Following that principle above, Dean, it could be interesting to mix with an eq on the master bus with a LPF and HPF set to simulate standard consumer systems and just do full range checks every now and then. Obviously bring everything back and do a final tune up of the highs and lows at the end of your mixing though. It would be interesting to compare results. Much more attention could be paid into the mid range and really getting it to sit nice. I would imagine this would be even more counter productive for a beginner (they keep trying to boost those parts anyway and make it even worse still), not necessary for a professional, but maybe us guys sitting in that medium level could benefit from a little bit of this in our mixing...

Of course the ideal is using an actual speaker designed for this above purpose, using it as a check speaker. I do believe a good number of studios at the very least have something like this for a quick check. But I wonder how it would compare with just using a simple eq on your master bus? It may just help you focus your attention where it really matters.

The other option is to actually boost your highs and lows so you don't add too much.

And then the final option is to maybe just learn how to mix well ;)

I would be very careful about putting eq's and things into your monitor system. It is not a common technique and not done very often. (I am not talking ARC here, I am talking what Matt is suggesting like a massive bass and treble rolloff in your main speakers) Mixing into a compressor doing light compression is about the only thing I would do in terms of processing in between your mixer and your monitors.

The other reason it is not a good idea is that you are still hearing your main monitors as opposed to another speaker or set of speakers.

The Auratone concept works best. Feed L+R into a small 3" or 4" single mono driver type speaker. And do this at low volume as well. That concept already solves all your issues. The low volume means you are not really hearing bass and the very highs and also the speaker being what it is also removing these parts of the spectrum and you are just hearing mids anyway.

I have championed the idea of the single mono speaker many times here and at low volume as well. It is simply a revelation. It is so revealing and I spend most of my mixing time on it only going onto main speakers here and there for obvious checks. Your mixes will sound way better for it as well. In fact I would say that the small speaker is the biggest improvement to your mixes you can possibly make. Your room acoustics wont effect it either. I just sit right in front of it and listen up close. When everything sounds perfect in the small speaker when you go up loud on your main monitors the mix is always incredible. It is also the only way to balance vocal levels against music or backing tracks as well. 

Something like this:

http://www.avantonepro.com/Avantone-Active-MixCube-Powered-Full-Range-Mini-Reference-Monitors.html

They make passive models too if you have got a spare poweramp lying around.

Another point about rolling off your extreme bass low end. Don't forget the human ear/brain combination has this wonderful ability to reconstruct a missing fundamental based on the harmonics present in a signal.

Use this ability to your advantage.

mattplaysguitar


I've got to ask... What is so special about exactly 79Hz....?

Does it have something to do with the E2 being 82Hz and the D# being 78Hz? If so, this would really only apply to songs written in E, would it not?

I'll take a stab at that one Matt. :) (I actually HP 80 Hz....79...close enough lol) On my bass tones, the meat of the bass seems to kick from 80 Hz to about 130 Hz. Anything under 80 to me starts to sound too sub low. I personally don't like that stuff in my basses. I like to give the kick reign from 55 on up until it starts to mask...then I back it down and isolate it more.
 
So when Philip gets a bass guitar sample from me, controlling 80 Hz is usually going to sculpt it just right. I've usually taken care of everything else in that tone, so all he has to decide is how much of that 80 he wants. Using a Sonitus eq HP, anything under -1.6 on the Q starts to remove subs. 9 times out of 10 a HP on the dominating frequency is all you need to do to a bass tone that was recorded correctly unless you're going for something else. Now with other bass tones from clients, it's not going to be an 80 Hz HP...it's always different. But I personally find 80 Hz to be a nice frequency to accentuate bass guitar lows in quite a few situations. That seems to be the low end that I like the most in a bass as far as the low end push goes. Some like to go lower...but it depends on what you're faced with on your kick drum.
 
With a kick that has more beater attack and less low end, you can allow more bass guitar lows to be present. When you have a kick that needs more thud like in Philip's music, you need a different approach on the bass guitar or it all turns into mud. Unlike Jeff, I don't like 40 Hz in my basses at all unless it's some sort of specialty thing that needs to be there. Same with kicks...other than bass drop type stuff, I see no need for much 40 hz in a project at all other than maybe a slight over-tone here and there. And when it gets used, it has to be tight or I just don't like the effects of it.
 
