rolling off....

  • Thread starter Thread starter raven46
  • Start date Start date
raven46

raven46

New member
the LF or the HF

ive read about it but i hav'nt come across any examples of how to do it

what are the bacis techniques involved
 
You don't expect a useful answer without telling us what you are about to achive first, do you?
 
it's an eq thing, low shelf-controols the lows
hi shelf- controols the hi end.

it starts taking effect at a user selected frequency and goes all the way to the top (or bottom) of the frequency spectrum. a user defined amount.

say
-6db (hi cut) starting at 2000 hz, that same cut (-6db) holds true all the way up to 20000hz (and beyond really)

just eq stuff
 
all they're really talking about is diminishing the extremes a bit as some people in an attempt to better define instruments have a tendency to over accentuate the highs and similarly to overdo the lows as players in the volume wars... after all when we think of humans ability to hear we talk about 20-20K but most of us dont really come close after about age 20-25 for various reasons...
 
dementedchord said:
all they're really talking about is diminishing the extremes a bit as some people in an attempt to better define instruments have a tendency to over accentuate the highs and similarly to overdo the lows as players in the volume wars... after all when we think of humans ability to hear we talk about 20-20K but most of us dont really come close after about age 20-25 for various reasons...


ok then............
 
i read about it and tought.. if i knew how to do it i could get my tracks to sound better

eqing is the hardest part IMO, especially bass and vocal

im trying to take in all i read but im coming across a lot of stuff i dont know

is there any idiots guide to eqing :o
 
well, some eq very basics

subtractive eq (taking away rather then adding) is slightly safer and slightly harder to get your self into trouble with then additive eq.
read- try to get the sound better by taking away more then adding.

if your not sure, don't do it.

take a brake, listen to something someone else recorded, then listen to your stuff again. the new prospective will occasionally blow your mind.

as a genral rule, noobs should deffinately follow a less is better approach to eq. this will save you a LOT of problems. but remember not to be afraid of eq. sometimes big cuts are needed. much less often are big boosts needed.

you'll have to learn by making mistakes as i can only assume you're not working with/for any one with more experience.
 
raven46 said:
i read about it and tought.. if i knew how to do it i could get my tracks to sound better

eqing is the hardest part IMO, especially bass and vocal

im trying to take in all i read but im coming across a lot of stuff i dont know

is there any idiots guide to eqing :o
Think of that as similar to asking if there is a guide to salting and peppering and spicing when cooking food. As every one knows, the only way to do that is to taste the food and see what, if anything, it needs.

Same thing here. What you need to do is develop your audio tastebuds (aka your ears) to recognize the different frequencies in your mixes when you give them a taste listen so you can tell what's needed here and what's not needed there.

Spend a few nights with a playlist of a variety of music and instrument types and a 1/3rd octave or 2/3rds ocatave graphic EQ. Set all the EQ bands in the middle, and as you play back the music, slide the individual band controls up and down one at a time to hear what that frequency band sounds like and how it affectes the different instruments and vocals.

After practicing this exercise for just an hour a night for a few nights, you should be strting to get to the point where you'll be able to "taste" your mixes and start recognizing what EQ spices they need added or taken away.

G.
 
I love how all (or most) of Glen's analogys are about foods & spices. :D Are you a chef, Glen?
 
raven46 said:
the LF or the HF

ive read about it but i hav'nt come across any examples of how to do it

what are the bacis techniques involved

The only real basic thing with a roll off is that with the exception of the kick drum and the bass guitar in normal rock music you are pretty safe to use a low roll off starting at around 80 to 90 hz in order to reduce unwanted rumble in a song caused from stacking up low freqencies. It also creates space for a more destinct feel and sound (mostly feel) to the kick drum.

Most other instruments including vocals don't really have anything down that low to contribute except for unwanted rumble.

SSG is right, and there are exceptions to the rule. You should never say I can't roll off anything above 90hz or that you have to roll off the bottom on a synth string section. It's all about things fitting together well.

