Subtractive EQ on Piano

Scoopz

New member
Greetings,

This is my first real post here so here we go as I sort of had a revelation today

I have a baby grand that I mic with 3 SM-57's. This is what I have to work with, so please don't comment on that. It works

When I go into project and start to do subtractive EQing on said Piano, I have found if I put a dynamic cut of about -6db and adjust the Q to taste on the lowest "Tonic" it really cleans up all the noise, and rather nicely.

So let me say this another way...The song I'm mixing is in the key of C, if I put a dynamic EQ cut node at C3, it does wonders.

Yikes.....how many other little things like this are there out there?
 
You will find that most stringed instruments are like this. Much of what we recognize as the sound of the instrument happens an octave or two above the note being played.
 
Greetings,

This is my first real post here so here we go as I sort of had a revelation today

I have a baby grand that I mic with 3 SM-57's. This is what I have to work with, so please don't comment on that. It works

When I go into project and start to do subtractive EQing on said Piano, I have found if I put a dynamic cut of about -6db and adjust the Q to taste on the lowest "Tonic" it really cleans up all the noise, and rather nicely.

So let me say this another way...The song I'm mixing is in the key of C, if I put a dynamic EQ cut node at C3, it does wonders.

Yikes.....how many other little things like this are there out there?
I'm curious here if you mean noise, in the typical sense (non music related?), or note resonance perhaps?
 
I cannot imagine chopping notches in a piano response. Are you really saying you are EQing your piano on a song key basis? None of the EQ I use on mine is remotely narrow in the Q settings. I have a little dip at the bottom end where the pedal release rumbles, and another little dip centred around the start of the right hand-ish. I have never needed anything that would pick a cluster of notes and modify just them. Depending on the music, many times there is no EQ at all. Is yours a terrible piano or are you recording unusual music that needs this approach? I’m not saying it’s wrong, just very, very strange.
 
I'm curious here if you mean noise, in the typical sense (non music related?), or note resonance perhaps?
Sounds like it cleans up the resonant response of the piano as a whole. If I put the cut in at the low end, it seems to make the rest of the piano more articulate
I cannot imagine chopping notches in a piano response. Are you really saying you are EQing your piano on a song key basis? None of the EQ I use on mine is remotely narrow in the Q settings. I have a little dip at the bottom end where the pedal release rumbles, and another little dip centred around the start of the right hand-ish. I have never needed anything that would pick a cluster of notes and modify just them. Depending on the music, many times there is no EQ at all. Is yours a terrible piano or are you recording unusual music that needs this approach? I’m not saying it’s wrong, just very, very strange.
So I need to poke a little fun at your first comment. Notches? We don't need no stinking Notches! I suppose I could set the Q on the dynamic eq to be a notch, but it wouldn't get me there. Most of the subtractive EQ I do on the Piano is as you suggest, dips here and there. I also put in a high pass (40-100Hz depending) with a moderate slope around 36db as there is always a bass guitar that accompanies. I find that if I put the high pass filter an octave below the "Tonic" node, I get really good bass guitar articulation

This piano has a really loud pedal, so I typically use RX, and just remove them. It's pretty fast and simple (select one, and find all - delete)

And yes, I am saying EQ the piano to the key of the song, and it seems to be working for me. All of the stuff I work on stays in a key, and doesn't modulate into different keys.
I suppose we could go into a long dissertation on the overtone series and how this would make a sense, but that has the potential for train wreck, so I'll stay away. "These aren't the droids I am looking for"

Some background:
I mix 4 to 5 songs a week for the church I attend. We record each service, and I take those recordings and turn them into web content with accompanying video.
The recording environment is about as bad as it can get. There is no isolation for the various mics, and the trumpet seems to find it's way into everything that is mic'd.
The vast majority of my time is spent on cleaning/de-bleeding the individual files. I only have an hour or 2 to clean and mix each song. Is my final released product perfect. No, far form it, but they are presentable.
As a side note Melodyne Editor, and RX10 advanced are my friends. But as you may know, these tools leave artifacts. Maybe that's part of what I am dealing with.

Cheers
 
I'm confused. If you are putting gentle EQ in at very specific frequencies with modest curves, the C and D are surely indistinguisable - what you are doing is far wider than individual pitches - this is why I thought you were targetting specific notes with very high Q?

