Clean Trick 4 your Mix

[TheMarksman]

I have always wonder how to get a clean mix so for the past couple months
i started cutting the lows..

in my instruments believe it or not there are still bits of unwanted frequency
on your instruments even lead sounds that muddy up the mix

I learned this trick at a recording class at the community college ,its called eq sweeping

the goal is to find the sweet spot for your sounds and eliminating the unwanted frequencies See the pic

I also have done this with my kick drum cutting the mid and treble ,now i know this is all bias as we produce all get unique with the kicks see pic
But this tremendously increases Clarity you will find that your mix is clear and you can hear your kick snare and hats much better

I also found that cutting frequency below 50 Hz will clean up everything and will increase cleanliness even in bass and sub i cut below 50hz

 

[sleepy]

The problem is usually now how, but why. Most people know how to sweep, eq, filter, etc... but not everyone understands why they should.

Which are the unwanted frequencies? If I have a Wurlitzer piano sound, perhaps the low end is not wanted. But maybe I want that low end because the rest of the track doesn't have anything else filling in that low end. Maybe is has a really nice mid-high end sound that you want. There are a lot of scenarios and endless possibilities.

And while there's nothing necessarily wrong with cutting a hi-hat, crash, or snare below 50hz, it's not always necessary. I wouldn't cut sub bass below 50hz.

If you have a TR707 kick and you cut the highs and mids, you take out the entire life of the kick; unless you actually wanted a muffled TR707 kick.

There are cases when I might do extreme filtering like in your examples, but that's only for one sound here and there. I don't mean to knock your post. I appreciate the sharing of information, but your technique will do more bad than good with most sounds.

 

[Czarkasm]

I am by no means an audio engineer or even a proficient mixer.

With that said, I have in the past tried to low cut most sounds except for the bass and kick. Even when I backed the low cut off, I would still find my mix to be thin.

While there are times when I still do use a low pass, multiple times in a mix, even, I found that some sounds just work better with a low shelf, where I lower the sound by a few db when I find a low cut makes it sound too thin.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

This is called high pass filtering (i have never heard anyone call it sweeping). What you did to the kick is low pass filtering.

While I can't hear the kick, I have to say that you have an absolute ludicrous cut on the kick. Do not tell people to do that. You're attenuating frequencies all the way down to 180. Unless it's an incredibly sub heavy kick, that makes no sense. And even then its still an absurd cut.

 

[njm255]

You don't have to completely cut a frequency every time. If the kick and say a piano are clashing at 400Hz you could clear things up by doing a small 2 or 3 dB dip at 400Hz on the kick. It doesn't have to be a complete low pass or high pass every time.

 

[bandcoach]

This is called high pass filtering (i have never heard anyone call it sweeping). What you did to the kick is low pass filtering.

While I can't hear the kick, I have to say that you have an absolute ludicrous cut on the kick. Do not tell people to do that. You're attenuating frequencies all the way down to 180. Unless it's an incredibly sub heavy kick, that makes no sense. And even then its still an absurd cut.

the process of selecting a parametric eq band and sweeping the center frequency to find the target of what you perceive to be a problem is common. And, yes, it is referred to as sweeping (sleepy using the term should have made you realise it was a common term in the industry)

Using it to define the corner frequency of a high or low pass filter is not necessarily a good idea, but it is as good a technique as any other

I agree with your criticisms of the specific application shown but without audio I have no idea if what has been done is justified or not

 

[Ametrine]

I too take out the frequencies in a majority of my synths below 50hz, but I would also never do that to the sub or the kick. That's where most of the power comes from. Personally, I think a better method of getting cleaner sounds is to just high-pass filter until the sound starts to change more than you need it to. Then you know you've hit the right point.

I tend to only EQ sweep around the high mid-range because I tend to get resonating frequencies in that area. If it's not too crazy, I'll just pull down where it's the most annoying.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

the process of selecting a parametric eq band and sweeping the center frequency to find the target of what you perceive to be a problem is common. And, yes, it is referred to as sweeping (sleepy using the term should have made you realise it was a common term in the industry)

Using it to define the corner frequency of a high or low pass filter is not necessarily a good idea, but it is as good a technique as any other

I agree with your criticisms of the specific application shown but without audio I have no idea if what has been done is justified or not

All I was saying was he made it sound like sweeping and filtering go hand in hand, which doesn't really make sense with a high pass filter, or even the giant shelf made to be a high pass filter.

As for the kick, like I said, I don't have the audio, but we don't want people that have never seen and LPF, HPF, or High and Low shelving to look at this thread and think they can make a cut that big.

