(Complimentary) EQ Envelopes?

Any EQ Envelopes you've 'discovered' that really make a difference?

Complimentary EQs? (While one goes up the other goes down?)

For example:
I've had excellent luck with EQ envelopes to clarify/de-clarify Vox in portions (2-3 KHz boost/reduction at Q = 1) ... so far.

I haven't tried complimentary EQs with High-pass/Low-pass, nor on guitar vs. other instruments ... but I feel this is valuable stuff for our mixes.

Thank you for any thoughts/experiences you might share concerning dynamic and/or complimentary EQ envelopes.

i would use envelopes if you really needed to squeeze every last bit of headroom out. for example, you've got the strummy acoustic intro and you don't want it to sound like a bag of paper clips getting dragged over a cheese grater, so you let out the fullness of the guitar. but when the drums and electrics and vocals and backing vocals and B3 and string quartet and bass and cowbell kick in you don't need anything but the pick attack so you drop everything else and suddenly there's all this room you didn't have before.

note that i've never used this method although i've experimented with it, but i'd be willing to bet it's a very common practice in studios trying to get that RMS up a bit higher. personally i try to find a nice balance between all the instruments and let it go from there.

you've got the strummy acoustic intro and you don't want it to sound like a bag of paper clips getting dragged over a cheese grater, so you let out the fullness of the guitar. but when the drums and electrics and vocals and backing vocals and B3 and string quartet and bass and cowbell kick in you don't need anything but the pick attack so you drop everything else and suddenly there's all this room you didn't have before.

LOL!
CJ, your mixes are relatively unwavering (consistent), with party beats and hooks ... mine are a bit more wavering and ... like huge tides of vocals and instruments rolling in waveform after waveform.
Slosh, crash, ching, chime, etc. ... but I see your point (as per Matt and Jack.

ORIGINAL: rob.pulman
I know about volume and pan envelopes but how do I do an EQ envelope?

Insert an EQ plugin, add a track envelope like normal but choose the plugin rather than vol/pan. Then choose which parameter to automate. Draw/record the envelope you want. You can automate almost every parameter of any plugin as long as it "exposes" the parameter to automation.

ORIGINAL: rob.pulman

I know about volume and pan envelopes but how do I do an EQ envelope?

Rob, The question might be:

I know about volume and pan envelopes but which EQ gain envelope? Sonar Per-Track-EQ, LP64 Equalizer, Ozone3 module EQ gain envelope, Cakewalk FXEQ (VST), and/or Sonitus EQ

IMHO, The clear winner is: Sonar Per-Track-EQ ... especially if you've forgotten to consider an EQ plug-in to make envelopes.
IMHO, The clear loser is LP64 Equalizer; it's so processor intensive as to render it worthless for envelopes. (Sonar hiccups bad with LP64)
Currently, I only use the LP64 for precise boost/reduction Qs on the instrument bus.

ORIGINAL: bitflipper

Here's an example of where EQ envelopes work well: an instrument that starts the song solo, then becomes a rhythm instrument when the rest of the band kicks in. I tend to do that with piano or acoustic guitar. For the first 4 measures, I want the instrument to have the full spectrum. After that, I want to do the usual low-cut to keep the low mids from getting muddy. An envelope on a high pass filter does the trick.

The same technique might be used on any instrument that takes a solo during the course of a song, such as a bass solo.

Wouldn't it be easier to just clone the track for intro and use fuller eq'd sound on cloned track?
Or am I missing something here.

ORIGINAL: RichardHiorns

ORIGINAL: bitflipper

Here's an example of where EQ envelopes work well: an instrument that starts the song solo, then becomes a rhythm instrument when the rest of the band kicks in. I tend to do that with piano or acoustic guitar. For the first 4 measures, I want the instrument to have the full spectrum. After that, I want to do the usual low-cut to keep the low mids from getting muddy. An envelope on a high pass filter does the trick.

The same technique might be used on any instrument that takes a solo during the course of a song, such as a bass solo.

Wouldn't it be easier to just clone the track for intro and use fuller eq'd sound on cloned track?
Or am I missing something here.

Richard, it may be easier, safer (depending on your processor intensive EQ-VST), and recommended ... to do it your way ... especially if you're just concerned about 1 basic EQ issue. But cloning may get old as you may want to invoke 'Complimentary EQing' on other tracks.
Bit, I suppose you're increasing the band of the HP filter via EQ frequency parameter or Q parameter (envelope) ... Not just reducing dcbs.

Consider Bits example in the 'lower-mids'.

But how many of your instruments fundamental notes are directly competing for clarity at the 500Hz to 2000 Hz band, the dominate mid-range (C5-C7); fortunately, many have harmonics that may be tightened independently, and clarified on something bigger than a car stereo. But many (like myself) listen in the car, to be sure.

Now I've got 2 KHz -gain envelopes (for dynamic boost/reduction) on lead guitar, vox, back-up vox, instrument bus ... and am considering for the drum-bus ... to give relative sitting room for up-in-front leads and decreasing mud in the mids.

Currently all are Pre-FX envelopes (which may be a mistake as fx-compressors and fx-exciters kick in) ... Duh, I think I'll try to change them to Post-Fx envelopes.

ORIGINAL: RichardHiorns

ORIGINAL: bitflipper

Here's an example of where EQ envelopes work well: an instrument that starts the song solo, then becomes a rhythm instrument when the rest of the band kicks in. I tend to do that with piano or acoustic guitar. For the first 4 measures, I want the instrument to have the full spectrum. After that, I want to do the usual low-cut to keep the low mids from getting muddy. An envelope on a high pass filter does the trick.

The same technique might be used on any instrument that takes a solo during the course of a song, such as a bass solo.

Wouldn't it be easier to just clone the track for intro and use fuller eq'd sound on cloned track?
Or am I missing something here.

Hi Richard.

I do what bit flipper describes, and it's very common at the top of song, as the different parts are layering in. But you asked a good question.

For me, it depends on how extensive the changes are throughout the track. If there are a lot of abrupt changes throughout the track -- then I might split those sections out to their own track, and manage them as separate parts. Neither method is inherently better, and both accomplish the same thing. But sometimes one just feels preferable depending mostly on how I'm thinking about and visualizing the mix. It's a workflow thing. It's very subjective.

FWIW.