To me, excessive low end frequencies ruin more mixes than those who use excessive high end. Bass is the death of a mix 9 times out of 10 followed by excessive low mid and mid range congestion. Everyone seems to go for warm, big and bottomy....to me, it never sounds right no matter who is mixing it. Most of the new Nickelback has this sub low stuff happening. It sounds like absolute @ss in real monitors and in your car....yet in ear buds, it's acceptable. I like to get a happy medium that works for everything...and as long as excessive lows are in the picture, they are not going to give you that happy medium.
 
-Danny

I don't like a lot of 40 Hz either. I agree with Danny in that bottom end is the death of a lot of mixes. But the mix is one thing but mastering is another. I have found in mastering I am getting the ideal bottom end by rolling off at 60 Hz, not a steep slope but not too slow either. So that frequency seems to be in the middle of 40 and 80 Hz and it is interesting as it seems to provide a decent low end without thinning it out very much but has the ability to really control the bottom end and reign it in nicely. I find this gets rid of the sub stuff and the deep stuff which does not really help.

It still amazes me though how sorting out the low end really defines how the mids and highs sound after doing that. If you want to punch the mids through a mistake that could be made in mastering is leaving the low end alone and start boosting mids. But if you control and reign in the low end suddenly the mids just poke forward nicely and all without touching them and isn't it great when you get something for nothing like that or by taking something away rather than boosting something else.

Mastering is one way to do it but keeping the low end in check during the mix is also a good and better way to do it as well. I think you have turn up the music pretty loud actually to really hear how the bottom is really sounding. Some here say oh wow 85 dB SPL is just so loud and I cannot go that high for various reasons. But even at 85 dB SPL you don't really hear the bass so well. I find once you get into 95 dB and plus levels then the bass really stands out and begins to shine. Of course you don't have to stay up there for long but I still believe you have to go up loud at some time during an important mix. When you jump in your car to check out a mix do you do it softly, I say no you don't you crank it, well I do anyway! 

Jeff Evans


Mastering is one way to do it but keeping the low end in check during the mix is also a good and better way to do it as well. I think you have turn up the music pretty loud actually to really hear how the bottom is really sounding. Some here say oh wow 85 dB SPL is just so loud and I cannot go that high for various reasons. But even at 85 dB SPL you don't really hear the bass so well. I find once you get into 95 dB and plus levels then the bass really stands out and begins to shine. Of course you don't have to stay up there for long but I still believe you have to go up loud at some time during an important mix. When you jump in your car to check out a mix do you do it softly, I say no you don't you crank it, well I do anyway![/quote 
 
Yeah mastering is a totally different animal in how *I* deal with low end. I was speaking more from a mix perspective. Watch curbing 60 Jeff...it will take away the "oomph" in your kick drums just about always. Try removing 40 and below as this will allow the good stuff in the 50's and 60's to still be there for impact purposes. The only time I touch 60 in a mastering situation is when someone may have too much thud in a kick drum or they have their bass accentuating in that area. Most times though, once I remove the low mid mud and all the stuff under 40, I can actually pump 60 up a dB or so to add a bit more definition to the kick or bass guitar. But it's rare for me to cut in that area...then again, it depends on the style of music. For rock, kicks and basses are going to end up in this area and need the force there. Sometimes a mix may have too much of this, other times, not enough. It's always different though as we know. :)
 
-Danny

What the heck happened to that post?! LOL! Sorry about that Jeff!

It should read: Yeah mastering is a totally different animal in how *I* deal with low end. I was speaking more from a mix perspective. Watch curbing 60 Jeff...it will take away the "oomph" in your kick drums just about always. Try removing 40 and below as this will allow the good stuff in the 50's and 60's to still be there for impact purposes. The only time I touch 60 in a mastering situation is when someone may have too much thud in a kick drum or they have their bass accentuating in that area. Most times though, once I remove the low mid mud and all the stuff under 40, I can actually pump 60 up a dB or so to add a bit more definition to the kick or bass guitar. But it's rare for me to cut in that area...then again, it depends on the style of music. For rock, kicks and basses are going to end up in this area and need the force there. Sometimes a mix may have too much of this, other times, not enough. It's always different though as we know. :)

-Danny

If I am mastering I don't have any control over the mix of course. I don't take any 60Hz out either. I leave that right up at 0 dB but start the roll off from there downward which seems to work a lot of times during mastering. I have also done what you suggest as well Danny and kill below 40 Hz and even bump 60 Hz up a little.

