Most people have an idea of what they want in the final product but may not quite be able to put their finger on what exactly needs to be done. A new set of ears can often be helpful for resolving this dilemma. Listening to the same tracks repeatedly without breaks can cause your perception to change and it becomes easy to drift away from your objective. The saturation factor is why I never finish a project in any less than five separate sittings, usually with a day or two between them, or at least a few hours. Listening on a good nights sleep can reveal things that may not have been apparent yesterday. I will not rush any project. Patience does pay off in the long run!
F.S.
Mastering advices from the GURUS
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
Experienced people in the music industry have their releases mastered professionally for one reason - they want it to succeed. They expect at least three things from a mastering session:
* Impact and life in the music will be enhanced.
* Levels and spectral balance on the CD will compare well with (other) major label product - especially on radio. This sound will hold up well across different types of speakers.
* They be treated with professional courtesy and consideration.
Music recorded on an extensive budget usually sounds great and mastering puts the final polish on an excellent product. Independent material can be a different story. It often requires a little more attention to get "the sound" that people expect. Mastering can give your music the best possible sound by giving it optimal shaping for the fullest sound.
DB
* Impact and life in the music will be enhanced.
* Levels and spectral balance on the CD will compare well with (other) major label product - especially on radio. This sound will hold up well across different types of speakers.
* They be treated with professional courtesy and consideration.
Music recorded on an extensive budget usually sounds great and mastering puts the final polish on an excellent product. Independent material can be a different story. It often requires a little more attention to get "the sound" that people expect. Mastering can give your music the best possible sound by giving it optimal shaping for the fullest sound.
DB
*MUSIC* The most Powerful Language in the world! *INDEED*
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
IMPRESSIONS OF LOUDNESS
It’s an established fact that the human hearing curve isn’t flat, but instead is more sensitive to mid-range sounds than to frequencies at the extreme high and low ends of the spectrum. Again, we don’t notice this, because we’ve heard things this way all our lives. However, as the level of sound we’re listening to increases, the mid boost of the hearing system becomes less, with the result that high and low frequency sounds seem proportionally louder. This is yet another of those interesting physiological factors that can be exploited into fooling the ear into believing it perceives something that isn’t entirely true. For example, if we know that extreme high and low frequencies stand out more when we listen to loud music, we can create the impression of loudness at lower listening levels by attenuating the mid range and boosting the HF and LF ends of the spectrum. The loudness button on a stereo system does exactly this, and if you look at the graphic EQs used in a nightclub or PA system, you’ll often see them set up showing a smile-shaped curve to promote the illusion of loudness and power. Of course this works just as well in the studio, through it’s generally most effective just to treat some of the sounds in a mix so as to maintain a contrast between the different sounds.
P.W.
It’s an established fact that the human hearing curve isn’t flat, but instead is more sensitive to mid-range sounds than to frequencies at the extreme high and low ends of the spectrum. Again, we don’t notice this, because we’ve heard things this way all our lives. However, as the level of sound we’re listening to increases, the mid boost of the hearing system becomes less, with the result that high and low frequency sounds seem proportionally louder. This is yet another of those interesting physiological factors that can be exploited into fooling the ear into believing it perceives something that isn’t entirely true. For example, if we know that extreme high and low frequencies stand out more when we listen to loud music, we can create the impression of loudness at lower listening levels by attenuating the mid range and boosting the HF and LF ends of the spectrum. The loudness button on a stereo system does exactly this, and if you look at the graphic EQs used in a nightclub or PA system, you’ll often see them set up showing a smile-shaped curve to promote the illusion of loudness and power. Of course this works just as well in the studio, through it’s generally most effective just to treat some of the sounds in a mix so as to maintain a contrast between the different sounds.
P.W.
*MUSIC* The most Powerful Language in the world! *INDEED*
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
TO CUT OR BOOST?
