Is EQ need for tracking?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dbc
  • Start date Start date
D

dbc

New member
There's a thread below that sparked this question...

There was a question about 31 band graphic EQ's being used in the recording and the answer was that one wasn't needed.

Question:
>31 band EQ recommendations
>
>Can anyone recommend a good 31 band EQ at a resonable price point, say <$500.
>The application would be to EQ a live monitor mix and also to be used in recording.

Reply:
>The Ashley's fall in that price range, and will work quite well on a monitor mix.
>
>I would avoid using any graphic eq while recording though. Select a different
>mic, or move the mic position, or change the source sound to what you need
>for the recording. While mixing, I doubt that a graphic is going to offer any
>better control than a decent parametric eq.
>
>But do check out the Ashley's for your monitor mix use.


(https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=66469)


Could I get some elaboration on this? I'm looking into buying a graphic EQ for my home studio and was curious as to why. I agree that the simplest and most effective way to change the EQ is to simply move the instrument or move the mic position. Is the need for EQ primarily at the mixdown stage?

I'm asking this because I'm trying to assess my needs for the following pieces of equipment: EQ, headphone amp, rack case. I have a Behringer Composer Pro (which is working out nicely), Samson C1 condenser mic (into the Behringer 6 channel 48v mixer), Boss half rack chorus, reverb, and flanger (anyone want to sell the delay?).

Inquiring minds just gotta know!
 
Personally, I wouldn't waste my money on a 1/3 octave EQ for recording. They can be OK for fighting feedback in a live PA monitor system. If you have to have an outboard EQ, check out this one.
http://mercenary.com/specmodasctr.html
For the most part I don't find myself using tons of EQ when mixing. I don't use it at all when tracking.
 
A graphic eq is a clumsy way to go about applying eq, even at mix down. Your mixer will have eq's that are probably acceptable. If you track your material to sound like you want it, the benefits of a graphic eq will be next to none.

Let's say you have a need for a Low Shelf eq on drum over head tracks. On your console eq, well, you would just turn down the Bass knob (this would be a set frequency Low Shelf eq, probably set somewhere between 70-120Hz....). On a 31 band graphic eq, you would have to turn down about 5 sliders, and do so in a way that creates the same type of "curve" as a Low Shelf would to do the same thing. For such a simple need, that would be silly right?

Indeed, if you needed to do a 1/3 octave cut/boost of a certain frequency, then that 31 band would be the ticket, but on any parametric eq, you could accomplish the same thing.

Anyway. If you still feel you just HAVE to have a 31 band 1/3 octave eq for your studio, and have a dual use for it in live sound, again, the Ashley's sound pretty good and are affordable. If you only need it for studio use, you could save a lot of money by purchasing something like the Behringer parametric eq. Sound quality wise, there will probably be little difference in the end, and the parametric is a more straight ahead way of applying eq.

Ed
 
Ok...

Excellent advice so far. Thanks Gentlemen!

Now the second part. What about mixdown and mastering?

Let's say that I've got the best mix I want. I run my signal to the Composer Pro (stereo) and then to the DAT machine (or another hard drive). What about Graphic EQ vs Parametric EQ?

(I trying to envision all of the possible scenerio's here.)
 
You seem to be hung up on graphic EQ, despite the fact that people keep telling you they really have no place in recording. May I ask why? What is your objection to using the proper tool for the job (in this case parametric EQ)? If it's because you don't really understand parametrics, PLEASE do yourself a favor and get one. The sooner you learn how to use it, the better off you'll be.
Regarding your original question, I almost never use EQ while tracking (I have enough different mics and preamps to get the sound I want), and I use very little while mixing. For pre-mastering, I use a high quality 6 band parametric on the 2 buss.

Scott
 
Scott,

Didn't mean to imply I was "hung up" on the Graphic EQ. (It's the only type I'm familiar with. My "old school" mentality coming through here...) I do agree that getting the best sound right off the bat is the key to great recordings!

I definitely caught the message that the parametric was the way to go. I just needed to understand where the two fit in to the whole scheme of things...

Thanks for the advice. I'll search around for info on Parametric EQ's. Any other reccomendations on Parametric EQ's?

Thanks again all!

:D
 
Last edited:
Graphic EQs only amplify a given freq.You have no control over what freq you are amplifying. Only the ones they give you.
A semi-parametris Eq has Gain, and freq. You can boost the gain, then sweep through the freq. A fully parametric EQ can control gain, freq, and bandwidth. Bandwidth allows you to narrow in on a given freq and either cut it or boost it.
The reason you don't want to use graphic EQS in a studio, is because 1/3 octave Eqs are really 31 gain stages. 31 amplifiers in a row. They are usually noisy. And you have more control with semi, or fully parametris EQs.
 
TR,

Yes, I did check out the link. Sounds like a great piece of gear. Sadly, I'm not in the position to spend $560 on an EQ. I've got $50 - $150 as a target...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top