Do Most of You Steer Away from EQ?

[domo peace]

If you do not - do you use a guide of instruments vs. frequencies you start off with?

I tracked vocals straight in with compression and have gotten some nice results. The voices blend a little too much with the piano.

I'm thinking of redoing the piano take with a different tone.

[seaneldon]

The best "guide" you have is your ears. No chart or presets will come close.

I slice and dice with EQ quite a bit as a track, though microphone selection and positioning is your best and most transparent form of equalization. Still, if I get the mic in the right place, EQ can finish the job to make something poke out from other frequency-related instruments.

Perhaps the vocal blends with the piano too much because they're both the same exact volume all the time, maybe a bit overcompressed? Don't be afraid of putting the vocal a little louder than you want to...the vocal will drive the song and nothing should step on it (unless the vocal isn't any good, of course).

[domo peace]

The best "guide" you have is your ears. No chart or presets will come close.

I slice and dice with EQ quite a bit as a track, though microphone selection and positioning is your best and most transparent form of equalization. Still, if I get the mic in the right place, EQ can finish the job to make something poke out from other frequency-related instruments.

Perhaps the vocal blends with the piano too much because they're both the same exact volume all the time, maybe a bit overcompressed? Don't be afraid of putting the vocal a little louder than you want to...the vocal will drive the song and nothing should step on it (unless the vocal isn't any good, of course).




I think I just need to drop the piano volume a bit. Piano was also recorded before the vocals so I may re-record them and play around the vocals more as far as dynamics go.

Compressed going in the the PBC (maybe it is a bit overcompressed) - DAMN! I'll try the piano first as I really dig the takes.

[Mixwell]

Context is king

[Zachg]

Whatever sounds the best is the best. If your not on the clock, why not try re-recording the piano, as well as eq the original take and compare results, then let the ears be the judge. I definately agree with Mixwell, make it sound as good as possible in context with the song, don't worry about the sounds individulally as much.

Hope this helps a bit,

Zach

[AndrewHutchinson]

In my experience, EQ can help tracks sit better in the mix without sacrificing dynamic range. Especially if you use a "dynamic eq" plugin," which is, i guess a more advanced side-chained comp. If I'm trying to fit instruments into the mix and I don't want to crush it, EQ is my best friend. I've been reading "Make Mine Music" by Bruce Swedien, and, I guess, it's been rubbing off on me. He keeps talking about EQ instead of compression, and mic placement instead of EQ'ing. Good advice for all of us, in my opinion.

[AndrewHutchinson]

P.S., It doesn't hurt that he's been able to put U47's, M49's and RCA ribbons in front of Duke Ellington, Count Basie and Michael Jackson amongst many others. If we could all be so lucky.
edit: Michael Jackson sang through a SM7, in case any fellow nerds were about to call me on that point.

[domo peace]

Whatever sounds the best is the best. If your not on the clock, why not try re-recording the piano, as well as eq the original take and compare results, then let the ears be the judge. I definately agree with Mixwell, make it sound as good as possible in context with the song, don't worry about the sounds individulally as much.

Hope this helps a bit,

Zach


I'm definitely going to re-record the piano part and EQ the original take (saving both separately).

[domo peace]

In my experience, EQ can help tracks sit better in the mix without sacrificing dynamic range. Especially if you use a "dynamic eq" plugin," which is, i guess a more advanced side-chained comp. If I'm trying to fit instruments into the mix and I don't want to crush it, EQ is my best friend. I've been reading "Make Mine Music" by Bruce Swedien, and, I guess, it's been rubbing off on me. He keeps talking about EQ instead of compression, and mic placement instead of EQ'ing. Good advice for all of us, in my opinion.


I've been trying to minimize anything effecting the sound for sure. With an 18 month old it's tough to find time so it just draws out the process of finishing an album (which is fine).

It's amazing how I'll do a demo take and like it better than my newly recorded, produced version. It's also amazing how the vibe of the tune changes with very little changes in arrangement. I'll just have to really take my time and work the tracks without effects if possible.

[Sandyrb]

Do Most of You Steer Away from EQ?

I record without EQ most of the time. Also, if I do use EQ, I set myself a limit - no more than 4dB cut or boost on anything. This being said there are sometimes exceptions! :)

As the name of the forum implies, moving the mics is everything. Actually this morning I was demonstrating this principle to a Work Ed lass. She brought her own guitar and sat there playing it while I piped it through the cans. Then we moved the mic to several different positions so she could hear the difference. She was amazed at how just turning it a few degrees could radically alter the sound.

I think my main use of EQ, as has already been alluded to in this thread, is to "layer" things which have conflicting frequency ranges and sort out any clashes whilst mixing. Coincidentally I have been mixing an album recently which has a lot of piano and vocal. In general this is a bit of a problem but I find the roughly average frequency of the vocal, drop that out of the piano and they fit just fine. Usually just a couple of dB cut from the piano is more than enough.