In general, the less EQ boost you use, the more natural the final sound will be – the human ear is far more tolerant of EQ cut than it is of boost (especially at high Q settings), so rather than adding lots of top to critical sounds such as vocals in order to get them to sit at the front of the mix, you could instead try applying high end cut to other sounds in the mix that are conflicting with the vocal.
Some classical purists might say that you don't need EQ at all, but in the real world of pop recording, where the emphasis is on appropriate rather than accurate sounds, equalisation has become a way of life. The close miking of drums was originally tried in an attempt to cut down on spill from other instruments, but now it's become the normal pop drum sound. EQ plays a very large part in creating the modern drum sound, but because we're not in a creative context rather than a corrective one.
In general, the less EQ boost you use, the more natural the final sound will be – the human ear is far more tolerant of EQ cut than it is of boost (especially at high Q settings), so rather than adding lots of top to critical sounds such as vocals in order to get them to sit at the front of the mix, you could instead try applying high end cut to other sounds in the mix that are conflicting with the vocal.
Some classical purists might say that you don't need EQ at all, but in the real world of pop recording, where the emphasis is on appropriate rather than accurate sounds, equalisation has become a way of life. The close miking of drums was originally tried in an attempt to cut down on spill from other instruments, but now it's become the normal pop drum sound. EQ plays a very large part in creating the modern drum sound, but because we're not in a creative context rather than a corrective one.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
SEPARATING SOUNDS
EQ can be used in many ways, but one of the most popular applications is to separate two similar sounds within a mix where the degree of overlap is causing the sound to become confused, or muddled. If, for example, two sounds are fighting it out in the same part of the spectrum, a peaking equaliser can be used to add a degree of bite to one sound at one frequency while the other sound can be peaked up at a different frequency. Similarly, the top or bottom end of a sound can be “trimmed” to avoid conflict, a typical example being the acoustic rhythm guitar in a pop mix where the bottom end can get confused with the vocals, the drums or even the bass guitar. Here you can roll off quite a lot of the bottom end without spoiling the sound of the guitar, though if you listen to it in isolation, it will probably sound rather thin.
IT’S NOT WHAT SOMETHING SOUNDS LIKE IN ISOLATION THAT COUNTS, BUT HOW IT SOUNDS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE REST OF THE MIX.
P.W.
EQ can be used in many ways, but one of the most popular applications is to separate two similar sounds within a mix where the degree of overlap is causing the sound to become confused, or muddled. If, for example, two sounds are fighting it out in the same part of the spectrum, a peaking equaliser can be used to add a degree of bite to one sound at one frequency while the other sound can be peaked up at a different frequency. Similarly, the top or bottom end of a sound can be “trimmed” to avoid conflict, a typical example being the acoustic rhythm guitar in a pop mix where the bottom end can get confused with the vocals, the drums or even the bass guitar. Here you can roll off quite a lot of the bottom end without spoiling the sound of the guitar, though if you listen to it in isolation, it will probably sound rather thin.
IT’S NOT WHAT SOMETHING SOUNDS LIKE IN ISOLATION THAT COUNTS, BUT HOW IT SOUNDS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE REST OF THE MIX.
P.W.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
WHEN TO EQ
As a general rule, equalisation should be employed only after all efforts have been made to obtain the best sound at source. What's more, there's a huge subjective difference in sound between a budget equaliser and a top quality studio equaliser, so if you have to work with a budget EQ, or the EQ section build into your desk, you'll probably have to use it very sparingly if the overall sound isn't to suffer, especially if you want to make changes in the critical 800Hz to 4kHz region where the human ear is very sensitive. Though the character of a really nice equaliser is difficult to quantify, the best equalisers allow you to make more drastic changes without the sound appearing unnatural, nasal or harsh.
Most often, a combination of cut and boost is required, but always use the EQ bypass switch to flip back and forth between the equalised and unequalised sounds, to make sure you really have improved matters. Equally, if you feel the need to EQ an instrument in isolation, check again with all tracks playing to make sure that the settings you're using work in context with the rest of the mix. More often than not, you'll have to make further adjustments, but it really is worth striving to get your sounds right at the outset – EQ is an invaluable ally in shaping well-recorded sounds, but even the best equalisers have their limits when faced with difficult material.
