EQ during tracking

[cellardweller]

Does anyone do any EQing during the recording of vocals, or does everyone for the most part just leave it flat?

I'll probably end up experimenting with it, but I was just wondering what to expect from bumping, maybe 1k-2k up a hair....? Would this make the vocals cut through a bit more?

[Carter]

I use very little eq on my vocals I really like to track flat and process during mixdown.

[MadAudio]

For me, it depends on the singer. Some people are more sibilant than others, so I'll sometimes eq for that. I almost always run some light compression while tracking vox, too.

[LRosario]

EQ if you need to

If not...just straight up the middle and maybe some light compression

[Raw-Tracks]

Originally Posted by cellardweller

I'll probably end up experimenting with it, but I was just wondering what to expect from bumping, maybe 1k-2k up a hair....? Would this make the vocals cut through a bit more?

Male or Female vocal? 1-2kHz? No way, not on either male or female. I often wind up cutting about 1-2kHz a couple dB on a female during mixing. An octave lower on males. Of course this all dependant on a number of factors, and not a rule of thumb. If I do any EQ during vocal tracking, it's usually a slight high shelf boost around 12-16kHz, and maybe a slight low shelf cut at about 50-60Hz.

[PapillonIrl]

Don't forget that you can use mic positioning techniques on vocalists as well as guitar cabs !

Everyone sings from a different side of their mouth (especially when they let rip !)

Up=less nasal/midrange honk
Down=More body+honk(if they project from their nasal!)

Adjust to singer = better than eq !

Every vocalist is different.

Nathan

[NYMorningstar]

Originally Posted by Raw-Tracks

Male or Female vocal? 1-2kHz? No way, not on either male or female. I often wind up cutting about 1-2kHz a couple dB on a female during mixing. An octave lower on males. Of course this all dependant on a number of factors, and not a rule of thumb. If I do any EQ during vocal tracking, it's usually a slight high shelf boost around 12-16kHz, and maybe a slight low shelf cut at about 50-60Hz.

Originally Posted by cellardweller

I'll probably end up experimenting with it, but I was just wondering what to expect from bumping, maybe 1k-2k up a hair....? Would this make the vocals cut through a bit more?

This is a good reason not to eq on the way in. Depending on the sound chain, one will hear it one way and someone else hears it another way and you come up with two different approaches. I think it's a good idea to work on the singer and room until it sounds good enough to where you don't need eq changes but if all else fails, fix it in the mix

[Track Rat]

If I feel it needs it, I'd definately do SOMETHING. But the first thing I'd do is look at the mic/preamp/singer. Is it the right mic for the singer? Right preamp for the mic? Mic position, etc. For the most part I go right from the preamp out to the inputs of the deck but if I feel it needs more I have no problem patching in an EQ.

[ecktronic]

Why record effects on the way in when you can do it afterwards? Gives you more choices. How can you tell how you want the EQ to be until you fitting it in the mix?

[Kevin Deschwazi]

Originally Posted by ecktronic

How can you tell how you want the EQ to be until you fitting it in the mix?

Right on

Some good advice I try to stick to is that eq shouldn't be used to make a source sound good when solo'd. It should sound good anyway and then eq can be used if necessary to get it to sit nicely in the mix.

[Rickson Gracie]

I Use Pro Tools LE and I have the effect plugins running while recording. Is there a reason i hsouldnt do that? I can always just change it afterwords when i mixdown...right?

[Zetajazz44]

Originally Posted by Rickson Gracie

I Use Pro Tools LE and I have the effect plugins running while recording. Is there a reason i hsouldnt do that? I can always just change it afterwords when i mixdown...right?

Not if you record the effect to the track... The 'original' sound file will have that particular effect on it... Do you not have latency problems while monitoring? I know if you disable Low Latency Monitoring, it also disables the plugins on the track that is record enabled...

On my ProTools LE system, I just come from the mic, into my preamp, which happens to be an MP20, I have a RNC compressor inserted into the preamp... I just use the compressor for a limiter during record...

In a nutshell, if an effect is recorded to the track, it's there for good...

Thanks,

Zetajazz44

[ecktronic]

No the plugins will not be recorded to your track. The track is recorded into your harddrive untouched by the plugins. The plugins are effects placed ontop of the raw tracks so when you bounce down your mix, the plugin effects are embeded in the bounced track. What is your interface? How do you set the levels for input?

[Rickson Gracie]

Originally Posted by ecktronic

No the plugins will not be recorded to your track. The track is recorded into your harddrive untouched by the plugins. The plugins are effects placed ontop of the raw tracks so when you bounce down your mix, the plugin effects are embeded in the bounced track. What is your interface? How do you set the levels for input?

thats what i thought ecktronic, i have a digi002 rack. i set the level with the preamps.

[Zetajazz44]

Originally Posted by Rickson Gracie

thats what i thought ecktronic, i have a digi002 rack. i set the level with the preamps.

Oh, Ok... I see... What I had on my mind was creating an Aux input track, puting your plugins there and bussing to an audio track that is record enabled... This will record the plugin effects to your track...

Thanks,

Zetajazz44

[xstatic]

I EQ quite often on the way in. Then again, I know my studio like the back of my hand, my console has KILLER Eq's, and I am usually coproducing as well.

[Light]

I sat in on a session by Eddie Kramer (Jimi Hendrix's engineer, for those who don't know) when I was at Berklee. He spent a lot of time before the session talking about how he NEVER does any gain or EQ during tracking, and that he always gets the sound he is after 100% through moving the mic around to find the right sound in the room.

