The EQ Thread

[TylerDrums109]

So basically i would like to start a thread in which we discuss how we tend to EQ different instruments in our mixes to fit and sound better in our final mix...i know very little about Eq'ing but i think i aswell as many others could benefit from such a thread...so if you could just post how you tend to EQ different instruments and what frequences you tend to cut or boost to allow for a more improved qualitiy of individual sound and overall sound of the mix...thanks

[Seafroggys]

Probably the most important EQ advice ever:

Hi-pass everything.

[RAMI]

Tyler, no offense man. But you should be doing more recording and posting less questions every time something pops into your head. You've got 2 threads on page one of this forum and 4 on page one of the RECORDING forum.

I'm not giving you crap, I'm giving you advice. You're not going to absorb all this stuff from written pages, you've got to experiment with your equipment and use your ears while learning stuff through trial and error. There are no cut and dry answers for most of what you're asking.

Having said that, there are a million threads about EQ'ing one click away from the SEARCH button.

A good resource for learning about EQ is Soutside Glen's interactive EQ chart: http://www.independentrecording.net/...in_display.htm

Don't take my rant the wrong way, you have the right to post as often as you want. I'm only trying to help.

[Dogbreath]

Yeah...I generally hi pass (or lo cut) just about everything.
Especially if I'm doing metal tunage.
A lot of mud tends to build up after you've tracked 4 to 6 different guitar takes and you still have bass guitar and kick to mix.
So yeah...hi pass is your friend.

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by RAMI

Tyler, no offense man. But you should be doing more recording and posting less questions every time something pops into your head. You've got 2 threads on page one of this forum and 4 on page one of the RECORDING forum.

I'm not giving you crap, I'm giving you advice. You're not going to absorb all this stuff from written pages, you've got to experiment with your equipment and use your ears while learning stuff through trial and error. There are no cut and dry answers for most of what you're asking.

Having said that, there are a million threads about EQ'ing one click away from the SEARCH button.

A good resource for learning about EQ is Soutside Glen's interactive EQ chart: http://www.independentrecording.net/...in_display.htm

Don't take my rant the wrong way, you have the right to post as often as you want. I'm only trying to help.

No offense is taken...i completely agree with what you are saying...but i DO spend most of my time messing around with my equipment...but when i run out of ideas in how to go about fixing a problem i give my ears and brain some rest and come post on here...and most of the questions i have asked have simply been to give me some ideas on how to direct my experimentation...to see how others have faired in getting results their way so i can try some of their methods aswell...and i have read alot on EQ i just thought it would be nice to post ONE thread were we can all share our ideas...to gather the information in once place...sorry if i am annoying anyone with my questions...but i don't post things just to post

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by Seafroggys

Probably the most important EQ advice ever:

Hi-pass everything.

Really? Everything?...why so?

[RAMI]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

i DO spend most of my time messing around with my equipment...but when i run out of ideas in how to go about fixing a problem i give my ears and brain some rest and come post on here....sorry if i am annoying anyone with my questions...but i don't post things just to post

Fair enough brother. As long as you're spending more time recording than on the internet asking questions ABOUT recording. You're not annoying me, just thought you may have been slowing down your own progress.

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by RAMI

Fair enough brother. As long as you're spending more time recording than on the internet asking questions ABOUT recording. You're not annoying me, just thought you may have been slowing down your own progress.

Nah man...im pretty driven when it comes to the things i want to do well in...it gets to almost an obsessive passion haha

[dean1964]

Although I am not sure about "Hi-pass" everything. There is some truth going on here. For example, the fundamental of a kick is what, about 80Hz -100Hz it might beneficial to turn down everything below this point.

Anything below the lowest fundamental of each instruments may muddy up your recording once you start summing track after track. Cleaning this stuff out can be quite helpful. But its not always the best idea.

But, here are no hard and fast rules.

[WhiteStrat]

Originally Posted by dean1964

But, there are no hard and fast rules.

Isn't that in and of itself a hard and fast rule?

Hmm...

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by dean1964

Although I am not sure about "Hi-pass" everything. There is some truth going on here. For example, the fundamental of a kick is what, about 80Hz -100Hz it might beneficial to turn down everything below this point.

Anything below the lowest fundamental of each instruments may muddy up your recording once you start summing track after track. Cleaning this stuff out can be quite helpful. But its not always the best idea.

But, here are no hard and fast rules.

Ah i see makes sense...but then would it also make sense to decrease frequencies above the fundamental high of each instrument?

[WhiteStrat]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

Ah i see makes sense...but then would it also make sense to decrease frequencies above the fundamental high of each instrument?

Except that those don't "muddy up" a mix like the low ones; and doing so carelessly with the high end can cause harm--what's "mud" on the low end can often be "air" on the top end.

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by WhiteStrat

Except that those don't "muddy up" a mix like the low ones; and doing so carelessly with the high end can cause harm--what's "mud" on the low end can often be "air" on the top end.

