Understanding EQ / Everthing in its own space
- Thread starter Tim20
- Start date
- Status
Just kidding. It is nice to see so many people jump in and contribute their ideas to one thread.
E
EL_HOlandes
Guest
tips hiphop:
cut off eq below 800 hz for hats
+ 75. 50. 90 hz : kick
- 400 hz for kick: bass increase in the same spot
- 800 hz for kick; 2 or 4 db
bass: + 400; -50; +3000 hz for pluck increase
low cut filter at 60 hz
vocals: low cut at 75 hz
cut off eq below 800 hz for hats
+ 75. 50. 90 hz : kick
- 400 hz for kick: bass increase in the same spot
- 800 hz for kick; 2 or 4 db
bass: + 400; -50; +3000 hz for pluck increase
low cut filter at 60 hz
vocals: low cut at 75 hz
zentatonic
New member
I have one for you:
In CEP, there's a "scientific filters" FX mode.
It enables you to apply low and highpass filters to tracks...
But includes options for "phase" or "delay" in the filter. (I tried 'em both and heard no phaser or delay...)
It also says something about "11th order", "12th order", etc...
Can someone explain what these options do?
Regardless, I applied the highpass filter at 100 hz on "12th order" and "delay" to my guitar and vox, and it cleaned up my mixes something magical...
In CEP, there's a "scientific filters" FX mode.
It enables you to apply low and highpass filters to tracks...
But includes options for "phase" or "delay" in the filter. (I tried 'em both and heard no phaser or delay...)
It also says something about "11th order", "12th order", etc...
Can someone explain what these options do?
Regardless, I applied the highpass filter at 100 hz on "12th order" and "delay" to my guitar and vox, and it cleaned up my mixes something magical...
E
EL_HOlandes
Guest
Hi
I found this site:
Most of us have been familiar with EQs since long before we ever started recording audio in our home studios. The presence of EQs on home and car stereos has made it seem like we have a grasp on what they do and how to use them to improve the sound of our recordings. However, applying EQ appropriately to a stereo mix and using EQ to add definition and clarity in a multitrack recording are indeed, two different things entirely. In order to achieve the latter, you must gain a working knowledge of EQ Theory.
How many times have you mixed your latest number one hit only to find that the vocals seem buried in the mix? To bring them out more, you just need to turn them up a little, right? Well, not necessarily. In fact, doing this most often just places that vocal "on top” of your mix. The result sounds like two completely separate recording playing at the same time; one of the band, and one of the vocals. How do you get the vocals to sit "in” the mix without fighting with other tracks? How do you get that bass guitar to still be nice and bottom heavy and still hear the kick drum punching through? How do you make that sax solo pop out front without piercing your ear drums? You guessed it. EQ.
Proper use of compression, panning and levels all contribute to this goal as well, but EQ will provide much of the groundwork for what we’re trying to achieve.
EQ Theory
First, it's important to understand that your mix (or any recorded sound) is nothing more than a bunch of frequencies that hit various amplitudes over the course of a timeline. The human ear is capable of hearing frequencies in the range from about 20Hz up to about 20,000Hz (20k). Everything audible in a recording falls somewhere in this range or thereabouts and a given instrument (or any other sound) will occupy certain frequencies more dominantly than others. For example, a hi-hat cymbal would have significant amplitude (volume) between around 3k to 5k and would have virtually no amplitude at 30Hz. Likewise, a bass guitar will have a lot of amplitude around 80Hz and next to none at 10k. So, if you apply this theory across all of the tracks in your mix, you can imagine how each track (instrument, voice) will primarily occupy a certain range of frequencies. Most any track will have a dominant frequency range that constitutes the "meat" of the sound. They will also occupy other frequencies in less significant amplitudes that make up some of the characteristics of the sound. For example, the "boom" of a kick drum might be around 60Hz while the "attack" might be around 2k. So, when you mix, you're not just mixing several instruments together. Your mixing the frequency ranges of multiple sound sources. Many of these sound sources will occupy overlapping frequency ranges. If two sounds are trying to occupy the same frequency at similar amplitudes, they will fight with each other creating a muddy sound and losing definition from both sound sources.
