|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 9, 2019 8:13:00 GMT -6
Just wanted to get some of your thoughts on proportional eq. I got the Kush Axis on sale recently, so of course I had to use my new toy all over the place on two mixes following the purchase! On both mixes, the Mastering Engineer pointed out that the vocals were a little too sharp in the hi mids, and of course, once he pointed it out it was pretty obvious. So, is there a rule of thumb that slipped through my extensive cracks, like “proportional eq is best used on transient sources?” I used to work at a Studio that had two different API desks and I was even taught the supposed “Aerosmith guitar trick” of diming all three bands by a pretty established engineer. Sounds amazing. And I really like the saturation of Axis, but now I’m thinking wider bells are where it’s at for things like vocals. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by trakworxmastering on May 9, 2019 9:55:49 GMT -6
I don't think there's any rule of thumb about when to use a proportional EQ. Just use whatever EQ sounds best in a given situation. That will vary.
The best rule of thumb is just to listen. You can address that vocal issue with just about any EQ but you have to notice it first.
I usually reach for a dynamic EQ or multiband comp to address vocal harshness because it's usually only harsh on certain notes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 9, 2019 11:49:24 GMT -6
I don't think there's any rule of thumb about when to use a proportional EQ. Just use whatever EQ sounds best in a given situation. That will vary. The best rule of thumb is just to listen. You can address that vocal issue with just about any EQ but you have to notice it first. I usually reach for a dynamic EQ or multiband comp to address vocal harshness because it's usually only harsh on certain notes. Ok, so you’re saying I should just listen then? |
|
|
|
Post by trakworxmastering on May 9, 2019 12:02:57 GMT -6
Yeah, I'm saying you can't generalize about this or that Q setting for vocals or anything else. There will be times when narrow or wide bells work better. Or shelves. It seemed to me that your example with the vocal harshness was more a case of not hearing the problem than of using the wrong Q setting, no? It happens to all of us...
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 9, 2019 12:36:58 GMT -6
Yeah no one rule ever for anything EQ.
I like to follow a simple rule(one that I still break often but its a nice guide) of if im boosting, do broad filters, cutting, do sharp filters. I've had good results with that generally. But totally depends on the job you're trying to do. Tone shaping vs surgical for instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 9, 2019 13:18:21 GMT -6
I'm probably being dense here, but what it proportional EQ?
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 9, 2019 13:22:14 GMT -6
I'm probably being dense here, but what it proportional EQ? API style. Where the Q gets tighter with more boost cut, and more broad with less. |
|
|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 10, 2019 3:36:50 GMT -6
Yeah, I'm saying you can't generalize about this or that Q setting for vocals or anything else. There will be times when narrow or wide bells work better. Or shelves. It seemed to me that your example with the vocal harshness was more a case of not hearing the problem than of using the wrong Q setting, no? It happens to all of us... I was being sarcastic, but I agree with everything you’ve said. And you’re right, dynamic eq turned out to be the right tool in this case as it was only an issue on certain notes. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on May 10, 2019 20:57:53 GMT -6
....I used to work at a Studio that had two different API desks and I was even taught the supposed “Aerosmith guitar trick” of diming all three bands by a pretty established engineer. Sounds amazing.... Can you elaborate on this? Just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on May 10, 2019 21:25:50 GMT -6
....I used to work at a Studio that had two different API desks and I was even taught the supposed “Aerosmith guitar trick” of diming all three bands by a pretty established engineer. Sounds amazing.... Can you elaborate on this? Just curious. Yeah, I'm interested, too. I've never heard of this "Aerosmith guitar trick." |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 11, 2019 5:26:52 GMT -6
I'm probably being dense here, but what it proportional EQ? API style. Where the Q gets tighter with more boost cut, and more broad with less. I've always just thought of this as dynamic EQ. Although, I suppose that can also mean multi-band compression |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 11, 2019 6:11:43 GMT -6
API style. Where the Q gets tighter with more boost cut, and more broad with less. I've always just thought of this as dynamic EQ. Although, I suppose that can also mean multi-band compression No, this is different. On API eq's, when boosting 2dB, the q is fairly wide. If boosting 12 dB, it's much sharper. Once you set it, it's static. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 11, 2019 6:20:39 GMT -6
Yes exactly the Q increases proportionally with the boost or cut amount.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 11, 2019 6:28:23 GMT -6