Hope your new piano track works out okay! :)

Cheers,

[CaptainHook]

I've found more and more lately i don't really 'think' about what i do much anymore.
I just act and react.

[domo peace]

I record without EQ most of the time. Also, if I do use EQ, I set myself a limit - no more than 4dB cut or boost on anything. This being said there are sometimes exceptions! :)

As the name of the forum implies, moving the mics is everything. Actually this morning I was demonstrating this principle to a Work Ed lass. She brought her own guitar and sat there playing it while I piped it through the cans. Then we moved the mic to several different positions so she could hear the difference. She was amazed at how just turning it a few degrees could radically alter the sound.

I think my main use of EQ, as has already been alluded to in this thread, is to "layer" things which have conflicting frequency ranges and sort out any clashes whilst mixing. Coincidentally I have been mixing an album recently which has a lot of piano and vocal. In general this is a bit of a problem but I find the roughly average frequency of the vocal, drop that out of the piano and they fit just fine. Usually just a couple of dB cut from the piano is more than enough.

Hope your new piano track works out okay! :)

Cheers,

All of what you're saying totally makes sense. Thanks for the input.

Recording alone is stinky (maybe I need to get somebody involved when I'm setting up the mics). Tough to move the mics and hear the options going back and forth from one room to the next.

[Tomasz]

Recording alone is stinky (maybe I need to get somebody involved when I'm setting up the mics). Tough to move the mics and hear the options going back and forth from one room to the next.

If I have no help and I'm tracking, say, guitar overdubs, I'll put on cans and have the player play in the control room in front of the monitors "listening" for his/her magical tone while I am slowly moving the mics. I tell the player to stop playing when the tone is "IT" The silence is my cue to stop moving the mic(s)....
As far as general EQ tactics, I like to capture the instrument as it actually sounds, or how the artist thinks it should sound, without EQ if possible. moving/changing mics, changing preamps/ settings. Then I'll EQ if necessary during the mix to make sure there is clarity etc...
only one rule: if it sounds good, it is good.

[domo peace]

If I have no help and I'm tracking, say, guitar overdubs, I'll put on cans and have the player play in the control room in front of the monitors "listening" for his/her magical tone while I am slowly moving the mics. I tell the player to stop playing when the tone is "IT" The silence is my cue to stop moving the mic(s)....
As far as general EQ tactics, I like to capture the instrument as it actually sounds, or how the artist thinks it should sound, without EQ if possible. moving/changing mics, changing preamps/ settings. Then I'll EQ if necessary during the mix to make sure there is clarity etc...
only one rule: if it sounds good, it is good.

Thanks again for everybody's help. Your thoughts make sense.

The one thing that I lack is monitors. Currently using a stereo and getting decent results.


Thanks again, guys.

[pauly]

i almost never record with eq, 80% of the time i get it right with the correct mic and moving it around. sometimes i'll change the mic. when i do use eq it's mostly shading and is often just to make room for another instrument to have some space. i do think a high pass or low cut should be standard on all preamps, that would be the only eq i would normally do during tracking.

the biggest reason i dont eq when i track is most projects i do are not a live band playing in a room, the drums get done then everything gets layered. if i recorded each player in a 5 piece rock band and cut and boost and tried to make things peak i would have a mess. i think with more experience i would do more and i know guys are making killer records carving shit as they go. compression on the other hand i will track with compression but usually just a db or 3, a little more on bass, not too crazzy cause i cant remember where my uncompress box went.

i dont think i answered your initial post...no i dont steer away from eq, but its mostly shading.

[pauly]

He keeps talking about EQ instead of compression, and mic placement instead of EQ'ing. Good advice for all of us, in my opinion.

great advise, obviously bruce swedien know's his shit and if i ever have half his success recording and mixing than i did well. but sometimes i like compression rather than eq or use compression for the sonic footprint, 1176, la2a ,germanium, distressors etc.. but maybe i should just read the book so i dont sound like an:moon:

[Chuchi]

Ciao a tutti,

I'd like to post the following sample in order to get some of your comments.
All tracks of the Guitars were played with a Gibson ES-150, tomastik flatwound strings swing series.

Vocal has been recorded with a Microtech Gefell UM 70 S (thanks Adam) and copied for a stereo effect.
Preamp Mercury M76/m1 for vocals and Universal audio Twin Finity 710 as DI,
Audio Interface StudioKonnekt SK 48.
I have tried to add some effects using EQ on the voice, and guitar and some compression.I have to confess that I am not very satisfied but do not understand what should be changed to improve this mix..
This is a song from Nougaro called Les dons Juans.

