Volume automation would be my first tool to use, not compression. Also, you could automate the inputs of your compressors, or the gains of the tracks.
A thing that could'nt be fix is if some instruments sound different because they were played softer, ex: a snare that was littly play won't sound the same but I think it might be good after all.

Btw, I would keep a dynamic difference between the verse and the choruses, it keeps the music alive !!

It's not an easy thing to get right. So much depends on the song itself, and you should really go with what the song is telling you to do. I remember that for one of my "big" numbers that had intimate verses and huge choruses, I recorded the lead singer using a different microphone for the verses from that in the choruses and a different mouth-mic distance for the two. It had the result of people asking me "What's that effect you used for the verse vocals?", when it was mainly the difference between a dynamic mic and a condenser mic.

However, to fit in with standard pop and rock conventions, I used volume automation (rather than compression/expansion) to bring the verse levels up, and this gave the whole song the needed lift and punch. It's surprising what the ear will accept as normal if you get the detail right.

Sounds great. So basically I'd be evening out the actual volume levels (somewhat) with automation, simply bringing the verses up without affecting transients. I'd do this in my mixing DAW (Cubase).

Then I'd just do regular stuff to the mix in my mastering software (Wavelab).

And this works because the instruments still retain the "softly played" sound on the verses. They aren't really louder in the technical sense, they just have the volume turned up. So the delicate cymbal and snare work still sounds delicate, etc.

Yes, but if you feel you want to bring the instrument level up as well, don't bring it up as much as the vocal in the verses. In this way, the vocal stands out more over the backing during the verses and can wallow more in the backing during the choruses.

A professional job of level adjustment can be "invisible" to the ear when done well. If you can find other commercial examples of intimate verse/strong chorus songs that you like the balance of, take a really close listen to the dynamics and level of the vocal and backing. It's surprising what is apparent even in a track that you think you know if you listen to it with a different hat on.

Boswell, post: 411177, member: 29034 wrote: It's not an easy thing to get right. So much depends on the song itself, and you should really go with what the song is telling you to do.

This is the core truth of mastering. You can't force a mix to be something it can't be. If you want the end result to have less dynamics then it should be mixed that way.

Personally I would probably push for leaving the dynamics in the song if that's the way it was mixed. Besides, if the LUFS thing catches on you'll be ahead of the game.

OK, I read an explanation of LUFS. Can you give me a 2 sentence explanation my musician brain can comprehend?

The playback system will detect the average level of songs and automatically adjust them to be similar. Loud songs with no dynamics will be lowered so they will no longer have a competitive advantage over more dynamic songs, and the dynamics of the more dynamic songs will mostly be retained instead of crushing them up to the level of the loud songs as is currently done on broadcast radio.

AWESOME! How do I order? :)

push faders up during verse. pull faders down on the chorus'. repeat to the end.

OK, I tried it, and it works! Thanks guys!