Proper EQing and Spectrum Analysers

electrogrimey

I think my EQing is one of my major problems in mixing down tracks and getting them to sound good, so I'm looking for some advice on what you guys do as regards EQing. I'm not talking about EQing instruments for tone, I mean EQing in order to avoid frequency crossover etc.

Do you use spectrum analysers? If so, what's your procedure?

How does one go about limiting a track to a specific frequency without ruining its sound?

Should I be EQing a track while solo'd, or with the other tracks playing?

Anima

I mean EQing in order to avoid frequency crossover etc

The best way to avoid that is to use sounds that don't overlap by much in the first place or by better arrangement. EQ'ing is supposed to help a bit, not completely fix something that just doesn't work in the first place.

How does one go about limiting a track to a specific frequency without ruining its sound?

Not sure what you mean by that, a well produced track will be well balanced in all areas.

Should I be EQing a track while solo'd, or with the other tracks playing?

EQ'ing I think is all about relative adjustments to other sounds, so you should EQ with at least 2 sounds playing at once I'd say.

Sky King

Not sure if I agree with that last statement, I find I need to EQ a track solo to get it sounding the way I want it to before I to slot it in nicely with other stuff.

I don't know about spectrum analysers, but I havent heard of bedroom producers (like me) using them... maybe the more professional folks are into that but you can get excellent results without it....

This page is savage for all your EQ knowledge requirements:
http://www.recordingwebsite.com/articles/eqprimer.php

ICN

I find my EQ'ing has got a lot better & is now based on musical choices. I'm also looking at he whole Freq.Spectrum & choosing / making sounds to fill gaps & avoid other elements. Layering in octaves & inbetween in Key.

All because of this: Voxengo Span - http://www.voxengo.com/product/span/

Its free. Lets you see the musical note of the peaks in your waveform. Stick it on your master.

Posted this somewhere else for someone - so I thought I'd Spam it here just for anyone who needs a pointer on how to use it.



An unbelievably simple Kick & Bass Combo to go with this.. so you to replicate exactly as I have done in the Screenshots.

Just a kick from a pack & a bass tone from one of the OSC's in Ultrabeat.


2 120bpm Loops - A Kick loop in A, and a Bass Loop also in A.


Labeled screenshots show where to find:

The Lo-Freq Preset in order to view in Scan.

The Main Freq's / Note of the Kick in Scan.

The Main Freq's / Note of the Bass in Scan.


A handy thing to do is press the "Hold" button when the sample you are auditioning peaks, so you can investigate.. even when the audio has stopped. At the bottom of the waveform GUI is a Bar that lets you zoom in & out.

When you see A1 + or - a number - thats the amount of Cents that area is off being A1 or whatever - etc.. Moving the Mouse Cursor over the peaks will show you the different freq's involved in the make up of that sound. The simpler the sound, the easier its going to be to tell what note it is from just looking.

When its a bit more complex - like noise or a real FM'y or harmonically rich thing - then you are going to have to give the ears a day out while transposing a little. Roll the dice!


Zip - SPAN.zip - 2.35MB


Enjoy - Its a really handy tool. Its on my master & open on my 2nd screen all the time.

Sham Squire

EQ while solo'd just to remove any problems (like low freq hum or high hiss) and then EQ in the mix. There's no point in making something sound fantastic on it's own, nobodys gonna hear it that way. Always EQ in the mix. Solo-ing is really only for checking for problems (clicks, clipping, etc.)

I use Fabfilters Pro-Q and it's a super clean and easy to use. As far as spectrum analysis I use the one that's bundled with the DAW I'm using.

electrogrimey

Sham Squire wrote: »

I use Fabfilters Pro-Q and it's a super clean and easy to use. As far as spectrum analysis I use the one that's bundled with the DAW I'm using.

That Pro-Q looks great, but any suggestions of a decent free EQ VST? I'm just using Ableton's ones, and I'm sure I could do better with a VST.

seannash

electrogrimey wrote: »

That Pro-Q looks great, but any suggestions of a decent free EQ VST? I'm just using Ableton's ones, and I'm sure I could do better with a VST.

we have discussed this before and to be honest unless an eq is based on a specific hardware eq or intentionally adds harmonics to the sound most eq's are the same.
apple has a free eq that can go from 10 to 32 band.no visuals but its handy.

im pretty sure theres a decent free eq out there but like i said i dont think it really makes a huge difference unless it has a predesigned sound.

better eq's are more about how easy they are to use

seannash

heres the discussion

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055591739&highlight=pultec

ICN

Oh, whatever happened to Miss_Terry? :rolleyes: :pac:

Sham Squire

seannash wrote: »

we have discussed this before and to be honest unless an eq is based on a specific hardware eq or intentionally adds harmonics to the sound most eq's are the same.
apple has a free eq that can go from 10 to 32 band.no visuals but its handy.

im pretty sure theres a decent free eq out there but like i said i dont think it really makes a huge difference unless it has a predesigned sound.

better eq's are more about how easy they are to use

I appreciate what you're saying but there are some major differences in design. Take the EQ3 that comes with Ableton Live, it only has 24db/oct cutoff and it's designed to behave like an analog EQ unit (so they say in the manual) so it's deliberately not clean. The Pro-Q (just as an example) has 48db/oct cutoff and when compared to the EQ3 has a super clean, no added artefacts sound.
I appreciate what everybody is saying about EQs essentially all coming from the same maths but at the end of the day EQ designers often try to differentiate their model by adding quirks. It's worth trying a few out to see which one does what you want it to. Or rather doesn't do what you'd rather it didn't.