I've never had to do this in the way you explain - de-bleeding? Many years back I had to record big band, where almost every player had a mic, and they all had the neighbour in it, but the angling meant you could force or pull people on different lines. The double bass got the harshst filtering to remove the drum metalwork - and the piano close-ish miked was never an issue. The only feature was that the brass and woodwind by virtue of distance were each 'clean' from each other.

If your bleed is louder than the wanted source, can't you adjust the mics to reduce. EQ seems a blunt tool to repair this one? It's far, far too destructive and a huge amount of work too? No chance of a little tinkering with spacing and screens?
 
@rob aylestone

More background. We typically have the following
Vocals - Mic'd
Piano - Mic'd
Flute - Mic'd
Trumpet - Mic'd
Bass - Di'd
Clavinova - Di'd

The room seats about 150 people, so it's not real big
We mic everything for recording purposes, but not everything goes through the Mains on Sundays for obvious reasons
The musicians all sit within close proximity of one another, and I suspect partitioning will probably yield only marginal results
My mics are Shure SM57, and SM58 and Beta58.

I really need to de-bleed! It makes mixing the end product much easier.
Case in Point: Trumpet bleeds into the Vox mic. If I want to put a reverb on trumpet, I can't do so effectively because it has bled in the Vox. Also, If I want to boost the Vox in any way shape or form, I'm in essence doing the same thing to the trumpet. It does come through considerably. I have asked the trumpeter to use a mute, but the gentleman is elderly, and doesn't have lung power to push the notes.

So then there's the EQ. When I get back to my DAW, I'll post a pic of what I'm doing with the EQ.

Cheers
 
Greetings,

This is my first real post here so here we go as I sort of had a revelation today

I have a baby grand that I mic with 3 SM-57's. This is what I have to work with, so please don't comment on that. It work

So let me say this another way...The song I'm mixing is in the key of C, if I put a dynamic EQ cut node at C3, it does wonders.
You are most likely cleaning up the Deficiency of your SM57s - most like what the Microphones are resonating at.
 
trumpets are loud, but very directional. When you say 'de-bleed' do you mean you're just EQing, or some other process. Vocals, piano, flute and trumpet is everyday stuff and I have never had to do what you are doing? If we assume the vocalist has the mic on the lips, that just means the flute will be the source that gets compromised by the trumpet. The mute is a tonal change device, not really something you pop in to reduce volume, though of course it does. If the trumpet is in the vox, then the singer's mic needs orienting so the trumpet is in it's deader spots and the trumpet playet needs more separation, or maybe one of the small circular perspex screens - although you say he's not too loud?

As the loudest source, there should be no issue adding reverb - the fact the bleed into the vox mic is reverb less should not matter. If you want, you could let us have a listen? that might let us assess the tracks and what is preventing a normal mix. I'd normally have no problems with such a small number of mics, so something odd is happening?

Do you mean the piano pedal thumps loudly when pressed/released? It's normally a very quiet sound - rarely an issue when playing in an ensemble - and is usually right down the bottom, so a gentle roll off easily fixes it?
 
You are most likely cleaning up the Deficiency of your SM57s - most like what the Microphones are resonating at.
Hmmmm.... good food for thought. I'll have to take a look at my other mics. I usually dont have to do this with the other mics. I only have the 57's on the piano
Isn't this down to mic positioning?
We had an "expert" come in and look at the piano. It's an older Baldwin Baby Grand. He said we will have to live with the noise, and it can't be fixed. I've tried 2 differnt configs on mic placement. One config was near the hammers/dampers to get the percussive quality, the other config was back about a foot an a half to get a less percussive tone. Not much difference in terms of reduction in pedal noise.I think I'll try another, farther away from the pedal noise source.
 
57s are fine mics, but really a PA, not a recording tool for grand pianos. The sparkle of a grand is lost on 57s, and they of course are pretty decent at bass. Like the others are thinking, I reckon, you've probably just not found the right mic postions for any of these instruments and people. Got any pictures? I think a sound sample is also crucial. My thinking, from your descriptions is that you're trying to fix something with 'tools' that should have been fixed before you hit record. Reactive, not proactive.

Vocals that pick up the trumpet badly? Then the singer is not close enough, and the trumpet is on axis with the front area of the mic - it needs to be towards the side.
Piano - pedal noise. Are we talking the pedal itself, or the noise from the dampers dropping? If it's this causing the noise, then move the mics further away from dampers. I assume you've found the piano's sweet spot? They're all different. On some Yamahas (the models 2's and 3's) sometimes a mic underneath pointing up at the soundboard is really nice. On a Steinway, it sounds horrible. Underneath might remove the thumping, but probably some low end removal and top end sparkle is needed.
Are you sure lots of the spill is not coming from the flute mic? They usually need more gain, and that opens them up to other load sources?