Yes exactly the Q increases proportionally with the boost or cut amount. So you and Jesse and I are in agreement, in that case. Or We'RE ALL WRONG!! BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH |
|
|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 11, 2019 7:10:05 GMT -6
....I used to work at a Studio that had two different API desks and I was even taught the supposed “Aerosmith guitar trick” of diming all three bands by a pretty established engineer. Sounds amazing.... Can you elaborate on this? Just curious. Well, I qualified this by saying “supposed”, but here goes. We had a Demedio API, that came from Sunset Sound. The guy who brought it to us showed me the “trick”. Basically, it’s all three frequencies at 6:00 with the gain on each dimed.*Of course you have to bring down the gain at the line input, but that’s it. It sounded pretty great to my young ears! Hope this helps. *edit - while standing on your head. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 11, 2019 7:17:40 GMT -6
Yes exactly the Q increases proportionally with the boost or cut amount. So you and Jesse and I are in agreement, in that case. Or We'RE ALL WRONG!! BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Well jesse was pointing out that proportional Q EQ is not the same as dynamic EQ, I just rephrased the definition slightly |
|
|
|
Post by mhbunch on May 11, 2019 10:49:55 GMT -6
Can you elaborate on this? Just curious. Well, I qualified this by saying “supposed”, but here goes. We had a Demedio API, that came from Sunset Sound. The guy who brought it to us showed me the “trick”. Basically, it’s all three frequencies at 12:00 with the gain on each dimed.*Of course you have to bring down the gain at the line input, but that’s it. It sounded pretty great to my young ears! Hope this helps. *edit - while standing on your head. Do you mean frequencies at 6:00? |
|
|
|
Post by mitchkricun on May 11, 2019 11:35:59 GMT -6
Well, I qualified this by saying “supposed”, but here goes. We had a Demedio API, that came from Sunset Sound. The guy who brought it to us showed me the “trick”. Basically, it’s all three frequencies at 12:00 with the gain on each dimed.*Of course you have to bring down the gain at the line input, but that’s it. It sounded pretty great to my young ears! Hope this helps. *edit - while standing on your head. Do you mean frequencies at 6:00? Yes, good catch. Will edit post |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 13, 2019 10:28:40 GMT -6
Can you elaborate on this? Just curious. Well, I qualified this by saying “supposed”, but here goes. We had a Demedio API, that came from Sunset Sound. The guy who brought it to us showed me the “trick”. Basically, it’s all three frequencies at 6:00 with the gain on each dimed.*Of course you have to bring down the gain at the line input, but that’s it. It sounded pretty great to my young ears! Hope this helps. *edit - while standing on your head. Here's what the EQ curve for this might look like (with green and without blue the band pass filter)...  |
|
|
|
Post by sean on May 13, 2019 16:04:25 GMT -6
That probably would sound pretty good on an electric guitar...
|
|
|
|
Post by shoe on May 13, 2019 17:51:33 GMT -6
That's an interesting theory. I'll have to try it.
I'm more used to software EQs but have been wanting to get more into hardware EQs and the API is an interesting piece to me.
One thing that I sometimes do that I suppose you could call reciprocal EQ (and API would also be good for this) is if I have two similar guitar tracks that sound pretty good on their own (like double tracked or two mics), I will cut the same amount of the same frequency from one as I am boosting in the other, so they kind of are working together to get to whatever overall EQ content they have in combination. It seems to prevent them from stepping too much on each other and becoming mush.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 13, 2019 17:59:42 GMT -6
That's an interesting theory. I'll have to try it. I'm more used to software EQs but have been wanting to get more into hardware EQs and the API is an interesting piece to me. One thing that I sometimes do that I suppose you could call reciprocal EQ (and API would also be good for this) is if I have two similar guitar tracks that sound pretty good on their own (like double tracked or two mics), I will cut the same amount of the same frequency from one as I am boosting in the other, so they kind of are working together to get to whatever overall EQ content they have in combination. It seems to prevent them from stepping too much on each other and becoming mush. I've heard a lot of "pros" talk about this kind of EQ move, usually on bass and kick, but also for guitars panned L and R as well. Some people recommending doing this kind of EQ in mono, and then going back to stereo when you're moving on. I think it's a critical concept to master. Your tracks can't all sound "huge" it's the entire mix that needs to be made tidy rather than EQing everything in solo. You've only got two speakers and a limited amount of headroom and frequency range that must be optimized. I'm sure most people know this by now but it's something that I'm constantly reminded of. |
|