P.W.
As a general rule, equalisation should be employed only after all efforts have been made to obtain the best sound at source. What's more, there's a huge subjective difference in sound between a budget equaliser and a top quality studio equaliser, so if you have to work with a budget EQ, or the EQ section build into your desk, you'll probably have to use it very sparingly if the overall sound isn't to suffer, especially if you want to make changes in the critical 800Hz to 4kHz region where the human ear is very sensitive. Though the character of a really nice equaliser is difficult to quantify, the best equalisers allow you to make more drastic changes without the sound appearing unnatural, nasal or harsh.
Most often, a combination of cut and boost is required, but always use the EQ bypass switch to flip back and forth between the equalised and unequalised sounds, to make sure you really have improved matters. Equally, if you feel the need to EQ an instrument in isolation, check again with all tracks playing to make sure that the settings you're using work in context with the rest of the mix. More often than not, you'll have to make further adjustments, but it really is worth striving to get your sounds right at the outset – EQ is an invaluable ally in shaping well-recorded sounds, but even the best equalisers have their limits when faced with difficult material.
P.W.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
WHAT SOUNDS ARE WHERE
Probably the best way to get to know the audio spectrum is to check out some common musical sounds and see what part of the audible range they occupy. Try feeding a commercial CD through your equaliser, apply a few dBs of boost and sweep through the frequency range to see how different sounds and instruments are picked out. The low-frequency limit of an instrument is usually quite easy to define as an instrument can’t produce a pitch below the fundamental frequency of its lowest note, but the high-frequency end is somewhat less well-defined. That’s because nearly all sounds include harmonics that extend right to the top end of the audio spectrum and beyond, and even though the level of these harmonics is probably very low, they’re still very important in defining the sound and creating the impression of clarity. For the purpose of this section, the most useful thing I can do is pick a ball-park range to show where most of the audio energy from a particular source resides. It’s up to you to try EQ’ing above these frequencies to find out exactly how much the sound is affected. For example, a flute produces a relatively pure tone, though the breath-noise harmonics extend to the top of the audio spectrum and will respond to high frequency EQ.
Probably the best way to get to know the audio spectrum is to check out some common musical sounds and see what part of the audible range they occupy. Try feeding a commercial CD through your equaliser, apply a few dBs of boost and sweep through the frequency range to see how different sounds and instruments are picked out. The low-frequency limit of an instrument is usually quite easy to define as an instrument can’t produce a pitch below the fundamental frequency of its lowest note, but the high-frequency end is somewhat less well-defined. That’s because nearly all sounds include harmonics that extend right to the top end of the audio spectrum and beyond, and even though the level of these harmonics is probably very low, they’re still very important in defining the sound and creating the impression of clarity. For the purpose of this section, the most useful thing I can do is pick a ball-park range to show where most of the audio energy from a particular source resides. It’s up to you to try EQ’ing above these frequencies to find out exactly how much the sound is affected. For example, a flute produces a relatively pure tone, though the breath-noise harmonics extend to the top of the audio spectrum and will respond to high frequency EQ.
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
DRUMS
The bass drum puts out most of its energy in a narrow band between 50Hz and 150Hz – depending on how it is tuned – but the attack transients reach right up into the upper mid-range. This can be confirmed by applying some EQ boost to a bass drum sound at around 4-6kHz; the difference in the attack characteristic is very noticeable. The usual pop music trick is to add weight by boosting between 70 and 90 Hz.
Drums are a special case when it comes to equalisation, because the accepted pop and rock drum sound is not that of a natural kit. What’s more, if you include the cymbals, they cover the entire audio spectrum. The trick is to make the drum sound both bright and solid but no too “thick”.
