EQ during tracking

  • Thread starter Thread starter cellardweller
  • Start date Start date
I always say,...

I EQ the signal on the input-side, & record it down to tape, for optimum sound.

Then, on the turnaround, I use little or no EQ on remix. :eek:

I know it's clearly against popular opinion, but that works best for me, & YMMV.
 
In my mind, EQ during tracking is nothing to be hesitent about. Every time you flip a tone switch/pick up selector on a guitar you are recording, you have made a drastic EQ change. Everytime you rotate that knob on a bass guitar, you are making huge eq change. Same with mic selection/placement. So why are permenant parametric/graphic adjustment so "taboo" ? If stuff doesn't work at mixdown, I find that it is more likely my mic placement/mic choice than anything else that is the culprit. I rarely wreck stuff while recording with EQ, but when i do it is a good learning experience...
 
I too usually track flat, but maybe I just don't know any better :)
 
teainthesahara said:
In my mind, EQ during tracking is nothing to be hesitent about. Every time you flip a tone switch/pick up selector on a guitar you are recording, you have made a drastic EQ change. Everytime you rotate that knob on a bass guitar, you are making huge eq change. Same with mic selection/placement. So why are permenant parametric/graphic adjustment so "taboo" ? If stuff doesn't work at mixdown, I find that it is more likely my mic placement/mic choice than anything else that is the culprit. I rarely wreck stuff while recording with EQ, but when i do it is a good learning experience...
Click to expand...

I think that about sums it up. How is committing to a specific microphone any different than eq'ing? They both are affecting the tone that is being recorded.
 
Raw-Tracks said:
I think that about sums it up. How is committing to a specific microphone any different than eq'ing? They both are affecting the tone that is being recorded.
Click to expand...

But doesn't the use of EQ add artefacts to the signal and so degrade the quality of the audio? This is what I've always been taught anyway and this is why I try and do what I can with mic selection and positioning before I turn to the eq.

I guess the higher the quality of the gear then the less of an issue this is but I don't think your average home recor (ie. me) should just be throwing any old mic up in front of sources in any old position and then relying on the eq on their Behringer UB mixer to get the right sound.
 
Kevin DeSchwazi said:
I guess the higher the quality of the gear then the less of an issue this is but I don't think your average home recor (ie. me) should just be throwing any old mic up in front of sources in any old position and then relying on the eq on their Behringer UB mixer to get the right sound.
Click to expand...
Or home rec'r like me, who doesn't even own said mixer..... :o
 
Kevin DeSchwazi said:
But doesn't the use of EQ add artefacts to the signal and so degrade the quality of the audio? This is what I've always been taught anyway and this is why I try and do what I can with mic selection and positioning before I turn to the eq.

I guess the higher the quality of the gear then the less of an issue this is but I don't think your average home recor (ie. me) should just be throwing any old mic up in front of sources in any old position and then relying on the eq on their Behringer UB mixer to get the right sound.
Click to expand...

Kevin,
yeah, i hear what you are saying. My take on things are this: any audio artifacts I add during the EQ process are by far insignificant as compared to the benefits i get by judiciously applying EQ. The degredation is commonly talked about, but i for one have never heard horrible artifacts coming out of my inexpensive symetrix/altec eq's when used within their limits. For some types of sounds, i would want my mic's/placement and instruments to get me there 100%. But with my apartement room acoustics, limited mic choices, and less than stellar quality of instruments, that is not a reality. So EQ gets me alot of the way towards my audio objectives...and in a nice way. The audio artifacts that are encountered are probably more of a worry for pro engineers with a pro set-up. When your signal chain is that detailed and revealing, it makes sense to worry about such things. But for now, the eq helps more than it hurts...i view it as part of the whole 'tracking sound', and not just a last resort. I think if one spends some time and know's the limits of their hardware, and they are not careless with it, you cant really go wrong with tracking EQ.
 
teainthesahara said:
Kevin,
yeah, i hear what you are saying. My take on things are this: any audio artifacts I add during the EQ process are by far insignificant as compared to the benefits i get by judiciously applying EQ. The degredation is commonly talked about, but i for one have never heard horrible artifacts coming out of my inexpensive symetrix/altec eq's when used within their limits. For some types of sounds, i would want my mic's/placement and instruments to get me there 100%. But with my apartement room acoustics, limited mic choices, and less than stellar quality of instruments, that is not a reality. So EQ gets me alot of the way towards my audio objectives...and in a nice way. The audio artifacts that are encountered are probably more of a worry for pro engineers with a pro set-up. When your signal chain is that detailed and revealing, it makes sense to worry about such things. But for now, the eq helps more than it hurts...i view it as part of the whole 'tracking sound', and not just a last resort. I think if one spends some time and know's the limits of their hardware, and they are not careless with it, you cant really go wrong with tracking EQ.
Click to expand...