 

[TheMarksman]

yeah sleepy that why i was its a bias cause sometimes if your making a heavy track with lots iof instruments its beneficial but yeah a wurlitzer would be one of those tricky instruments like a Hammond organ sound all those frequencies or beneficial but it depends how many sounds are in your song

 

[dvyce]

I am by no means an audio engineer or even a proficient mixer.

With that said, I have in the past tried to low cut most sounds except for the bass and kick. Even when I backed the low cut off, I would still find my mix to be thin.

While there are times when I still do use a low pass, multiple times in a mix, even, I found that some sounds just work better with a low shelf, where I lower the sound by a few db when I find a low cut makes it sound too thin.

then you are rolling off too much low end. I'm sure there is a bunch of low end you can roll off where you wouldn't even hear the difference.

 

[crimsonhawk47]

then you are rolling off too much low end. I'm sure there is a bunch of low end you can roll off where you wouldn't even hear the difference.

This is interesting because it seems to be a big debate.

I think when people say you can't do it, they assume we are high-passing all the way up to like 300.

Interesting excerpt from a Chris Carter interview (who obviously knows what he's doing if you haven't heard his stuff).

It seems like you keep a lot of sonic information in your records. What I mean is that it sounds like you don’t high pass or low pass very often. Am I right?

(chris) I don’t do that crap, [laughs] honest to God. I’ve never understood it when people talk about carving out space for things. I mean I’ve tried but it just sounds like shit every time. I know that there are mixing engineers that really stress that philosophy and have mixes that sound really incredible but I don’t know how the hell they do it. I just decided not to play that game. Honestly, I just work with the arrangement – I want everything to sound full. For example, I don’t think in terms of the synth needing to be separate from the bass and as a result cutting everything below 400 Hz. I’m cranking 10 kHz on bass lines all the time. What it comes down to is just working with the arrangement and figuring out how to make everything cut through and be present. When I high pass something, it’s strictly for the sound of that instrument and to make it sound better but not to make space for something else.

 

[dvyce]

The concept of "carving out space" is a bit of bullshit... I have said that here at least 1000 times.

but that is a completely different thing from rolling off unnecessary frequencies on a piece of audio. It has nothing necessarily to do with "carving out space"

 

[Unique B.]

You don't always want to cut all of the low end or cut all of the high end. You don't always want to sweep it all either. It's very depending on what you're doing with the track

 

[dvyce]

You don't always want to sweep it all either. It's very depending on what you're doing with the track

If you understood what "eq sweeping" is (it is explained in one of the first few posts, i believe) you'd understand that there is never a reason not to sweep the eq.

"sweeping" is simply referring to making a tight EQ peak and "sweeping" that frequency band back and forth from low to high, and high to low, and listening to the sound to determine what your relevant frequencies are regarding the selected piece of audio... it sounds like "weeeeaaaooowwwweeeeooowww"

After doing that, you can decide what, if anything, to do regarding eq.

But "sweeping" has no sonic effect on anything in your mix... so doing it is never harmful....

..plus, it's fun because it makes that cool "weeeeaaaooowwwweeeeooowww" noise!

 

[crimsonhawk47]

The concept of "carving out space" is a bit of bullshit... I have said that here at least 1000 times.

but that is a completely different thing from rolling off unnecessary frequencies on a piece of audio. It has nothing necessarily to do with "carving out space"

I think it would be beneficial for everyone if you go in deeper on this, because I really don't know what you mean.

Subtractive eq? I mean I get that you should have a good sound selection to begin with but surely you carve out a little space?

I'm experimenting with getting my levels sort of right, then switching to mono in one speaker, getting them right there, then using slight subtractive eq to make it a little clearer. I've heard this tip before, as it's supposed to get you to focus on the spectrum for a bit, then switch back to stereo for panning.

I'd just like to know why I shouldn't be carving out space.

 

[dvyce]

I think it would be beneficial for everyone if you go in deeper on this, because I really don't know what you mean.

Subtractive eq? I mean I get that you should have a good sound selection to begin with but surely you carve out a little space?

I'm experimenting with getting my levels sort of right, then switching to mono in one speaker, getting them right there, then using slight subtractive eq to make it a little clearer. I've heard this tip before, as it's supposed to get you to focus on the spectrum for a bit, then switch back to stereo for panning.

I'd just like to know why I shouldn't be carving out space.

sounds don't need to be "in their own space", per se...

You don't have to do things like eq instruments so they only occupy some frequency ranges that do not overlap.

You eq sounds so to bring out the best of that sound and minimize the worst of that sound... You eq sounds so they all sit well together...

Multiple sounds can coexist in the same frequency spectrum.

You can have a guitar, piano and a vocal (for example) that are all focused in the same frequency range... you don't need to "carve out" individual spaces for them.