Neurojazz

Another angle is a 'dynamic EQ' - i'd much prefer to use something like this that an eq that's on all the time... so it just fixes the problems on the fly...

Pity mine is in the powercore at the moment and i can't spare the CPU in it as there are 4 instances of Virus in there

I'd used it on a track sent to me by Dav nagle and made his guitar sound about 3k more expensive just by dynamically reducing a small band around 5k mark if my memory serves me right. Really good to play with, and also had a sidechain feature built in.

seannash

Sham Squire wrote: »

I appreciate what you're saying but there are some major differences in design. Take the EQ3 that comes with Ableton Live, it only has 24db/oct cutoff and it's designed to behave like an analog EQ unit (so they say in the manual) so it's deliberately not clean. The Pro-Q (just as an example) has 48db/oct cutoff and when compared to the EQ3 has a super clean, no added artefacts sound.
I appreciate what everybody is saying about EQs essentially all coming from the same maths but at the end of the day EQ designers often try to differentiate their model by adding quirks. It's worth trying a few out to see which one does what you want it to. Or rather doesn't do what you'd rather it didn't.

thats cool,but how steep of a cutoff slope should be adjustable in most inbuilts.eq 3 as you know is there dj eq,eq 8 is there production one for want of a better term.

apart from the slopes,as was discussed in that thread, the difference between alot of eqs is neglible in the grand scheme of things unless they intentionally add harmonics or are based on an old analogue eq which imparts a sound.

so after all that fluff basically what im saying is that if your looking for advice on how to eq better the answer isnt a new eq its the techniques that need to improve.

DamagedTrax

pro-q kinda changes things a little seannash. if you have infinite bands available you can do things that a 3 band parametric could never do.

soundwise i would expect a lot of clean eqs to sound similiar, being that they are "clean", its when you start accounting for curve shapes and human interaction (ie: adding say 13 bands) that the differances in pro-q shine thru.

and thats without talking about the option for linear phase and the option to split any band into M/S.

seannash

DamagedTrax wrote: »

pro-q kinda changes things a little seannash. if you have infinite bands available you can do things that a 3 band parametric could never do.

soundwise i would expect a lot of clean eqs to sound similiar, being that they are "clean", its when you start accounting for curve shapes and human interaction (ie: adding say 13 bands) that the differances in pro-q shine thru.

and thats without talking about the option for linear phase and the option to split any band into M/S.

ah yeah defintely know a 3 band parametric isnt gonna outshine something like pro q

this whole thing stemmed from electrogrimey asking this

That Pro-Q looks great, but any suggestions of a decent free EQ VST? I'm just using Ableton's ones, and I'm sure I could do better with a VST.

in my own roundabout way i was alluding to the fact that abletons inbuilt eq 8(which as you robably guessed is an 8 band eq)would be quite capable of handling his eq needs.

i did take onboard the opinions in that thread and decided that because i couldnt hear a difference between the inbuilt eq and my sonalksis eq i was gonna save my cpu and use the inbuilts

pro eq has some neat tricks alright and i do tend to take for granted that what comes bundles with logic(comes with a linear phase eq,spectral analysers and about 4 other eqs)comes with most daws.

genuine question but has there been a case where youve needed to use more than 8 bands for eqing.

also if yes would a work around be to use 2 eqs(giving you in theory 16 bands.i know this is awkward but im just curious)

DamagedTrax

to be honest the only time ive ever used more than 3 or 4 is ironing out some unwanted harmonics all the way up the octaves.

seannash

DamagedTrax wrote: »

to be honest the only time ive ever used more than 3 or 4 is ironing out some unwanted harmonics all the way up the octaves.

octaves!????

us dance boys know nothing of these octaves:D

i think i get what you mean,where as we'd normally have any octave changes with our synths on a new channel(i do anyway) and eq it then you might have a guitar recorded in one take and as such you need to eq the whole section which is changing as the song goes on.

DamagedTrax

nope

what i mean is, say you have a ringy snare drum and you want to eq the ringiness out. well sometimes the note thats ringing can also have harmonics at higher or lower octaves. and since the frequency spectrum relates to notes (remember 440hz = A), you can eq out the harmonics of the note aswell as the note itself using multiple frequency bands spaced along the octaves.

seannash

DamagedTrax wrote: »

nope

what i mean is, say you have a ringy snare drum and you want to eq the ringiness out. well sometimes the note thats ringing can also have harmonics at higher or lower octaves. and since the frequency spectrum relates to notes (remember 440hz = A), you can eq out the harmonics of the note aswell as the note itself using multiple frequency bands spaced along the octaves.

ah okay:o

that makes alot more sense than what i thought you meant ha ha