I tried to find places in the space for the various sounds but I find that the result is not very good. The sound misses presence and air and the voice is not very defined. :mad:
I do find that the mix is not very aerial ..so, any suggestion would be welcomed.;)


In addition, I don't know why, there are some bugs in the tempo and synchronisation at the beginning of the song, probably my Imac was already overloaded...
After your comments I plan to record again since this was dedicated to understand the plugins and then...I've been kept by music....

[Sandyrb]

Ciao Chuchi.

the voice is not very defined.

Okay, I can hear two problems immediately.

1) The singer should learn to sing as though he means it. He mumbles and thus is not well defined.
2) He's so close to the microphone I can almost hear his tonsils rattling.

In the case of the latter it would be no surprise that the voice doesn't sound "airy" because there's absolutely NO air between the singer and the mic. Back him off by a foot and you might start to get some definition.

Apart from that... what's wrong? I think it sounds pretty good. :)

Spero che questo aiuti. Soggiorno incoraggiante! :)

Cheers,

[Chuchi]

Ciao Sandy,

Vedo che parli italiano più, io sono un belga francofono e lavoro in Parma, dunque dovevo imparare..:)

Grazie mille....i tuoi commenti sono molto interessanti...:rolleyes:
Più sono facili da applicare: Sono il chitarrista ed anche il cantante...:o

Vado a provare oggi

Chuchi

[Sandyrb]

Vedo che parli italiano più, io sono un belga francofono e lavoro in Parma, dunque dovevo imparare.

Right, right, I see. So you speak all three? Wow. I think probably we should stick to English now though, so everyone else doesn't think we're talking about them! ;)

[Just so everyone knows, Chuchi is explaining that he's a French speaking Belgian who had to learn Italian for his job in Parma.]

Let us know how you get on. :)

Cheers,

[Chuchi]

I also speak 2 additional..:cool:
But sure, sure, English is my working language and I feel more comfortable to explain my distress and share my lack of knowledge in English...:(

Ciao a tutti

Chuchi;)

[hardtoe]

If you do not - do you use a guide of instruments vs. frequencies you start off with?

I tracked vocals straight in with compression and have gotten some nice results. The voices blend a little too much with the piano.

I'm thinking of redoing the piano take with a different tone.

I have been mixing some piano and voice stuff lately (suprisingly challenging) and for a track I was trying to get to sit right yesterday, it was very helpful to have a couple of db of compression on the piano triggered by the vocal - dipped it down just enough to give clarity to the vox without pumping the piano obviously...(or having the vocal sit on top of the track)

[Weiss-Sound]

I would just like to devil's advocate and say that moving mics is not necessarily "transparent." You change more than the frequency curve. You also change the amount of room content, the amount of natural compression the mic does, in the case of vocals moving the mic can effect the performance, and you change the frequency RESPONSE which is not linear - all of these can be for the better or for the worse. Once I find a placement that is working for the source and for the context I feel very much inclined to do any further tone balancing with eq (or compression) - because of all the things stated above, and because most sessions are somewhat time dependent.

My rule of thumb is once something works: Stop! If it needs reworking later, fine. I'm pretty sure my studio has these big expensive EQs for some reason.

A dab of EQ is usually pretty transparent - even in relatively cheap eqs. There's a certain point where eqing, particularly in boost mode, starts to "cartoon" the sound. EQ, imo, is only artificial when it's used to compensate for something that isn't really present in the sound - and that's where getting the mic placement just right is imperative.

I think the biggest misuse of EQ is in separation. First, I philosophically disagree that separation is always the goal. Sometimes things should blend together and form one full, hard to identify sound. I find that 1: Volume, 2: Imaging, get the most separation, and any remaining separation needed could be accomplished with compression, eq, special effects, and spatial effects - depending on what the mix dictates.

[Warhead]

Mic selection first as mentioned, but I find EQ to be a great way to build the mix like a puzzle...which really is what it is. Everything has to fit together, in solo certain things may sound "small" or "dark" but in context they make sense. If you can carve things up with an outboard EQ while tracking, making space each time, in the end you can push up the faders and voila...it's almost already mixed already, all ready!

Regardless of style of music however, I never EQ vocals (mic selection is as close to 100% as I can get). In case overdubs or punch ins are needed later it makes it that much harder to recall and match. Vocal tracks don't really benefit from being EQ'd twice either, like drums can for example.

With sparse acoustic based stuff I typically don't EQ much or at all, I'm talking about more dense rock / pop based stuff that is complex.

Having said that I wish Tracy Chapman or Jack Johnson would come by my humble little place so I could record and mix them...a little trap kit that rarely even has tom-tom fills and an acoustic guitar, bass and maybe one vocal...that would make me look like a genius.

War ;)