I see...so low pass should be much more carefully handled then high pass...but its important to find a nice seating in the mix for each instrument based on its frequency range...but how about those instruments who's frequencies overlap?...is it up to me how i chose to place these sounds or is there some sort of guideline for doing so

[dean1964]

Not necessarily. An instruments timbre is created by is harmonic structure. Harmonics are multiple integers of the fundamental frequency. So if you have a 100Hz fundamental (sometimes called 1st harmonic) the 2nd harmonic will be 200Hz (1 octave). so anything under the fundamental can be rolled off. The point is, anything above the fundamental you probably need, below it, you probably don't.

I sometimes look at low pass filters as a tool to shape timbre ( because you are messing with the balance of the harmonic structure), and a high pass filters as way to clean out garbage.

Whitestrat - Moderation in everything, except moderation?

[WhiteStrat]

Originally Posted by dean1964

Whitestrat - Moderation in everything, except moderation?

Exactly. For if you were moderate in your moderation, you'd be extreme elsewhere...

[Seafroggys]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

Really? Everything?...why so?

For one, you don't need anything below the fundamental for MOST instruments. Almost everything you record has some energy in the sub 100 area, even if its a shredding guitar solo where the fundamentals are at least 250, if not higher. Just cut them out. It will make everything clearer, prevent buildup, and pave way for the bass instruments.

Even the bass instruments I will hi-pass. Usually for bass guitar I set it to 65. Sure the fundamentals go down the 40, but most of the bass's energy is in the first harmonics, which start at 82-ish. Plus a full powered low E can really make things muddy. Bass drum I hi-pass at 55 usually, cleans it up a tad and makes it punchier.

Also, if you can't monitor low frequencies, don't have them. If your monitors are clean down to 45, it might be wise to put a master hi-pass at 45.

The only thing I can think of that I usually don't hi-pass are my drum overheads, but that's because the mics themselves have a hi-pass setting I use.

Even for like synth basses that need that deep rumble.....I still hi-pass at about 30.

[TylerDrums109]

Right so now i have an idea on how to deal with the frequencies above and below the range of any particular instrument now what of those right in the "meat"...how would i deal with those?...i know i should just go about trusting my ear but any guidelines you guys work by?

[RAMI]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

now what of those right in the "meat"...how would i deal with those?..

Usually nothing.

One piece of advice I can give you is to worry more about how something sounds in the context of a mix, rather than solo'd. Another thing is, USUALLY cutting un-wanted frequencies is preferable to boosting wanted ones. I put "usually" in capital letters because I know someone will come in and say they sometimes boost this or that.

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by RAMI

Usually nothing.

One piece of advice I can give you is to worry more about how something sounds in the context of a mix, rather than solo'd. Another thing is, USUALLY cutting un-wanted frequencies is preferable to boosting wanted ones.

Right because once you add in all of those other instruments frequencies may begin to clash...which is why a high pass is important because you will clean up some of the "mud" of the lower frequencies...starting to get this...thanks guys...really wish i was on MY computer right now so i could test some of this advice...cant wait till after the holidays when i get hold of some of the equipment i've been waiting to invest in

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Tyler, I don't think you're going to find a whole lot of useful advice as far as specific recipes for specific frequencies on specific instruments, because that's typically just not how things really work. The chart Rami refers to does provides some general guidelines as to what some frequency ranges can mean can mean to various instruments, but it in no means is intended to provide any advice as far as what to actually DO in any given situation.

There are, however a few general techniques and platitudes regarding the general use of EQ that can be helpful. As always with these kinds of "rules", there are always exceptions; they do not hold true or work 100% of the time. But they do tend to me more useful and helpful to remember than to ignore:

I'd start you out with checking out this article on how to use a parametric EQ for sweeping the crud from your tracks. Hardly a instrument track passes my desk that doesn't wind up benefiting from a parametric sweep, IMHO. After that:

- Use EQ only when called for, not just for the sake of using it. While I understand and kind of agree in principle with the "high pass everything" idea, I personally like to supercede that with the idea of "keep your signal chain as short and clean as possible". In this case, if a buildup of bass mud is not a problem in your mix, then I see no need to add all that extra EQ to the signal processing, myself.

- Use EQ boost to make something sound different, use EQ cut to make something sound the same but better. There are many exceptions, but this is a good principle to use as a baseline.

- Boost wide and low, cut narrow and deep. Again, there are exceptions, but generally speaking, you'll probably most often find yourself successful with EQ if your boosts are mid-to-wider bandwidth of just a few dB to generally shape the sound, and you use more surgical cuts of narrow bandwidth but more dBs to surgically remove trouble frequencies (as in the parametric sweep.)

- Sometimes you can make a radical EQ boost sound better (more transparent and natural) but distributing your EQ across the close harmonics. For example, a fairly narrow but radical boost at, say just for example, 200Hz can *sometimes* sound better by lessening the boost by a few dB but then adding small boosts of a dB or three at 100 and 400Hz. Experiment to taste.

- Often, rather than trying to force one instrument into the mix by excessive EQ boost, you can get it to fit in better by boosting it just a couple of dB and then making room by cutting just a couple of dB from the competing tracks. This is often referred to as "differential EQ".

The tips almost never end, but that's a pretty good starter list, I think.

G.

