Potentially Interesting Rhythm Guitar Recording Technique (now w/ Audio Example}

I'm sure many of you are aware of the concept of dropping the mids on acoustic guitar to make room for vocals, or pulling back the low end a bit if it interferes with bass. I kept thinking that's kind of a broad approach, and there should be a way to accomplish a similar result less invasively.
 
Long story short, I think I've found it. I inserted a Sonitus EQ in the rhythm guitar's FX bin; the song was in the key of A. So, I created six notches using the sharpest Q possible at the following frequencies: 110, 220, 440, 880, 1760, and 3520. Pulling back on the gain for each band took out the "meat" from the guitar, giving it a somewhat thinner but extremely balanced sound. It fit more transparently into the track, and its "key of A-ness" stayed out of the way of other instruments.
 
I guess that this work also work with something like piano, if you wanted to thin it out somewhat but leave the guitar sound as is because you want to emphasize it.
 
Anyway, I thought you might find this interesting. It really does seem to open up some more "space" when mixing.

Key of A Major:
I:    A     110...
      C#   138.6...
      E     164.8...
 
IV:  D    146.8...
      F#   185...
      A     110...
 
V:   E     164.8...
      G#   207.7...
      B     123.5...
 
 
fixed

Interesting technique.  Maybe Cake needs to implement a chordal EQ, smart so you set the key and changes and the eq proportionally follows along.
 
@

Anderton
I'm not sure it would be necessary to go to too great lengths with all this. In the prelim tests I did, I played various chord progressions and just dealing with the tonic seemed to make a sufficient difference. However, the reason why I post these ideas/works-in-progress is in case others want to pursue, and add their own expertise/experiences.
 
I also found that the two highest notes aren't really all that important, it's the lowest four that matter.

I agree it's not that important to go through all the automation of the EQ. I do agree with the original premise of the test. I think subtractive would be better though. Either way it does have it's drawbacks as even if you hit a single F#, there are a multitude of overtones and those can add the flavor of the note. Still, an interesting idea as you could subtract the frequencies just above or below the target note. Say and A 440. Drop the frequencies below 420 or above 460. Even then it depends on how it sounds. I think it's a good idea to EQ by key but all this talk about automating the EQ , whatever, is overthinking things. I would worry about the space for each instrument in relation to the key.

There is a free course, Play with your Music, and they say that  even though you hit the note A 440, all frequencies sound out. It's just which frequencies prevail.

Interesting, I must try it out.
 

 

Anderton
The idea is to subtract the fundamental and its even harmonics only, 

I have pointed out that the rhythm track in a song in the key of A Major is almost as likely, at any moment, to have a fundamental, or undertone, at 146.8Hz or 164.8Hz as it is to be rooted at a multiple of 110Hz,
 
If you think about it long enough, it explains why a low shelf cut seems to be a nice way to make some space for other instruments.
 
The technique described is something I tried back when I was a school boy, but I soon learned that arranging the song more effectively and working with guitarists (or pianists) that play with a sensitivity for the tune yields the best results. I also learned that thoughtful mic placement on acoustic guitars is very useful, and that tone knobs were placed on electric guitars for a reason.
 
 
 
 
 
An idea that is somewhat related, that I have been fascinated with, is the use of impulse responses that are constructed of chord tones and have been identified as being matched with song keys for use in convolution processors. There was a fellow over in Africa preparing samples of these a few years back and he offered some freebies that I thought provided an ability to glue a song together in a sweet harmony.
 
At some point I realized that the results I heard were more or less the same sound musicians have, for the past few centuries, created by including a soft pad in their arrangements. The experience of using the song key impulse responses reinforced my appreciation of very quiet pads and the way they can make everything played on top seem to glue together in harmony. 
 
At some other point I imagined that the technique of using song key impulse responses, as I have described, could be hybridized into a system of using distinct impulse responses, each prepared for a specific chord voicing. I imagined a system where the IRs would be swapped out as the song moved through the harmony. When I was done dreaming about that it occurred to me that this is, more or less, what a really good reverb already does when it reacts to the music injected into the system.
 
Good times!
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
edit grammar

mike_mccue
 
I have pointed out that the rhythm track in a song in the key of A Major is almost as likely, at any moment, to have a fundamental, or undertone, at 146.8Hz or 164.8Hz as it is to be rooted at a multiple of 110Hz,
 
If you think about it long enough, it explains why a low shelf cut seems to be a nice way to make some space for other instruments.

 
But although a low shelf solve problems in terms of lower-frequency mud, it doesn't solve the problem of midrange instruments interfering with each other. The genesis of this experiment was rhythm guitar parts taking up too much sonic space, and realizing that a Nashville tuning - which shift the overall harmonic structure higher - often solved the problem. One thing led to another...
 

The technique described is something I tried back when I was a school boy, but I soon learned that arranging the song more effectively and working with guitarists (or pianists) that play with a sensitivity for the tune yields the best results. I also learned that thoughtful mic placement on acoustic guitars is very useful, and that tone knobs were placed on electric guitars for a reason.