Without an example and maybe pics - we're just guessing, so post up what you're doing for us to look/listen and we can hopefully move forward.
 
trumpets are loud, but very directional. When you say 'de-bleed' do you mean you're just EQing, or some other process. Vocals, piano, flute and trumpet is everyday stuff and I have never had to do what you are doing? If we assume the vocalist has the mic on the lips, that just means the flute will be the source that gets compromised by the trumpet. The mute is a tonal change device, not really something you pop in to reduce volume, though of course it does. If the trumpet is in the vox, then the singer's mic needs orienting so the trumpet is in it's deader spots and the trumpet playet needs more separation, or maybe one of the small circular perspex screens - although you say he's not too loud?

As the loudest source, there should be no issue adding reverb - the fact the bleed into the vox mic is reverb less should not matter. If you want, you could let us have a listen? that might let us assess the tracks and what is preventing a normal mix. I'd normally have no problems with such a small number of mics, so something odd is happening?

Do you mean the piano pedal thumps loudly when pressed/released? It's normally a very quiet sound - rarely an issue when playing in an ensemble - and is usually right down the bottom, so a gentle roll off easily fixes it?
So, in a room the size we are in, the trumpet is actually omnipresent, and not very directional with respect to the mics. :)

When you ask about de-bleeding, no it's not EQ adjustments. I have a number of tools and techniques to de-bleed
1) For the trumpet, I use Melodyne Editor in Polyphonic mode. When I bring up the file, you can actually see all the notes that the trumpet mic picked up. If you are familiar with Melodyne, you will know my lingo here, but the musical notes in the wave file are represented by a blob on a piano scroll. The louder notes are larger, and the quiter note are smaller. It's very easy to tell what notes are the trumpet notes just by looking at it. I simply delete the smaller blobs. End result is just a trumpet sound without anything else. I need to be a little careful with this though because secondary and tertiary harmonics come in and are some of the smaller blobs. I do get some artifacts as well
2) My second method is to use Izotope RX de-bleeder. In the tool, I can run an analysis between a file that has some bleed though against the source of the bleed. I typically use this on the Vox and flute files for de-bleeding the trumpet. It works pretty well for this as my bleed source file (from step 1) is almost pure trumpet. No matter what, I still get some bleed, but it's alot more manageable. I do get some artifact if I get too aggressive with the settings.
3) My third de-bleeder is Izotope Music Re-balancer, and I use this primarily for the piano when I have to. This is also a very cool tool. I run an analysis on the file, and I have 4 options to re balance. Vox, Drums, Bass, Other. I can literally go into the file and I can readjust the the volume levels of each of the 4 options. If i turn Vox, Bass, and Drums to "off" the only sounds I get is Other, which is the piano. This method works well, but does leave artifacts as well.

Do not assume vocalist has lips on mic. The singer is typically a foot to 18 inches. Gotta remember we are in a church performing a church service, not a recording studio.

The trumpet is playing away from all of the other mic as well. (Edit: trumpet is off axis for all other mics)

I'll have to disagree with you on the reverb comments. In many cases, I like to put a thick reverb on the trumpet to soften it up a bit, and put it a little further back in the mix. If I have trumpet bleed through in other mics, I simply can't control and set the trumpet back as easily.

As far as the pedal noises, yes when the ensemble is playing, it's not an issue, but if the piano is doing a solo intro it's an issue.

Cheers
 
OK - I'm going to duck out now. What you are doing is flawed. If you have a poor capture, then fix it. Do not record badly and try to repair it. That is a terrible and absolutely last resort recording technique.

You need to talk to the people, explain the problem, and record better! If the singer is too far from the mic, then it's compromised. If the trumpet is a problem, then fix it. Churches all over the world have this issue and often with many more music sources than you have.

How important is the recording to the people in charge? Get the mic in close, solve your issues, or put up with your crazy and time consuming way of fixing it.

Remember that Izotope is a fairly new fixing tool - but it is NOT essential, and it's a last resort to recording properly. Every TV or Radio outside broadcast for years has had your issues, and when it's live, you capture properly. Singers in churches can happily put their lips on the mic - If they are told to!

