subtractive eq'ing technique

  • Thread starter Thread starter mindsound
  • Start date Start date
KNL said:
The OP was stating that it is better to use subtractive eq. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Yes, and your statements still make no sense. Sorry man. I'll let others carry on this conversation, I don't have the energy.
 
I'll just say that subtractive EQ, while not a rule, is generally a better technique to use that additive EQ no matter what the circumstances. Has nothing to do with bad equalizers, distortion, thin tracks, or gain staging. You're out in left field man.
 
I am still scratching my head here over "good" and "bad" eq's in the digital realm. :wtf:

They are what they are. "Good" and "bad" are so relative to opinion, and there is NO quantitative values to support either other than opinion!

Maybe saying something like "Subtractive eq'ing is probably the best approach 75% of the time that you need an eq" would make sense. But add, subtract, whatever, it really depends on which side of the compressor I strap that eq on, and what I need to "fix" in the sound. I would say that I add 30-40% of the time! :)
 
In response to some of the last few post, It's not subtractive eq instead of X thing or Y thing. Whatever how the tracks were recorded (micing techniques, preamps, comp, eq...), at the mixing stage, I'm sorry but there is one SURE THING, you have to choose and so making space for all the tracks to live together as a whole. I.e, you can't have a big drum, big guitars, big bass....big everything. That's where subtractive eq come into play for that matters...an many others too.
Of course, a big part of these choices can be made at the recording, but you cannot do that 100% at the micing stage. Things always evolve, until it's done (and when it's done??? a big question). So there is always choices and corrections to make at the mix. That's why, yes, they used subtractive eq'ing even on Dark Side of The Moon. (sorry for those who are tired of this recording cliché!)
 
snus said:
"Subtractive eq'ing is probably the best approach 75% of the time that you need an eq" would make sense. But add, subtract, whatever, it really depends on which side of the compressor I strap that eq on, and what I need to "fix" in the sound. I would say that I add 30-40% of the time! :)
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with using EQ boost at times, but it's much easier to remove frequencies that are excessive rather than add ones that are not there to begin with...AFTER you've record a track, in order to fine-tune the track's EQ balance.

Buy subtracting the offensive frequencies...you can than boost up the level of that track and that bring brings up (boosts) ALL the remaining "good" frequencies for a given track. You get where you want to be in a much cleaner, less obtrusive way. If you first remove the 'bad" frequencies...and then do some boosts if neeeded, you get more bang for your buck rather than just trying to "overcome" the bad frequencies by boosting "good/needed" ones more than the "bad" ones.

After you do it enough times, you realize the value of subtractive EQ, but again, sometimes you just need to boost a little here-n-there to sweeten up a signal, though from a corrective standpoint, boosting always causes more issues than subtracting....regardless if they are digital EQs or analog EQs.
 
miroslav said:
There's nothing wrong with using EQ boost at times, but it's much easier to remove frequencies that are excessive rather than add ones that are not there to begin with...AFTER you've record a track, in order to fine-tune the track's EQ balance.

Buy subtracting the offensive frequencies...you can than boost up the level of that track and that bring brings up (boosts) ALL the remaining "good" frequencies for a given track. You get where you want to be in a much cleaner, less obtrusive way. If you first remove the 'bad" frequencies...and then do some boosts if neeeded, you get more bang for your buck rather than just trying to "overcome" the bad frequencies by boosting "good/needed" ones more than the "bad" ones.

After you do it enough times, you realize the value of subtractive EQ, but again, sometimes you just need to boost a little here-n-there to sweeten up a signal, though from a corrective standpoint, boosting always causes more issues than subtracting....regardless if they are digital EQs or analog EQs.
Click to expand...

I think I have "done it enough times" to know how I like to work. ;) Again, each has it's uses. I am not always eq'ing to "fix" a "bad" thing. Sometimes, I just want a different character. Sometimes, I want a certain frequency range to set off the compressor. Sometimes after compression, I want bass notes in a certain range to jump out in the mix a bit with a little bit of aggression. So many practical uses for ADDITIVE eq. Anybody living by a model will be restricted to that model. I have no interest in restricting myself by "rules". I have probably 12,000 hours or more sitting at a mixer trying to make stuff sound the best it can. I have learned from my own experience and watching other skilled craftsmen that there are no rules, and that what works is what works.
 
Yeah...but this thread is about subtractive EQ techniques to correct things when initially setting up your mix.
You're tossing in other uses of EQ, and that's cool....but most of the other things you mentoin, you can, and would do...AFTER the initial subtractive EQ is done at the start of the mix.
First you fix things, then you go about sweetening.
That ain't a "model" or rule...it's just a common sense approach. :)
 
snus said:
I think I have "done it enough times" to know how I like to work. ;) Again, each has it's uses. I am not always eq'ing to "fix" a "bad" thing. Sometimes, I just want a different character. Sometimes, I want a certain frequency range to set off the compressor. Sometimes after compression, I want bass notes in a certain range to jump out in the mix a bit with a little bit of aggression. So many practical uses for ADDITIVE eq. Anybody living by a model will be restricted to that model. I have no interest in restricting myself by "rules". I have probably 12,000 hours or more sitting at a mixer trying to make stuff sound the best it can. I have learned from my own experience and watching other skilled craftsmen that there are no rules, and that what works is what works.
Click to expand...


