Daft Punk's Behringer Compressor: Let's Finish This.

that sounds spot on, poor headroom... and I felt the make up amp was noisy, so its inability to handle bass transients and kept it off drums and bass guitar and also kept me from smashing stuff unless I had a lot of makeup gain available on my return to compensate for the loss when not using the output amp to achieve unity because of hiss.... mine was used for stereo pads and other keyboards that had a lot of crazy energy that would pop out of a mix and needed some gentle linked taming, stereo acoustic guitar recordings and backup and gang type vocals in stereo. I seldom used it as 2 mono compressors and rarely put it on a parallel bus although it happened occassionally... I was known to sue it to suck the bass and naturalness out of drum loops too, exploiting the poor headroom for instant lofi dynamics although the 3630 could also do a job like that in an uglier way. But that was usually parallel kick and snare back then.

I could be wrong about the ducking but I read it in an article at one point where they talked about ducking samples with their drums using these cheap compressors to make the music between the drums in the sample swell up between their drum hits in that distinctive way... it seemed very clever to young me. If you troll sound on sound or future music from the late 90s and early 00s it will be somewhere in there because those were my rags at that time before tape op and my graduation to full bore pro engineering. If they were ducking with the 2100 sounds like they were magicians. I've enver ducked with mine, I would use something intended for that purpose even back then like the equally cheap (at the time) and infinitely better symetrix 522 of which I own I think 3 at this point although one has channel A stuck in expander mode LOL

I think my composer saw steady service until about 2005 and I'm not even sure where it is right now

perhaps my personal insights from back then will point you in a useful direction

Two things to consider: 1) perhaps the 2.1 2000 manual is a missing link. The 2100 is just a play on 2000 2.1. In other words, they might have been branded as the same compressor once?! 😅 However, 2) Something's catching my attention in Exhibit A now: "En principe, cet appareil est connecté en sortie stéréo." "En principe" translates to "in principle" or "in theory". If this is a correct understanding of the magazine's use of the phrase, is this an acknowledgement of false stereo, thus proving the MDX2000?

I don't want to get into the theory of linking detector circuits for 'stereo' operation... often when i use units in stereo they are unlinked for various reasons, this is a shady business and could be a whole article...

Exhibit A now: "En principe, cet appareil est connecté en sortie stéréo." "En principe" translates to "in principle" or "in theory". If this is a correct understanding of the magazine's use of the phrase, is this an acknowledgement of false stereo, thus proving the MDX2000?

I think you're onto something.... you can exploit a misdesigned link, this seems like an extreme case but often its just that the summed sidechain input to the master isn't balanced well between both sides at all frequencies creating stereo artifacts. You can use this, the pro VLA has a wonky link mode and I exploit it for certain thing, especially as the time constants are so laggy on the mk1 version I favor

Exhibit A now: "En principe, cet appareil est connecté en sortie stéréo." "En principe" translates to "in principle" or "in theory". If this is a correct understanding of the magazine's use of the phrase, is this an acknowledgement of false stereo, thus proving the MDX2000?

I think you're onto something.... you can exploit a misdesigned link, this seems like an extreme case but often its just that the summed sidechain input to the master isn't balanced well between both sides at all frequencies creating stereo artifacts. You can use this, the pro VLA has a wonky link mode and I exploit it for certain thing, especially as the time constants are so laggy on the mk1 version I favor

I Google-translated the full paragraph for the "Behringer Composer" from Exhibit A, and it sounds like they may be describing a different type of exciter/enhancer.

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

The "Dynamic Gain Reduction" device, listed separate from the Behringer Composer in the diagram, is described as:

"still called compressor / limiter, it is a device used everywhere, on occasion, since it allows the sound to be processed so that it, even if it is played very loudly, does not saturate. Or conversely, to considerably amplify a fair sound, so as to balance its level in relation to other sounds."

its amazing how these guys just stumbled through this assuming this translation is accurate because they're not very well informed!

