Practical Use of EQ

Hi everybody,

Could you all make some recommendations for video tutorials that demonstrate actually using EQ, compression, etc?  Something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LViLvXbI6yA&list=UUcI5MQBfsDhklgkzQ5YAPqQ&index=3&feature=plcp

Some I've reviewed show the features of different tools, like what the controls do (gain, fequency, Q, etc).  I'm comfortable with those aspects, so I'm looking for something more related to practical use; examples of decision making; the "why" related to using them.

Thanks!

Donny

Thanks Bit.  I'll definitely have a look.

the most important thing about learning how to EQ, is to learn that taking away, is more important than adding.

i'm a firm believer in removing problem frequencies, versus adding other frequencies to make up for it.


use this simple concept, and your mixes will improve droddey

they did for mine, and i've been doing this a long time.

maybe we are talking the same thing here.

bitflipper


Watch Dan Worrall's two FabFilter Pro-Q tutorials. Even though he's marketing a FF product specifically, it's still an interesting look at EQ for mastering. You may need to watch them 2 or 3 times.

You should buy their products too, they're really good. And they have some really nice videos explaining how to use them. Compressor, Limiter, Gate, EQ, modulation (Volcano) delay, they are all really nice.

batsbrew


i'm a firm believer in removing problem frequencies, versus adding other frequencies to make up for it.


use this simple concept, and your mixes will improve droddey

they did for mine, and i've been doing this a long time.

maybe we are talking the same thing here.

me too. unless everything is tape and analog. 

to be complete with my response, i will say:

i do boost frequencies.

i do wide and narrow eq cuts and boosts.

but for someone asking the question like the OP, and are obviously just really getting into it, i think teaching the concept of CUT over BOOST is important.

once you know these things from practical experience, only THEN do i say BOOST AWAY'



too many times, have i heard mixes ruined by zealous boosting of frequencies when the problem was masking and buildup.

Donny,

I'll give you my take for what it's worth. In my opinion as well as what I teach, when you are new to this field as far as eq goes, "be a cutter not a booster".

That said, it depends on WHAT you actually record. It's almost like telling someone to automatically use a high pass at 150 Hz on down on a guitar track, yet the guitar track itself doesn't NEED to be high passed to that extent. So though I would definitely like to see you be a cutter instead of a booster, there are a few things to consider.

The most important thing that no one has mentioned so far, is what I like to call "sound identification". Meaning, you have to be able to hear a sound and know that it will be useful once you mix, or know that you may need to change a mic or a sound choice BEFORE you even record it.

If you cannot decipher that, an eq will only bring on frustration and excessive turd polishing. You simply don't record a sound that isn't right from the source. If you can't tell, sound identification is where you need to be before you even mess with an eq.

To be able to really understand what constitutes good and bad sound, the fastest way to achieving this is to be shown examples of sound in its best and worst forms. By conditioning and remembering, you know when something is useable and when it should be thrown away.

In understanding sound identification, you must have a good system to hear the right stuff. For example, I had a client approach me to record a video for them showing them examples of these sounds. Their monitor environment was not correct so they had problems hearing what I was trying to teach. I can't show good and bad uses of sub low bass if someone doesn't have a system that can handle sub low bass frequencies. This individual had a horrible time judging bass in his mixes. No wonder why he was jacking up loads of bass in everything...his monitors were not allowing him to hear bass at all in those registers.

So in order to learn about sound, you have to be hearing sound correctly. This is why good monitors, a tuned room or at least some sort of monitor EQ like ARC or something can make an incredible difference. You can't fix a thing if you can't hear the thing, understand?

Once you have a grasp on this stuff, all the eq uses and techniques will give you that "ah, now I get it!" moment. Until then, you very well could be squirtin' into the wind. Having the knowledge on what to do and when to do it will always over-power techniques or "how to's".

All this depends on what and how you track as well as what you hear from those instruments tracked being transferred properly or not. You don't high pass a bass guitar because someone told you that you should if YOUR particular bass guitar is lacking lows. See my point? Sure it's common practice for us to high pass a bass, kick drum, snare or vocal...but you have to determine whether or not YOUR actual instrument needs that and to what extent.

So most definitely watch and check out videos people share with you...but keep in mind that you HAVE to know what to listen for before any eq technique, trick or "common practice" can be applied. Best of luck.

-Danny

spacealf


The Practical use of EQ is not to have to use it.

true, that.


the joy of mixing....


is faders up.


and don't touch anything, except the pan




i've had a few like that, but ONLY a few!!!


heheh

the 10 most important frequencies and these are of course:

Careful, Jeff. Somebody's going to take this literally and write those numbers down and take them as gospel. 

Thanks *VERY* much Danny.

Danny Danzi


Donny,

I'll give you my take for what it's worth. In my opinion as well as what I teach, when you are new to this field as far as eq goes, "be a cutter not a booster".

That said, it depends on WHAT you actually record. It's almost like telling someone to automatically use a high pass at 150 Hz on down on a guitar track, yet the guitar track itself doesn't NEED to be high passed to that extent. So though I would definitely like to see you be a cutter instead of a booster, there are a few things to consider.

The most important thing that no one has mentioned so far, is what I like to call "sound identification". Meaning, you have to be able to hear a sound and know that it will be useful once you mix, or know that you may need to change a mic or a sound choice BEFORE you even record it.

If you cannot decipher that, an eq will only bring on frustration and excessive turd polishing. You simply don't record a sound that isn't right from the source. If you can't tell, sound identification is where you need to be before you even mess with an eq.

To be able to really understand what constitutes good and bad sound, the fastest way to achieving this is to be shown examples of sound in its best and worst forms. By conditioning and remembering, you know when something is useable and when it should be thrown away.