Imagine you’re in line to get into a concert. There are ten lines all running side by side and at the front of each line is the ticket-taker and a turnstile. As long as everyone goes one at a time, the lines continue to move nicely. But what if the guy behind you tries to go through the turnstile at the same time as you? If you let him pass, no problem. But if you both try to push through the turnstile with the same strength at the same time, you both end up stuck in the turnstile, detained by security and missing the opening song of the show! This is not unlike what happens in your mix when two sounds (tracks) are competing for the same frequencies. They jumble themselves together and you never hear either of them clearly. Think of your mix as 180,000 lines (20Hz to 20Khz) to get into your ears.
Notching Out
Now that you have a basic understanding of EQ Theory, let’s look at how you make sure everyone is waiting for their turn in the lines; Notching Out. Let’s just jump right in to an example. My voice usually sits "primarily” around 2.1k to 2.5k. If I also have a guitar track that includes the same range, the two tracks will step on each other. The vocal doesn’t get a chance to shine through on it’s own because that guitar track is trying to force his way through the line at the same time with the same force.
This graph maps the average amplitude and frequencies of two tracks in a mix. Notice the similar amplitudes in the frequencies from around 2K to 2.5K. Which track gets heard here? This struggle causes muddiness in the mix.
To fix this, some might just turn up the vocal track. But, as I stated earlier, this won't really fix it. What will happen is that the vocal will sit "on top" of the guitar. That's not what we want. We want the vocal sit along side of the guitar. So, we notch out the guitar track for the vocals. By applying an EQ to the guitar track and reducing the volume of the frequencies in that 2.1k to 2.5k range, the vocal ends up louder than the guitar ONLY in that range. The other frequencies that the guitar occupies are left alone. So now, the guitar track and the vocal track can stay at fairly even volumes to one another without losing clarity in the vocals. Make sense?
Now, the guitar track has been "notched out" between around 2K to 2.K. This creates an opening that the vocal can sit in allowing both tracks to co-exist without fighting each other.
You can apply this concept throughout your mix to help create better definition between tracks and to allow every track to have its own place in the mix. As another example, I always roll off everything below about 80Hz on a guitar track and just let the bass fill that void. When I listen to the that guitar track by itself, it might sound a little thin, but when the bass is playing along with it, the two sit along side of each other allowing both to be heard clearly. As you apply this approach across your mix, you will begin to see how it can clean everything up by reducing the amount of overlapping frequencies from track to track.
In this mix, the guitar track has been notched out for the vocals and rolled off for the bass. The bass has been notched out for the kick drum. As a result, all four tracks have their own place in the mix and no tracks are fighting each other in the upper amplitudes.
Cutting the Notch
So, exactly how do you do this? Well, some basic understanding of how EQs work is imperative. There are a few good articles in the Recording Tips section on that, so I won't go into too much detail here, but I'll give you the basics. All you really need to do is apply an EQ to the track you wish to notch out. If the track already has an EQ on it, then you're one step ahead of the game. Select a band that is near the range you wish to notch out. Pull the gain for that band down 3 - 4 db. Set the Q or bandwidth to be around 1 octave. Different EQs use different values for this, but basically, you only want the Q about as wide as the range you wish to notch out. Then you just sweep the frequency of the band around the range you're looking to notch out until you hear that you've hit the pocket.
In this example, a paragraphic EQ is used to notch out a tight hole at 750hz and to roll off everything above 12Khz.
This can take a little ear training to recognize the difference since it can be fairly subtle. But once you find it, you should be able to hear a noticeable improvement in the clarity and definition of the track you're notching out for (this would be the vocal track in the example above).
Use Your Ears
After all, we’re working with audio here! I’m making mention of this seemingly obvious point because with the plethora of software based EQs and visual displays, it’s easy to begin "looking" at your mix instead of listening to it. Use the visual references to better understand what your doing, but listen carefully to the way you’re effecting the sound. Notching out the wrong frequencies will not only fail to accomplish our goal of creating more definition between tracks, but will also rob the track of frequencies that may be important to the character of the sound.
Finally
Ok, I’m going to shut up now and let you get back to mixing. I’m confident that once you start using these concepts and techniques in your mixes, you will notice a dramatic improvement the sound. Your recordings will begin to "open up" and individual tracks will start to reveal themselves more clearly. Subtleties that were once buried under other tracks will come through and add character and your vocals and instrument solos will sit right "in" the mix and no longer sound "pasted on." So, listen carefully to your mix and then get in there and demand that all of those frequencies wait for their turn in line.
