I don't think presets would be of much help, but a detailed write up on the Quad-curve would be great. I use hybrid and pure most of the time. If it had a mid/side feature I would use it on the master bus more.

John T
I take your point, but I'd argue that mixing isn't really about making individual instruments sound good or sound a particular way, it's about presenting the song and the performance. And that is always different, even if it's the same people on the same instruments in the same room.

Sure it is. Using EQ with a preset is a good starting point, if needed you tweak from there. The saxaphone preset of the Waves C-6 on a bus for the TTS -1 as a sax comes to mind.
And not only is an EQ for just song presentation, but you can also use it as a musical instrument of sorts for sound creation.

Honestly, for me, loading up an EQ preset seems more time-consuming than just turning the knobs.

John T
Honestly, for me, loading up an EQ preset seems more time-consuming than just turning the knobs.

This is why I like track templates

clintmartin
I don't think presets would be of much help, but a detailed write up on the Quad-curve would be great.

I get the impression from this thread it would be helpful to some people, so while I can't make any promises, I'll add it to the "possible useful things to do someday" list.

John T
Honestly, for me, loading up an EQ preset seems more time-consuming than just turning the knobs.

I can't get my head round the idea either. Each instrument (of the same type) has different responses and problem resonances, each mic and room the same too. add those 3 together and how can a preset be the first thing to go for. Then every mix requires different space. 
 
Submit Post

Kamikaze

John T
Honestly, for me, loading up an EQ preset seems more time-consuming than just turning the knobs.

I can't get my head round the idea either. Each instrument (of the same type) has different responses and problem resonances, each mic and room the same too. add those 3 together and how can a preset be the first thing to go for. Then every mix requires different space. 
 
Submit Post

Indeed most of the time, circumstances will be different so a preset doesn't have much value. But at least for me, there are plenty of times where the circumstances are the same. For my singing voice, over the years I've developed a signal chain that works well. There's a little bit of Concrete Limiter to tame the peaks, followed by a PC2A leveler, then EQ with a steep low frequency rolloff to deal with leftover plosives, and a gentle upper mid boost. I also always use the same input for my mic. So with a track template, when tracking I have my input ready to go in under 5 seconds and giving a sound that's at least very close to what I want. It saves a lot of time. This doesn't negate tweaking during the mix, but I'm already 75-80% of the way there.
 
I also have a track template for narration. That ensures that when doing a project with multiple "chapters" over a period of time, the voice will have a consistent timbre - I won't have to spend time doing timbre-matching at the back end of the projects. Presets definitely have their uses. 

Ah I'm with you there. Though I have used them, I can see the value in that. It hadn't crossed my mind. User presets make more sense to me than factory.
 
If I play the same guitar with the same mic and in the same room all the time. Or for those working with other musicians regularly, to set up and be ready, that's cool.
 
Then it's just adjusting to the mix. But that would be the normal process anyway I guess, balance the sound, clean it up, balance to a mix.
 
I don't tend to use factory presets for anything really. If there was a 'global fx off' option on a synth, I'd use that when running through patches, and is usually the first thing I turn of to actually hear the synth.