A Close-miked bass drum without EQ will often sound less than ideal, though occasionally you get a great sound straight off. Most often there is a need to add definition to the hit, plus degree of low-frequency weight. For a straightforward, punchy sound, a little boost at 8-Hz will almost always improve matters, but to get a deeper sound without the end result being too boomy, try adding 10dB or so of boost with you shelving bass control (most consoles have their bass controls at 50 or 60 Hz) and then wind in 10dB or so of cut at around 220Hz using the lower mid control. The two controls work together to produce a narrow area of low-frequency boost rather than the rather wide, uncomfortable boost that is obtained by using the low EQ on its own. The result is a kick sound with a lot of low weight.
To add definition to the beater impact, boost the upper mid-range between 3.5 and 6kHz, choosing the final setting by ear. A wooden beater is far better than a felt one for producing a modern kick drum sound, and the slap can be further enhanced by taping a piece of thin plastic on the drum head at exactly the spot where the beater impacts. Credit cards work splendidly for this job!
Toms may be handled in much the same way as bass drums, with boost (using the lower mid sweep control) in the 80 to 120Hz region, the exact setting depending on the size and type of tom. Careful adjustment of the upper mid control can help pick out the stick impact, and if the tom rings on too much or if it rings in sympathy with other drums, you can usually afford to roll off quite a lot of bass without the result sounding tin in the context of a mix. I often use a gate side-chain filter in key listen mode for this because of its very sharp response – I know that isn’t what it was intended for, but it does the job perfectly! This kind of corrective EQ is invariably better than applying too much damping to the drum.
Snare drums are quite unpredictable and you never quite know how they’re going to sound until you’ve put up a mic and listened to the result over the monitors. The sound can be fattened by boosting the 90-140Hz band, while the bite can usually be located in the 3-7kHz region. It’s easiest, when searching for the fight area, to apply full boost then tune for the appropriate pitch. Once you’ve found it, you can back off the degree of boost until you have a sound you can live with. If the drum still doesn’t sound crisp enough, consider switching to a capacitor mic or patching in an exciter.
When recording to analogue, always record cymbals at a low level to prevent tape overload and keep in mind that they always cut through more loudly than you expect. Brightness can be added using the shelving high EQ control or you can tune the upper mid control until you find a sweet spot. IN general, cymbals are recorded as part of the overhead mic mix, and in some cases, it can help to roll off the bass end quite significantly to prevent the drum sounds picked up by the overheads from obstructing the drum sounds from the close mics. When recording digitally, levels may be optimised as normal.
The bass drum puts out most of its energy in a narrow band between 50Hz and 150Hz – depending on how it is tuned – but the attack transients reach right up into the upper mid-range. This can be confirmed by applying some EQ boost to a bass drum sound at around 4-6kHz; the difference in the attack characteristic is very noticeable. The usual pop music trick is to add weight by boosting between 70 and 90 Hz.
Drums are a special case when it comes to equalisation, because the accepted pop and rock drum sound is not that of a natural kit. What’s more, if you include the cymbals, they cover the entire audio spectrum. The trick is to make the drum sound both bright and solid but no too “thick”.
A Close-miked bass drum without EQ will often sound less than ideal, though occasionally you get a great sound straight off. Most often there is a need to add definition to the hit, plus degree of low-frequency weight. For a straightforward, punchy sound, a little boost at 8-Hz will almost always improve matters, but to get a deeper sound without the end result being too boomy, try adding 10dB or so of boost with you shelving bass control (most consoles have their bass controls at 50 or 60 Hz) and then wind in 10dB or so of cut at around 220Hz using the lower mid control. The two controls work together to produce a narrow area of low-frequency boost rather than the rather wide, uncomfortable boost that is obtained by using the low EQ on its own. The result is a kick sound with a lot of low weight.
To add definition to the beater impact, boost the upper mid-range between 3.5 and 6kHz, choosing the final setting by ear. A wooden beater is far better than a felt one for producing a modern kick drum sound, and the slap can be further enhanced by taping a piece of thin plastic on the drum head at exactly the spot where the beater impacts. Credit cards work splendidly for this job!