In understanding sound identification, you must have a good system to hear the right stuff. For example, I had a client approach me to record a video for them showing them examples of these sounds. Their monitor environment was not correct so they had problems hearing what I was trying to teach. I can't show good and bad uses of sub low bass if someone doesn't have a system that can handle sub low bass frequencies. This individual had a horrible time judging bass in his mixes. No wonder why he was jacking up loads of bass in everything...his monitors were not allowing him to hear bass at all in those registers.

So in order to learn about sound, you have to be hearing sound correctly. This is why good monitors, a tuned room or at least some sort of monitor EQ like ARC or something can make an incredible difference. You can't fix a thing if you can't hear the thing, understand?

Once you have a grasp on this stuff, all the eq uses and techniques will give you that "ah, now I get it!" moment. Until then, you very well could be squirtin' into the wind. Having the knowledge on what to do and when to do it will always over-power techniques or "how to's".

All this depends on what and how you track as well as what you hear from those instruments tracked being transferred properly or not. You don't high pass a bass guitar because someone told you that you should if YOUR particular bass guitar is lacking lows. See my point? Sure it's common practice for us to high pass a bass, kick drum, snare or vocal...but you have to determine whether or not YOUR actual instrument needs that and to what extent.

So most definitely watch and check out videos people share with you...but keep in mind that you HAVE to know what to listen for before any eq technique, trick or "common practice" can be applied. Best of luck.

-Danny

doncolga


Thanks Bit and Danny again and agreed on all this.  I'd say that my mixes were just consistently dark across the board compared to commercial mixes, so I'd toss Ozone on the master bus in pursuit of the "sheen".  Most all my instruments are straight off a keyboard or plugins, so I had the mindset that I shouldn't have to tweak the sounds any more.  Glad I'm moving out of that mindset and listen, evaluate, tweek, repeat until I've got what I want.

Also the idea that the mix should aim to be as close to the finished product as possible and that ideally, not too much should be required in my "mastering" is emphasized in some of the videos I've been watching.

bitflipper


Expanding on Danny's theme...my best EQ tip is to apply the strongest corrections to individual tracks, and the gentlest tweaks to busses. The closer to the source, the better. So really, the best EQ technique of all is capturing the desired spectrum at the source through mic placement, instrument placement, and microphone selection.

I sometimes catch myself abusing EQ, such as a boost on the bus to counter a cut in the same band on a prominent track. Such "duh" moments can often be avoided by simply postponing any bus EQ at all until the mix is 99% complete. The ideal mix is one that sounds full and complete at the master bus with nothing on it.

You're very welcome. :) Dark mixes....the reason being, most sounds in a synth out of the box are meant to make you go "darn that sounds great!" This puts you in the position of a guitar player that is tone chasing. "Umm what Danny...you lost me?!" LOL! No worries...I'll explain.
 
When we hear sounds by themselves that blow us away, they just about always will NOT work in a mix. Sort of like the rock guitar players that come up with these insane tones. They sound great by themselves but put them in a mix and you're removing lots of the stuff that made the tone appealing.
 
The same goes for these out of the box synth sounds. They sell you on the greatness of the sound....however, they just about always need to be high passed, low passed and then tweaked inside the low mids and upper mids. This all depends on what else you have going on in your mix as well as what instruments are focal points and which are backing instruments.
 
You can get away with focal point instruments being a little bigger in sound size, but backers usually need to have the "goodness" stripped out of them. You probably won't like the sound when solo'd up, but it will work in the mix. That's just the nature of the beast there...and is also the reason you try your best to stay away from that solo button. LOL!
 
But yeah, if you're not doing much to the sounds in your synths, this is the reason for the darkness you're talking about. I would say (based on my own experience with this) that the darkness is more mid-range congestion and low end. Once you curb that, the sound will get a bit more shine to it. From there, you can decide whether or not you need a little more top end.
 
Try to do as much of this at the mix stage as you can though. Taking care of it via mastering can not only ruin the good stuff you have going on, it can be more difficult because you're dealing with the entire mix instead of individual instrumentation.
 
So keep some of that in mind. Hope this helps a little Donny...best of luck bro. :)
 
-Danny

When we hear sounds by themselves that blow us away, they just about always will NOT work in a mix

One of your best pearls yet, Danny.

The general exception to the rule is the very sparse mix. The sparser the mix, the bigger each instrument can be and not step on other toes. Mixes used to be (generally speaking) vastly sparser than they are today, something I'd like to see come back. So you could have a fat bass and big drums and lots of ambience. In fact having lots of ambience was part of the picture, and why you could push those older mixes back further. As you pour more and more stuff into a mix, you can't have as much ambience generally, and everything has to be more and more frequency limited.

I like sparser mixes, with each instrument having much more space. That doesn't mean that they are highly separated necessarily. By allowing each instrument to be bigger, and having a good composition, you can have a huge sounding tune, with everything fairly fat, and everything glued together nicely. The longer reverbs can provide a lot of that glue. When you hear some classic tunes as separate tracks it's sometimes amazing the amount of reverb on them (and in those days of course a lot of that could be the room since they weren't recording in an apartment.)

To be fair, it's easier to control overtones on synths. With analog instruments, they have lots of overtones generally, and they are taking up space far above and below the actual notes being played. Synths can control this and you can use more fundamental tone and less harmonics, which will take up way less space.

To me the big issue with self recorders is that the initial tracks are almost always overplayed becasue there's nothing else there. Then you become loath to redo them since you put in so much time on them. If you go back and do them again after more stuff i is in place, it's a lot easier to spare them down.