Giving each instrument its own EQ Space

NTK88

NTK88

New member
Is it better to boost say 2 or bands in a row rather than splitting bands?

For example if I wanted to dip some mids out of bass and guitar so that they have a mid range presence, would it make more sense to maybe dip 500-630 HZ from the guitars and 315-500HZ from the bass rather than 315 from bass, 400 from guitar, 500 from bass, 630 from guitar?
 
Not to side step the question, but does this presume that they both already have had they're basic shapes and hot spots delt with or they're ok in that respect?
With that in mind I just tend to look for the best way to fit things with the least amount of moves and a) move to a parametric so that you're not stuck with predefined centers and widths, and b) the 'extra split bands' seems kind of 'zig zag?
 
I'm with mixsit, if you really want to carve out space for instruments then you need parametric eq. To keep things sounding natural and like your mix hasn't obviously been 'processed' you need to be able to ascertain and deal with the actual frequencies that need work, and you need to be able to define the bandwidth.

Using a graphic eq for this purpose is a bit like using a machete for micro surgery.
 
Haha I see, well thats why I am here asking these questions :p
Ok so ill look into how to use that EQ method rather than a graphic EQ.

With that said, are there any programs that I can actualy see the frequencies in the form of say bars on a meter? Abobe has a feature where I can gather a line graph of the frequencies but the chart is so damn small I would need a magnifying glass to read it!

Also what are hotspots?
 
NTK88 said:
Haha I see, well thats why I am here asking these questions :p
Ok so ill look into how to use that EQ method rather than a graphic EQ.

With that said, are there any programs that I can actualy see the frequencies in the form of say bars on a meter? Abobe has a feature where I can gather a line graph of the frequencies but the chart is so damn small I would need a magnifying glass to read it!

Also what are hotspots?
Click to expand...
What you're asking about are "real time analyzers" or RTAs, and yes there are some good ones available. Probably one of the best and most popular is one called "Span" by Voxengo. However, it's a VST plug, and, depending upon your version of Audition, you may need a VST to DX wrapper to run it.

But I'd stay away from RTAs for now and concentrate on using your ears to learn the frequencies; that'll get you a LOT further to getting a good mix than any pictures will.

Do a search of these forums for "parametric sweep" to find several posting describing one of the best methods to using parametric EQ to tame "hotspots" (bad sounding resonant frequencies in an instrument track) and to get instrument tracks to beahve.

G.
 
It all depends on how the tracks are recorded.
Unfortunately there is no set way to so things like this IMO.

Eck
 
NTK88 said:
... Also what are hotspots?
Click to expand...
Two examples- Like Glen mentioned, say the bass is mic'd cab which is a good candidate, a resonance peak where some notes are sticking out over others. Now add a guitar track with it's own peaks.

There's a few ways to go here. Fixing the things on the individual tracks that appear obviously out of whack might be first, but also how they (and everything else) fit together in the mix will ultimately determine how they should be shaped. You can see these as possible two separate thought processes that go on as you dial in.

This is all just part of the basic shaping. Fine tuning with more micro stuff works as needed (and when you can hear them better) after the bigger moves. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top