What part? The sizes are in meters so for US' you need to convert from feet. It computes when you hit your enter key.
Click on the various 'Show buttons for the displays at the various freqs.
Carving EQ Holes
- Thread starter adam79
- Start date
Click on the various 'Show buttons for the displays at the various freqs.
I was checking this book out and the author doesn't have one nice thing to say about monitors with ports. I was planning on grabbing a pair of JBL LSR305's based on amazing reviews and several recommendations. However, they have a port on the back. Just wondering if I should take this guys advice and look for a new pair of monitors to buy.
Nah, Service has it in for pretty much all inexpensive ported monitors. Which is what I have, btw. I'm not buying any more gear for the foreseeable future, so I'm going to work with what I have.
I mean, the program isn't using any type of input device, right? Is it saying that any type of room of a certain size with have the same freq characteristics? I'm also having a bit of trouble understanding what exactly the results are telling me. Are the light areas the ones that should be treated or is it the opposite? I barely have any knowledge of acoustical treatment, so I'm unsure of what I'm actually looking at. Also, Does the program go higher than 100 Hz? Thanks.
Personally, I find doing a sweep and finding the awful tones is the best way to go. I've watched the pros do it while they are mastering music so I've copied them. When I used to run a recording studio, a guy next door with years of experience told me this trick and it's worked every time.
Subtractive eq'ing is the safest way to eq as opposed to additive (boosting). I find that all tracks need to be eq'd, regardless of how good they are recorded as they need to sit in their own spot in the mix and prevent tracks from competing within the same frequencies. So, that means a hi-pass filter on bass, as well as synth sounds that are too muddy. I'm still learning but the hi-pass filters are a huge factor in a good mix.
Subtractive eq'ing is the safest way to eq as opposed to additive (boosting). I find that all tracks need to be eq'd, regardless of how good they are recorded as they need to sit in their own spot in the mix and prevent tracks from competing within the same frequencies. So, that means a hi-pass filter on bass, as well as synth sounds that are too muddy. I'm still learning but the hi-pass filters are a huge factor in a good mix.
066959 Wrote:
"Personally, I find doing a sweep and finding the awful tones is the best way to go. I've watched the pros do it while they are mastering music so I've copied them. When I used to run a recording studio, a guy next door with years of experience told me this trick and it's worked every time.
Subtractive eq'ing is the safest way to eq as opposed to additive (boosting). I find that all tracks need to be eq'd, regardless of how good they are recorded as they need to sit in their own spot in the mix and prevent tracks from competing within the same frequencies. So, that means a hi-pass filter on bass, as well as synth sounds that are too muddy. I'm still learning but the hi-pass filters are a huge factor in a good mix. "
Thanks for the info. Do you use the same Gain and Q setting when sweeping the frequency spectrum for unwanted tones? If yes, what are thee settings you use? I definitely agree that mostly every time, cutting freq. is the way to do it, versus boosting them. I've noticed that up until a certain year, mostly every graphic EQ unit didn't even have anything past 0dB.
I always use a high pass filter on vocals, guitar and bass when recording. I just got a drum kit the other day (still need to set it up), but I'd assume that a high pass should be used on every piece of the kit, except the cymbals, maybe. I don't have much experience recording drums; can't wait to set them up. I'm gonna have to figure out the best spot in my room for them before I even attempt to record them.
The dimensions of my rehearsal space are: 21' x 15' x 8.75'. I need to figure out the best way to test for unwanted frequencies so I can figure out the ideal placement for my kit. Any suggestions on how to go about this. They sell kits for this procedure, but I'm cash poor at the moment and won't have the means to buy something like this for a long while. There's a post in this thread with a link to something that analyzes room frequencies, but I haven't really grasped how to use it.
Also, I won't have the cash for any acoustical treatment material. The walls in my room are just dry wall with drop ceiling tiles. I've been thinking of taking down all the tiles, but I have no idea what's above them. I'm on the first floor of a two story rehearsal complex. I don't believe there's a rehearsal room above me...I think it's either a hallway(s) or common space leading into a hallway(s). I'll at-least take a couple tiles out and go up there w/ a flashlight to see what I have to work with.
