How much eqing do YOU do?
- Thread starter Pughbert
- Start date
grn
Well-known member
at first I thought you said "egging" as in "egging people's houses" and I thought you were on to me. but uhh... I try to do as little as possible, just enough to give each instrument their own space, as always, it depends on each and every mix. I think for me I EQ drums the most.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
The impossible dream
Chad is correct. Asking how much EQ to use is like asking how much salt to use, it totally depends on what is on one's plate at the time and one's own taste.
That said, however, I'd like to humbly offer a few general offerings on how EQ is often best used (there are always exceptions)...
1.) Try to use EQ in mixing to make stuff sound better, not to make it sound different. Shoot for getting the right sound in the tracking/recording phase, and use EQ only for any small necessary adjustments in the mixing phase. If you have to make major EQ adjustments in mixing, that is usually an indication that someting went wrong during tracking, and - if time and budget permit - might be best off being re-tracked.
2.) Use EQ boosts to make things sound different. Use EQ cuts to make things sound better. (This is a very general rule, but it's a useful one to remember.)
3.) When you have a busy mix or complex arrangement, on miked instruments, depending on the instrument, use high or low shelving as appropriate to cut off unused or unnecessary frequencies for that instrument. This will "make more room" in the sonic spectrum for the other instruments and allow them to fit in the mix together better. For example on a kick drum you might shelve off the mid-high to hi frequencies whereas on an acoustic guitar you might shelve off the low bass, etc.
4.) It often sounds better to boost the lower harmonic and higher harmonic of a particular frequency by a couple of dBs than to boost that particular frequency by several dBs. For example, if you feel you need a real boost at 700Hz, sometimes just slightly nudging up at 350Hz and 1400Hz will have a better sound than a super boost at 700. Sometimes. Try both individually and see what happens.
5.)Try to do as much EQing as possible on the individual tracks before you mix down to stereo. Keep EQing of the mixdown itself to minimal sweetening.
There are more tips and techniques for EQ, but they start straying from the thread. These hould hopefully give you some ideas at least.
HTH,
G.
Chad is correct. Asking how much EQ to use is like asking how much salt to use, it totally depends on what is on one's plate at the time and one's own taste.
That said, however, I'd like to humbly offer a few general offerings on how EQ is often best used (there are always exceptions)...
1.) Try to use EQ in mixing to make stuff sound better, not to make it sound different. Shoot for getting the right sound in the tracking/recording phase, and use EQ only for any small necessary adjustments in the mixing phase. If you have to make major EQ adjustments in mixing, that is usually an indication that someting went wrong during tracking, and - if time and budget permit - might be best off being re-tracked.
2.) Use EQ boosts to make things sound different. Use EQ cuts to make things sound better. (This is a very general rule, but it's a useful one to remember.)
3.) When you have a busy mix or complex arrangement, on miked instruments, depending on the instrument, use high or low shelving as appropriate to cut off unused or unnecessary frequencies for that instrument. This will "make more room" in the sonic spectrum for the other instruments and allow them to fit in the mix together better. For example on a kick drum you might shelve off the mid-high to hi frequencies whereas on an acoustic guitar you might shelve off the low bass, etc.
4.) It often sounds better to boost the lower harmonic and higher harmonic of a particular frequency by a couple of dBs than to boost that particular frequency by several dBs. For example, if you feel you need a real boost at 700Hz, sometimes just slightly nudging up at 350Hz and 1400Hz will have a better sound than a super boost at 700. Sometimes. Try both individually and see what happens.
5.)Try to do as much EQing as possible on the individual tracks before you mix down to stereo. Keep EQing of the mixdown itself to minimal sweetening.
There are more tips and techniques for EQ, but they start straying from the thread. These hould hopefully give you some ideas at least.
HTH,
G.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
As little as possible (see sig)
Hi, I'm a beginner too and was curious...
I thought the goal was to get the "hotest" (in terms of loudness without distortion) and most pure signal from the input and then make adjustments to the recorded track. While mixing, the goal is to give each component its own space though some instruments/tracks share and overlap frequency ranges. So EQing, panning, compression and effects are all part of the mixing task. Please correct me where ever I may be wrong or oversimplifying.
