Sonar ProChannel EQ challenge

You need to have it in context of the song

Why would that need EQing?

You could up the lower frequencies a bit but I like it as it is. Besides isn't that the way it sounds?

A good starting point would be to kill that 330hz ring... 

narrowest Q, -5db, vintage curve (seems to be the less phasy one for that)

it does bring it cleaner, then adjust further in context... 

HTH  

V

or a description, as vlab has provided.

The "ring" isn't that part of the sound of the guitar? Are we trying to make it into something its not? This is just a question.

pdarg


This is a Taylor DN3, through a Gefell M930 mic, mono recording with a Pacifica preamp, about 12 inches away.

To me the question is: what EQ does this clip need to sound aesthetically/sonically pleasant - assuming that you would hear it just alone.

That question is a matter of taste. What I am asking is if you don't like the sound by all means process it but if you do why process it? I like it as it is.

Yeah, I'm a bit lost here too, I'll admit. I don't really see EQing in particular or audio engineering in general as an exercise in getting "good" individual sounds, partly because I think it's impossible to meaningfully define "good" in this sense. There doesn't seem to be an artistic goal in mind here, so I wouldn't know what t work towards. I can think of a dozen different ways this could sound, including what it sounds like already. Without a further context, I don't think I could pick a "best".

EQing is all about personal preference. there is no right or wrong way to eq a track. If it sounds good, then its good

I think that's right CJ, though I'd throw in an additional factor; there is a fairly mundane technical thing about making sure sounds don't mask each other to the detriment of the intended effect and so on. But yeah, broadly, there's no such thing as "correct" or "best" EQ. Best *practise* perhaps, but that's not the same thing.

I do agree with everyone it does sound fine as is but the first trouble spot I would look at be it in the mix or not, is as Vlab suggested the 330 ring.

I must admit, I thought the OP was looking for a whole variance of ideas hence I posted what I thought sounded good to me, but it is all subjective. If the intention was for a 'right' answer than there's no such thing is there?

I was expecting to see that 20 different people had posted 20 different results, all with their own take on it and merits in each one. How it's EQ'd as a standalone is almost certainly going to be different to how it'd be EQ'd in a mix and that's going to be depend on each mix as well.

@the OP. Were you looking for a definitive answer or was this as I assumed just a bit of fun to see how others heard it?

FastBikerBoy
I was expecting to see that 20 different people had posted 20 different results.
 
@the OP. Were you looking for a definitive answer or was this as I assumed just a bit of fun to see how others heard it?

That was my original thought: many RQ opinions on this one piece. To my ears, there is a LOT of low-mid that either needs to be cut, or compensated for the in the higher end range.
 
It's also about the mic. I have another sample of this - same preamp, same recording - done at the same time with a different mic - same distance, same angle. Let me see if I can upload that as well (I am getting close to running into a space limit!).

FastBikerBoy


I must admit, I thought the OP was looking for a whole variance of ideas hence I posted what I thought sounded good to me, but it is all subjective. If the intention was for a 'right' answer than there's no such thing is there?

I was expecting to see that 20 different people had posted 20 different results, all with their own take on it and merits in each one. How it's EQ'd as a standalone is almost certainly going to be different to how it'd be EQ'd in a mix and that's going to be depend on each mix as well.

@the OP. Were you looking for a definitive answer or was this as I assumed just a bit of fun to see how others heard it?

Like you, I took the time to try to help.