EQ approaches to fit the tracks

  • Thread starter Thread starter jerzydrimmtimm
  • Start date Start date
J

jerzydrimmtimm

New member
OK, this is something that I have tried many times in a different ways, and I think I still can't achieve good results
1) first quality EQ - Lw-pass, High-pass, notching ugly frequencies and resonances, etc.
2) mixing EQ - and here comes troubles - how to make space for each track? How much to cut in DB, what Q, shelves? Lets say we've got drums, guitar, bass, synths, vocals, if any of them needs its own space, it would be very small and not full space: For example - should I leave for piano only small and narrow band, and the rest bands should be cut by 10 db to make space for another small bands of other tracks? Or just make small notches with big Q amount onle where other instruments shines most? Which is correct?
Especially in midrange/low midranange containing fundamentals - to lower every instruments fundamentals by few db, or leave only fundamental for most importasnt and cut the other?


thanks!
 
I think you're over-thinking it. It's all about listening, finding overlaps, and making subtle adjustments to get a little closer to ideal. Using a lot of EQ can lead to phase problems and sound unnatural. If you need 10db of anything, go back and re-record the track.
 
Yeah, it's easier said than done but mixing shouldn't be about cutting things up with eq to make them fit.
It should be about things that fit pretty well to start with and then just subtly shaping them to perfect.
 
What they said! :thumbs up: Only EQ what's needed for the mix - there are no hard and fast rules. I will typically scoop out some low-mids on electric guitars to prevent muddiness. The only time I've used EQ on piano is to tame a resonant frequency. Hi-pass on most instruments (except bass and drums) to get rid of any low rumbles that are not part of the instrument sound, obviously.
 
So it is more like arrangment, composing guitars and vocals, choosing another samples, synths, and THEN some eq if needed?
This I already know as theory, but if still too much eq needed - it is still bad ... (above), and I should focus on arrangment etc., until there are some few 1-2db cuts needed only to polish the whole thing?

Thanks guys, that sounds pretty reasonable.
 
jerzydrimmtimm said:
So it is more like arrangment, composing guitars and vocals, choosing another samples, synths, and THEN some eq if needed?
This I already know as theory, but if still too much eq needed - it is still bad ... (above), and I should focus on arrangment etc., until there are some few 1-2db cuts needed only to polish the whole thing?

Thanks guys, that sounds pretty reasonable.
Click to expand...

It's one of those things. That's the sound advice yeah.
I don't know how others feel about it but in the real world I sometimes find myself having to slice and dice an instrument to make it fit.
Like maybe a ukelele rhythm sounding muddy with other guitars. I end up doing some pretty drastic shaping to make it heard.

It's a bit of educated choice I think.
If you're carving everything to get a passable mix, then there's a fundamental problem.
 
Yeah, Steenamaroo, that's the point, sometimes I find all my instruments EQ-ed with very drastic and bizarre shapes... I guess this is not a way to go....
 
It's all well and good me saying that, but it's not very helpful.
If other things are lacking (room/instruments/mics/monitors) then you might not have a choice.

I suppose just be aware that it's not ideal and it should be that hard. ;)
 
Steenamaroo said:
Yeah, it's easier said than done but mixing shouldn't be about cutting things up with eq to make them fit.
It should be about things that fit pretty well to start with and then just subtly shaping them to perfect.
Click to expand...

This ^^^^^^^^^^

Dialing in and tracking good, appropriate tones to begin with makes mixing a breeze.
 
Consider which are your main/key instruments. Like....for typical Rock/Pop the foundation is usually drums, bass, guitar(s), and of course, vocal(s).
Those things should not need drastic cuts/boosts....if they do, something is wrong from the start.

Now, as you add more elements to decorate the arrangement and/or act as ear candy....those things you might need to cut/boost to fit.
For example....when I use a piano track mainly as a backing/fill track, I find that I will roll the low-end way off from like 200Hz down in order to remove that THUMP you get from the keys hitting in the piano bed when playing harder....or like if there is a repeating guitar line that needs to cut through, I might also roll off the lows, and boost its fundamental range, depending on which notes are being played.
If I was doing a song where the piano was the center of attention....then I would not cut it as hard in the low-end, and would let it be more natural.
If you use a lot of synths...that's a per-patch thing, since many synth sounds are programmed way to rich, so that they soung great alone, but sometimes dominate too much when mixed with other stuff.