F.S.
 
Last edited:
danny.guitar said:
I love how all (or most) of Glen's analogys are about foods & spices. :D Are you a chef, Glen?
:). I only dabble in it a bit. I do make the best damn Jambalya this side of the French Quarter, though; I guarantee you unlike any other you've tasted.

The fact is, though, that I do find mixing audio and cooking to be extremely similar disciplines. The only real difference is that one is for the taste buds and the other is for the ears. Same thing, different senses. And it makes a handy analogy because, while not everybody's a cook, most people are far more practiced in eating food than they are in listening to music.

Either way - cooked or mixed - there's way too much junk food out there ;)

G.
 
nice one for the replys...

ok i get it...

pratice, experiment, and dont stick to any rules...

just get it sounding nice enough to eat.. :)
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I do make the best damn Jambalya this side of the French Quarter

"best dam jambalya in chicago"


hahahahahahahah
HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE

woooooo....
:D
 
A while back, I had read so much about "cut, don't boost" that I was really tentative about using EQ. Then I read some articles, rants, and what have you by pro engineers that know their stuff, including their EQ settings and realised they weren't shy about boosting at all! And some were pretty heavy handed with it too!

So now I just say "fuck it", and do whatever I think is needed for a particular track in a particular situation...

So... the only "rule" one should follow from this is this: Don't use canned settings, use your ears and do what you think is needed.
 
noisewreck said:
A while back, I had read so much about "cut, don't boost" that I was really tentative about using EQ. Then I read some articles, rants, and what have you by pro engineers that know their stuff, including their EQ settings and realised they weren't shy about boosting at all! And some were pretty heavy handed with it too!
I have always thought that "cut, don't boost" was one of those oversimplified, erroneous translations made by the general masses of what was actually being said. It's right up there with those who read some multi-line compression technique for vocals (or whatever) and, after only remembering the compression ratio, they derive this false rule that says "Joe Professional says to compress vocals by such and such a ratio", when that's not really what he said at all.

I think there are two far truer statements about EQ that often get said by the Big Boys in one form or another that get misinterpreted:

"Cut, don't boost" I think is far more accurately stated as "boost to make something sound artificially better, cut to make something sound naturally better." There are exceptions to this, of course, but it's actually a pretty good general rule of thumb that works much of the time IME. It just gets corrupted into "cut, don't boost" by those who equate natural to good and artifical to bad.

"Go easy on the EQ" is one that's often broken by the Big Boys, because that "axiom" is another overgeneralization and mistranslation of the real advice. That real advice usually falls somewhere along the lines of "(unless you're doing for some real synthetic sound), it's best to try and keep EQing to a minimum. For that reason, try to put yourself in a position where you don't need a lot of EQ."

Or put another way, "don't plan on or count on large EQ in mixing or mastering to get you out of a large jam you got into in tracking."

noisewreck said:
So... the only "rule" one should follow from this is this: Don't use canned settings, use your ears and do what you think is needed.
I agree totally, though I think there's an even more fundamental rule underneath that...

"You can't EQ (or even mix) well until you get your ears trained to understand exactly what you are hearing that you shouldn't be and what you are not hearing that you should."

G.
 
giraffe said:
say
-6db (hi cut) starting at 2000 hz, that same cut (-6db) holds true all the way up to 20000hz (and beyond really)

Usually, when an EQ has a roll off set at -6dB (or actually and dB reduction). There is -3dB reduction at the set frequency. The filter begins at that frequency, progressing -6dB per octave thereafter.
 

Attachments

  • 6db_filter.webp
    6db_filter.webp
    5 KB · Views: 110
"roll off" is a bit of a loose term that can refer to (at least in my head)
a low/hi pass (like you have shown) or a subtractive low or high shelf, like i tried to explain.
 
I've always cosidered a low roll off and a hi pass identical. A hi or low shelf on the other hand is a different creature.

low roll off verses hi pass is like A# VS Bb.

F.S.
 
Back
Top