User-submitted comments
excelant work blue - Noize2u - May 13, 2003 08:20 pm
Well let me be the first to make a comment. Well done dude. I like the graphics and all. You have doen this in a very clear and understandable fashion, and it should help every level of musician trying to get the right sound out of his mix.
Peace,
Noize 2 U
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos - GuitarLord - Jul 29, 2003 10:13 pm
While I had a decent understanding of how EQ's worked, the graphics really brought the point home. Helluva job blue!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powered by dB Masters Multimedia. Copyright ©2003 Home Recording Connection. All rights reserved.
The following addresses are spamtraps for the Harvestor Project. Do not use them or you will be banned from hundreds of web sites
Webmaster Editor Sales
I found this site:
Most of us have been familiar with EQs since long before we ever started recording audio in our home studios. The presence of EQs on home and car stereos has made it seem like we have a grasp on what they do and how to use them to improve the sound of our recordings. However, applying EQ appropriately to a stereo mix and using EQ to add definition and clarity in a multitrack recording are indeed, two different things entirely. In order to achieve the latter, you must gain a working knowledge of EQ Theory.
How many times have you mixed your latest number one hit only to find that the vocals seem buried in the mix? To bring them out more, you just need to turn them up a little, right? Well, not necessarily. In fact, doing this most often just places that vocal "on top” of your mix. The result sounds like two completely separate recording playing at the same time; one of the band, and one of the vocals. How do you get the vocals to sit "in” the mix without fighting with other tracks? How do you get that bass guitar to still be nice and bottom heavy and still hear the kick drum punching through? How do you make that sax solo pop out front without piercing your ear drums? You guessed it. EQ.
Proper use of compression, panning and levels all contribute to this goal as well, but EQ will provide much of the groundwork for what we’re trying to achieve.
EQ Theory
First, it's important to understand that your mix (or any recorded sound) is nothing more than a bunch of frequencies that hit various amplitudes over the course of a timeline. The human ear is capable of hearing frequencies in the range from about 20Hz up to about 20,000Hz (20k). Everything audible in a recording falls somewhere in this range or thereabouts and a given instrument (or any other sound) will occupy certain frequencies more dominantly than others. For example, a hi-hat cymbal would have significant amplitude (volume) between around 3k to 5k and would have virtually no amplitude at 30Hz. Likewise, a bass guitar will have a lot of amplitude around 80Hz and next to none at 10k. So, if you apply this theory across all of the tracks in your mix, you can imagine how each track (instrument, voice) will primarily occupy a certain range of frequencies. Most any track will have a dominant frequency range that constitutes the "meat" of the sound. They will also occupy other frequencies in less significant amplitudes that make up some of the characteristics of the sound. For example, the "boom" of a kick drum might be around 60Hz while the "attack" might be around 2k. So, when you mix, you're not just mixing several instruments together. Your mixing the frequency ranges of multiple sound sources. Many of these sound sources will occupy overlapping frequency ranges. If two sounds are trying to occupy the same frequency at similar amplitudes, they will fight with each other creating a muddy sound and losing definition from both sound sources.
Imagine you’re in line to get into a concert. There are ten lines all running side by side and at the front of each line is the ticket-taker and a turnstile. As long as everyone goes one at a time, the lines continue to move nicely. But what if the guy behind you tries to go through the turnstile at the same time as you? If you let him pass, no problem. But if you both try to push through the turnstile with the same strength at the same time, you both end up stuck in the turnstile, detained by security and missing the opening song of the show! This is not unlike what happens in your mix when two sounds (tracks) are competing for the same frequencies. They jumble themselves together and you never hear either of them clearly. Think of your mix as 180,000 lines (20Hz to 20Khz) to get into your ears.
Notching Out
Now that you have a basic understanding of EQ Theory, let’s look at how you make sure everyone is waiting for their turn in the lines; Notching Out. Let’s just jump right in to an example. My voice usually sits "primarily” around 2.1k to 2.5k. If I also have a guitar track that includes the same range, the two tracks will step on each other. The vocal doesn’t get a chance to shine through on it’s own because that guitar track is trying to force his way through the line at the same time with the same force.
