What are your eq tips for bass line in the mix?

P

Pykon

New member
Hi,

please, write here how you equalize recorded bass track to fit in the mix.

- do you apply low cut (say under 40 Hz) to protect low end of the mix? If so, what kind of filtering you use (shelving low or hipass) and how high are the frequency and Q values (+ gain if shelving low filtering used)?

- do you apply hi cut? If so, what kind of filtering you use (shelving high or lowpass) and how high are the frequency and Q values (+ gain if shelving high filtering used)?

- when boosting low frequencies do you accentuate individual strings and sounds with a narrow Q values or boost a certain range? If you choose the second option, you prefer a peak/dip eqing or low shelving filtering?

- on which frequency range you concentrate when boosting low end of the typical, simple bass line: approx. 40-70 or 80-150 Hz?

Please, write values of Q, ranges and kind of filtering you use and how they depend on the particular notes the bass plays.

best,

Mike
 
Anything below 100 is waaaay too low... I apply a MASSIVE low shelf cut a lot higher than that, my low cut starts at about 150Hz where it's at 0, it's -6 at 50Hz, and it drops fast as you go lower. Otherwise it's way too boomy and it muds up my kick. I also have a +6db spike with a low/medium Q at about 2.5k. That's about as good as I can get mine ...

I might add - I record my bass via direct box straight into my board, no amp no mic, so. And my bass is a cheapy and the strings are 10 years old... I think a good bass thru a good amp and a good mic would be a whole different ball game. I'll be recording a band this weekend, the bass player has a nice Musicman - I'll track a DI straight out of the amp AND a d112 on the cab. I'm expecting to have to do something very different on the bass eq..

I'm interested to see what others think about this as well, cuz the bass in is one of my harder chores when it's time to mix down.
 
Pykon said:
please, write here how you equalize recorded bass track to fit in the mix.
Click to expand...
Which bass track and which mix?

There is no formula, it depends entirely on what one has to work with. I've had bass tracks with zero EQ and others that I've had to mangle nine ways to Sunday. Most cases fall somewhere in-between.

I think the best way to approach it is to not assume it needs any particular anything before you even listen to anything. You need to do the track and the mix whatever your ears tell you they need.

You will probably need to decide what roles you want the kick and the bass to play relative to each other; probably the majority of any EQ that might be wanted would be in the form of carving out a dominant space for the bass and a space for the kick.

Also, you have to be careful when asking for Q values, because not all EQ plugs follow the same standard for assigning a number for the Q value. a W of 1.5 on one plug is not necessarily the same thing as a Q of 1.5 on another plug.

G.
 
Obviously there is no standard, but here are some tricks I use on some of my tracks:

For the record, I record a Fender Jazz direct-in.

As far as EQ goes, I high pass at 65 hz, to make room for the bass drum beneath that. I may or may not cut at 400, depending on muddiness issues, but I usually cut at 800. I boost at 1 khz to add a little bite.

As far as compression use, for my album I used fast attack, fast release, about 5:1 compression, although now I use an LA-2A with equivalent settings which sounds great. Depending on other factors, I may add a bit of drive through a plug-in to add some aggression to the tone since I do bypass an amp.
 
both my basses sound different (short scale with new strings, long scale with old strings) but i generally add a high pass, up to around 60Hz and a small peak in the higher range...depends on the mix where and how big

a good idea is to double the mono track and keep a one with a low pass in the middle (low frequencies firmly anchored) then one with a high pass and more treble slightly off centre...of course this is personal preference, and my bass playing is pretty shocking to begin with lol
 
suprstar said:
Anything below 100 is waaaay too low... I apply a MASSIVE low shelf cut a lot higher than that, my low cut starts at about 150Hz where it's at 0, it's -6 at 50Hz, and it drops fast as you go lower. Otherwise it's way too boomy and it muds up my kick.
Click to expand...

Hard to be specific without hearing the mix...but I find that a bit....drastic.

