really use it during tracking (so I don't get any latency). Once ITB, it's all WAVES DBX 160.
Thoughts on why not?
Yeah lots of thoughts on analog vs digital when it comes to compressors. I always prefer analog comps over digital ones. I thought the waves dbx sounded good until I compared it to the analog ones. Even against the dbx 160x which is still different to the 160vu which the waves emulation is, the analog 160x comes off better to me.
With analog I find I can compress harder and it still has punch and energy in a mix and doesn’t sound over compressed. With plugins they sound almost gated a lot of the time. Detail is lost in the sustain and decay of the sound source. To my ears anyway.
Why would you use an emulation software when you have the real thing,currently I have 3 dbx160x 1 dbx 160a 1 dbx 165a among others sitting in my rack...
@@Tenna880
Using the ITB emulation gives a MUCH faster workflow for mixing and producing stems and final mixes for Mastering.
I can generate TEN versions with digital mix down in the time it would take to make ONE outboard/hybrid version since the hybrid mixes most be performed in real-time. So a 5-minute song takes 5 minutes to export each stem while the ITB export takes ~1 minute to deliver the final mix and 8 stems. (So Total Time for Mix + 8 Stems is ~1 min ITB, ~45+ min Hybrid)
@@sijel You have some valid points, recall is no where near as easy with analog gear. But it is a worthy sacrifice to me. I think you are missing out on something awesome. I was an "in the box" guy for 10 years. I changed my mind when I heard a real comparative recording in person between analog compression and saturation and "in the box" compression and saturation. What most people don't realize that mixing "in the box" is fine as long as the recording has analog saturation baked in to the tracks. My first mix recording/mixing session with analog gear that I wasn't familiar with at all completely blew away anything I'd ever done in the box. I now have a Cranborne 500r8 which allows 28ch in and 30 ch out simultaneous multi channel summing and my mixing job is so much faster because my tracks already sound good going in. I have much less work to do when mixing and everything important has it's own analog chain. Plus if something needs an injection of analog gooeyness, then I just patch whatever I need in. Oh and my analog gear will be worth basically the same and still useable in 10-50 years.
@@dudemcgee256
I agree with your assessment that a good deal of analog “goodness” is needed.
Ans I mentioned I use my DBX166 during tracking . I also use analog BAE 1073 preamps, Warm Audio 76 & 2A compressors and well ART ProVLA compressors and MPA tube preamps (as well as a few one off tube mini-preamps). So I have plenty of analog baking in the ovens. 😉
My reply was to clarify to someone who asked “why bother using emulation instead of mixing down in hybrid mode.”
It’s just too much of a time soak when I’m creating and wanting to get a rapid turnaround on a product.
Cool vid!
Not sure the 160x is a « pro-secret » tho’.
I’ve seen the A and X in a lot of studios, but I have rarely seen them used. Especially when DBX 160VU or 161 are available instead.
I didn’t know J.Joshua used the 160x. I thought he used the VU.
I’ve never been a big fan of the 160x/160a sound (it often sounds a bit « rough » to me, like a live compressor would be). But the negative ratio on that thing is darn insane. I am thinking of grabbing a 160a or 560a just for that. Very useful (I showcased it on one of my crappy videos on this channel).
Cheers 🤝.
Ahh well if you didn’t know they used the 160x, maybe it is a secret then? 😜
they use both of course but the 160x is often on bus duties for snare and or kick. There’s heaps of info about it online. www.soundonsound.com/techniques/secrets-mix-engineers-jaycen-joshua?amp
The 160x is far better than a standard live comp. Does the attack thing. Does some cool stuff. Mostly use it to add to the transient.
@@diyrecordingstudio Hehe, I don't think there are much secrets in this industry hehe ^^. But actually the info are a bit contradictory, as they say it's the B.Power thing, which, from everywhere else I could read about it it says 160VU. Anyway, I am sure the X works.
I wasn't a big fan of the crunchy quality of the XT I tried in comparison to the VU, but maybe the X is different.
Although for negative ratio I think they absolutely rock!
I have 3 160X's I will never part with. Permanently on kick, snare, and bass chains.
I have 3 as well!! I use them on kick in, snare top and bottom. Theyre so underrated. 90's drum sounds for days!
My Vocals / Rap go truth Neve 1073 dpa - Spl Dees - DBX 560A ... than it makes BOOM
Yeah dude that’s a great combo for sure. Excellent signal chain.
I wish these sort of videos were more to the point.
I remember when these were £150, cheap as chips compressors
Yeah I picked up a bunch for about $200-$250 last year. I’ve seen em going for up to $800 now. Wild hey 😄
How is a video about compression so quiet?
Because its a mix, not a master? I don't know man, you tell me.
bruh it's trash. I only use Fairchild directly pulled from abbey road only
Hahahaha just caught this. I know you love the dbx compressor built into your tascam, you’d probably dig these too!
The analog discussion ina nutshell 😂
*PromoSM* ✌️