Romanza - li'l help with EQ

  • Thread starter Thread starter XLR
  • Start date Start date
X

XLR

______
Romanza This is the EQ'd version.

Romanza pre-EQ

Help me out by telling me how the EQ change sounds on your monitors. Probably pretty obvious what I did to it. :D

Any suggestions?

Tracked with cheap gear, had kind of a brittle high end but I liked the feel of it so wanted to fix it up a bit rather than retrack. Did an initial EQ test tweak on my general-purpose laptop before going to my "real" music computer, and thought it came out OK so left it at that. Let me know what you think.

Tim
 
Beautiful playing Tim. Very cool song. Sounds really nice for 128K.
Obviously, the EQ'd version seems to have more body to it. The plain one is still very nice sounding, but the other one has a bit more puch.
Nice...
Ed
 
Listening on PC speakers....Post eq is smoother, don't know how to describe it any other way. I hear a bit of a bump up in lower (mids?) frequencies and bit of a drop in highs...Sort of an evening out of the sound. Super playing by the way! :D
 
Timothy Lawler said:
Thanks Ed. What kind of system are you listening on?

Tim
Click to expand...
It's a 5.1 system on the pc...and I don't have the center channel on right now.
 
Thanks for the input ido1957.

Dogman, I'm still just in the old stereo realm myself, heh-heh. Good to know it translates to a surround system OK. Guess I should check that out.

Tim
 
Timothy Lawler said:
Thanks for the input ido1957.

Dogman, I'm still just in the old stereo realm myself, heh-heh. Good to know it translates to a surround system OK. Guess I should check that out.

Tim
Click to expand...
I actually set my surround up a bit different. 2 speakers up high, 2 at shoulder level, and the sub next to my feet. Seems to give it a more realistic sound, as far as if i was to be near the music being played.
And I listen at a somewhat moderate level. Most of the time, probably well below 85db.
 
Interesting. I've got a studio system I'm used to, and a couple other systems in the house, and I probably should set up one of the house systems in a surround format of some type just to stay current. :D

Tim
 
ah man, this stuff makes me cry :o weep weep.
this is really beautifull man, exelent playing, +++ for the song choice.

The first track really hit me, it sounded old and very good fathersih, I can see michael riding the donkey :D around the sundry paths of siscilly..

teh other eq`d track sounds a bit more mellow, and more polished, its also great, but I like the rawness of the ohter track better.
it sounded more authentic :confused: I think.

anyway that was my cents, big fan of your work man.
saving this to my mp3 player. :)
 
Timothy Lawler said:
Interesting. I've got a studio system I'm used to, and a couple other systems in the house, and I probably should set up one of the house systems in a surround format of some type just to stay current. :D

Tim
Click to expand...
Tim, if you can capture roughly what you hear, that is what you should strive for. Meaning, a somewhat live sound. One acoustic guitar, in a room, has a feel. Your music seems to have that. Very full, but not overprocessed. If you know what I mean. It is very simple sounding, without a lot of added sound. Just a guitar. Very full and crisp. Actually sounds very natural. That is what I like. It sounds like you are playing near me. Good, clean sounds. Make sense? If not, sorry. Just sounds very natural to me.
Ed
 
eq`d track sounds a bit more mellow, and more polished... but I like the rawness of the ohter track better
Click to expand...
I know what you mean... do I go with a more processed, homogenized sound or accept the flaws of the original track along with the greater realism? I guess, for me, the edgy highs were bothering me so I leaned towards having less HF content than having an edgy HF range. :D Reminds me of why I usually avoid doing anything to the high end with guitar solos and just retrack when needed... this was an older track I'm trying to improve a bit.

Michael riding a donkey in Sicily? Not familiar with the reference... do you mean that it sounds Old World-ish? I think so. Thanks for all the kind words Nakatira.

Dogman - Yeah, I like the Less Is More approach for solo guitar... I'd probably just go with mono if I could get away with it. But surround sound is so common now I should probably have one of our house systems set up that way just to check to see how stereo files I do sound in that setting. Don't think I'd probably want to track with mic's all over the place to get a true surround sound, or do a lot of processing after the fact to simulate it. So I hear you.

Tim
 
I prefer the pr-eqd version.

the eqd version sounds boomy and unnatural
 
What my ears hear, is the Pre EQ'd one has more bassy warmth to it.

The EQ'd one brings a brilliance to the highs, and it would seem to be a matter of preference, as they both sound very good to me.

I prefer the EQ'd one, because this a piece is focused on single note-ing, rather than chording. I like the brilliance of each note as it is played. :)
 
Timothy Lawler said:
I know what you mean... do I go with a more processed, homogenized sound or accept the flaws of the original track along with the greater realism? I guess, for me, the edgy highs were bothering me so I leaned towards having less HF content than having an edgy HF range. :D Reminds me of why I usually avoid doing anything to the high end with guitar solos and just retrack when needed... this was an older track I'm trying to improve a bit.

Michael riding a donkey in Sicily? Not familiar with the reference... do you mean that it sounds Old World-ish? I think so. Thanks for all the kind words Nakatira.

Dogman - Yeah, I like the Less Is More approach for solo guitar... I'd probably just go with mono if I could get away with it. But surround sound is so common now I should probably have one of our house systems set up that way just to check to see how stereo files I do sound in that setting. Don't think I'd probably want to track with mic's all over the place to get a true surround sound, or do a lot of processing after the fact to simulate it. So I hear you.

Tim
Click to expand...

I see i misspelled a bit when I said good fatherish, I ment god fatherish as in the god father, Michael corleone ;) cappiche :D was riding the mule\donkey :)
Anyway it gave me great sunny\ meditiranian vibes :)
 
Wish I could help you with your EQ question but umm....I don't use my music computer for the internet, so I'm using some lousy speakers. But your playing is great on this one. :D
 
CyanJaguar – Yeah, I think I’m not where I want to be yet with the sound of this. Thanks for the input.

True – Good ideas and perceptive. Thanks.

Nakatira – Ahh… I got it now. Thanks for clarifying.

cmhansen – thanks for listening and posting.

I’m going to work some more on this. Thanks everybody for your opinions.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top