Most times the ugly "boom" seems to be between say 150 and 300Hz....not so much way down below that.
I mean...it depends on your speakers and what they are capable of reproducing.
I kinda like to scoop in the 150-300 range, and leave the sub-60 stuff in there...though again, on smaller dinky speakers or iPod ear buds, most of that gets rolled off anyway! :D

But then...I'm more focused on the mix as it sounds on a full-spectrum monitor system, and my Mackie 824 monitors easily cover down to 40Hz and below, so the mix sounds very FAT without as much of that "boom".

But again...so much depends on you music....and your monitors.


Maybe it's time for a fresh set of strings! ;)
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Which bass track and which mix?

There is no formula, it depends entirely on what one has to work with. I've had bass tracks with zero EQ and others that I've had to mangle nine ways to Sunday. Most cases fall somewhere in-between.

I think the best way to approach it is to not assume it needs any particular anything before you even listen to anything. You need to do the track and the mix whatever your ears tell you they need.

You will probably need to decide what roles you want the kick and the bass to play relative to each other; probably the majority of any EQ that might be wanted would be in the form of carving out a dominant space for the bass and a space for the kick.

Also, you have to be careful when asking for Q values, because not all EQ plugs follow the same standard for assigning a number for the Q value. a W of 1.5 on one plug is not necessarily the same thing as a Q of 1.5 on another plug.

G.
Click to expand...

Ditto...good advise
 
Maybe my bass guitar is especially boomy, like I said it's old and has the original strings :D (yeah I'll get some new ones) With those settings it sounds comparable to other music in my car, which is a system I KNOW how the low end should sound, a lot more than my studio even.. If I leave my eq flat, it's so low and boomy it sounds like shit, all I hear is low boom mud. I have to chop those lows so I can bring up the track enough to actually hear the bass line!

I have a mix I'll be posting in the clinic soon, I think the bass is by far the weakest link. That's what I'm spending a lot of time trying to figure out anyway.
 
I do one surgical cut at the same point where the kick sounds best in the low end (somewhere less than 50 typically) and another where the kick sounds best in the high end (varies). so I listen to the kick, find out what I like best about it, and take that out of the bass guitar.

however having a GREAT sounding bass guitar is the biggest thing. di an amazing sounding bass and you don't have to worry about bass mud or anything wierd. I never roll off the low bass sound if it sounds great first, I do the surgical thing instead so I can get the sexiest kick coming through while retaining the great bass tone if it's there.

if the bass doesn't sound sexy though then I do find a rolloff in the bass (HPF) can do wonders around 60Hz or so.

keep in mind a bass e string is, what, 42Hz? something like that. if you want your fundamental bass note coming through on the best speakers people will listen through.... try not to filter that off unless you must.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Which bass track and which mix?
Click to expand...
Exactly.

About 5 times today, I typed out a sarcastic response (to the OP, not to Glen's post) and then decided to let it go and not post.

But, seriously, what do you expect to gain from getting 10 different people telling you the 10 different ways they EQ THEIR bass???? It's absolutely and completely irrelevant to you and your set up, along with your taste and your music.
 
Twiddle the knobs until it sounds good!
Set up a high gain low Q and sweep accross the frequencies. see which ones sound good and which sound bad, grating or whetever cut the ones that sound bad.

If the kick and the bass are both needing the same frequencies you need to decide which is more important at any point in the song and bring that one out accordingly. or retrack/re arrange if it's just overwhelming

You could also look at side chaining to duck the bass when the kick hits or Vice versa but keep the levels up when they are not directly competeing
And sometimes panning one a few degrees left and the other a few degrees right can help too

but as others have said, do it because it sounds good not because it's what you always do or even worse what someone else always does on mixes you have never heard.
 
Last edited:
great post bristol! Yeah, sweep thru the freq's, that'll help you get a feel for what different freq's sound like. Eventually, when you hear it, you'll know exactly where to cut.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Which bass track and which mix?

