EQ Rules of Thumb

  • Thread starter Thread starter doncol07
  • Start date Start date
Ford Van said:
Audio with the processing removed. I adjusted some levels to try to even things out a bit. I guess I could work it a bit more, but, overall, this is about as good as it get's. By the way, the toms on the original recording were SO horrible that I used Drumagog to replace them. That is what you hear here.

Here is the mix I supplied to the client. He was fairly stoked about it. I sort of wish I had HIS mix of it, cause that would be a better comparison. He is an inexperienced mixing engineer, so he was liking what I did to his song.

Anyway. If you listened to both those recordings, who's advice would you consider to have a bit more "weight" ?

;)

What is the same song was used as an example
Click to expand...

Thats BOD isnt it?
Chris's daughter?
When were they in Portland...? I would've went.
 
And FOR THE RECORD, I agree that IF you can achieve what you are after while tracking, great! I certainly don't just throw up freakin' mics in the studio and capture "whatever" for sound then look to eq/compression/whatever to save the day. I never said that is how I work, nor how I "prefer" to work.

I don't like the insinuation that I am somehow "new skool" or some shit just because I say "eq to get what you want if you need to".

I get plenty of projects where re-tracking a part that doesn't quite sound right IS NOT an option. I have tracked MANY things where I knew going to "tape" that it wasn't the greatest sound, but because of circumstance beyond my control, we had to go with it, and re-tracking it later was STILL not an option. There has been times where I just didn't nail the sound right at all. There have been many times where I have tracked something assuming a certain production sound was sought, and the band wanted something different, and re-tracking it later was NOT an option. I have had tracks that weren't all that great, but didn't WANT to revisit trying to track it again.

In any of those scenarios, I HAVE to make do with what I have, and I will not hesitate for one second to do whatever extreme stuff is neccesary to make that track work in the mix.

There is plenty of stuff I have posted that sounds great, and had some fairly extreme eq settings. There is PLENTY MORE where I didn't even touch the eq! Neither way is right or wrong. If I dont' NEED to eq, I certainly don't. I never insinuated that, nor would I ever!

So, let's all stop posting the obvious here! I will end this with saying that if Southside want's to go ahead and retrack something because he is going to have to use more than 6dB of cut/boost on an eq to make the sound behave, well, by all means, he can do that!
 
xfinsterx said:
Thats BOD isnt it?
Chris's daughter?
When were they in Portland...? I would've went.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is BOD. Yes, that is Jaimee. No, they did not come to Portland. Chris did some legal stuff for me, so I mixed a song for him. He just sent me .wav files via ftp.

I mixed this at home in my bedroom with Sonar.
 
You need a SONAR o even FIND anything in MY bedroom
 
Wow...certainly a charged thread.

My only concern was someone mentioning the strained use of outboard gear. Pushing it further than it's normal intended use.

I'm not pointing fingers, but I will have this to say:

Overuse of processing and FX is one of the main killers of records in the 21st century.

So the question shouldn't be whether you CAN get it that loud or process that much, but rather if you SHOULD.


Just because you have 4 gallons of red paint dosn't mean you have to use it all on your paintings. ;)
 
Ford Van said:
Yes, it is BOD. Yes, that is Jaimee. No, they did not come to Portland. Chris did some legal stuff for me, so I mixed a song for him. He just sent me .wav files via ftp.

I mixed this at home in my bedroom with Sonar.
Click to expand...

Hey- to change the subject, what did you do to the acoustic in the begginning? I think I know, but not real sure.

Thanks.
 
NL5 said:
Hey- to change the subject, what did you do to the acoustic in the begginning? I think I know, but not real sure.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I warped it out with a multiband compressor. Both of them actually.
 
LeeRosario said:
My only concern was someone mentioning the strained use of outboard gear. Pushing it further than it's normal intended use.

I'm not pointing fingers, but I will have this to say:

Overuse of processing and FX is one of the main killers of records in the 21st century.
Click to expand...

Depends on the genre, music and the sound. I know some people that overdrive the inputs on the mixers (stuff like Soundcraft, Mackie, etc), to distort the sounds, then sample them and process some more. Equipment abuse certainly has it's place ;) Not that it should be a rule of thumb.
 