Toms may be handled in much the same way as bass drums, with boost (using the lower mid sweep control) in the 80 to 120Hz region, the exact setting depending on the size and type of tom. Careful adjustment of the upper mid control can help pick out the stick impact, and if the tom rings on too much or if it rings in sympathy with other drums, you can usually afford to roll off quite a lot of bass without the result sounding tin in the context of a mix. I often use a gate side-chain filter in key listen mode for this because of its very sharp response – I know that isn’t what it was intended for, but it does the job perfectly! This kind of corrective EQ is invariably better than applying too much damping to the drum.
Snare drums are quite unpredictable and you never quite know how they’re going to sound until you’ve put up a mic and listened to the result over the monitors. The sound can be fattened by boosting the 90-140Hz band, while the bite can usually be located in the 3-7kHz region. It’s easiest, when searching for the fight area, to apply full boost then tune for the appropriate pitch. Once you’ve found it, you can back off the degree of boost until you have a sound you can live with. If the drum still doesn’t sound crisp enough, consider switching to a capacitor mic or patching in an exciter.
When recording to analogue, always record cymbals at a low level to prevent tape overload and keep in mind that they always cut through more loudly than you expect. Brightness can be added using the shelving high EQ control or you can tune the upper mid control until you find a sweet spot. IN general, cymbals are recorded as part of the overhead mic mix, and in some cases, it can help to roll off the bass end quite significantly to prevent the drum sounds picked up by the overheads from obstructing the drum sounds from the close mics. When recording digitally, levels may be optimised as normal.
I have a bit of advice on top of what's already been presented here. I'm not sure if this is industry standard or not. I rarely ever hear any "pro's" say this out loud.
Try not to use any EQ, compression or limiting. That's right. You heard it here first. Take all that stuff and throw it in the garbage can. If you can't achieve the sound you need right at the source, then there's something wrong with the source and it needs to be fixed before you even hit the record button. Of course, this is often easier said than done especially if you're at the mercy of a client or producer who has their own way of working/creating. Breaking the rules often leads to innovation. But I can tell from experience that paying attention to the source, up front, will always produce a more natural (and better quality) sound than heaping gobs of EQ, compression and limiting on top of the track.
And the more you try it, the easier it gets. Spend an extra hour up front and it could save you many hours on the back end. Nuff said
Try not to use any EQ, compression or limiting. That's right. You heard it here first. Take all that stuff and throw it in the garbage can. If you can't achieve the sound you need right at the source, then there's something wrong with the source and it needs to be fixed before you even hit the record button. Of course, this is often easier said than done especially if you're at the mercy of a client or producer who has their own way of working/creating. Breaking the rules often leads to innovation. But I can tell from experience that paying attention to the source, up front, will always produce a more natural (and better quality) sound than heaping gobs of EQ, compression and limiting on top of the track.
And the more you try it, the easier it gets. Spend an extra hour up front and it could save you many hours on the back end. Nuff said
This is good advice for the tracking/mixing stage, but post-production mastering (pre-mastering)inevitably requires some EQ and multi-band compression tweaks, as well as other finishing tricks (like de-essing, stereo adjustment, M/S EQing). I've seen very few "finished" mixes that couldn't benefit from some of these mastering techniques. The recording/mixing studios I work with are happy to leave this stage to a mastering studio. Thankfully.
/dave
/dave
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
BASS GUITAR
Whether the bass guitar is DI’d or miked during recording, the equalisation on a typical console can be used to create a wide range of tonal characters. (I’m assuming the use of console with four-band EQ and two sweep mids, but it is possible to use an external graphic or parametric equaliser to achieve the same result.) The lowest note on the conventionally tuned four-strings electric bass guitar is 41Hz, but the higher notes contain significant energy up to 2 or 3kHz.
At around 80Hz can be used to pull out the low bass, while boosting between 500Hz and 800Hz adds nicely aggressive bite. Boosting hither up the spectrum tends to bring out the finger noise and little else, so if a bright sound is what you’re after, get it as close as you can at source.