There is no formula, it depends entirely on what one has to work with. I've had bass tracks with zero EQ and others that I've had to mangle nine ways to Sunday. Most cases fall somewhere in-between.

I think the best way to approach it is to not assume it needs any particular anything before you even listen to anything. You need to do the track and the mix whatever your ears tell you they need.

You will probably need to decide what roles you want the kick and the bass to play relative to each other; probably the majority of any EQ that might be wanted would be in the form of carving out a dominant space for the bass and a space for the kick.

Also, you have to be careful when asking for Q values, because not all EQ plugs follow the same standard for assigning a number for the Q value. a W of 1.5 on one plug is not necessarily the same thing as a Q of 1.5 on another plug.

G.
Click to expand...

+10. No way there's a general, fit-all solution for this. Think about it.
 
Bristol Posse said:
Twiddle the knobs until it sounds good!
Set up a high gain low Q and sweep accross the frequencies. see which ones sound good and which sound bad, grating or whetever cut the ones that sound bad.
Click to expand...


Sure, by accentuating particular frequencies, they'll sound ugly. But that doesn't mean you should cut them necessarily. Sometimes an ugly frequency gives the overall sound a bit of character. I boost and sweep frequencies to find what sounds bad and what sounds good. (I cut and sweep frequencies too.) But before I commit to either a corrective or enhancing EQ adjustment, I listen to what it then sounds like in the mix. In the mix, not on its own. You know, sometimes I find an ugly frequency in something, so I cut that frequency, but it doesn't make the mix sound better, so I abandon the tweak.
 
Pykon said:
Hi,

please, write here how you equalize recorded bass track to fit in the mix.
Click to expand...

Depends on the bass, how it was recorded, and what its place in the mix is. Two places to look at:

* a high-pass filter with a roll-off somewhere between 65 and 130 Hz for a starting point.

* a boost or a cut in the low mids, maybe 350-450 Hz. I used to cut there all the time, but now, depending on the bass and the mix, I find myself boosting there a bit to bring out the character of the bass.
 
dkelley said:
keep in mind a bass e string is, what, 42Hz? something like that. if you want your fundamental bass note coming through on the best speakers people will listen through.... try not to filter that off unless you must.
Click to expand...

So you mean it's safe to rely on such low end frequencies? Sometimes I find my mix sounding so different and uneven on some stereos (most of which give up at some 60 Hz) that I cut bass fundamentals in favour of boosting some higher harmonics. This way 41 Hz of E appear in 82 Hz area to cut through and there's no risk some notes will be heard and some not. It's not optimal trick to my ears but safe in some ways.

A word to the oponents: this post wasn't supposed to bring the one and only bass eq rule. I treat it as a guide for creative experimenting.

Best,

Mike
 
Pykon said:
So you mean it's safe to rely on such low end frequencies? Sometimes I find my mix sounding so different and uneven on some stereos (most of which give up at some 60 Hz) that I cut bass fundamentals in favour of boosting some higher harmonics. This way 41 Hz of E appear in 82 Hz area to cut through and there's no risk some notes will be heard and some not. It's not optimal trick to my ears but safe in some ways.
Click to expand...
With both bass and guitar, most of the energy actually comes from the first overtone and not the fundamental. This is why so many folks get away with high passing the bass the way they do as a shortcut to taking the stress off of the low bass.
Pykon said:
A word to the oponents: this post wasn't supposed to bring the one and only bass eq rule. I treat it as a guide for creative experimenting.
Click to expand...
The best guide for creative experimentation is the mix itself. There are two problems with getting numbers from others as a "guide":

First is that they totally ignore and have zero relation to whatever tracks you have in front of you. I could almost say, "Cut at ____ Hz and boost at ___ Hz with a Q of ____" and fill in the blanks with numbers that I got from a monkey pulling numbers out of a hat, and they'd be equally as relevant starting "guides" as the ones you've gotten here.