This graph maps the average amplitude and frequencies of two tracks in a mix. Notice the similar amplitudes in the frequencies from around 2K to 2.5K. Which track gets heard here? This struggle causes muddiness in the mix.
To fix this, some might just turn up the vocal track. But, as I stated earlier, this won't really fix it. What will happen is that the vocal will sit "on top" of the guitar. That's not what we want. We want the vocal sit along side of the guitar. So, we notch out the guitar track for the vocals. By applying an EQ to the guitar track and reducing the volume of the frequencies in that 2.1k to 2.5k range, the vocal ends up louder than the guitar ONLY in that range. The other frequencies that the guitar occupies are left alone. So now, the guitar track and the vocal track can stay at fairly even volumes to one another without losing clarity in the vocals. Make sense?
Now, the guitar track has been "notched out" between around 2K to 2.K. This creates an opening that the vocal can sit in allowing both tracks to co-exist without fighting each other.
You can apply this concept throughout your mix to help create better definition between tracks and to allow every track to have its own place in the mix. As another example, I always roll off everything below about 80Hz on a guitar track and just let the bass fill that void. When I listen to the that guitar track by itself, it might sound a little thin, but when the bass is playing along with it, the two sit along side of each other allowing both to be heard clearly. As you apply this approach across your mix, you will begin to see how it can clean everything up by reducing the amount of overlapping frequencies from track to track.
In this mix, the guitar track has been notched out for the vocals and rolled off for the bass. The bass has been notched out for the kick drum. As a result, all four tracks have their own place in the mix and no tracks are fighting each other in the upper amplitudes.
Cutting the Notch
So, exactly how do you do this? Well, some basic understanding of how EQs work is imperative. There are a few good articles in the Recording Tips section on that, so I won't go into too much detail here, but I'll give you the basics. All you really need to do is apply an EQ to the track you wish to notch out. If the track already has an EQ on it, then you're one step ahead of the game. Select a band that is near the range you wish to notch out. Pull the gain for that band down 3 - 4 db. Set the Q or bandwidth to be around 1 octave. Different EQs use different values for this, but basically, you only want the Q about as wide as the range you wish to notch out. Then you just sweep the frequency of the band around the range you're looking to notch out until you hear that you've hit the pocket.
In this example, a paragraphic EQ is used to notch out a tight hole at 750hz and to roll off everything above 12Khz.
This can take a little ear training to recognize the difference since it can be fairly subtle. But once you find it, you should be able to hear a noticeable improvement in the clarity and definition of the track you're notching out for (this would be the vocal track in the example above).
Use Your Ears
After all, we’re working with audio here! I’m making mention of this seemingly obvious point because with the plethora of software based EQs and visual displays, it’s easy to begin "looking" at your mix instead of listening to it. Use the visual references to better understand what your doing, but listen carefully to the way you’re effecting the sound. Notching out the wrong frequencies will not only fail to accomplish our goal of creating more definition between tracks, but will also rob the track of frequencies that may be important to the character of the sound.
Finally
Ok, I’m going to shut up now and let you get back to mixing. I’m confident that once you start using these concepts and techniques in your mixes, you will notice a dramatic improvement the sound. Your recordings will begin to "open up" and individual tracks will start to reveal themselves more clearly. Subtleties that were once buried under other tracks will come through and add character and your vocals and instrument solos will sit right "in" the mix and no longer sound "pasted on." So, listen carefully to your mix and then get in there and demand that all of those frequencies wait for their turn in line.
User-submitted comments
excelant work blue - Noize2u - May 13, 2003 08:20 pm
Well let me be the first to make a comment. Well done dude. I like the graphics and all. You have doen this in a very clear and understandable fashion, and it should help every level of musician trying to get the right sound out of his mix.
Peace,
Noize 2 U
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos - GuitarLord - Jul 29, 2003 10:13 pm
While I had a decent understanding of how EQ's worked, the graphics really brought the point home. Helluva job blue!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Powered by dB Masters Multimedia. Copyright ©2003 Home Recording Connection. All rights reserved.