 
But maybe you want a full voicing on the guitar, and you want all those "key" notes. I'm differentiating here between a full arrangement and a full frequency spectrum. Mic placement, arranging, and tone knobs on guitars (which of course do only high cuts) are all useful and part of the toolkit, but so is this.
 
Think of this approach as simply a variation on the technique used by so many mastering engineers who do a broad, shallow cut around 300-400 Hz, except applied to an individual instrument or two instead of en masse.
 
In practice, this works. Even if you don't think of it in terms of frequency response, being able to have a higher average level without dynamics is also useful.
 

An idea that is somewhat related, that I have been fascinated with, is the use of impulse responses that are constructed of chord tones and have been identified as being matched with song keys for use in convolution processors. There was a fellow over in Africa preparing samples of these a few years back and he offered some freebies that I thought provided an ability to glue a song together in a sweet harmony.

Yes, this kind of thinking can be very cool. I often add resonances at specific pitches and put them way in the background on parts like shaker and tambourine. It gives a sense of pitch that can really help blend into a track, if that's what you want (which of course isn't a given - sometimes the percussion is there to stand out).

sven450
I love this forum and all the cool (and wacky) ideas that are proposed, but any technique that involves me doing math falls into the "taking the fun out of music" category.  I don't doubt it could work, but just too much fiddling!  

I think I'm with you on this Sven.  I do like the ability to program and layer.  Technology allows for some awesome adjustments.  However, too much automation can be too much of a good thing.  Alas, I agree:  Leave the fiddling to the fiddler.
 
Fresh is Best,
-Erin

I'm a big fan of carving EQ to mitigate masking, but ...
 
If the song is in A, and you notch every frequency in that scale and thereby lower every note the guitar is likely playing, how is that different from just turning down the guitar?
 

"This is the kind of thing that's somewhat difficult to imagine mentally, but if you have a rhythm guitar, vocalist, and piano all playing at the same time and apply this to either the guitar or piano, you'll definitely hear the results."
 
 
It doesn't seem hard to imagine, nor does it seem hard to imagine that you can hear a difference.
 
 
 
However, It just doesn't seem like a "musical" solution. Turning down the fundamental and under and overtones of one of the 7 commonly used chords, the tonic or root chord, in a song key is a seemingly arbitrary choice and it doesn't seem sensitive to the idea that the frequencies chosen only appear in the voicings of a few of the other chords in a song key. 
 
 
It seems to me that stringing a guitar up with Nashville tuning is a much more "musical" solution, and writing parts with chord voicing that compliments a song isn't a bad idea either.
 
best regards,
Mike
 
 

Perhaps someone could design a "harmonic notch filter" plugin where you could notch out fundamental and harmonic frequencies for a variety or purposes and techniques. It could even have a scale or "harmony wizard" that helped the process. Adjustable "Q" and other parameters might be useful, as well. Is there already such a plugin?
 
 

Thanks Craig! Another great idea to put in the toolbox.
 
Seems like you can't say anything around here without stirring up a controversy....LOL.
 
I like the way you think. It's no wonder you are the Gibson Magic Guy.
 

Vlar
Perhaps someone could design a "harmonic notch filter" plugin where you could notch out fundamental and harmonic frequencies for a variety or purposes and techniques. It could even have a scale or "harmony wizard" that helped the process. Adjustable "Q" and other parameters might be useful, as well. Is there already such a plugin?

Meldaproduction's MDynamicEQ and MAutoDynamicEQ, and maybe - I'd have to check to make sure - MAutoEqualizer. Up to 16 harmonics.
 

sharke
Like Mike I am a fan of tailoring the arrangement so that instruments compete less. 

I can't seem to get across the premise that what I described has nothing to do with notes or arrangements, but levels and spectra. You can arrange a piece so the instruments don't overlap at all, and still derive benefits from thinning out an instrument's energy in a subtle way so that one instrument is more prominent in the mix than another. 
 
If you create a set of notch filters as described, you'll hear what I mean. I first used this technique on a finger-picked guitar and it was as if I had compressed it somewhat, but without the artifacts. This allowed me to raise it a little bit in the mix without stepping on the other instruments. The arrangement was fine; the mix wasn't...but it is now. I thought that was very useful, which is why I posted this thread.

DeeringAmps
"The sound feels like you're playing the amp sim"
Now you're talkin'!
More details PLEASE.
 
Tom

Stay tuned...it's a combination of trying to simulate the "push" you get from a cab, which is mostly low frequencies; TH2 has a built-feature along these lines called ReSPIRe (I have no idea what that means, so don't ask!) that comes close.
 
he other element is dynamic response. As you of all people would know, with a real amp when you pull down the volume the amp "cleans up." The smoothness with which this happens has a lot to do with the dynamic response, and it seems to me that with a lot of amp sims it's more like a switch than a smooth analog change (I hope I explained that well enough). I'm trying to counteract that "switch" effect so there's a close correlation between what you play and how the amp responds.
 
It's not a done deal but I'm getting closer. In any event I think what I'm getting now is already an improvement. I have a guitar-playing friend who doesn't like sims coming in this afternoon to do a reality check. He's already convinced it will suck even without hearing it, so if he smiles, I'll consider that a major win