So then he goes in to do the tracking, and he spends a few minutes setting up mics, goes in to the womb to listen, and comes back and makes some adjustments to the mics. He then listens to the mics, and the first thing he does after setting the mic gain is turn on and adjust the compressors on the console (an SSL 4000 E for those who get off on such like). The next thing he did is start fiddling with the EQ.

Don't believe what you read in magazines about the great engineers "never processing during tracking."

It's a load of crap.

If you know the sound you are after, get it. End of story. The idea of leave yourself options for the mix is just procrastinating, lazy bullshit. Make Decisions, and stick to them. Mixing is much easier, and you get better mixes. Or at least, I do.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

[Rokket]

Originally Posted by Light

I sat in on a session by Eddie Kramer (Jimi Hendrix's engineer, for those who don't know) when I was at Berklee. He spent a lot of time before the session talking about how he NEVER does any gain or EQ during tracking, and that he always gets the sound he is after 100% through moving the mic around to find the right sound in the room.

So then he goes in to do the tracking, and he spends a few minutes setting up mics, goes in to the womb to listen, and comes back and makes some adjustments to the mics. He then listens to the mics, and the first thing he does after setting the mic gain is turn on and adjust the compressors on the console (an SSL 4000 E for those who get off on such like). The next thing he did is start fiddling with the EQ.

Don't believe what you read in magazines about the great engineers "never processing during tracking."

It's a load of crap.

If you know the sound you are after, get it. End of story. The idea of leave yourself options for the mix is just procrastinating, lazy bullshit. Make Decisions, and stick to them. Mixing is much easier, and you get better mixes. Or at least, I do.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

I think, at least for me, it's going to take a lot of trial and error before I get to the level of Eddie Kramer. I still like to go in as dry as possible with all my tracks. I don't add a lot of effects afterward (reverb, a little compression, very sparse eq), so perhaps I am already doing that (getting the sound before I record), and just didn't realize it?

[Kevin Deschwazi]

Originally Posted by Light

I sat in on a session by Eddie Kramer (Jimi Hendrix's engineer, for those who don't know) when I was at Berklee. He spent a lot of time before the session talking about how he NEVER does any gain or EQ during tracking, and that he always gets the sound he is after 100% through moving the mic around to find the right sound in the room.

So then he goes in to do the tracking, and he spends a few minutes setting up mics, goes in to the womb to listen, and comes back and makes some adjustments to the mics. He then listens to the mics, and the first thing he does after setting the mic gain is turn on and adjust the compressors on the console (an SSL 4000 E for those who get off on such like). The next thing he did is start fiddling with the EQ.

Don't believe what you read in magazines about the great engineers "never processing during tracking."

It's a load of crap.

If you know the sound you are after, get it. End of story. The idea of leave yourself options for the mix is just procrastinating, lazy bullshit. Make Decisions, and stick to them. Mixing is much easier, and you get better mixes. Or at least, I do.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

Do you think perhaps this is not such a good thing for a beginner to be doing though?

A pro will probably know pretty quickly when they've got the best mic for the job and when that mic is in the best position to record it's source etc. And like xstatic they'll probably know alot of the gear they're using inside out (not to mention the quality of that gear).

I think as a beginner I'm better off doing as they say rather than as they do, certainly in this case.

[Stefan Elmblad]

I always record vocals flat, except for maybe the highpass engaged on mic or preamp. Most often, not even that.

[A Reel Person]

I EQ the signal on the input-side, & record it down to tape, for optimum sound.

Then, on the turnaround, I use little or no EQ on remix.

I know it's clearly against popular opinion, but that works best for me, & YMMV.

[teainthesahara]

In my mind, EQ during tracking is nothing to be hesitent about. Every time you flip a tone switch/pick up selector on a guitar you are recording, you have made a drastic EQ change. Everytime you rotate that knob on a bass guitar, you are making huge eq change. Same with mic selection/placement. So why are permenant parametric/graphic adjustment so "taboo" ? If stuff doesn't work at mixdown, I find that it is more likely my mic placement/mic choice than anything else that is the culprit. I rarely wreck stuff while recording with EQ, but when i do it is a good learning experience...

[fraserhutch]

I too usually track flat, but maybe I just don't know any better

[Raw-Tracks]

Originally Posted by teainthesahara

In my mind, EQ during tracking is nothing to be hesitent about. Every time you flip a tone switch/pick up selector on a guitar you are recording, you have made a drastic EQ change. Everytime you rotate that knob on a bass guitar, you are making huge eq change. Same with mic selection/placement. So why are permenant parametric/graphic adjustment so "taboo" ? If stuff doesn't work at mixdown, I find that it is more likely my mic placement/mic choice than anything else that is the culprit. I rarely wreck stuff while recording with EQ, but when i do it is a good learning experience...

I think that about sums it up. How is committing to a specific microphone any different than eq'ing? They both are affecting the tone that is being recorded.

[Kevin Deschwazi]

Originally Posted by Raw-Tracks

I think that about sums it up. How is committing to a specific microphone any different than eq'ing? They both are affecting the tone that is being recorded.

But doesn't the use of EQ add artefacts to the signal and so degrade the quality of the audio? This is what I've always been taught anyway and this is why I try and do what I can with mic selection and positioning before I turn to the eq.

I guess the higher the quality of the gear then the less of an issue this is but I don't think your average home recor (ie. me) should just be throwing any old mic up in front of sources in any old position and then relying on the eq on their Behringer UB mixer to get the right sound.