Would it be worth going to the thrift store and buying a bunch of cheap comforters to line the walls with? Just to have something to absorb reflection. The floor is straight concrete. There's a lot of sq ft to cover if I wanted to buy a rug, which means money I don't have. At the very least, I should probably buy an area rug to place under the drums. I also have a two piece sofa w/ a mattress in each that I don't use. I'm not sure of their dimensions, but I could probably put those to good use.
-Adam
"Personally, I find doing a sweep and finding the awful tones is the best way to go. I've watched the pros do it while they are mastering music so I've copied them. When I used to run a recording studio, a guy next door with years of experience told me this trick and it's worked every time.
Subtractive eq'ing is the safest way to eq as opposed to additive (boosting). I find that all tracks need to be eq'd, regardless of how good they are recorded as they need to sit in their own spot in the mix and prevent tracks from competing within the same frequencies. So, that means a hi-pass filter on bass, as well as synth sounds that are too muddy. I'm still learning but the hi-pass filters are a huge factor in a good mix. "
Thanks for the info. Do you use the same Gain and Q setting when sweeping the frequency spectrum for unwanted tones? If yes, what are thee settings you use? I definitely agree that mostly every time, cutting freq. is the way to do it, versus boosting them. I've noticed that up until a certain year, mostly every graphic EQ unit didn't even have anything past 0dB.
I always use a high pass filter on vocals, guitar and bass when recording. I just got a drum kit the other day (still need to set it up), but I'd assume that a high pass should be used on every piece of the kit, except the cymbals, maybe. I don't have much experience recording drums; can't wait to set them up. I'm gonna have to figure out the best spot in my room for them before I even attempt to record them.
The dimensions of my rehearsal space are: 21' x 15' x 8.75'. I need to figure out the best way to test for unwanted frequencies so I can figure out the ideal placement for my kit. Any suggestions on how to go about this. They sell kits for this procedure, but I'm cash poor at the moment and won't have the means to buy something like this for a long while. There's a post in this thread with a link to something that analyzes room frequencies, but I haven't really grasped how to use it.
Also, I won't have the cash for any acoustical treatment material. The walls in my room are just dry wall with drop ceiling tiles. I've been thinking of taking down all the tiles, but I have no idea what's above them. I'm on the first floor of a two story rehearsal complex. I don't believe there's a rehearsal room above me...I think it's either a hallway(s) or common space leading into a hallway(s). I'll at-least take a couple tiles out and go up there w/ a flashlight to see what I have to work with.
Would it be worth going to the thrift store and buying a bunch of cheap comforters to line the walls with? Just to have something to absorb reflection. The floor is straight concrete. There's a lot of sq ft to cover if I wanted to buy a rug, which means money I don't have. At the very least, I should probably buy an area rug to place under the drums. I also have a two piece sofa w/ a mattress in each that I don't use. I'm not sure of their dimensions, but I could probably put those to good use.
-Adam
Farview
Well-known member
I only sweep to find the frequency of what I think the problem is. In other words, I'm not looking for problems by sweeping, I know what the problem is and I'm sweeping to find it.
If you have two things that are fighting, you can hear where the congestion is. You sweep to find that setting on the knob that adjusts that frequency.
If you have two things that are fighting, you can hear where the congestion is. You sweep to find that setting on the knob that adjusts that frequency.
rob aylestone
Moderator
We're in danger of promoting bad practice again. Much of the stuff being talked about is 100% solid - BUT - only in context, and although you may well see people do it - as in...
Do you actually know what it was they heard?
When you've trained your ears for a long time, you hear characteristic problems that prevent you doing your job. You then select an appropriate tool, and use it. Subtractive mixing is a perfectly valid solution to some problem mixes. Equally, adding a few dB at a specific frequency is another. Your real problem without experience and a trained ear is which one to use. The reality is that subtractive AND additive eq can be identical. With modern eq, adding 10db at 3.5K can be exactly the same as removing 10dB below and above 3.5K - the only real difference in practical terms is where the channel fader ends up!
