Harrison's compressors -sidechains-

[vicenzajay]

No worries - I understand. That said, v5.32 is still fairly recent in the grand scheme of things. It came out in very late 2019, so waiting for v7 in early 2021 is really not a terrible imposition.

[ermina]

i just want to add some praise for the old side-chain button. When one does programs with voice-overs by the bucket, it was perfectly fast to set up and sounded just right in all situations.
I have tried using side-chaining plug-ins in MB6 and it is orders of magnitude slower, actually i never got it to sound correctly and reverted to hand drawing volume automation curves, which is as slow but at least give consistent results.

Now, i would keep using MB4 if it did not have a font-related problem with slow loading times on my Debian stable (10) systems. Since using secure systems has absolute priority over the applications that we run on them, i too would like to see MB6.x (or 7) bring back a fast mechanism that allows to side-chain the bus integrated leveler/compressor/limiter (which, frankly, is the only one i ever use apart from the XT multiband).

[Sthauge]

I was a big fan of the simple sidechain (I made it!) but it was intentionally simplified; and unfortunately it was -too- simple. Without separate attack/release controls you couldn't do the creative pumping effects that most people were looking for.

The new system doesn't take many more clicks for the simple case (sidechain the bass to the kick.....) but it does allow much much more flexibility if you need it. And I decided that we didn't need 2 different sidechain mechanisms. So the "big" one won.

-Ben

Hi Ben

Why remove the "easy and simple" one because of the need of a "big" one? I see the need of a more flexible sidechaining, so the "big" one is needed.

I used simple sidechaining in many situation when it worked well. Two click with the mouse, some adjustments and it was good to go. But of cause, I'm not doing much "pumping" type of stuff.

Is there any conflict between the two system wise? Is there a lot of maintenance work just to keep it in there up and running? Would it be confusing for the users to have two possibilities to do sidechaining? If not - why just leave it in there and call it what it is - simple sidechaining ?

S :-)

[AB_02]

Hi Ben

Why remove the "easy and simple" one because of the need of a "big" one? I see the need of a more flexible sidechaining, so the "big" one is needed.

I used simple sidechaining in many situation when it worked well. Two click with the mouse, some adjustments and it was good to go. But of cause, I'm not doing much "pumping" type of stuff.

Is there any conflict between the two system wise? Is there a lot of maintenance work just to keep it in there up and running? Would it be confusing for the users to have two possibilities to do sidechaining? If not - why just leave it in there and call it what it is - simple sidechaining ?

S :-)

+1

I refrain from MB32c v6 installation

[vicenzajay]

Big +1 for Sthauge's post....