Suggestions for EQ on Bass

[dennyc765]

My mixdown on Yamaha AW1600 sounded great on monitor speakers (Alesis Monitor 1 with RA150 amp). Played on other equipment and WAY WAY too much bass. Suggestions for eq on bass? frequency specific? It's not loud in sections, just too loud period.

Other forum suggested better monitors but can't afford that. I'm thinking to do test mixed to CD with various amounts of pulling bass down in volume?

dennyc765

[SouthSIDE Glen]

A common question.The vast majority of times the problem is not your bass track or even your monitors so much as it is the size and bass response characteristics of the room in which you're mixing. If that true in your case as well, even $2000 worth of monitors are still going to give you a bass-heavy mix.

If your recording setup, and/or monitors are in the corner of your room, and/or against the back wall, get them out of the corners and into the center, if you can, and pull them out a good 8"-2' from the rear wall. Then head over to the studio building forum on this BBS and look up how to make yourself some inexpensive bass traps and how to place them in your room.

G.

[Farview]

Along with what Glen has said, you also should start listening to the bass guitar in the midrange. I tend not to add any low end to basses, I will add something in the 500 - 800hz range for growl and 3 - 4k for clank.

But for general muddiness, you really need to be able to hear what's going on.

[ecktronic]

Originally Posted by dennyc765

My mixdown on Yamaha AW1600 sounded great on monitor speakers (Alesis Monitor 1 with RA150 amp). Played on other equipment and WAY WAY too much bass. Suggestions for eq on bass? frequency specific? It's not loud in sections, just too loud period.

Other forum suggested better monitors but can't afford that. I'm thinking to do test mixed to CD with various amounts of pulling bass down in volume?

dennyc765

I suggest importing a commercial mix (that is of similar style to the song you are mixing) into your mix session.
Try and get your bass or low end close to the commercial mix.

For bass guitar you might want to boost around 100Hz for the low end, and anything under that might be a bit boomy so you might want to cut that area slightly and also place a hi pass around 20-30Hz.
Also try cutting around 200-300Hz to get rid of muddy boomy sound.

Eck

[giraffe]

watch it, 100hz may be the source of his problems.
blind suggestions like that can be more harmful then helpful.

[mixsit]

And to add; To know your 'bass' is to control bass..

Do a clean-up check on all your tracks, look for any bumps' and thumps on the ones that do not belong/contribute to that end.
Go to the ones that will own the bottom. In solo, and in combination- get a handle on their general traits.
'Too much bass'- Where, and why? You'll begin to get specific handles on the question.
Use shelf eq for broader overall control.
Question final narrow band decisions in a small room. Use all you options here. Head phones, move around in the room (that can be huge in this context), play them on other systems.

[mixsit]

Originally Posted by giraffe

watch it, 100hz may be the source of his problems.
blind suggestions like that can be more harmful then helpful.

Hmm. I have to go with this.
If for no other reason, to get to 'tight, full and even' I'd guess that more than not I'll be reducing (broad band and or hot spots) on kick and bass.
...Is that just me?

[Ethan Winer]

Originally Posted by mixsit

Question final narrow band decisions in a small room.

Bingo. It's always the room. Always. Repeat: always. The only solution is bass trap and other acoustic treatment. Repeat: only solution.

--Ethan

[LemonTree]

Learn your monitors!

Spens 100 hours at least listening to commercial CDs and learn how your monitors sound. Even in a bad room there's no real excuse for not knowing how your monitors reproduce sound. A/B your mixes to commercial CDs all the way through the mix process till you get it sounding as close as you can and ofcourse ...treat ya room which cam be out of budget for some people but theres plenty info on t'internet on how to do it yourself and do it cost effectively.

good luck with it

[bkkornaker]

i actually like to add some 60hz to give it some full rumble on the low notes, also add some 800hz for more body, and a we bit of 2.5 for string slap/klank.......


....and then i squash the hell out of it with a compressor..........lol

[Farview]

As with any EQ decision, it's a 4 step process:

1. Listen to the sound you have
2. Imagine the sound you want
3. Calculate the difference
4. Dial the difference into the EQ

[jeffmaher]

I got the best sound I ever got on a recording in the project I'm doing now.

I recorded it direct from a tube pre...everything wide open and flat...played very lightly...level way up in the phones....and I left it alone.

I listened to it solo, and went "Ugh." Lots of HF artifact...just didn't sound right.