Playing technique has a lot to do with the tone of a bass guitar and no amount of EQ will compensate for a weedy finger-style of playing. A touch of low-mid cut at around 200-250Hz can sometimes be effective in combination with a little low-end boost; this warms up the low bass end without allowing the low-mid area to get uncontrollably boomy. On the other hand, in a crowded mix, applying low mid boost might actually produce a more confident bass sound.
Bass synths can be treated in much the same way as bass guitars, though their ability to produce higher harmonics means that EQ at higher frequencies will also be effective. However, be cautious when using very bright bass synths sounds; they can so easily fill up the space in a mix, leaving the whole thing sounding congested.
The traditional pipe organ goes an octave lower than the bass guitar, down to 20Hz or so where sounds are felt rather than heard. High organ notes, on the other hand, generate significant energy as far up the spectrum as 8kHz and beyond. Synthesizer sounds can also go this low, or even lower, but there’s little point in adding energy at 20Hz when few domestic loudspeakers systems extend far below 50Hz.
Whether the bass guitar is DI’d or miked during recording, the equalisation on a typical console can be used to create a wide range of tonal characters. (I’m assuming the use of console with four-band EQ and two sweep mids, but it is possible to use an external graphic or parametric equaliser to achieve the same result.) The lowest note on the conventionally tuned four-strings electric bass guitar is 41Hz, but the higher notes contain significant energy up to 2 or 3kHz.
At around 80Hz can be used to pull out the low bass, while boosting between 500Hz and 800Hz adds nicely aggressive bite. Boosting hither up the spectrum tends to bring out the finger noise and little else, so if a bright sound is what you’re after, get it as close as you can at source.
Playing technique has a lot to do with the tone of a bass guitar and no amount of EQ will compensate for a weedy finger-style of playing. A touch of low-mid cut at around 200-250Hz can sometimes be effective in combination with a little low-end boost; this warms up the low bass end without allowing the low-mid area to get uncontrollably boomy. On the other hand, in a crowded mix, applying low mid boost might actually produce a more confident bass sound.
Bass synths can be treated in much the same way as bass guitars, though their ability to produce higher harmonics means that EQ at higher frequencies will also be effective. However, be cautious when using very bright bass synths sounds; they can so easily fill up the space in a mix, leaving the whole thing sounding congested.
The traditional pipe organ goes an octave lower than the bass guitar, down to 20Hz or so where sounds are felt rather than heard. High organ notes, on the other hand, generate significant energy as far up the spectrum as 8kHz and beyond. Synthesizer sounds can also go this low, or even lower, but there’s little point in adding energy at 20Hz when few domestic loudspeakers systems extend far below 50Hz.
*MUSIC* The most Powerful Language in the world! *INDEED*
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
ELECTRIC GUITAR
The electric guitar has a starting point one octave higher than the bass guitar at 82Hz and, because of the restricted range of electric guitar speakers, there’s little energy above 4kHz. Even so, it’s a mistake to draw too many conclusions from the upper limit of any sound, because EQ applied above this arbitrary limit will almost certainly have some audible effect.
If you need to add warmth to the sound of an electric guitar, concentrate on the area between 125Hz and 200Hz. There’s no point adding boost much below this region, as the lowest note’s fundamental frequency is 82Hz. Bass boost will only bring up the cabinet boom and make the overall sound muddy; it could also conflict with the bass guitar. Equally important, boosting the bass end will accentuate any mains hum in the signal – most guitar pickups, especially single-coil types, pick up a surprising amount of hum.
To add attack to the sound, go for the 3-4kHz section of the spectrum, but don’t add any really high-end boost unless the guitar is DI’d, as there’s not much coming out of a guitar speaker above 3 or 4kHz. All you’ll do is bring up the background noise and, if the guitar is being used with an overdrive sound, this will tend to go buzzy or fizzy.