When I am doing a mix though this does not happen in the mastering situation (me mastering that is) because one can control things much more so in the mix situation by pulling down the rumble in some instruments while pushing up others in a similar area to add oomph etc.

BTW Danny I am keen to get the Waves API 2500 compressor plugin. I am getting a lot of mastering work lately. I have been using digital EQ (Pultec and LP64, they are both amazing especially together!) and limiting of course but using the C2 as the analogue compressor. (its not mine though) I am just a bit nervous because I love how the C2 sounds it is just incredible. But I also believe you when you say things like the plugin API may be just as good. (as the real one or the C2) Is it OK? You are going to say yes it is aren't you LOL! 

Jeff
BTW Danny I am keen to get the Waves API 2500 compressor plugin. I am getting a lot of mastering work lately. I have been using digital EQ (Pultec and LP64, they are both amazing especially together!) and limiting of course but using the C2 as the analogue compressor. (its not mine though) I am just a bit nervous because I love how the C2 sounds it is just incredible. But I also believe you when you say things like the plugin API may be just as good. (as the real one or the C2) Is it OK? You are going to say yes it is aren't you LOL!

 
LOL!!! I'd never say anything digital or something modeled would be just as good...that's for sure. However, I do feel that the differences are too subtle to really fuss about other than when you are using an analogue piece to "color". To me, digital does not have that aspect down quite yet. But as far as how well these things work, I'd say just as good as far as the inner workings go. The API is one of the best compressors Waves has ever put out. And it DOES add a bit of coloration, but not to the extent that the real hardware version does. They just (in my opinion) don't quite have the circuitry thing down yet other than how the UAD stuff comes darned close yet still falls a little short.
 
As for it comparing to your borrowed C2, it's a different animal. I think you could come close using a few other pieces in conjunction with the API 2500, but by itself, it's going to give you different results than the hardware C2...that's for sure. It all depends on how much you need that added analogue coloration, Jeff. See man, to me, most of the analogue coloration I hear comes by way of softening highs or pushing low mids a bit more. This to me can be achieved with soft eq to compensate.
 
The other form of coloration comes by way of softly clipped transients that give us that tube saturated type sound. I don't feel anyone quite has that down yet...although like I've mentioned, UAD to me has it down enough to where it doesn't matter "as much".
 
I'll put it to you this way, if you were to grab a track and process it with your C2 and then grab an unprocessed track and try to cop it with the API and a few other things, I sincerely believe you would come so close to getting it right that it wouldn't matter...and quite possibly no one but you would notice the subtle differences. This is why I have somewhat taken the stand I've taken on analogue gear. It has its place, it does make a difference...but it's a subjective difference that no one will really notice other than those "in the field" and even there, whether it's good or bad will always be subjective.
 
But rest assured, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to come close using the API and the Pultec or LP 64 to get the sound you're looking for. The Pultec is so transparent, you should be able to sculpt your mix with the coloration the C2 would give you. I'm not sure which one you use, but the Pultec pro I use from UAD is remarkable in the coloration area. It's a very different kind of eq that doesn't get as much praise as it should because of what it DOESN't do. It's one of those "icing on the cake" types of eq's in my opinion...sort of like the Manley Massive Passive...but better because the Pultec can be used on a wider range of material.
 
At the end of the day, you know you can't keep the C2 so you either have to buy one if you can afford to or find a replacement. I would say the API with a few other enhancement plugs will get you there without failure for way less money. :)
 
-Danny

http://www.rotarywoofer.com/





I think it can be exciting when you hear all the of good stuff happening down below 40hz.





http://www.eminent-tech.com/main.html