Then I played it with the rest of the trax, and marveled at how great it sounded. Previously, I'da started smacking the bass track around...compression, EQ....assuming that what I heard solo was bleccchhh. Never totally as happy with the result as now, though. All that 'trash' in the signal is what gives it zoom; and the balance iin range s perfect. For the first time, the lowest octave doesn't sound undefined and muddy. Nice, true ,sub 100Hz growl. Like Abe Laborie's sound.
Full circle. How many good tracks I've destroyed by not leaving them alone! I was moving away from what I wanted....cuz I'm a ignernt newbie. "SHCMACK!!!!" [ouch] Context is everything.

[Hi_Flyer]

you need much less "bass" in bass tracks than you think.

[rayc]

I use a big pinch (not much Q width) of boost at 3khz for definition to cut through the mix & then can pull back the bottom end to make space for the bass drum etc. Occasionally I use some blockfish compression if everything is louder than everything else - but NOT the studio bass setting!.

[mixsit]

Ok, we got push 60, 100, 500, 800, 2.5k, 3k and 4k (3k is very popular! ) and cut 200-300.

And I want to add 'kill at 8K' cause this damned '"I want to do modern" thing active-direct goes DC to light and the clicking is coming through like spastic lips smacks next to the snare track...

(Just in case... I'm funnin here.

The other cool thing is all these (very valid) eq points work and sound like they do... on about anything you put them on.

Denny ya need to get back in here and steer this thing. How we doing?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by mixsit

Ok, we got push 60, 100, 500, 800, 2.5k, 3k and 4k (3k is very popular! ) and cut 200-300....How we doing?

Awful. Those numbers are meaningless.

EDIT: This may be pure coincidence, but I do find it interesting that the boost numbers in that series tend to accentuate alternating B and G-to-G# frequencies, except for the 3k, which accentuates a high harmonic of the E. The cut between 200 and 300 tends to cut the mud from the B around B3.

If there is any meaning to this - and I'm not sure there is since the numbers are very rough - it would seem to indicate a general need to pull up and sharpen the B and the G, and just to add some high end to the open E.

Nevertheless, those numbers bely the fact that what one needs to dofor any given bass track depends entirely upon THAT bass track, and not some recipe of numbers.

G.

[NYMorningstar]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Awful. Those numbers are meaningless.

G.

Isn't that the truth. It all depends on the source and a good bass player will already be giving you a good sound with no need to attenuate it. Of course then you have the problem of where are all the good bass players?

[mixsit]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Awful. Those numbers are meaningless.

One thing for sure, context is everthing. ..particularly given the original problem ...too much bass.

(You got that it was satirical right?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by mixsit

(You got that it was satirical right?

Doh. I should have known better. Damn text communication!

G.

[mixsit]

Nah. Damn me. 'Clever can be tough to nail.

[rayc]

Satire or sarcasm?

[mixsit]

Originally Posted by rayc

Satire or sarcasm?

Definetelly not sarcasm. I'm always going for the good side, sometimes the fun of it.
Remember -it was from the begining, in spite of the title- 'too much bass'.

Hell, I'm still hoping Denny comes back and tells us; what have you learned? what do you need?

[rayc]

Yeah, sarcasm is too easy to slip into - satire is for the common good!

[giraffe]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

EDIT: This may be pure coincidence, but I do find it interesting that the boost numbers in that series tend to accentuate alternating B and G-to-G# frequencies, except for the 3k, which accentuates a high harmonic of the E. The cut between 200 and 300 tends to cut the mud from the B around B3.

If there is any meaning to this - and I'm not sure there is since the numbers are very rough - it would seem to indicate a general need to pull up and sharpen the B and the G, and just to add some high end to the open E.

neat little case study glen! i wonder if there's anything to it, or just random meaninglessness....

[IronFlippy]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

EDIT: This may be pure coincidence, but I do find it interesting that the boost numbers in that series tend to accentuate alternating B and G-to-G# frequencies, except for the 3k, which accentuates a high harmonic of the E. The cut between 200 and 300 tends to cut the mud from the B around B3.

If there is any meaning to this - and I'm not sure there is since the numbers are very rough - it would seem to indicate a general need to pull up and sharpen the B and the G, and just to add some high end to the open E.

Coincidentally, right smack in between 200 and 300 IS B3. As to why people want to slice that away, I have no idea. Conspiracy against B? Actually, my best guess is that there is a strong formant in that range on the bass itself. Plus, it gets in the way of the guitars.

As for 3k, I'm not sure about its relationship to E (I'm assuming low E, E2) because it's well above even the upper level harmonics of the note. It has a closer relationship to the pitch area of the pick scraping the strings. Although I'm sure you know more about that than I do, Glen.