Ford Van, for all your wild man talk in this thread I was expecting something really out there in your mix. I would describe that mix as tasteful and restrained. The parts are balanced nicely, there's a sheen to the sound, reverb is kept under control, delay is present but not overpowering.

You may have been using crazy settings, but it doesn't sound like it. The mix seems appropriate for the music and appropriate considering the original rough mix you also provided. I have no doubt the client was happy with that one.
 
SonicAlbert said:
Ford Van, for all your wild man talk in this thread I was expecting something really out there in your mix. I would describe that mix as tasteful and restrained. The parts are balanced nicely, there's a sheen to the sound, reverb is kept under control, delay is present but not overpowering.

You may have been using crazy settings, but it doesn't sound like it. The mix seems appropriate for the music and appropriate considering the original rough mix you also provided. I have no doubt the client was happy with that one.
Click to expand...

Thanks man. I appreciate the nice comments about that mix.

There ARE some pretty whacky things I did.

I have crunched the hell out of the snare and added GOBS of eq in the top end to get that "snappy" sound, even though it is being compressed all to hell too! Same with the kick drum. GOBS of eq and compression. I think it really took a marginal sounding kick and snare and made them sound appropriate for the genre.

Certainly, you couldn't say that this music is "metal" by any means! LOL

The bass guitar has GOBS of eq and compression too!

I tamed the vocals using a multiband and a wideband compressor.

Lot's of mangling going on in that mix. I don't think the mangling "hurt" the production at all, and in fact brought out a lot of nice qualities in the music!

But, I supposed I should just go ahead and wipe out all the settings and not do any more than about 6dB of eq on anything, and "live" with what I get. :rolleyes:

Boyz, there are NO RULES in producing audio! You do what you need to do to get the job done. If that means gobs of eq, then you use gobs of eq.
 
Ford Van said:
Boyz, there are NO RULES in producing audio! You do what you need to do to get the job done. If that means gobs of eq, then you use gobs of eq.
Click to expand...


In the end that's true. It's all about aesthetics and each person has a way of achieving that. So to that I say....


Tooshay and a drink!
 
I kinda look at like an... I won't say artist, but painter with different colors of paints (tracks)... He can arrange them anyway he wants to please his taste, or his clients taste, if he has a client... In the end all paintings will look different but most all of the painters will still refer to their work as art... Not all viewers will appreciate it as art though...

Look at some of the modern abstract stuff out there today... In my opinion, I'm sure a typical 6 year old kid could do just as good, some of them do better... BUT there are eyes that don't see it that way...those eyes will even pay big money for it...

I mainly play/record acoustic bluegrass music... I don't know a lot about Hip-Hop, Heavy Metal..etc... I've heard some mixes from these 2 genres of music that a lot of people said were great... I couldn't make it through half the song till I was more than done listening to it... I'm sure there are Hip-Hop and Heavy Metal players out there that have listened to my prefered genre of music and said/done the same...Couldn't make it through half the song...

Music is even hard to desribe... Try to describe to someone what a 'fat sound' is... It's all about preference and it's hard to change someone's preferences when it comes to things like music that means a lot to them and they've invested countless hours into...and they consider their art.

Just my .02...
 
You know whats funny about the whole engineering thing...


I've been at this for a while now and everytime I'm reminded that engineering is an art, I think of David Botrill.

You might know his work, he's done stuff with Tool, Coheed and Cambria's latest album, Peter Gabriel just to name some stuff.

Anyway, something thats true about analyzing his work is that he acheives awesome dimension in his songs. You can almost reach in and grab an instrument with your bare hands. His mixes are defined by enormus imaging and flexibility.

So along the lines of being a "painter", he has a very simple concept that's never been easy for me to understand.

He says, "I mix with the intent that everything in a mix has to be heard, so if you record something, and you can't hear it, then whats the point of having it?"

And you see, to that I would say, "but some things are ment to be felt, not heard".

Which is why an engineer like me might tend to layer sounds more than Botrill might.

And you see, it's those differences in audio philosophy that allows us to take the approach we do.

And in the end, who is wrong? Niether of us.

However, in terms of Botrill, I'll eventually see it his way and have my clairty, too. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top