I Google-translated the full paragraph for the "Behringer Composer" from Exhibit A, and it sounds like they may be describing a different type of exciter/enhancer.

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

that argues the new Pro which didn't exist yet... the new one has an enhancer circuit I think, though who knows if it does anything in reality. Uli loves tacking pointless features onto things. Perhaps the 2100 had the enhancer, I have stuff to do, someone read both manuals... or maybe the translation is fine but the interviewer messed up. Journalists can be quite ignorant you know.

I Google-translated the full paragraph for the "Behringer Composer" from Exhibit A, and it sounds like they may be describing a different type of exciter/enhancer.

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

that argues the new Pro which didn't exist yet... the new one has an enhancer circuit I think, though who knows if it does anything in reality. Uli loves tacking pointless features onto things. Perhaps the 2100 had the enhancer, I have stuff to do, someone read both manuals... or maybe the translation is fine but the interviewer messed up. Journalists can be quite ignorant you know.

Both the 2000 and the 2100 have enhancers. The 2100 has a refined one.

Both the 2000 and the 2100 have enhancers. The 2100 has a refined one.

I do not remember mine having that, I need to find it, it might be in my storage unit, its not in my house that I can suss out... its possible I sold it or gave it away and forgot. I also could swear mine said it was an optical comrpessor, there was this time when vactrols got small and cheap so you would find things like half rack joe meeks and the composer that have the opto detector in a modern design then.... that's also the era of the VLA.... instead of having that photo cell that plugs into a socket like a tube like all the urei designs the thing could be pcb mounted, I think the LA22 is like that and the LA4 might be too. It was a late 80s thing into the 90s, I guess its normal now too, but a lot of companies are straight copying the older method which is enat because switching vactrols changes your time cosntants. Acme optocom uses this idea, its got 2 photo cells, a vintage one and a modded one and that's the fast slow switch. I kinda want one of those.

but that's not really the conversation here, I'm no longer sure its a 2000 because they mention putting it on the master bus and if its barely limiting and being used mroe for the enhancer then the ducking problems would not be a big deal. But a bad link mode on your master would really suck if you had panning stuff going on etc.... Iw ould think they woulda had the 2100 for stereo linked master bus compression. Or maybe they went unlinked, I don't usually do that on my master personally, it can make the stereo image wonky, better to do that on stere osignals or sub groups.

Both the 2000 and the 2100 have enhancers. The 2100 has a refined one.

I do not remember mine having that, I need to find it, it might be in my storage unit, its not in my house that I can suss out... its possible I sold it or gave it away and forgot. I also could swear mine said it was an optical comrpessor, there was this time when vactrols got small and cheap so you would find things like half rack joe meeks and the composer that have the opto detector in a modern design then.... that's also the era of the VLA.... instead of having that photo cell that plugs into a socket like a tube like all the urei designs the thing could be pcb mounted, I think the LA22 is like that and the LA4 might be too. It was a late 80s thing into the 90s, I guess its normal now too, but a lot of companies are straight copying the older method which is enat because switching vactrols changes your time cosntants. Acme optocom uses this idea, its got 2 photo cells, a vintage one and a modded one and that's the fast slow switch. I kinda want one of those.

but that's not really the conversation here, I'm no longer sure its a 2000 because they mention putting it on the master bus and if its barely limiting and being used mroe for the enhancer then the ducking problems would not be a big deal. But a bad link mode on your master would really suck if you had panning stuff going on etc.... Iw ould think they woulda had the 2100 for stereo linked master bus compression. Or maybe they went unlinked, I don't usually do that on my master personally, it can make the stereo image wonky, better to do that on stere osignals or sub groups.

It never said anything about a master bus. And how do we know it's not the Alesis 3630 being referred to as the "Dynamic Gain Reduction"?

Here are photos of each compressor. This MDX2000 image comes from this Reverb.com listing and this MDX2100 image comes from Behringer's website. Both have an Expander/Gate.