Otherwise....you really shouldn't need to do drastic EQ on every track. If anything, minor cut at the "mud zone" and possibly at the harsh/"ice-pick" zone, depending on the instrument and what it is playing.
 
I'll do whatever it takes to make a mix work. I don't always have the luxury of re-tracking so sometimes I have no option but to apply radical eq.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
I'll do whatever it takes to make a mix work. I don't always have the luxury of re-tracking so sometimes I have no option but to apply radical eq.
Click to expand...

Absolutley....but I bet you don't apply radical EQ to most of your tracks to make them work....which is what the OP seems to be doing.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
I'll do whatever it takes to make a mix work. I don't always have the luxury of re-tracking so sometimes I have no option but to apply radical eq.
Click to expand...

The key word there is "sometimes". You probably don't make a habit of it or have to do it to every track. I would hope not anyway.
 
miroslav said:
Absolutley....but I bet you don't apply radical EQ to most of your tracks to make them work....which is what the OP seems to be doing.
Click to expand...

Greg_L said:
The key word there is "sometimes". You probably don't make a habit of it or have to do it to every track. I would hope not anyway.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Just last night I was mixing a rehearsal. I got the eq down to such a minimal amount on the lead vocal that I finally just bypassed the channel eq. We track some rehearsal stuff and I had been more or less reversing the above eq for the reference mixdowns, so now I'll probably not have to eq those either. I try to gravitate toward no eq when possible and will consider changing something, a mic or its placement or whatever, but there are times when I hack something to death (or to life). Having to mix a song in which the piano was tracked with a mic on the woofer of a Roland keyboard amp is one example.
 
Yeah...same thing I was talking about with the piano track in my example... sometimes needing a huge cut to make it sit right and sound right.

OP....
You do what you have to to make things work in a mix....but *drastic* application of EQ *across most of your tracks* is a red flag.
I also think that maybe you are going into a mix assuming that you MUST use EQ on every track in some way....as though that's mandatory when recording. Once you start turning the knobs on one track, you can create a domino effect, and that's why you end up with stuff all over the place and nothing works.
Take a step back and listen to what you have. Start with the main elements of your song, and ignore the rest until you get them balanced...then move on the the other tracks. I bet you will find that you don't need as much EQ as you think you do.

Also, maybe the levels and the panning are giving you problems? If a bass guitar is too loud, it will also sound like you need to cut the low-end out...etc...or if a lead guitar is too loud, you might think you need to cut at its fundamental frequency....etc...etc...
 
bingo Miroslav!
I just realized that I open an EQ even before I start to think if Ireally need it... mavbe that's the key....
thanks!
 
jerzydrimmtimm said:
bingo Miroslav!
I just realized that I open an EQ even before I start to think if Ireally need it... mavbe that's the key....
thanks!
Click to expand...

I find it good practice to start a mix with just gain adjustment. Once I get that roughed out I start to consider eq. I will conceptually break up instruments into frequency ranges and start to mix with eq. For example, I'll set the piano level so in the key vocal clarity range (2-6kHz or so) it balances with the vocals, then if necessary I'll eq it above and below that range to tailor it to other parts of the mix.
 
I like to think that every instrument has its own normaly frequency and therefor its own space in the mix. I normaly cut to get rid of unwanted things and the boosts are only to help the allready existing frequencies.

In the perfect world all the EQs are done pre-recording by the instruments and the space in the mix comes naturaly and can be enhanced by panning.
 
It's worth bearing in mind that the various instruments, (almost) regardless of genre, were invented and evolved to be naturally spaced throughout the frequency spectrum. Most of the heavy lifting has been done for you by western civilization as a whole. You don't have to find a spot for everything, you just have to massage it back into it's spot when it strays and make the spot big enough for the things that need to share the same spot.
 
Kastehvalen said:
In the perfect world all the EQs are done pre-recording by the instruments and the space in the mix comes naturaly and can be enhanced by panning.
Click to expand...

My impression is that this world is not perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top