Two simple questions. Help, please.

[Maddox]

I realize that those questions are very elementary, and that experienced users sometimes just don´t feel like answering basic, simple questions, wich is fair.

But this questions here, though simple and basic, are a cause of distress for me, for i can´t seem to find the answers anywhere in the web: perhaps due to misreadings, or too many technical terms or - and this should always be considered as an option - a lack of intelligence on my end).

I have two questions, and i would be most grateful if someone could take the time to clarify it for me.

I don´t have much to give in return, but i promise that every and any help will not pass unnoticed and that my gratitude is real.

thank you.

---------------------------------------
Question 01

Say we want to add attack to a bass. Instead of boosting the attack frequency on the bass, we can attenuate the same frequency on masking instruments, as showed in this picture:




However, by attenuating a frequency on an instrument so we can improve another instrument, wouldn´t we be "impairing" the first instrument´s quality ?

For instance, if we attenuate a frequency of the guitar so we can improve the backing vocals, the guitar will no longer sound the way it did before this attenuation.

So I ask, is it a matter of considering both parts and favor the one we think is more important ?
In this case, the whole song would be affected just because some important yet short part of the arrangement.

Or is this achieved by eq using automation, and changing equalization only temporarily, during that specific part of the song, then bringing it back to the previous settings ?
In wich case equalization would be a an always changing process, varying during the song, wich would make it really hard to keep tracking of things, since others intruments would also be affected in the process, then every change would require additional changes to those other intruments.

Or is it a case where, by attenuating a frequency of an instrument, this attenuation would only take place when in conflict with other instruments at that frequency, remaining unnafected when not in conflict ?
Wich seems to be very unlikely.

----------------

Question 02

I recorded a guitar, then bass, then the vocals. They´re all at good levels individually, without clipping.

Still the level of the vocals sound way lower when comparing to the other instruments.

wich one is preferable ?

To lower the levels of all the other tracks (in this case, the guitar and bass) in order to even things out, so that the vocals can now be heard ?

Or to create copies of the vocal tracks untill everything sounds more even, then bounce it to a single vocal track ?

 

[M1Fanatic]

If you are having to EQ everyting to extreme it probably wasn't recoded correctly to begin with.

You'll need to find what notes the singer is using along with the guitar and bass and work on not having everyone walking on top of another.

If the singer is singing the root, move the guitar to a third and the bass to a fifth. This is more a matter of arranging than recording, but it allows everyone to be heard and sound melodious.

This was just an example, and you will have to find out what will work with the song and what won't.

Regards

 

[Maddox]

I understand what you said. But it´s not a mather of having to eq on extremes.

It´s about masking and the equalization during the song. That´s for the first question.

The second question is about level differences and the better method to deal with it.

Anyway, thanks

 

[Bristol Posse]

First of all my disclaimer: All of this is my personal preference as there is no one way to do this stuff

Second question first
I would always turn down the tracks. If the vocal is 6DB quieter bring the other stuff down. You can always turn the whole mix up when you are ready to mix down to a final stereo format. The reason I would do this is in turning everything up, you re getting closer to potentially clipping the mix and adding verbs, and other VSTs and automation if you are already at close to 0dBFS means that you are more likely to get into a situation of clipping the master bus

First Question second
For me EQ is somewhat a moving target. I will generally EQ a track so that it fits nicely in the mix and use those as base setting but things will be variable from there. Backing instruemnts may need a little tweak when they are supporting the vocal verseus playing solo. Vocals may be EQd differently in different sections of the song for different feel between verse and chorus for example
Could be done with automation, sidechaining, breaking up the recording into different tracks with different settings depending on where in the song that part is and what needs to be going on or even manually as the track is playing if you are mixing through some form of external summing piece and recording back into the DAW.
You need to decide what is the most important aspect of the song at any given point and what needs to shine through. If the guitar part is beautifully performed and guitarist gave the performance of his carreer and it happens to be at a point where the vocal is more important or it's during the keyboard solo then it may have to take a back seat no matter how brilliantly played it was. Or you have to rearrange the song to let it be front and center.
Panning can sometimes help to move things away from each other and allow each aspect a little more of it's own space too if there is competition for the same frequencies.

However I would also echo M1s comment that if you need radical EQ correcton (aside from for a specific unatural effect) to make things work you should look at the tracking and arrangement of the piece things may need to be redone to a) get the best possible take that doesn't require a whole lot of EQ to fit in well b) correct masking if, due to the arrangement, there are too many things that are happening in the same musical register at the same time and cant' be forced to sit nicely together.

 

[dementedchord]

good quetions... you've been thinking about it obviously... as to the first... imo this a instance where eq is probably not the right tool... attack is a dynamics problem not freq issue... try a compressor with a slow attack and modest ratio then use alittle make up gain...

second bring the others down...

 

[mixsit]

..Say we want to add attack to a bass. Instead of boosting the attack frequency on the bass, we can attenuate the same frequency on masking instruments, as showed in this picture:

View attachment 59108

However, by attenuating a frequency on an instrument so we can improve another instrument, wouldn´t we be "impairing" the first instrument´s quality?

Yes, I would say first off that at least looking at 'what there is too much of' is a valid way to approach eq and can represent a large portion of eq technique in general. However I'm not sure about the thought of it impairing'. Perhaps, but more often I suppose it could be simply a case of making 'the better mix.

For instance, if we attenuate a frequency of the guitar so we can improve the backing vocals, the guitar will no longer sound the way it did before this attenuation.

To make the same case again, a) it is not sounds necessarily in an isolated context that are important but their roll and fit in the mix, and b) there may also be other ways besides eq to resolve a conflict.

So I ask, is it a matter of considering both parts and favor the one we think is more important ?
In this case, the whole song would be affected just because some important yet short part of the arrangement.

Two things there; It doesn't have to be seen only as a compromise, yes some are chosen to be featured' or more important, but still all parts are playing their supporting roll so..
..and now you've introduced a temporary' roll factor..

Or is this achieved by eq using automation, and changing equalization only temporarily, during that specific part of the song, then bringing it back to the previous settings ?

Not all that often but sure, why not?

In wich case equalization would be a an always changing process, varying during the song, wich would make it really hard to keep tracking of things, since others intruments would also be affected in the process, then every change would require additional changes to those other intruments.

More likely I think volume moves a lot ('mixing is moving faders), and we use many other tools, sometimes including eq automation.

Question 02...Or to create copies of the vocal tracks untill everything sounds more even, then bounce it to a single vocal track ?

Copies (straight simple copies) combine add to volume -just like raising the fader (or lowering some other things that are too loud.