I came up with a way of simulating sidechaining in Renoise as I couldn’t find a stable VST-solution that worked well enough and wasn’t able to use MIDI-enabled VST-effects in Renoise.
The method is to use a sendchannel for the ‘sidechaining effect’ and send the tracks/channels you want to be affected to it. Then, add an LFO-device on the ‘sidechain’-sendchannel, using the upramp saw-waveform and setting the destination to the Volume of the sendchannel.
By setting the frequency of the LFO to something that fits with your BPM (the time between two bassdrums or a little upwards) and adjusting the amplitude and offset-parameters in the LFO-device, you’ll get the volume-envelope of something being sidechained. You can retrig the LFO-device (like the bassdrum would) in the pattern by adding 1600 in the ‘sidechain’-send effect-track (if it’s the first device in the effect chain).
Hopefully the rest should be self-explanatory by checking out the rns and the mp3-file. The method demands a little work (especially when you have passages in the music where you don’t want things to duck by the kick etc). Also, on very clean sounds (like sine waveform basses), you will hear the ramping of the LFO on the volume. Still, it’s a method that works for me. Happy stomping.
Kameleontti: Well, for one reason, this method doesn’t flatten out the dynamics of the ‘sidechained’ material like a compressor would do. I think this is a good way to keeps control of the volume of stuff, which can easily get out of hand when instead using a compressor without sidechaining. But to each it’s own. I’m not forcing anyone to use my method.
Not really. When you’re using a compressor, you’re changing (compressing) the dynamics of the audio. What this effect does is to duck the signal at the kick (changing the volume of it). But of course, you can always add a compresor after the lfo-device. I do that sometimes too.
Compression is usually to keep control over your peak amplitudes and keeping a single track rms within the certain overal amplitude range of the instrument (or voice), this makes it easier to mix down tracks.
Usually voice, guitar and drum-lines being played by humans, have a dynamic rms mixture that is not in contrast to what it actually should be, a human not always can give in at the same amplitude, he / she did one or more moments ago.
If you work with samples and specially percussions, (a good quality set is usually a set of percussion samples recorded in the same session), the peak-values and average rms has already been critically mixed and compressed for it’s own proportions, so applying extra compression on such samples ain’t nessesary.
But i also read that a human drummer should just do a proper warm up before going into a recording session.
A good warm up means a more tight rythm and impact performance thus a good average rms and no need for compression.
Yes, unfortunately this works better in 1.5.1 and backwards than in 1.8.0 - as the smoothing of envelopes (of the LFO) wasn’t working and taktik fixed that bug. On the other hand, I’ve getting used to work with sidekick v3 instead to get the trick done.
It’s easiest implemented on a 4x4 beat, but is applicable on all kinds of beats, all you need to think of is to set the effect of the lfo to zero after (f.ex.) 4 steps, so the sound of the lfo, ramping down doesn’t affect the output.
Anyway, these days, I would rather go with a compressor or the earlier mentioned sidekick to obtain something similar.
I dunno man, you have an incredibly limited view of compression judging by what you just said. Every single engineer i know that’s worked commercially (there’s a few) use compression for punch and effect as much as simple levelling. I personally use it for adding click to drums that lose it in final mix, in addition to, y’know, generally murdering the f**** out of any semblance of properly balanced rms.
Sorry for my very late reply (as i read this just today)
My limited view is just based upon a compilation of a few different sites that supply tips on mixing or critics against mixing methods. Maybe i should browse some more to get a clearer picture.
Getting a punch effect through compression is just the point you cut which sounds like we are going into this loudness war debate again and discuss clearity versus loudness…
But that part is really out of my league nevertheless i hear this “punch effect through compression” all the time and the cons and pros against this.
So when does punch really matter or when you prefer clearity? What would you like your listener to experience when he turns up the volume knob on his stereo, because that is the control-knob you will never be able to maintain.
You can also achieve nice and tight effects using gating… Which does at least not destroy the amplitude level of the dynamics in the sample.