The following addresses are spamtraps for the Harvestor Project. Do not use them or you will be banned from hundreds of web sites
Webmaster Editor Sales
allrigthy then
I must admit, nice topic, but on the other hand, if you're interested in this kind of stuff… it's just theory, you can find everything in a simple book for engineers… and then you have also pictures with it, visual placement of instruments etc… I don't say this topic isn't interesting but…
anyway, at least now you don't have to buy these expensive books to know these things 
I must admit, nice topic, but on the other hand, if you're interested in this kind of stuff… it's just theory, you can find everything in a simple book for engineers… and then you have also pictures with it, visual placement of instruments etc… I don't say this topic isn't interesting but…
anyway, at least now you don't have to buy these expensive books to know these things 
I think you mean parametric, not panaramic. This type allows you to select the "Q", basically the bandwidth and the boost or cut the frequency.
By bandwidth, I mean how much of a frequency range will be included in the boost/cut.
Graphic is just that graphic, and that is seperated into bands. Each knob will only boost/cut that band and you can see a graphic display of what you are doing.
A single parametric in essence takes all of the knobs of the graphic and rolls them into 2: Q and boost/cut.
On top of that there are shelving types which can be referred to as high band pass and low band pass.
If all of this is hard to understand, do a google search on EQ's and just read all of them you can. Most articles include some pictures which make this easier to understand.
By bandwidth, I mean how much of a frequency range will be included in the boost/cut.
Graphic is just that graphic, and that is seperated into bands. Each knob will only boost/cut that band and you can see a graphic display of what you are doing.
A single parametric in essence takes all of the knobs of the graphic and rolls them into 2: Q and boost/cut.
On top of that there are shelving types which can be referred to as high band pass and low band pass.
If all of this is hard to understand, do a google search on EQ's and just read all of them you can. Most articles include some pictures which make this easier to understand.
T
TitoRicci
Guest
This is exactly the info I was looking for today. All it takes is a simple search @ future producers. I copy and pasted hella pages off this thread to a word document, now I can enjoy a couple of hours of reading. This ought to help me with carving eq holes on the ole digirack.
Just a question. Should the kick & the snare be at the same volume, then eq'd? Any help would be the ish.
Thanx,
Tito
Just a question. Should the kick & the snare be at the same volume, then eq'd? Any help would be the ish.
Thanx,
Tito
J
junk126
Guest
Very Informative and helpful
That was one of the most helpful posts I've ever read. I'm new to the forums, and I Registered after reading it. Thanks.
That was one of the most helpful posts I've ever read. I'm new to the forums, and I Registered after reading it. Thanks.
Laughing Boy
New member
The EQ tables are a great starting off point. They should give you some good guidelines to try. I'd say though, before reaching for the eq, push all the faders up and listen, see how things interact with one another, you certainly wouldn't add salt to soup before tasting it, eqing is the same. The least amount of eq you can get away with the better (too much eq, leads to smearing and phase shifting, unless of course you're going for a special effect). Also take a hard look at the arrangment, if there's too much info in any tonal range, you may have to take out a part or pan it, panning can help clean things up and help keep parts from fighting with one another. Also I've found subtractive eq to be more musically pleasing in most cases, though I've found that boosting around 250 hz works wonders for electric guitars (old Frank Zappa trick). But in my experience I can't stress enough the importance of getting it right in tracking, commit to sounds when recording. Make things sound great when you're recording. That will make eqing and mixing that much easier. Good luck and happy eqing.
C
ChristKilla
Guest
ROCK (or TRANCE or <insert your favorite genre here>) ON!
Great post. I'm new (only been doing it two-three months0) to the world recording/mixing/digital production and I have been searching for good information on EQ'in that was peppered with helpfull tips along with the scientific techno babbel
.I have been surfing the Net looking for this info for a while and I have seen some good tips here and there but this is, by far, the best (most comprehensive) thread on the subject that I have come across yet.
I have been compiling and editing the info I have found on the web and, once the doc is finished (with proper credits to all origional posters) if there is any interest I'll offer it up for anyone who wants all the info in an editd logical (hopefully) format - prolly as a PDF.
This thread impressed me so much that I have registered as a user here and will be coming back here frequently . Nice Site guys (and gals)!
ChristKilla
A
alien-embryo
Guest
That bit about using graphic eq's really helped me out. I had some strings with some buz in it and i've been using parametric and could take the buzz out but it sounded bad in the end. Turns out the q was too wide, trying out a graphic helped me understand a bit better.