The cure for your scenario is to position mics properly, encourage the performers to use the mics properly, reposition the trumpet player and perhaps to stop spending money on plugins and buy some different mics that will help.

You are on the old fix it in the mix way of working, and that has always been flawed. I'm really sorry but your routine electronic fixing is a poor alternative for controling the recording. It's a really bad way of recording. It forces you into crazy ways of working that you are struggling with.

I hope it all works out for you. Best wishes with it.
 
really, the choice of your mics creates the need for the eq'ing...
that, and the positioning of the mics.

ideally, the only reason you should have for needing to eq' the piano, is if there are masking issues with other tracks.
 
really, the choice of your mics creates the need for the eq'ing...
that, and the positioning of the mics.

ideally, the only reason you should have for needing to eq' the piano, is if there are masking issues with other tracks.
Wow, so many different answers.
I often wondered why the makers of EQ's provide mid/side, L/R and stereo capabilities. Hmmm, I always thought that these were for placing the sound in the mix so that they are more articulate. If you get my drift.

In my scenario, there are masking issues
 
You've maybe just found a strong resonant frequency in your room, or the piano.
If I sing a loud low F into my guitar it sits there and looks at me.
Sing a loud low G? It rings like a bell.
 
OP - hopefully you are not taking the comments as a dig at you, but it does ask a good question; Why are you EQ'ing? One reason could be to get it to "sit in the mix". Another is to "fix it in the mix". But it is about the mix.

Now, if you can fix it in the mix by changing mic placements or even mics. Most here feel that correcting at the source is the correct way. If it is correct at the source, then you can focus on other areas of the mix.

Some of the preferences are of economy/effort. The less effort I have to spend on something in the mix, the more time I can spend on "other" things?

Some preferences are a matter of purity. How pure do I want the sound to be duplicated?

Other preferences are I am going to manipulate the sound anyway, therefore I really don't give a $*it.

The first important question one has to make is, "what am I trying to do with the sound? " Once that is answered, then approach becomes important.

Recording is an art and a science, therefore, the art part makes it very subjective. But the science is rooted in fact. We are trying to make art out of facts.

I think that was pretty good bullshit if I say so myself :)
 
OP - hopefully you are not taking the comments as a dig at you, but it does ask a good question; Why are you EQ'ing? One reason could be to get it to "sit in the mix". Another is to "fix it in the mix". But it is about the mix.

Now, if you can fix it in the mix by changing mic placements or even mics. Most here feel that correcting at the source is the correct way. If it is correct at the source, then you can focus on other areas of the mix.

Some of the preferences are of economy/effort. The less effort I have to spend on something in the mix, the more time I can spend on "other" things?

Some preferences are a matter of purity. How pure do I want the sound to be duplicated?

Other preferences are I am going to manipulate the sound anyway, therefore I really don't give a $*it.

The first important question one has to make is, "what am I trying to do with the sound? " Once that is answered, then approach becomes important.

Recording is an art and a science, therefore, the art part makes it very subjective. But the science is rooted in fact. We are trying to make art out of facts.

I think that was pretty good bullshit if I say so myself :)
No angst, and thanks for the feedback

In life we are all dealt a deck of cards.
Here's my deck with respect to this situation, and I am very happy where I am at.

I have somewhat usable microphones, no bugdet to buy any thing, TOTALLY less than ideal recording conditions, volunteer/amateur musicians (actually some are afraid to be on stage), vocalists that don't sing into the mic, not a well refinded lead vocalist, and a point of focus to worship, not a recording session to make a perfect recording. I get crappy recordings, so I take the lemons and make lemonade

Too many responses really miss this point, so let me repeat it
The point of focus is to worship, not a recording session to make a perfect recording.

To answer your question, what am I trying to do with this?
Simple, put something online adequate enough for people to listen to
It doesn't have to be perfect, but it does spread the word of God and Jesus!!!

If interested, Google Briggs Road Evangelical Free Church and look up the videos by clicking on the video tab after the search.

Now what I put online is far from perfect, I know this! But I do have a time constraint

So if someone comes along here and says, "What a crappy mix" I might agree, but would respond by saying are you getting the message?

I would like to offer a challenge then as well.
I can send anybody who wishes a set of my raw files.
I'd like to see/hear what the experts here can do with the raw in 2 hours

Cheers
 
Back
Top