Graphic vs Parametric EQ

  • Thread starter Thread starter DigitalDon
  • Start date Start date
D

DigitalDon

New member
Need some advice. Searched this forum but not satisfied yet. Recommendations on which type of equalizer for vocal recording. Graphic or Parametric? Have tried several different mic positions with CAD E100 and Shure SM58 mic but can't seem to get rid of unwanted nasal tones. Majority of recording will be with same vocalist. Feeding mic thru ART Tube MP, thru Behringer compressor (ratio less than 3:1), into Tascam 424MK II. Don't have a lot of EQ adj available on the 424. Only need a single channel EQ. Prefer rack mount but not absolute requirement. Budget is $200US. Looking at ART 351 Graphic EQ ($150), not sure on a parametric EQ unit. Any ideas/recommendations???
 
The best resolution on a 36 band graphic EQ is 1/3 octave.That's not really very precise.Parametric EQ,by contrast,can zero in on the offending frequency exactly,and can set the "Q" or width of the cut to a single cycle if necessary.
Either a real-time analyzer or software frequency analyzers like in cool edit will give you a precise picture of the possible trouble spots,which you can then operate on with surgical precision with a parametric EQ.Just my 2 cents.
Tom
 
I agree with Tom's comments. The Parametric is much more useful than a graphic (for recording). Grapic would probably be better for live sounfd room EQ.

Rick
 
Any recommendations on a mfg/model for the parametric EQ?
 
Every studio should/must have a parametric eq of some kind...most studios wouldn't/shouldn't miss not having a graphic at all. Of course, live is another story altogether!

BW
 
I'm keen to watch this post as I have often thought that graphic was better for me! But I am inexperienced:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top