EQ Mastering Approach

[pingu]

For the guys that do this quite often i would like to know what your approach with eq is.

When you eq do you aim to hear as much of the music as possible or do you sacrifice a bit of the stereo field in order to boost the frequencies or enhance the sections where the instruments that are driving the song.


I have found that if i get the eq correct then at times the soundstage can open up a lot, but at the same time this balance can result in music that is not driven by the instruments that maybe driving the song forward.

So whats more important, to be able to hear as much music and soundstage as possible or focus on the instruments that are propelling the song.

I hope i have explained this well enough.

I find i lean towards the balance at the expense of the drive.

 

[Change of POETS]

For me, it really depends on the genre of music.

For Rock, I'd focus more on the musical quality doing my best to preserve instrumentation, while bringing the main guitars etc out a bit brighter to drive the sound a bit more.

For Hip-Hop/Rap, I'd focus more on the kick/bass and that crisp low end to drive that club/street sound.

If it were classical, I'd do my best to preserve every instrument in the mix, as best as possible. Using as little EQ as possible, but utilizing it where needed...

EQ can be tricky, but it's very effective when properly utilized.

 

[pingu]

I suppose it is a case of doing what the song says to do.

How do you tell.

Another thing is i find i spend too long experimenting for the best sound i can get and i lose sight of the big picture.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I suppose it is a case of doing what the song says to do.

Bingo!

Sometimes it's a fine balancing act between what the song says to do and what the client says to do. If push comes to shove, the client is the one paying the bills, so they get the weighting.

But if the client leaves it to me (or I am the client), the song itself is the boss.

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

For the guys that do this quite often i would like to know what your approach with eq is.

The least amount needed.

When you eq do you aim to hear as much of the music as possible or do you sacrifice a bit of the stereo field in order to boost the frequencies or enhance the sections where the instruments that are driving the song.

The music should always take precedence over any technical issues. Whether stereo field or individual instruments should be the deciding factor is going to depend on the music itself. For example, in a classical recording where the instruments blend more uniformly, the stereo field may be more important. In a rock band the instrument tweaks may be more appropriate.

Another thing is i find i spend too long experimenting for the best sound i can get and i lose sight of the big picture.

Yep. People run into the same issue when mixing by soloing out individual tracks and trying to get the "best" [insert instrument/vox here] sound without hearing how it sits in the mix. Masking and other issues aren't taken into consideration this way.

When you feel that you are listening for too long a period of time, it's best to go to the head and take a long crap. Listening from the bathroom can give you a totally different perspective. Or just take a break ...

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

When you feel that you are listening for too long a period of time, it's best to go to the head and take a long crap. Listening from the bathroom can give you a totally different perspective.

Indeed.

"Sometimes it takes a trip to the bathroom to discover that it stinks worse in the studio." - Lao Tsu

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

Indeed.

"Sometimes it takes a trip to the bathroom to discover that it stinks worse in the studio." - Lao Tsu

G.

May I use that as my signature? That's beautiful.

 

[Reggie]

And quote credit is given to someone with an asian name, which makes it even more credible.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

May I use that as my signature? That's beautiful.

Brings tears to your eyes, doesn't it, Tom?

...or is that the smell doing that.

Yeah you can use it if you're serious. But I'm kidding about the accrediting to Lao Tsu, Reg. That's a G. original, I'm afraid. Back when Lao was around they had neither bathrooms (at least not as we know them) nor studios.

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

Brings tears to your eyes, doesn't it, Tom?

...or is that the smell doing that.

Yeah you can use it if you're serious. But I'm kidding about the accrediting to Lao Tsu, Reg. That's a G. original, I'm afraid. Back when Lao was around they had neither bathrooms (at least not as we know them) nor studios.

G.

I thought the quote was by his cousin Lao Tsi (pronounced "lousy") ah never mind ...

Thanks, I now have something intelligent to say ...

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I thought the quote was by his cousin Lao Tsi (pronounced "lousy") ah never mind ...

Thanks, I now have something intelligent to say ...

HA! Very nice!

Now don't get me started about his perverted cousin, Wi Fu Kem Yung...

Sorry, I had to dig all the way back to grads school for that one...I'd better quit now...

G.