Hello,
 
Some might say what I am about to is sacrilege, and to some degree, I do understand, but it is just time.
I have some albums that were produced in the early 80's that are severely lacking in bass.  Every time I put one of these discs in my car or home stereo, I'm turning up the bass on my EQ drastically to make it sound good.   A good example is Depeche Mode's "Speak And Spell" album.
 
So I decided I want to import these albums into Sonar and through a gentle/appropriate bass boost to these albums.  I am thinking for this album maybe a 3db low shelf between 0 and 60 Hz.
 
Question is, since this is already mastered and released material, is it best to use a Linear-Phase EQ over a normal EQ (like in the prochannel)?

Thank you!
-Adam
 

Try both and see which you prefer?

I'd go for linear phase "just because it might make a difference" and "it can't do any harm".

Be prepared to add a little compression, maybe at only low frequencies, as well.

You might just find that there's actually nothing to boost down there, lol!

I've done this to fix up bootleg concert recordings.  The cleaner the EQ the better.  Try the LP 64 EQ that comes with Sonar.  Very nice.

sven450
I've done this to fix up bootleg concert recordings.  The cleaner the EQ the better.  Try the LP 64 EQ that comes with Sonar.  Very nice.

 
you know I tried the LP 64 EQ, I just didn't like the sound of it.  I thought linear-phase is best for cleaning up masters or while mastering, but I really like the Pro Channel min phase EQ the best.  I just hope Im not causing any phase issues in what I am doing.

I don't hear any.

SilverBlueMedallion

sven450
I've done this to fix up bootleg concert recordings.  The cleaner the EQ the better.  Try the LP 64 EQ that comes with Sonar.  Very nice.

you know I tried the LP 64 EQ, I just didn't like the sound of it.  I thought linear-phase is best for cleaning up masters or while mastering, but I really like the Pro Channel min phase EQ the best.  I just hope Im not causing any phase issues in what I am doing.
I don't hear any.

The phase issues would only be a problem if you are EQing the left and right sides with a different EQ curve.
In this case a linear phase would be the choice.
Without linear phase, the phases would be different between the channels and there could be some phase cancellation as the two sides sum together.
 
A Linear phase could introduce audible pre-ringing. You have to try and see if you notice the low freq transients affected by the pre-ring.
 
My suggestion is a minimum phase since both channels are EQed the same.
 
As Sharke pointed out: they could have High-pass filtered everything out of the low end for the purpose of making the recording louder. There may not be anything left down there to boost.
 

I used the minimum phase EQ and check out the results.

I added bass and cleaned up the top end too.   


https://drive.google.com/...XpZYmc&usp=sharing

Yep, I can hear some subwoofer now that the original didn't have. The overall level is a bit higher too compared to the original. Sounds good.

I have used Ozone to bring old cassettes back to life.  Record them into Sonar and then use Ozone to tweeze the EQ to your ideal levels.
 
Many of the cassettes had low, squishy levels of bass and muted highs. Ozone was able to get it done. IMHO, the Ozoned version sounded better than the original one.... yup, even when the tape was brand new.

mikedocy
Yep, I can hear some subwoofer now that the original didn't have. The overall level is a bit higher too compared to the original. Sounds good.

yes - I was able to add just a little bit of limiting - the original peaks were only at about -1db, so I bumped it up about 0.5db... still safe from clipping.
 
Thanks for the compliment.  I wish THIS is what remasters really did.  The 2007 remaster of this album is just simply louder (and squashed)... no bass added or anything.