philbagg
Just Killing Time
I just read this in an article about mastering:
A high pass filter at 60Hz? That sounds a little strange to me
A high pass filter at 60Hz? That sounds a little strange to me
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Maybe he's just tired of sitting at stop lights next to a Chevy Monte Carlo with 28" rims that has the back seat ripped out in order to make room for a pair of underpowered 18" subwoofers that make everyone within 50ft of the car sick to their stomach while the Chevy's exhaust system is rattled right off the bottom of the car.A high pass filter at 60Hz? That sounds a little strange to me
Seriously, though, beware any advice that says one particular adjustment is appropriate across the board on most mixes.
G.
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
for tracking, I do that religiously... cept on dem kicks and such..
maybe a pretty mild slope on that hi-pass might be what was intended in the article??
maybe a pretty mild slope on that hi-pass might be what was intended in the article??
philbagg
Just Killing Time
I was thinking as much. Seemed like the kind of thing that most noobz come in here looking for: A formula.
Yeah I hi-pass everything except for the kick and/or bass too. But this is mastering. I can't see why you'd want a rolloff of most of your sub. I know that a lot of playback systems can't reproduce 60Hz and below very well, but what if some guy has a system that does it really well, or if the track is being spat out a PA at a live gig in between sets? You'd have your regular tunes, full spectrum, and you're hearing plenty of sub. Then this song kicks in, sounding pretty weak by comparison. Kind of the opposite effect mastering is supposed to have.
They probably did mean a mild slope. But I'd be more inclined to put a 24dB/18dB per octave HPF at around 30Hz than a lower one at 60Hz.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I tend to avoid using HP filters as an automatic thing during tracking (unless I'm hearing/seeing a problem).
I figure during tracking...if something has little or no energy in the sub 80Hz area...using a HP filter isn't going to make much difference...and if it does, I don't want to prematurely decide to cut it out (unless I'm hearing/seeing a problem).
AFA the mixdown/mastering phase...I find most of the low cut stuff ends up happening in the 150-300 range (AFA clearing out the mud)...not so much the sub stuff.
I figure during tracking...if something has little or no energy in the sub 80Hz area...using a HP filter isn't going to make much difference...and if it does, I don't want to prematurely decide to cut it out (unless I'm hearing/seeing a problem).
AFA the mixdown/mastering phase...I find most of the low cut stuff ends up happening in the 150-300 range (AFA clearing out the mud)...not so much the sub stuff.
kcearl
I see deaf people
well Ive just read the second Mastering Focus magazine by musictech and watched the dvd so if you just like to forward all this forums questions to me on Ill be happy to answer them 
philbagg
Just Killing Time
well Ive just read the second Mastering Focus magazine by musictech and watched the dvd so if you just like to forward all this forums questions to me on Ill be happy to answer them
How do I make phat beats? I want studio quality, with minimal effort. A few sentences will do. Thanks...em...homie?
kcearl
I see deaf people
squash 'em with a compressor, only download waves, and use presets...i think thats it covered 
D
dintymoore
Guest
... A high pass filter at 60Hz? That sounds a little strange to me
That's only one of many red flags. Considering that the low E on a P Bass is lower than that, it wouldn't make sense. Then he wants you to boost it back up after you've rolled it off (?).
I like "now is the time you can boost the bass or add a little more 'air' to the mix".
Add a little more 'air' to the mix? Would that would be by using my Craftsman compressor instead of the ones on Cubase?
That's the nutiest shit I ever heard.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Rolling of below 60Hz - no matter what the slope - "especially [for] systems with subwoofers" is kind of like saying "convert your file to 128k MP3, especially for systems with extended-range tweeters".
I think trying to give what they actually say a favorable interpretation is just letting them off the hook, because that doesn't make any more sense than anything else; it's still recommending doing something regardless of what is actually needed or not; it's baloney.
I think the far more likely candidate explanation is that you read an article written by a tin-head and/or published by a media that has no qualified editor.
G.
Waltz Mastering
New member
I just read this in an article about mastering:
A high pass filter at 60Hz? That sounds a little strange to me
+1 - that's some of the worst advice I have ever heard.
kcearl
I see deaf people
ive actually seen it in an EQs "mastering" preset....no jokes
T
TrevorQ
New member
This does seem like rather bizarre advice. I'm sure there are some mixes where you might have to do this but in most cases it's just going to sick the balls right out of your track. One thing that I actually do use eq wise on pretty much every master is about an eight db cut at 125hz with a very narrow Q which I find makes pretty much every mix I've ever done sound way better.
philbagg
Just Killing Time
If they're your mixes, why are you putting that much energy into the 125Hz area at the mixing stage? And 8dB is a lot!
Waltz Mastering
New member
Could be a room thing...
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
That's what I'd suspect as well.
philbagg
Just Killing Time
That would make a lot of sense... Although, still. If that was me, I'd go back to the mixing stage to remove that. I have a very bad room for mixing. I always double check on headphones.
S
StonedSunset
New member
a general eq curve?
i looked around this post a little and didn't see anything about if there is any kind of basic pattern you want with a spectrum analyzer in a commercially mastered recording. if i missed it i am sorry, but i wonder if someone can answer that question for me.
i looked around this post a little and didn't see anything about if there is any kind of basic pattern you want with a spectrum analyzer in a commercially mastered recording. if i missed it i am sorry, but i wonder if someone can answer that question for me.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Nope. You cannot tell how a track of music sounds by looking at it any more than you can tell how a picture looks by tasting it.
Spectrum analyzers cannot be used to determine if or when a track sounds right. They are only occasionally useful once you have already determined with your ears that there is something wrong, but you can't quite tell exactly why; and sometimes an analyzer can help you diagnose specific causes like harmonic ringing, converter aliasing, etc.
It's like an x-ray of your body. You can't really tell from an x-ray whether the patient is actually healthy or not, but when you know they are unhealthy, an x-ray may help you find a cause for the illness.
G.
Waltz Mastering
New member
While an analyzer might be able to give you some useful information, ime there is no common pattern that will give you a visual on how things should sound.