[TylerDrums109]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Tyler, I don't think you're going to find a whole lot of useful advice as far as specific recipes for specific frequencies on specific instruments, because that's typically just not how things really work. The chart Rami refers to does provides some general guidelines as to what some frequency ranges can mean can mean to various instruments, but it in no means is intended to provide any advice as far as what to actually DO in any given situation.

There are, however a few general techniques and platitudes regarding the general use of EQ that can be helpful. As always with these kinds of "rules", there are always exceptions; they do not hold true or work 100% of the time. But they do tend to me more useful and helpful to remember than to ignore:

I'd start you out with checking out this article on how to use a parametric EQ for sweeping the crud from your tracks. Hardly a instrument track passes my desk that doesn't wind up benefiting from a parametric sweep, IMHO. After that:

- Use EQ only when called for, not just for the sake of using it. While I understand and kind of agree in principle with the "high pass everything" idea, I personally like to supercede that with the idea of "keep your signal chain as short and clean as possible". In this case, if a buildup of bass mud is not a problem in your mix, then I see no need to add all that extra EQ to the signal processing, myself.

- Use EQ boost to make something sound different, use EQ cut to make something sound the same but better. There are many exceptions, but this is a good principle to use as a baseline.

- Boost wide and low, cut narrow and deep. Again, there are exceptions, but generally speaking, you'll probably most often find yourself successful with EQ if your boosts are mid-to-wider bandwidth of just a few dB to generally shape the sound, and you use more surgical cuts of narrow bandwidth but more dBs to surgically remove trouble frequencies (as in the parametric sweep.)

- Sometimes you can make a radical EQ boost sound better (more transparent and natural) but distributing your EQ across the close harmonics. For example, a fairly narrow but radical boost at, say just for example, 200Hz can *sometimes* sound better by lessening the boost by a few dB but then adding small boosts of a dB or three at 100 and 400Hz. Experiment to taste.

- Often, rather than trying to force one instrument into the mix by excessive EQ boost, you can get it to fit in better by boosting it just a couple of dB and then making room by cutting just a couple of dB from the competing tracks. This is often referred to as "differential EQ".

The tips almost never end, but that's a pretty good starter list, I think.

G.

Thank you and yes i do understand there is no "perfect" thing to do in any given situation and that less is more...im just trying to make a list of some things to give me some sort of organized path to travel on...get what im saying?..and again thank you very much for the advice

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

im just trying to make a list of some things to give me some sort of organized path to travel on...get what im saying?

Believe me, I'm all over what you're saying. But the sooner one understands that there IS NO organized path, no beaten path on which to travel, but rather that every mix has it's own topology and terrain demanding that one beats their own path, the quicker and better they'll get their mixes out of the woods and home safely.

Learn what the frequencies sound like.

Learn what 200Hz, 1kHz and 4kHz sound like, and how they sound different from 400Hz, 2kHz and 8hz, and so on. Then when you have that knowledge, you can take what you want to hear, compare it against what you actually do hear, and use the "general rules" like above to cause the EQ path for that particular situation (if one even exists) to appear before your eyes.

G.

[MCI2424]

Originally Posted by TylerDrums109

So basically i would like to start a thread in which we discuss how we tend to EQ different instruments in our mixes to fit and sound better in our final mix...i know very little about Eq'ing but i think i aswell as many others could benefit from such a thread...so if you could just post how you tend to EQ different instruments and what frequences you tend to cut or boost to allow for a more improved qualitiy of individual sound and overall sound of the mix...thanks

The one good piece of advice here is to record cold and mix cold. Recording too hot will kill the 2 buss of any DAW AND analog mixing console. I record about 50% of each track on my HD recorder and keep faders for each track about the same. Once you get to the 2-buss, you HAVE HEADROOM.

EQing is the last thing I do. I avoid it when recording because the best EQ is mic placement. I have nothing against EQing when recording a track on an SSL, but any Mackie or equivalent board, or most EQ plugins are low quality and add more problems than they solve. The "secret" of these home recording gurus is to make the best use of what you have and understand the limitations and how to get around them. If you can master this, you can make a decent recording on anything.

[Jaticus]

An EQ is an EQ isnt it? How can a plug-in cause more problems than it solves? Its not going to add noise. I supose if its only got 6 frequencies then thats a bummer but then you just find another surely.

Also tip for everyone here, if your wanting to high-pass a vocalist and want to find his or hers F0, download SFS WIN (speech filing system for windows). It'll calculate the ff and show you where the formants are, and its free!

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by Jaticus

An EQ is an EQ isnt it?

No more than a preamp is a preamp, a compressor is a compressor, or a reverb is a reverb. Different EQ circuits and plugs definitely have different tonal personalities just like any other signal processors do - often to a shockingly noticeable degree.

Though I do take issue with the general notion that digital plugs are in general worse than analog EQs. There are a LOT of awful-sounding analog EQs out there that are worse than your average decent-quality plug, just as there are a lot of awful EQ plugs that are worse than your average decent quality analog EQ.

While no plug sounds quite like the EQ on a Trident or Neve board, there's not an analog EQ - or chain of them - on the planet that'll give me the quality control and neutrality of sound of Roger Nichols Digital's Unequalizer.

G.