In a congested mix, two similar-sounding electric guitars can be separated by adding bite at different frequencies, say one guitar at 3kHz and one at 4kHz. However, this is rarely as successful as getting a different sound at source. If you can use two different amplifiers or preamp settings while recording the two parts it will help. It also makes sense to use different types of guitar – say one with single-coil pickups and one with humbuckers. If you’re miking the guitar amp, try using different mics for the different parts – a dynamic for one take and a capacitor for the other will make a noticeable difference, even if the guitar, amp and player remain the same.
The electric guitar has a starting point one octave higher than the bass guitar at 82Hz and, because of the restricted range of electric guitar speakers, there’s little energy above 4kHz. Even so, it’s a mistake to draw too many conclusions from the upper limit of any sound, because EQ applied above this arbitrary limit will almost certainly have some audible effect.
If you need to add warmth to the sound of an electric guitar, concentrate on the area between 125Hz and 200Hz. There’s no point adding boost much below this region, as the lowest note’s fundamental frequency is 82Hz. Bass boost will only bring up the cabinet boom and make the overall sound muddy; it could also conflict with the bass guitar. Equally important, boosting the bass end will accentuate any mains hum in the signal – most guitar pickups, especially single-coil types, pick up a surprising amount of hum.
To add attack to the sound, go for the 3-4kHz section of the spectrum, but don’t add any really high-end boost unless the guitar is DI’d, as there’s not much coming out of a guitar speaker above 3 or 4kHz. All you’ll do is bring up the background noise and, if the guitar is being used with an overdrive sound, this will tend to go buzzy or fizzy.
In a congested mix, two similar-sounding electric guitars can be separated by adding bite at different frequencies, say one guitar at 3kHz and one at 4kHz. However, this is rarely as successful as getting a different sound at source. If you can use two different amplifiers or preamp settings while recording the two parts it will help. It also makes sense to use different types of guitar – say one with single-coil pickups and one with humbuckers. If you’re miking the guitar amp, try using different mics for the different parts – a dynamic for one take and a capacitor for the other will make a noticeable difference, even if the guitar, amp and player remain the same.
*MUSIC* The most Powerful Language in the world! *INDEED*
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
PIANO
The piano forte must be recorded using good microphones, properly positioned, otherwise no amount of EQ will restore the natural sound. The bass can be enhanced by boosting at 90-150Hz, while the attack detail can be brought out by bringing up the 4-6kHz area of the spectrum. Air can be added by applying wide band boost at around 15kHz. If the sound is boomy, look for the offending area between 250 and 350Hz and apply just enough cut to keep it under control. Because the piano is such a natural instrument, it pays to use less EQ and concentrate instead on putting suitable mics in the right place when you first make the recording.
Electronic sample-based pianos can be equalised in the same way, though many models offer such a range of piano sounds that equalisation may be quite unnecessary.
The piano forte must be recorded using good microphones, properly positioned, otherwise no amount of EQ will restore the natural sound. The bass can be enhanced by boosting at 90-150Hz, while the attack detail can be brought out by bringing up the 4-6kHz area of the spectrum. Air can be added by applying wide band boost at around 15kHz. If the sound is boomy, look for the offending area between 250 and 350Hz and apply just enough cut to keep it under control. Because the piano is such a natural instrument, it pays to use less EQ and concentrate instead on putting suitable mics in the right place when you first make the recording.
Electronic sample-based pianos can be equalised in the same way, though many models offer such a range of piano sounds that equalisation may be quite unnecessary.
*MUSIC* The most Powerful Language in the world! *INDEED*
hi Nestor,
like many others here I appreciate your great work - do you have a special trick for that huge amount of typing ?
I'd like to mention a point which is generally overlooked and about which I'm not completely shure yet:
the phase relations of a signal.
Imho all frequency, signal to noise and bit depth argueing leads to nothing if the phase relations are 'disturbed'.
I add it here after your 'piano-part' because I noticed it first with a piano expander I use for quite some time now.
