Suggestions for EQ on Bass

[rayc]

Satire or sarcasm?

 

[mixsit]

Satire or sarcasm?

Definetelly not sarcasm. I'm always going for the good side, sometimes the fun of it.
Remember -it was from the begining, in spite of the title- 'too much bass'.

Hell, I'm still hoping Denny comes back and tells us; what have you learned? what do you need?

 

[rayc]

Yeah, sarcasm is too easy to slip into - satire is for the common good!

 

[giraffe]

EDIT: This may be pure coincidence, but I do find it interesting that the boost numbers in that series tend to accentuate alternating B and G-to-G# frequencies, except for the 3k, which accentuates a high harmonic of the E. The cut between 200 and 300 tends to cut the mud from the B around B3.

If there is any meaning to this - and I'm not sure there is since the numbers are very rough - it would seem to indicate a general need to pull up and sharpen the B and the G, and just to add some high end to the open E.

neat little case study glen! i wonder if there's anything to it, or just random meaninglessness....

 

[IronFlippy]

EDIT: This may be pure coincidence, but I do find it interesting that the boost numbers in that series tend to accentuate alternating B and G-to-G# frequencies, except for the 3k, which accentuates a high harmonic of the E. The cut between 200 and 300 tends to cut the mud from the B around B3.

If there is any meaning to this - and I'm not sure there is since the numbers are very rough - it would seem to indicate a general need to pull up and sharpen the B and the G, and just to add some high end to the open E.

Coincidentally, right smack in between 200 and 300 IS B3. As to why people want to slice that away, I have no idea. Conspiracy against B? Actually, my best guess is that there is a strong formant in that range on the bass itself. Plus, it gets in the way of the guitars.

As for 3k, I'm not sure about its relationship to E (I'm assuming low E, E2) because it's well above even the upper level harmonics of the note. It has a closer relationship to the pitch area of the pick scraping the strings. Although I'm sure you know more about that than I do, Glen.

 

[ecktronic]

you need much less "bass" in bass tracks than you think.

How does that work?
You can have alot of low end in bass tracks but still have it sounding good in a mix if controlled properly with maybe EQ and compression and even multi comp on the low end for tight bottom end.

Works for me.
Eck

 

[Hi_Flyer]

I guess I'm thinking of a couple times I had to mix bass tracks that had all kinds of bass stuff boosted in the low end. I think one occasion, it was a mic'ed bass cab, and there was just a TON of crap around 100 Hz, which may be fine for playing out, but it was just not right for recording...

Sure you can always fix and mangle stuff with plug-ins, but usually I like to try to get the sound recorded right, if I can. Of course thats easier said than done.

I know that I have recorded bass DI thinking "this sounds thin" on studio monitors, but then it ended up fitting in the mix pretty well.