2012/11/06 19:34:19
timidi
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. 
2012/11/06 21:48:31
batsbrew

"But, the thing is, many concepts can improve your mixes."



but, we're only talking EQ here. and i'm saying, subtractive eq is preferable to boosting eq. this is my opinion.you can listen to my own mixes, and decide for yourself if my opinion is valid enough or not, to consider. i'm only trying to helpbut, we're only talking EQ here.but, we're only talking EQ here. and i'm saying, subtractive eq is preferable to boosting eq. this is my opinion.you can listen to my own mixes, and decide for yourself if my opinion is valid enough or not, to consider. i'm only trying to helpbut, we're only talking EQ here. 


2012/11/06 21:56:36
batsbrew
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.

2012/11/07 00:28:15
spacealf
The Practical use of EQ is not to have to use it.
2012/11/07 02:44:14
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
2012/11/07 10:05:07
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.
2012/11/07 10:18:29
batsbrew
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
2012/11/07 20:29:16
Jeff Evans
This vid is a Studio One tutorial on EQ and uses an interesting approach.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...eature=player_embedded

Although you wont be able to use the presets the principals still apply well. Make a set of presets that boost and cut at the 10 most important frequencies and these are of course:

31, 63, 125, 250, 500, 1K, 2K,4K,6K and 16K.

Pink noise and a perfectly mixed music are good sources. Apply the boosts to get a feel where the boost is actually taking place but more importantly how it sounds. The cuts are interesting too. 

Cutting is a little easier in a way because an excess of energy in a particular part of the spectrum is a little easier to hear and hence remove. A deficiency in an area is a little harder to hear and requires more experience to track down and apply the right amount of boost to correct.

Neither boosting or cutting is more or less important they are both important. But I agree that cutting often corrects a problem and the other areas usually respond well around it and seem to get louder or just sound different and often better. There is a need for boosting otherwise it would not be available to us. 

Practice with filters too at the ends of the spectrum is also a nice easy way to get into using EQ although it is not strictly an EQ, it is cutting and on only two parts of the spectrum as well.

2012/11/07 20:46:35
bitflipper
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. 

2012/11/07 20:53:39
Jeff Evans
Sorry Dave LOL! Actually I was thinking for a beginner it might be better to halve those number of frequencies and make some wider boosts and cuts at:

30, 100, 300, 1K, 3k, 9K. These might be easier to hear at first. 

The 10 points I did mention are pretty standard 10 band graphic frequencies and are very typical centre frequencies.

I would rarely EQ in 10 spots in the spectrum, its more like 3 or 4 at the max. But it still does not hurt to get to know what all those frequencies sound like being boosted or cut. 
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account