I got a few questions from that.
Why is there 1 band and up to 10 band parametric equilizers, why would you use a 1 band when you could just use 10 and use what you need?
Are some eq's better than others? I know some really eat up resources does that make them better? For instance I tried ultrafunk eq which is fine and waves eq but then i tried some other ones like voxengo curve eq and just having one running nearly put my system to a halt.
I got a few questions from that.
Why is there 1 band and up to 10 band parametric equilizers, why would you use a 1 band when you could just use 10 and use what you need?
Are some eq's better than others? I know some really eat up resources does that make them better? For instance I tried ultrafunk eq which is fine and waves eq but then i tried some other ones like voxengo curve eq and just having one running nearly put my system to a halt.
F
fretsafire
Guest
alien-embryo
QUOTE: Why is there 1 band and up to 10 band parametric equilizers, why would you use a 1 band when you could just use 10 and use what you need?
In the digital world, it's processing power. If you use protools, this'll make sense... Plugins for Protools LE (real time plugins RTAS) are run by your CPU, the better and faster your CPU, the more plugins you can run. You'll see quickly that they can bog down your system without careful management. Think of a one band parametric eq. It has to analyze the digital audio signal, look at the settings you have on (what frequency, Q, cut/boost) and apply that to the audio signal that you are listening to, all pretty much in real time. Without getting too technical, there's a fair bit of processing involved with one instance of this parametric eq. we're talking about. Imagine this ten times on one track, that's one ten-band parametric eq. (although with software plugins, you can usually turn off as many bands as you want). Now put an eq on each channel on your mix, and to the master out, and that's a lot of processing for one cpu. That's why with the "pro" protools systems, you get outboard cards that aren't specifically designed for a particular task (eg - 4 band parametric EQ), but instead just have a processor, that your main cpu "farms" these instructions out to, to take the load off the cpu.
Here's something:
A manley massive passive eq will sound better than a dbx eq (the price tag shows it)
The sun will rise tomorrow
I'm pretty sure that both those things are true.
Software eq's aren't very expensive (not what i've seen - the voxengo curve is aruond$100), and just about any can do an excellent job on a mix.
Now that having been said, someone who has an excellent grasp on all the concepts presented so well earlier in this thread (thanks a lot everyone!!!) and a significant amount of experience can make a better mix on budget equipment than someone who just buys the most expensive stuff he can find, and expects the price tag to dial it in for him.
Basically, from what i've seen, knowledge is more powerful than having the "world's best equpment", so read read read, then practice!
Have a blast!
QUOTE: Why is there 1 band and up to 10 band parametric equilizers, why would you use a 1 band when you could just use 10 and use what you need?
In the digital world, it's processing power. If you use protools, this'll make sense... Plugins for Protools LE (real time plugins RTAS) are run by your CPU, the better and faster your CPU, the more plugins you can run. You'll see quickly that they can bog down your system without careful management. Think of a one band parametric eq. It has to analyze the digital audio signal, look at the settings you have on (what frequency, Q, cut/boost) and apply that to the audio signal that you are listening to, all pretty much in real time. Without getting too technical, there's a fair bit of processing involved with one instance of this parametric eq. we're talking about. Imagine this ten times on one track, that's one ten-band parametric eq. (although with software plugins, you can usually turn off as many bands as you want). Now put an eq on each channel on your mix, and to the master out, and that's a lot of processing for one cpu. That's why with the "pro" protools systems, you get outboard cards that aren't specifically designed for a particular task (eg - 4 band parametric EQ), but instead just have a processor, that your main cpu "farms" these instructions out to, to take the load off the cpu.
Here's something:
A manley massive passive eq will sound better than a dbx eq (the price tag shows it)
The sun will rise tomorrow
I'm pretty sure that both those things are true.
Software eq's aren't very expensive (not what i've seen - the voxengo curve is aruond$100), and just about any can do an excellent job on a mix.
Now that having been said, someone who has an excellent grasp on all the concepts presented so well earlier in this thread (thanks a lot everyone!!!) and a significant amount of experience can make a better mix on budget equipment than someone who just buys the most expensive stuff he can find, and expects the price tag to dial it in for him.
Basically, from what i've seen, knowledge is more powerful than having the "world's best equpment", so read read read, then practice!
Have a blast!
- Status