I thought the goal was to get the "hotest" (in terms of loudness without distortion) and most pure signal from the input and then make adjustments to the recorded track. While mixing, the goal is to give each component its own space though some instruments/tracks share and overlap frequency ranges. So EQing, panning, compression and effects are all part of the mixing task. Please correct me where ever I may be wrong or oversimplifying.
I do as much EQ'ing as necessary. Sometimes I may do too much, sometimes I may not do enough. It's always best to get the tracks laid the way you need them with instrument, mioc, preamp selection etc... The reality however is during mixdown things are often "discovered" that need to be different. Re tracking those things is quite often not a feasible option. At least not in a professional environment. It is also important to remember that needeing to re track something is not necessarily a sign of poor tracking. Often times by mixdown stage, or even during mixdown stage the song is pushed in a different direction with a different feel. This sometimes makes tracks that seemed just fine want to be different. That is why having good EQ's is so important to me. Luckily, I am blessed with 88 channels of killer EQ's which really opens up a lot of possibilities come mixdown.
R
RAMI
Guest
Hard one to answer, especially since there have already been some good responses. I can just add that I almost always cut and almost never boost. The occasional exception might be for drums, and even then, it might just be the bass drum (a little bit more click if needed). But, as a general rule, I subtract annoying frequencies more often (always) than I add frequencies.
Thanks! its almost making sense...
So in the case where a small jazz combo is playing (guitar, keyboards, bass and various percussion) you'll find a majority of "stuff" between 250hz - 1khz. In this case, there's no bass drum, just congos, bongos and marracas. The bass guitar shares the deep bottom with congos but I don't want to completely cut 250-1k from the guitar and keyboards either. Wouldn't you want to emphasize the upper midrange frequencies of the guitar (around 4k)? I guess what I'm leading up to is how to keep recordings from sounding "boomy" in the low-midrange area if all you can do is pan or cut frequencies in the mix.
So in the case where a small jazz combo is playing (guitar, keyboards, bass and various percussion) you'll find a majority of "stuff" between 250hz - 1khz. In this case, there's no bass drum, just congos, bongos and marracas. The bass guitar shares the deep bottom with congos but I don't want to completely cut 250-1k from the guitar and keyboards either. Wouldn't you want to emphasize the upper midrange frequencies of the guitar (around 4k)? I guess what I'm leading up to is how to keep recordings from sounding "boomy" in the low-midrange area if all you can do is pan or cut frequencies in the mix.
If you count lowpass/highpass filtering as EQ I'll do it to every track. I'll try to slide by on the minimum possible. Some types of sounds and music rely on a ridiculous amount of EQ'ing (i.e. metal); however I rarely EQ distorted guitars for that style--most of the radical EQ'ing will be done to the drums (and 50% of that is subtractive EQ).
I did a blues band last weekend and I barely eq'd or compressed a thing. Sounded excellent.
I did a blues band last weekend and I barely eq'd or compressed a thing. Sounded excellent.
I have found that EQ'ing isn't really genre specific. Its really player specific. If a death metal band comes in with great sounding well aranged stuff, the amount of EQ used may not be much. If a jazz combo shows up with bad tone and poor technique, I might need a lot. However, it seems like it is easier to find good jazz combo's than good death metal bands. So in many ways, Cloneboy is right
ecktronic
Mixing and Mastering.
If i only had one type of Eq it would have to be subtractive. Mostly to get rid of the lower frequencies to make my mixes cleaner. I make small boosts to acentuate certain instruments eg. lead guitar and drum and bass punch.
I think that most Eqing should be done at source in the sense that the less processing done at mix down the better. But that isnt set in stone as some recordings can get quite an original sound from alot of EQing a t mix down. Very subjective.... dont listen to me!!
I think that most Eqing should be done at source in the sense that the less processing done at mix down the better. But that isnt set in stone as some recordings can get quite an original sound from alot of EQing a t mix down. Very subjective.... dont listen to me!!
xstatic said:
Yeah but trying to get drums to punch thru in a metal band versus a jazz band is a whole 'nother ballgame.
Of course I use far more compression for metal than necessarily EQ, although EQ is a big part of it too. (Mainly in subtracting freq's on the guitars so as to not clog up your mix.)