That same thing was considered by me as everything from 'a piece of crap' to 'amazingly beautiful' depending on what it was connected to.
The idea of phase dependency came to my mind when experimenting with very small time amounts of a digital effects unit which produced nicely jumping sound quality from thin to dull to rich and full.
Of course these were artifacts of the 'out of range' processing (the mixer generally produces a very clear signal).
But they sounded exactly like situations where I tried to add expression to the piano by equing it the classical way and failed with whatever I applied.
Maybe some of the Gurus have more detailed information on this or how it is handled (or better avoided) profesionally.
cheers, Tom
like many others here I appreciate your great work - do you have a special trick for that huge amount of typing ?
I'd like to mention a point which is generally overlooked and about which I'm not completely shure yet:
the phase relations of a signal.
Imho all frequency, signal to noise and bit depth argueing leads to nothing if the phase relations are 'disturbed'.
I add it here after your 'piano-part' because I noticed it first with a piano expander I use for quite some time now.
That same thing was considered by me as everything from 'a piece of crap' to 'amazingly beautiful' depending on what it was connected to.
The idea of phase dependency came to my mind when experimenting with very small time amounts of a digital effects unit which produced nicely jumping sound quality from thin to dull to rich and full.
Of course these were artifacts of the 'out of range' processing (the mixer generally produces a very clear signal).
But they sounded exactly like situations where I tried to add expression to the piano by equing it the classical way and failed with whatever I applied.
Maybe some of the Gurus have more detailed information on this or how it is handled (or better avoided) profesionally.
cheers, Tom
-
Nestor
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Fourth Dimension Paradise, Cloud Nine!
Hello there… I think that the Pulsar Study Forum is to study anything in direct relation with Pulsar itself and it’s devices. Pulsar Creativity is more suited to study this kind of things, which are not always directly related with Pulsar. I don’t know. I let you choose, I don’t really mind if you prefer it over there and Johns agrees with you.
I write it for the forum to help a bit as I can and at the same time, to help myself cos I have to concentrate when typing, so I learn better.
VOCALS
Vocals can range from around 80Hz to 1kHz, depending on the style and sex of the performer. Again, there’s a significant amount of energy above that range, which is why live mic manufacturers often build in a presence peak at 3 or 4hKz, and de-essers have to function at between 5 and 10kHz to remove sibilance.
When recording vocals, always use a pop shield, as no amount of EQ will fix popping once it’s on tape. Try to get as near as possible to the sound you want, without resorting to EQ, by selecting the most sympathetic microphone. General brightening can be achieved using the shelving high EQ control on the mixer, but keep a wary ear open for sibilance. Boosting lower down, at 1-2kHz, gives a rather honky, cheap sound to the vocals and so is not recommended other than as a special effect. Presence can be added but be sparing in this as the natural character of the voice can easily be lost.
In a mix of backing vocals, rolling off a touch of bass often helps the sound fit in better with the mix.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Nestor on 2002-05-24 13:33 ]</font>
I write it for the forum to help a bit as I can and at the same time, to help myself cos I have to concentrate when typing, so I learn better.
VOCALS
Vocals can range from around 80Hz to 1kHz, depending on the style and sex of the performer. Again, there’s a significant amount of energy above that range, which is why live mic manufacturers often build in a presence peak at 3 or 4hKz, and de-essers have to function at between 5 and 10kHz to remove sibilance.
When recording vocals, always use a pop shield, as no amount of EQ will fix popping once it’s on tape. Try to get as near as possible to the sound you want, without resorting to EQ, by selecting the most sympathetic microphone. General brightening can be achieved using the shelving high EQ control on the mixer, but keep a wary ear open for sibilance. Boosting lower down, at 1-2kHz, gives a rather honky, cheap sound to the vocals and so is not recommended other than as a special effect. Presence can be added but be sparing in this as the natural character of the voice can easily be lost.
In a mix of backing vocals, rolling off a touch of bass often helps the sound fit in better with the mix.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Nestor on 2002-05-24 13:33 ]</font>