That's not to disparage the folks who have supplied their advice based upon their experiences, but those numbers are what works for them with their guitars, their strings, their amps and mics, their style of play, their type of music, their ears and personal preferences and their group of mix tracks that they have to fold the bass into. That can per perfectly solid advice for their specific situation, but could just as easily be totally wrong for your mix(es). Hell, just a change in the diameter of the kick drum can be enough to change what may or may not need to be done with the bass track.

Second is that the use of those numbers as arbitrary starting points will likely have a tendency to prejudice your decisions. It's the old "tail wagging the dog" syndrome; "this is what they do, so that must be what sounds good, therefore I'll use that as a guide - instead of my ears - to decide what sounds good."

I know you're looking for simple rote procedures and recipes, we'd all love that. But honestly, pykon, that's just not how it works. If you want a starting point to work from, the best - and really the *only* - starting point is to listen to what you have in front of you and work from there. grab your favorite EQ and start working it over your track(s), paying attention to what the numbers on the EQ itself say, so that you can learn to associate sounds with frequencies and certain results with certain settings.

None of this will work properly, though, - guidelines or not - unless or until you have an idea in your own head of what results you actually want.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
That's not to disparage the folks who have supplied their advice based upon their experiences, but those numbers are what works for them with their guitars, their strings, their amps and mics, their style of play, their type of music, their ears and personal preferences and their group of mix tracks that they have to fold the bass into. That can per perfectly solid advice for their specific situation, but could just as easily be totally wrong for your mix(es). Hell, just a change in the diameter of the kick drum can be enough to change what may or may not need to be done with the bass track.
Click to expand...

So true.
That's why I usually start off most of my answers to those types of questions by say something like "we need to hear your mix in order to give you specific details"...yet few people will actually put up their mixes for which they are asking advice...???
Not sure if they are just timid about putting up their rough mixes...or if they really DO think there are absolute answers that will apply to every mix....???
 
miroslav said:
Not sure if they are just timid about putting up their rough mixes...or if they really DO think there are absolute answers that will apply to every mix....???
Click to expand...
IME on these forums, it can go either way.

[RANT]That said, though, I have noticed a very strong and disturbing current flowing through the newb sector that supports the belief that mixing is an easily quantifiable science; that all you need to know is the right formula or recipe or preset set of values, and everything just falls into place. I'm not sure whether this is one of those self-perpetuating Internet myths, or whether it's simply wishful thinking by those who don't want to find out that this is just not as easy as all that, or whether it's a function of the advertising blitzes that leads the newbs to believe that all the need to do is buy a Shatner Mix-matic 2000 today and they'll be making platinum records tomorrow, but I suspect its probably some mix off all three. The belief that just because a technology is available to the public, that anyone of the public can just automatically use it and come out smelling like roses.

And - as you discovered in our little dust-up over panning vocals a while back, miro ;) (not that I want to start that again :o) - I personally have a real fundamental problem with the idea of arbitrary "starting points", mostly for the reasons I gave in the last post here. Whether we're talking panning, EQ, compression, or any other type of signal processing, there already is an arbitrary starting point; it's called "bypass" or "neutral".

On it's face, that is just as good and as valid of a starting point ans any other set of parameters as one may give; it has an equal chance of being just as right or as wrong as any other suggestion. But it also has an added advantage over any other; it forces one to actually listen to what they have in front of them as it is, and by listening to what they have as the real starting point, to figure out without prejudice where to go from there.

The real thing underneath all this is: this mixing racket is all about using one's mind and ears to sculpt a rough rock of a sound into a musical work of art (in virtually the same way that a sculptor uses their mind and eyes to turn a boulder into a statue.) Anything that takes away from the idea of letting your ears carry the load by suggesting that there is some stand-alone recipe or starting point unrelated to what one actually hears takes them farther form their goal, not closer to it. [/RANT]

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top