Look at an orchestra... you have many many instruments that have huge overlaps in tonal areas... they all sit perfectly together. You have the extreme low like the tuba, contra-bassoon and the doublebass... you have the extreme highs like the piccolo flutes and the high metals... and you have everything in between and they all have huge overlaps of frequency ranges they occupy... you have flutes, violins, violas, clarinets, oboes, trumpets, french horns, saxophones all playing together in harmony.

To acheive a full spectrum of sound, you use a full spectrum of instruments... good arrangement is important...


You do not need to "carve out space"

The sounds occupy whatever frequency ranges they occupy. "Carving" them makes them into something they are not.

No technical reason for "space" purposes to do this... carve whatever you want if the reason is that you simply want whatever sound is gives you...

But it is not something that needs to be done for the purpose of "giving everything it's own space".

You achieve a full sounding mix with highs and lows and everything in between by choosing sounds that have those lows, mids and highs.


Eq however you want... additive... subtractive... distortion... saturation... whatever.

Do whatever sounds good.

but to say "space needs to be carved out" is a fallacy.

You can do whatever drastic or subtle eq you find pleasing to the ear... But don't think of your song like a garage that needs to be organized. You don't need to move the bass over here so you can fit the kick drum into the garage... and move the piano sample over here so you can squeeze the vocal and synth line in behind the old sleeping bag.

You go through your daily life hearing sounds of all areas on the frequency spectrum overlapping and it sounds fine.

"space" is not a thing.

It was not that long ago that the ability to eq every sound even existed!

all those classic songs that everybody loves and that so many people strive to be like and want to sample may very well have little to no eq at all on them at a track level.

There is never any reason to need a "chart" to eq or to know any "numbers".

EQ is not Tetris.

carve away... but not to make space.

 

[crimsonBZD]

I have always wonder how to get a clean mix so for the past couple months
i started cutting the lows..

in my instruments believe it or not there are still bits of unwanted frequency
on your instruments even lead sounds that muddy up the mix

I learned this trick at a recording class at the community college ,its called eq sweeping
...
I also found that cutting frequency below 50 Hz will clean up everything and will increase cleanliness even in bass and sub i cut below 50hz

g

Good info, I ended up just kind of doing this myself as I started mixing. Even beyond this, I've found that if your eq sweep is at the start of the chain, by the end of the chain you'll need to do it again to get a really fine tune on it.

 

[dvyce]

g

Good info, I ended up just kind of doing this myself as I started mixing. Even beyond this, I've found that if your eq sweep is at the start of the chain, by the end of the chain you'll need to do it again to get a really fine tune on it.

Ehhhh.... and this is supposed to mean what?

 

[crimsonhawk47]

Erm. I think he means if you sweep and cut a frequency at the beginning of a chain and then start adding stuff after it, it loses it's effect, which is only true if you have a plugin afterwards that is completely contradictory to your cut.

With regards to that dvyce post, I never thought about it that way, but what if you just truly couldn't hear something over something else? Like it's very obvious frequency masking and it's a stem that can't be re recorded. Wouldn't you say you are carving out space then? Or at that point do you just say panning is what makes the space?

 

[dvyce]

With regards to that dvyce post, I never thought about it that way, but what if you just truly couldn't hear something over something else? Like it's very obvious frequency masking and it's a stem that can't be re recorded. Wouldn't you say you are carving out space then? Or at that point do you just say panning is what makes the space?

I can't think of a situation where I couldn't actually hear one sound over another and it wasn't a levels issue...

It would probably be more of an issue of the mix being "muddy"... the solution would be to roll off and cut frequencies that are unnecessary... for example, if you have a piano track, you can probably roll off everything at least up to 200k and you wouldn't even notice the effect when the piano was soloed (and even more in the mix).

After you remove the garbage that clutters and you boost some areas of the fundamental frequencies, you will have created more definition in your sounds and, as a result, in your whole mix.

Also, no two sounds (unless they are the same sound) are actually "the same frequencies".... AND there is MUCH more to a sounds timbre than where it falls on a spectrum analyzer.


If you are not hearing things, i'd venture to guess that it is really an issue of your mix being bad overall... look at other sounds that you think are not related to the sound you can't hear.


can't get definition in your kick drum? think it is your bass that is "masking" it? think about how those unnecessary frequencies below 200k in the piano are ****ing with your kick drum... you can't HEAR those low freqs in the piano track, but there may be subsonic noise that is moving your speakers. Just because you can't hear it doesn't mean it's not there and doesn't mean it can't overdrive your master bus without you realizing it.



and remember... just because a track is THERE in your mix doesn't mean it SHOULD be there. Just because you played it doesn't mean it is magic gold. If it's not helping, its hurting. If a part is not blending, its conflicting... and i'll bet you it's not an EQ issue.