The visual audio spectrum reveals any empty spaces, or over excited areas that your ear detected as 'something' wrong. As I get older and grumpier I'm getting quite concerned people are making music visually, ignoring their ears, following some kind of exotic recipe that promises audio excellence. Some music is wonderful because it has empty space in the frequency spectrum - people praising the clarity and openness. Other music is powerful because every bit of energy has it's own place, blending into a wall of sound, totally unlike Phil Spector's.
Take a side step into PA. Newcomers to live sound getting concerned about how much electricity supply they need for their 10,000Watt PA system. Doing the maths and demanding a power supply the venue simply cannot provide. The old hands then tell them their 10KW PA will happily run from a power outlet capable of just 3000W - because their music is full of gaps - in both frequency and time.
I know people who tickle the EQ controls, I know others that grab handfuls at a time - eventually, they meet in the middle.
The benefits of subtractive eq are usually removing unwanted or ineffective portions of each instruments output so it doesn't weaken something else's. If I want a dull 60s kick sound - I dump all the HF components above maybe 120Hz or so - which also removes spill. You could knock off the bottom end of the snare - making these two more separate - more control in the mix. Do you need the bottom from your overheads? What are they used for? The metalwork? - if that's all, a bit of sizzle, then again, chuck away their bottom - but maybe you also want a bit of mid range from the toms? Chuck away the very bottom? Leave the rest? Or maybe remove the very bottom and boost the 5K upwards? I can't write down the solution because I have not heard the drum kit.
Forums are great sources of information - but like recipe books in cooking - you must adjust for personal taste and the ingredients you actually have.
I have a tenor sax I play from time to time. I love how it plays. It sounds simply horrible. The eq I end up with when recording it matches nothing I have ever seen used by other people - odd sucks and boosts - just to get the damn thing neutral. That's not in any guide or book.
Too many people are making music by blindly following TAB, eking by internet consensus and treating rooms without even listening to them.
I hate visiting PA people who routinely blast out pink noise, and complain about the nasty peaks and troughs of the venue and spend an hour removing them, only to find the PA sounds simply dreadful. The reality is often that just because you can see something it doesn't have to be sorted - unless you can hear it!
I your mixes sound bad, they are. Go back and do it again, building it up logically based on what the music is. Got two guitars? EQ isn;t going to separate them but a bit of panning will, then perhaps you can change their overall tone gently which your brain accepts as they're not panned dead centre. Your brain hears them in a different location and the different tone splits them. If your drums are a mess, then gentle eq and panning can help no end there too. If the vocal is the most important feature in a song, then maybe that 2nd keys part should simply go or drastically go down in level to make space - NOT give it a weird eq cutting out the vocal range.
God I hate mixing by prescription!
Do you actually know what it was they heard?
When you've trained your ears for a long time, you hear characteristic problems that prevent you doing your job. You then select an appropriate tool, and use it. Subtractive mixing is a perfectly valid solution to some problem mixes. Equally, adding a few dB at a specific frequency is another. Your real problem without experience and a trained ear is which one to use. The reality is that subtractive AND additive eq can be identical. With modern eq, adding 10db at 3.5K can be exactly the same as removing 10dB below and above 3.5K - the only real difference in practical terms is where the channel fader ends up!
The visual audio spectrum reveals any empty spaces, or over excited areas that your ear detected as 'something' wrong. As I get older and grumpier I'm getting quite concerned people are making music visually, ignoring their ears, following some kind of exotic recipe that promises audio excellence. Some music is wonderful because it has empty space in the frequency spectrum - people praising the clarity and openness. Other music is powerful because every bit of energy has it's own place, blending into a wall of sound, totally unlike Phil Spector's.
Take a side step into PA. Newcomers to live sound getting concerned about how much electricity supply they need for their 10,000Watt PA system. Doing the maths and demanding a power supply the venue simply cannot provide. The old hands then tell them their 10KW PA will happily run from a power outlet capable of just 3000W - because their music is full of gaps - in both frequency and time.