Wait a minute, there's a visual difference! There's a white dot on the MDX2100's power button that the MDX2000 lacks! We just need to determine whether or not the bit of white in Exhibit A is that dot or glare.

It never said anything about a master bus. And how do we know it's not the Alesis 3630 being referred to as the "Dynamic Gain Reduction"?

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

that's the master or '2bus' in non-engineer parlance.

It never said anything about a master bus. And how do we know it's not the Alesis 3630 being referred to as the "Dynamic Gain Reduction"?

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

Is that mastering specific? Couldn't that still be used in a mixing setting?

We just need to determine whether or not the bit of white in Exhibit A is that dot or glare.

Self-Correction: There is glare. It's now a matter of scrutiny.

Higher res version of the whole of Exhibit A: https://img.17qq.com/images/djjihdoggjz.jpeg

It never said anything about a master bus. And how do we know it's not the Alesis 3630 being referred to as the "Dynamic Gain Reduction"?

"this is a device called an 'enhancer' used to specify and energize the contour of the sound spectrum in the extreme low and the extreme high. in principle, this device is connected in stereo output"

Is that mastering specific? Couldn't that still be used in a mixing setting?

its mixing whether its on the master or across 2 mono channels in stereo somewhere else, mastering is record specific, its the process of creating a physical master copy that's optimized for the format that will be reproduced so that you cna send it to a manufacturer to make CDs, vinyl,, physical product of any kind, even 8 track, that's all it is...

a huge portion of the hardware wielding population has a compressor on their master stereo output if only to catch any big peaks that could blow out spakers or clip the tape/ADC etc, on that mackie CR I suspect the output actually said stereo output right on it under the output jacks, its been awhile and it might say something else but I feel like they're just spitting out the terminology on their actual rack mixer here, the convention of calling it a master is from larger, pro grade desks and is not universal, its just how I talk. Stereo output to me means the whole mix, and you might use that if the CR series had no master inserts and it may not have! I forget. certainly there were channel inserts and you wouldn't call them stereo outputs even on a stereo channel (mackie loves those stereo channels with dumbed down controls) you would say stereo inserts, even if you're a crazy frenchman

PS: I see a dot, not glare. Anyone else?

PS: I see a dot, not glare. Anyone else?

I see a triangular patch, which suggests glare to me. Here are two other resolutions of Exhibit A:

• https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EwJ8f7jVoAIZaI5.jpg
• https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E12AQGlo9XNORuJwg/article-inline_image-shrink_1500_2232/0/1615208035234?e=1620864000&v=beta&t=pkIWvrKWtmrx_jdvPmpMwnY_UVrtKtJrdI5uYaKQhcs

let me get my reading glasses from upstairs.... I can't see little shit like this without them anymore

New observations:

• The width of the numbers in the squares is greater for the MDX2100. It's especially noticeable for the 2nd channel's "2".
• The "Auto" button on the MDX2100 has an "In Out" graphic that the MDX2000 lacks.
• The "Release" scale on the MDX2000 goes from 0.05 to 0.08, while the "Release" scale on the MDX2100 goes from 0.05 to 0.1.

the blown up ones look triangular, the one I was originally looking at even when magnified with my reading glasses could be a dot or could be nothing at all... but honestly we're talking about an enhanced version of a photo of an old style 3 color offset print magazine that was reproducing a photo taken with a pre-digital SLR oor maybe even soemthing less professional and then developed in a dark room with chemicals....

that dot or triangle could just be a development issue, or a printing error,...

I feel like Deckard https://youtu.be/hHwjceFcF2Q

• The "Auto" button on the MDX2100 has an "In Out" graphic that the MDX2000 lacks.

I've cracked it. There's no "In Out" under "Compressor / Limiter". It's an MDX2000.

oh yeah, they added that graphic and text to the auto button to be like all the other controls, huh, there ay go

So, now that we've figured out what it is(!!), how will submitting this work? We each ought to get GearIQ credit, but only one person needs to post. I figure pkennethk gets posting honors for starting the whole thing.