good use of parametric eq

[o-ron]

I'm sure other people have done this, but...

When going for a very *true* sound (one as close to the original source as possible, as opposed to trying to get one that sounds "punchy" or "sweet") I have found the following to work really well:
1. Find a graphicial frequency curve of the response of the particular microphone(s) you are using. Take note of where they dip or peak over the average "flat" line.
2. Go into the parametric eq and compensate for the peaks and valleys by boosting the lows and damping the highs (etc.)

I did this for my AKG C1000s's on a close-mic'ed recording of voice & guitar and the result was much smoother and more natural than anything I had previously come up with by "experimenting"

Hope this helps anybody

[Blue Bear Sound]

Hmmm... conceptually, your idea should work -- but in fact, it doesn't work that way at all....

If you're going for a natural sound, you don't want to be using EQ at all. The minute you enable that EQ IN button, you are adding phase distortion that has a negative effect on your sound (more so when you boost, but even so when you cut.)

The proper way to getting a natural sound (as opposed to "punchy" or "sweet") is using the appropriate mic placed in the appropriate position.

It's the same reasoning as why using EQ to "flatten" or "tune" your control room response DOESN'T work.

Bruce

[o-ron]

yes, technically, true.

however, I was just posting what I found what gave me the best results with that particular mic (it's not the flattest reponse mic in the world ;-)

[Blue Bear Sound]

I hear ya... but keep in mind you didn't make the response of the mic any "flatter" by using EQ, you simply traded one frequency aberration for another....

In the end, whatever works for ya is good, but sometimes it's also useful to understand the underlying theory of what you're REALLY doing to your sound!

Cheers...

Bruce

[o-ron]

thanks

:-)