cut 250 Hz

  • Thread starter Thread starter paresh
  • Start date Start date
P

paresh

Member
Hi guys - I just read the following tip in an article on guitar recording:

Watch out for those low mid frequencies! I cut 250Hz out of almost everything. That frequency can be like a blanket over your whole mix!

My question is how wide should the Q be? And I'm just an amateur - I realize there is probably lots of opinion on this - just some general guidance please. I think he was just referring to the guitar part, not the whole recording?? Thanks!
 
This falacy has been perpetrated across the internet forever.

Although there are some legitimate times to cut out certain frequencies for a specific purpose on certain instruments it is a entirely silly idea to slash ANY frequencies for no reason other than YOU have a problem with that frequency.
That frequency may be an issue in someones recordings because of the size an shape of the room (Room Modes) who knows.

There are no "standard frequencies" to cut for everything to be magic. 250 hz can be useful in many tracks such as Snare Drum.
I could see cutting a much lower frequency...say 60 hz...out of any track not contributing to the low end to make some space for Kick and Bass.

Maybe under 150 hz for acoustic guitar and lead vocals?

Again....it is much more preffered to do things because they are needed....not because it is a stated "silver bullet" I think if there is global problem with a specific frequency it needs to be dealt with at the tracking level.
 
Whether guitar, zither or vuvuzela (I just can't stop saying vuvuzela...I think it reminds me of a Brazillian madam I once knew.......), the idea of automatically doing anything to any particular frequency - or any other sonic property, for that matter - is rarely, if ever, a good idea.

It's true that the area around 250Hz can contain a lot of mud, but so can the areas around 50Hz, 100Hz, 120Hz, 180Hz, 320Hz, 400 Hz, 800 Hz, 1kHz, 4kHz, yada yada yada. Frankly, about every frequency in the whole spectrum could contain problem sounds that you don't want; that doesn't mean that one should cut everything. That's just called "turning down the volume".;) :D

Develop your ears so you can trust them to tell you what needs cutting and what doesn't in any given mix, and not some over-simplistic platitude like "cut frequency x, even if you don't need to".

BTW, there are legitimate guitar notes that fall around 250Hz, both in fundamentals and in first overtones. Automatically cut at that frequency, and you're automatically cutting the amplitude of those notes if/when you play them.

G.
 
Yeah, I have to agree. There have been times where adding a little boost to the low mids on a guitar track can add some punch and fullness that it may need in the mix. IMO, eq adjustments are made depending on the type of song it is, the type of guitar being used, effects, amp, etc. If there's mud in the mix due to instrument overload or traffic, than its time to take look at arrangement, panning, and volume. Misuse of compressors on a distorted guitar track can be a nightmare for lower freq's too.
 
The way I like to cut (lows. mids or highs)...is to sweep in turn through each band of my EQ with the EQ level boosted, while playing back a given track, and listen for the ugliest BUMP....that's the "bad area" for THAT given track/signal...
...then I turn the EQ from boost to cut and listen to how much I want to cut. Often, it's only 1-2 clicks that you need to "clean up" a bad area of the frequency spectrum for a given track.
You have to really listen...as any track you play is going to have lots of frequencies, and at times during playback, it may seem like there are many bad areas...but no, that's just the boost in EQ level giving you that perception. You have to pay attention for that one area that's the wost. Sometimes also watching the meters helps, as you will see the spike the hardest at the worst spots...but your ears are your friend. :)

In the mid-low end...that "mud" zone...you will hear a real resonant boom when you hit a real bad frequency area...in the mids it's that bright honk...and in the highs it's that brittle/harsh stab in your ear.

Once I *lightly* cut back the trouble spots...I then listen to the overall tone and adjust the overall EQ as needed relative to the mix, not just the soloed track.
 
It's difficult to give you a general guideline regarding Q width (or even freq.) because like the others have stated, it really depends on the specific guitar track and song you're working with. Your ears will be best tool for this.

FWIW, when I'm working with Q (after identifying the problem freq. with the track soloed) I often cut several db's at the problem freq. then expand and contract the Q width until I hear a spot where the problem disappears and the sound "clears up" almost completely. Then I unsolo the track and listen to it with the whole song. If the problem still persists, I widen the Q and repeat the process--if the track has "disappeared" in the mix due to excessive cutting/Q width, I go back and narrow the Q or boost the overall volume of the EQ'd track and repeat the process. I keep repeating until I'm satisfied.

All that said, sometimes gross sounding frequencies, especially in the mids, are a welcomed and encouraged thing ;)
 
200, 400, 600 and 1.2 can clog up a mix ... and are the most often"cut" not boosted frequencies
 
+1 for miro.
The only reason to cut any frequency is if you have too much of it. Some acoustic guitars are really boomy and might need a cut at 250hz, some are really thin sounding and might need some 250hz added.

There are three easy steps for EQing something
1. listen to what you have
2. imagine what you want it to sound like
3. set the EQ for the difference between what it does sound like and what you want it to sound like.

Miro's boost and sweep method works well.

As far as your question about the Q goes, it depends. A narrow Q works when there is just a spike at a certain frequency and a wide Q works when there is a whole area that needs to be dealt with. Generally, the more narrow the Q, the more gain (reduction) you will use. The wider the Q, the less gain you will need to hear the change.
 
err acoustic gutars depending on body size usually are in the 160-200 rage of body res on close miking.. most time 180hz will do the trick ..250 is too high
 
This may help give you some general guidelines.

EQUALIZATION PRIMER

These are NOT hard and fast rules, but a good place to start. The advice in the posts above is good. Don't just boost 5k on a kick because it says so. Do it if you can't hear the beater hits and need to to bring the kick out so it becomes more clear in the mix, etc., etc.. Define what you're trying to fix, i.e. muddy, gongy, harsh, thin, and use these guidelines to help you zero in on the problem.
 
Nothing should ever just be cut or boosted as a matter of course. Very few things like this should be done as a matter of course. But 250hz...it's certainly not a frequency I think of that automatically needs cutting. I barely EQ my guitars at all usually beyond rolling off the lows below 100hz if neccessary. Listen to the guitars in the context of the mix and just give it what it needs, not what some guy who knows nothing specifically about what you're working on has said on the internet. .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top