I know people who tickle the EQ controls, I know others that grab handfuls at a time - eventually, they meet in the middle.
The benefits of subtractive eq are usually removing unwanted or ineffective portions of each instruments output so it doesn't weaken something else's. If I want a dull 60s kick sound - I dump all the HF components above maybe 120Hz or so - which also removes spill. You could knock off the bottom end of the snare - making these two more separate - more control in the mix. Do you need the bottom from your overheads? What are they used for? The metalwork? - if that's all, a bit of sizzle, then again, chuck away their bottom - but maybe you also want a bit of mid range from the toms? Chuck away the very bottom? Leave the rest? Or maybe remove the very bottom and boost the 5K upwards? I can't write down the solution because I have not heard the drum kit.
Forums are great sources of information - but like recipe books in cooking - you must adjust for personal taste and the ingredients you actually have.
I have a tenor sax I play from time to time. I love how it plays. It sounds simply horrible. The eq I end up with when recording it matches nothing I have ever seen used by other people - odd sucks and boosts - just to get the damn thing neutral. That's not in any guide or book.
Too many people are making music by blindly following TAB, eking by internet consensus and treating rooms without even listening to them.
I hate visiting PA people who routinely blast out pink noise, and complain about the nasty peaks and troughs of the venue and spend an hour removing them, only to find the PA sounds simply dreadful. The reality is often that just because you can see something it doesn't have to be sorted - unless you can hear it!
I your mixes sound bad, they are. Go back and do it again, building it up logically based on what the music is. Got two guitars? EQ isn;t going to separate them but a bit of panning will, then perhaps you can change their overall tone gently which your brain accepts as they're not panned dead centre. Your brain hears them in a different location and the different tone splits them. If your drums are a mess, then gentle eq and panning can help no end there too. If the vocal is the most important feature in a song, then maybe that 2nd keys part should simply go or drastically go down in level to make space - NOT give it a weird eq cutting out the vocal range.
God I hate mixing by prescription!
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
"No you can't use your obsolete and inappropriate tool to wreck our system's response. If you hear a real problem, you can convince me it's really there and you know how to use time aware software like SMAART, or even REW for that matter, to find it I'll let you makes some tweaks."
jkuehlin
New member
Hello Adam. First be sure that the hole you're referring to is actually a problem which the EQ is the proper tool to address it with. There are several layers of EQ. First, there's a surgical layer (or so I call it). EQ that fixes junk that's wrong. For instance, you may have a 60 cycle hum in your vocal mic. Definitely a job for EQ. Beyond rolloffs, find the offending frequency and get it under control. Do this by getting in the general area, boosting a ridiculous 12db until you know where the frequency is that's giving you grief, then figure out how to get rid of it without damaging the sonic integrity of anything around it. Boost as subtley and narrowly as possible when doing surgery.
Then you can EQ for flavor. Now you're not getting bad frequencies under control, you're figuring out how to make the good ones stand out. But you need to the do the other first, because you can't enhance a track that you don't first have under control.
Then next you start eq-ing for balance. This is where you start to care large chunks out of some instruments to create space for others.
one thing I will caution you about is not trying to fix frequency range problems that were meant to be solved with compressors, saturators, phase alignment tools, or transient designers. If you have a annoying hi-hat bleeding through a snare mic, don't try to eq the hi-hat out. Use a gate.
EQ is over-rated. Really. It is. If you have a messy badly recorded male vocal with 250-800 blaring all over the place, don't make a wide scoop and try to EQ it out. Hit is lightly with an EQ, but smash it down with multi-band compressors and let that thing do the heavy lifting.
If you don't have enough snap in your snare or shimmer in your cymbals, again, not really a job for the EQ. Use a compressor or (if you know what you're doing) an exciter, or harmonic enhancer to bring these out. Not the EQ. EQ's can actually be somewhat limited in their overall contribution to a mix.