In my case, it's a no-brainer. I don't have any hardware eq of any type. No mixer, none of that. I track on my MR-8, and stay away from the mastering settings and effects on it because they are horrid, no matter what you do to them. So I eq when mixing down with my software. I've gotten pretty good with mic placement (mic choice is also a non factor because I only have one mic), and being creative and careful with my amp settings.
I am going to go through a huge learning curve when I do get new gear, and I know it. But for now, I do with what I have, and so far, I am getting away wtih it....
 
I record vocals with no EQ. I will use limiting and/or compression depending on the vocalist.

As for EQ, I'll use EQ when tracking on certain instruments especially bass guitar. I like that big bass sound. I've found that if I don't have that sound going in that I usually won't be able to get it out of a mix. So, in many instances, I'll track bass with hardware EQ before the signal hits the analog to digital conversion.
 
In my opinion, a little EQ on the way in and then a little more on the way out sounds a whole lot better than a lot of EQ on the way out. I say just do your best to get the right mic, pre and placement. Then listen to it. If it sounds better with some EQ, go for it.
 
Kevin DeSchwazi said:
But doesn't the use of EQ add artefacts to the signal and so degrade the quality of the audio? This is what I've always been taught anyway and this is why I try and do what I can with mic selection and positioning before I turn to the eq.

I guess the higher the quality of the gear then the less of an issue this is but I don't think your average home recor (ie. me) should just be throwing any old mic up in front of sources in any old position and then relying on the eq on their Behringer UB mixer to get the right sound.
Click to expand...


You beat me to it. If you're talking about commiting eq to tape/disk, the quality of the eq has to be a factor. Mic positioning is somewhat of a lost art, and, if you do know what you need from an instrument, is always the preference IMO.

On the other hand, if you're not sure, and the only eq's you have are behringer/mackie standard... track it flat.
 
PapillonIrl said:
On the other hand, if you're not sure, and the only eq's you have are behringer/mackie standard... track it flat.
Click to expand...
Brings up an interesting point: which eq should you buy, hardware-wise?


EDIT: assuming price was no object...

And if it was, which one gives the "best bang for the buck"?

I know this question has been asked, I just wanted your personal opinion... :o
 
Raw-Tracks said:
How is committing to a specific microphone any different than eq'ing?
Click to expand...

Because you can always EQ later, but you're forced to pick a microphone to start recording.
 
I do not have a control room. I press a pair of headphones to my head like a vice and try to block out the source (singer, guitar whatever) as best I can. Until I hear it on playback the only thing that I really know is a ballpark guesstimate of tonality and what the levels are going in. This is why for my situation I record direct as much as possible. If I had a 1/4 inch jack in my throat I'd record vocals direct too, but until that day, I save eq for when the only sound is the one coming out of my monitors. trial and ERROR!!!
 
Stefan Elmblad said:
Because you can always EQ later, but you're forced to pick a microphone to start recording.
Click to expand...

OK, if you need to procrastinate, then do so. I have seen reasons stated that do make a case for not EQ'ing on the way in. If your monitoring environment while tracking is less than adequate, if you don't have any decent analog eq's, not very experienced with recording, etc. Those are good reasons for not EQ'ing on the way in.

However, I maintain, there is nothing inherently wrong with applying EQ on the way in. I often see people on this and other boards, acting like it is a cardinal sin to apply EQ while recording. I see nothing wrong with it.
 
If it ain't broke, don't fix it... if it works do it...
sounds good to me...
 
I never EQ at tracking time, but i do add some light compression to control the vocal signal range and stop clipping.

If you eq at tracking time and remove something its difficult to put it back later if you change your mind. What's the point, if you can EQ at mixing time in consideration of the WHOLE mix?
 
Most all the engineers I have worked with EQ at tracking if they feel the need to do so. I think the important thing is to not rely on it. Use it for what it is, a tool.
 
glynb said:
If you eq at tracking time and remove something its difficult to put it back later if you change your mind. What's the point, if you can EQ at mixing time in consideration of the WHOLE mix?
Click to expand...
Well, for most of the projects I do, the vocals usually get tracked last. By that point the rest of the music is mixed enough that I can tell what it's going to sound like.
 
NewB

I try to steer away from making decisions according to what anyone else thinks.
I mean, these things are so personal and there's never a right or wrong, but only a successful song.

The best is trial and error. Try it first. You'll end up learning more about your gear, about your preffered sound and about your own ears that way.

"just do it".....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top