Equalization Questions
- Thread starter mayan
- Start date
Usually, you always want to put your compressor first in the effects chain.
Graphic EQ is mainly used more for taking OUT unwanted frequencies, like the low-end feedback you often get while miking acoustic guitars. The more bands your graphic EQ has, the better able you are to pinpoint those nasty frequencies that are troublemakers, and leave the rest of the audio bandwidth less effected.
Parametric on the other hand gives you a gentle bell shaped slope on either side of the frequency band you’ve selected, and is good for bringing out certain frequency ranges (rather than a narrow band as in the graphic EQ). For instance, if your mix is a little muddy, you might want to try a Parametric EQ centered around 3k to bring out some definition. Unlike the static EQ found on budget mixers, a FULLY parametric will allow you to adjust how wide the bell shape is that’s centered around the frequency you’ve selected.
Graphic EQ is mainly used more for taking OUT unwanted frequencies, like the low-end feedback you often get while miking acoustic guitars. The more bands your graphic EQ has, the better able you are to pinpoint those nasty frequencies that are troublemakers, and leave the rest of the audio bandwidth less effected.
Parametric on the other hand gives you a gentle bell shaped slope on either side of the frequency band you’ve selected, and is good for bringing out certain frequency ranges (rather than a narrow band as in the graphic EQ). For instance, if your mix is a little muddy, you might want to try a Parametric EQ centered around 3k to bring out some definition. Unlike the static EQ found on budget mixers, a FULLY parametric will allow you to adjust how wide the bell shape is that’s centered around the frequency you’ve selected.
I'll also add that I parametric EQ can be used to do anything. It can be used to cut/boost a narrow frequency or to do a broad frequency range. I have fully parametric EQ in my digital audio program (as most people do). With parametric, you can basically pinpoint any frequency, boost or cut, and control how wide of a range you want to boost/cut (called "Q" - low Q - wide frequency range, high Q - narrow frequency range).
I rarely use graphic EQ, because it's fixed to certain frequencies, that I may not exactly want. However, if you needed an equalizer for some "not-so-critical" track and/or your were running out of cpu power to uses multiple Parametric EQ's then a Graphic EQ may make sense, because you have one EQ with many points to boost/cut.
Rev E
I rarely use graphic EQ, because it's fixed to certain frequencies, that I may not exactly want. However, if you needed an equalizer for some "not-so-critical" track and/or your were running out of cpu power to uses multiple Parametric EQ's then a Graphic EQ may make sense, because you have one EQ with many points to boost/cut.
Rev E
sonusman
Banned
I don't neccesarily agree that compression should come before eq. Often, you can avoid the compressor becoming overly sensitive to a certain hot frequency by applying eq first, then compression. Both are going to phase shift the signal, but you may find that eq will go a lot farther taming nasty jumps in the sound.
There is nothing that a Graphic eq can do that a Parametric can't, except offer many more bands to cut/boost. But if your source sounds are good, and you recorded them well (good mic placement, etc...) you will not need all those bands to smooth out the sound. In fact, most Parametric eq's can have a narrower Cue (bandwidth, or how far above and below the center frequency the sound will be effected) then a Graphic can. Graphic eq's come in 1/3, 2/3, and full octave Cue's. For tuning a sound system for live applications, a 1/3 octave is more then enough, the systems speakers and/or room acoustics call for no more control then that. But for mixing/recording, you may want to really zero in on a frequency, and Parametrics will usually allow you to narrow the Cue down to around 1/7 of an octave. I have seen one's that would do 1/10 of an octave!
Parametrics tend to be easier to use because once you find the frequency you want to center on, you can use one knob adjust the Cue. With a Grphic, you have to adjust several bands.
Anyway, that is all from me.
Ed
[This message has been edited by sonusman (edited 05-24-2000).]
There is nothing that a Graphic eq can do that a Parametric can't, except offer many more bands to cut/boost. But if your source sounds are good, and you recorded them well (good mic placement, etc...) you will not need all those bands to smooth out the sound. In fact, most Parametric eq's can have a narrower Cue (bandwidth, or how far above and below the center frequency the sound will be effected) then a Graphic can. Graphic eq's come in 1/3, 2/3, and full octave Cue's. For tuning a sound system for live applications, a 1/3 octave is more then enough, the systems speakers and/or room acoustics call for no more control then that. But for mixing/recording, you may want to really zero in on a frequency, and Parametrics will usually allow you to narrow the Cue down to around 1/7 of an octave. I have seen one's that would do 1/10 of an octave!
Parametrics tend to be easier to use because once you find the frequency you want to center on, you can use one knob adjust the Cue. With a Grphic, you have to adjust several bands.
Anyway, that is all from me.
Ed
[This message has been edited by sonusman (edited 05-24-2000).]
Rev E covered parametric and graphic EQ.
As for the order of EQ and compression, I'm with sonusman. Always think about your signal path. You may have a big frequency bulge or a ring that you don't want in the mix at all. The normal fix is to make a cut using EQ. Everything in the signal path before the EQ will still contain the unwanted frequency/frequencies. Why pound your compressor harder with frequencies that won't even exist in the final mix? Putting it after the EQ will limit the compression to what the EQ spits out.
This is only one example situation. I'm sure there are plenty of circumstances under which you really would want to run the compressor first, of course. Remember to think about your signal path, and ask yourself WHY you're EQ'ing or compressing in the first place.
As for the order of EQ and compression, I'm with sonusman. Always think about your signal path. You may have a big frequency bulge or a ring that you don't want in the mix at all. The normal fix is to make a cut using EQ. Everything in the signal path before the EQ will still contain the unwanted frequency/frequencies. Why pound your compressor harder with frequencies that won't even exist in the final mix? Putting it after the EQ will limit the compression to what the EQ spits out.
This is only one example situation. I'm sure there are plenty of circumstances under which you really would want to run the compressor first, of course. Remember to think about your signal path, and ask yourself WHY you're EQ'ing or compressing in the first place.