Of Course there is no rules! There are just many ideas/concepts/practices at hands to craft our art. Subtractive eq'ing is just one of those. as mixing for me should be considered first as an art, it could just be boring to "be restricted by rules". But at the same time I don't have any idea of, say, any finest jazz improviser who didn't have to learned the scales first. Obviously, SNUS, you've practiced your scales.

Miroslav, I'm 100% agreeing with you with your concept of subtract. eq interplay with level of a track in a mix. I envision eq'ing the same way, all the time.
 
miroslav said:
Yeah...but this thread is about subtractive EQ techniques to correct things when initially setting up your mix.
You're tossing in other uses of EQ, and that's cool....but most of the other things you mentoin, you can, and would do...AFTER the initial subtractive EQ is done at the start of the mix.
First you fix things, then you go about sweetening.
That ain't a "model" or rule...it's just a common sense approach. :)
Click to expand...

No! Many times, the only thing I do to the sound is add some high or low shelf. Sometimes the sound was just captured wrong and needs "something" to it.

Again, subtractive eq is not the only way to get to where you want to go.

Saying something like "First you fix things, then you go about sweetening" just proves what I am saying about restricting yourself. If you cannot see through what I mean by that, then you are still restricting yourself. ;)
 
NO!

You're just stuck in the wrong mindset and only reading what you want.
You fix things if they need it....that's not a restriction.
And if they need it, you do that BEFORE anything else.

If they don't need it...then you don't need to do any subtractive EQ or anything else.

WOW...what a concept! :D
 
There is nothing like a good parametric equalizer. You cut out everything but one channel, tighten the "q" as tight as it will go, then run up the level on that channel and slowly weep back and forth until you find the bad sound. Now slowly wider the "q" until good sounds are coming in and tighten it back until there are only bad sounds. Do that on each channel. Then set everything a unity gain and listen slowly cut each channel until it starts to sound good. You are only cutting those bad frequencies so don't worry if your sliders all go down. Now slowly adjust the "q" on each channel. The reason for this is that each channel is unique and once you combine them, they affect each other. But now you know where the bad sounds are in each range. I used a Technics Pro five channel parametric for years and always found good sounds with it. Most recording and mixing programs have a parametric with a "q" adjustment available. (The"Q" is the width of the band selection. Some of them actually show you a graph of that on the screen.)

I recommend never ever boosting any frequency. And never try to mix after recording. you and your client cannot hear anything accurately after recording. Always schedule a separate session for mixing and insist on doing it that way. You need a day to let your ears adjust. Almost every bad mix can be blamed on trying to mix right after recording. So do this. Record everything. Then make a reference mix and leave the settings on the system. Come back tomorrow an listen to it. It will suck big time! And yesterday you thought it was good.
 
I myself, would never mix something the same day as recording. Hell, I won't start a mix for days actually. Even then, nothing is ever perfect the first run either.

I will say, that there are many times that boosting EQ is warranted in certain situations. I have never met a kick drum that didn't need some type of 'boost' shaping. Not in heavy rock genres anyway.

Also, the EQ quality thing: From what I know, there is really not much difference in a particular EQ's quality, in regards to how it is achieved digitally. Different algorithms may have a unique effect on how it is performed, via means of some saturation or whatever, in the processing of any particular plug. I myself can't stand the sound of anything above 800hz, boosted by the stock Cubase EQ. But, with other EQ's such as the PSP NobleQex, I find pleasant results when boosting the same frequencies. This is likely due to the processing (in addition to just frequency gain) that smooths the tone a bit.

That being said, if there are harsh frequencies in what was recorded, EQ boost will likely compound the nastiness.

Cut a fart. Don't boost it. :)
 
To clear thins up for me anyway. Isn't the theory behind subtractive eq to cut rather than boost?
My use of eq is to cut a frequency when there is too much and boost when there isn't enough. "Subtractive EQ" theorists agree on the former but not the latter. Say a boost of 1k is needed. "They" would prefer to cut everything around 1k rather than boost 1k.*
 
KNL said:
My use of eq is to cut a frequency when there is too much and boost when there isn't enough.
Click to expand...
That makes sense. But what you said earlier was that subtractive EQ was only good if you have a "bad Equalizer" or "bad gain staging",etc....That's what doesn't make sense.
 
Yeah, but you should probably stop trying to argue your point, and just listen to what everyone else is saying.

There are no rules for anything man. There just are not....
 
RAMI said:
That makes sense. But what you said earlier was that subtractive EQ was only good if you have a "bad Equalizer" or "bad gain staging",etc....That's what doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

No. You totally misunderstood. When I mentioned "subtractive eq" I was was referring to the theory of "subtractive eq" not merely cutting a problem frequency. I stand by my comment. If it sounds better to cut all around a frequency rather than just boost there must be a problem elsewhere. But just do what works for you.
 
jimmys69 said:
Yeah, but you should probably stop trying to argue your point, and just listen to what everyone else is saying.

There are no rules for anything man. There just are not....
Click to expand...

I think the only rule mentioned is that it's better to cut than to boost. I don't go by that rule. And no, I don't do things just because everyone else does.
 
Man, I am trying really hard to like you, but you are changing what you say every post. Listen to what others are saying, and just let it go.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top