|  | 
        
         |  | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-28 22:35 [#01259352] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | So the same little warning... I don't consider myself professional, I'm just offering tips on what I've learned
 and how I've learned it. Stuff I wish people had told me.
 This isn't meant to be a published article, just to start
 people talking about this stuff. So get to it! Anyways...
 
 Since there are two main times I EQ, I'll touch on each of
 them separately:
 
 One, pre-mix. EQ each track separately
 
 Two, post-mix. EQ the entire track to bring out certain
 parts
 
 Personally, I don't end up doing a whole lot of EQing. My
 ear catches most things as I mix things together while
 writing the piece. Well, that and I get incredibly pissed
 off when it doesn't sound like I want it to and end up doing
 half-assed EQing on the fly.
 
 Just like compression, subtlety is the key here. Even if
 you're making drastic changes in the sound, it's the small
 changes that make the sound change from good to amazing.
 
 So what are you trying to do with EQ?
 
 From a mastering standpoint, you're trying to remove
 unwanted clash in frequency ranges... example: you have a
 bass line and a melody line, the bass line has harmonics and
 effects that span the higher frequency ranges, and the
 melody has lower sounds. Since you want to bring out the
 bass line and melody line, EQ out the top a bit on the bass,
 and the lows off the melody.
 
 The simplest EQ is essentially just using high pass and low
 pass filters. You're cutting off the excess that you don't
 want. Why don't we do this? If you eliminate the frequencies
 that aren't the emphasis you lose the "human" sound of the
 instrument. The little nuances are what make it
 interesting.
 
 I know someone who writes dance music and masters like
 that... separates his drums into each band, filters out the
 excess, and compresses the hell outta it. His music doesn't
 change much overall, and so that style technically "Works"
 but it makes his music incredibly boring and lifeless, even
 though people will dance to it... it makes me want to claw
 my inner ears out when I listen at home
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-28 22:42 [#01259354] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | So that simple concept is getting a little more complicated... so start adding in more lines, bass drum that
 overlaps the bass line in some lower registers, snare over
 the mid, hihats on the top, and an ambient pad with white
 noise that spans the entire frequency range. Now what?
 
 This is where subtlety comes in and your ear becomes
 incredibly important. There are no magic frequency ranges,
 ESPECIALLY in IDM where we use incredibly weird sounds for
 different parts. The goal remains the same, keep the lines
 emphasized and not muddy, lower frequencies per instrument
 where they're not needed and do the same on the overall
 mix.
 
 I'm going to repeat that... you want to soften the parts
 that are unwanted. I did not say you want to amplify the
 parts you wanted to bring out. Making it as loud as possible
 is the LAST part of mixing. If you want something to come
 out, consider dropping parts that are conflicting with it,
 things that are very close in tone or Hz range. It sounds
 better when the track is louder, so it's really, really,
 REALLY easy to do this. Drop the ranges you want, increase
 the overall volume. Take a break, do it again.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  od_step_cloak
             from Pleth (Australia) on 2004-06-28 22:47 [#01259357] Points: 3803 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yep EQ is horribly important. I try to keep the mix of bass in the track so that it's about the same or slightly higher
 than the midrange and hi end.
 
 USUALLY if you're working with decent samples the EQ will be
 near enough by itself, in whihc case it's a matter of
 getting the samples etc to the right volume.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-28 22:49 [#01259358] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | But... even though you want to do it subtlely, it helps to know some of the magic frequencies, right? I'll point out a
 few I like...
 
 If you want to make something sound fuller, bring out the
 bass... depending on the instrument between 50-450Hz. Bass
 drums sound booming at around 60-80Hz, notch that up a
 little for some heavier bass. With a human voice, more like
 300-450Hz, plucked strings, a little lower, 100-200Hz,
 higher strings and brass type stuff much higher...
 400-600Hz.
 
 If you have a sparse sound, ambient or just a few
 instruments, you want to up these frequencies a little,
 depending on the instrument and where the real body of the
 sound is for the particular patch.
 
 It all depends on the particular instrument, and more
 importantly, what PART of the instrument you want to
 amplify.
 
 With a snare drum for example, you can make it deep and
 heavy by uping the bass drum frequencies, 80-100 or so, or
 up right above that to make it sound more full, but not club
 oriented, like 150-250, or go way up and get that crisp
 sound that comes close to a hihat, but pierces through the
 mix easily at around 2kHz.
 
 If you want any specific instruments, experiment, find a
 guide on the web, or ask on here and I'll fool around with a
 few patches and post what I figure out... I like
 experimenting
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-28 22:50 [#01259359] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Taking breaks is incredibly important. This is all about subtlety (how many times have I said that now? I love that
 word). Your ear gets used to the sound range when you've
 listened critically for a long time. You ever notice when
 you're listening to music in the car, not paying attention
 to it really, and you have an urge to turn it up? Try
 turning it down instead. You'll find in 5 or 10 minutes your
 ear will attune to the new decible range and you'll hear it
 ok again. Or, an easier way you'd recognize... how about
 listening to a song you wrote and mastered a week earlier,
 HUGE difference on what you hear. Your ear adapts to what
 you're hearing, so let it rest.
 
 I like flipping the EQ on and off when I'm mastering so I
 remind myself what I started out with. I take a break when I
 realize I'm not hearing what I could an hour ago, at least
 an hour, but sleeping on it is better. Try and go do
 something quiet for a while, let your ears relax.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-28 23:00 [#01259360] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | You might notice EQ does a lot of the same things Compression and Filters do. If they overlap some of the
 effects, how is that going to affect the mastering? Why does
 this matter?
 
 The order of the mastering is becoming important as we add
 the second piece... if you put EQ before compression, you're
 compressing the already equalized sound which could flatten
 out what you just tried to do. If you compress before
 equalizing you could lose the peaks you just tried to
 create.
 
 You need to worry about each part individually, and in
 relation to the sound coming out of the previous effect.
 
 Traditionally reverb and delay come first, then EQ
 empasizing the ranges you want, then compress the peaks,
 then maximize the volume. Compression makes the piece sound
 clearer, our ears pick up on the sharper peaks a lot easier
 than the subtle frequency changes, so we want that to be our
 primary concern. But then again, you can flip them around
 and get a slightly different sound. What works best? Depends
 on what you're doing. Experiment and find out.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  fleetmouse
             from Horny for Truth on 2004-06-28 23:02 [#01259362] Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Lately I've found I get better results modifying my source (synth patch usually) and playing with levels instead of
 EQing. You can fuck up a track real fast with EQ.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-29 13:52 [#01260206] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yeah, definitly will get better results from more fooling with the instrument itself... messing with the EQ too much
 makes the instrument lose it's charm sometimes
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sempoo
             from Barlinek (Pluto) on 2004-06-29 16:38 [#01260409] Points: 621 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | And how to get a deep bass without loosing overall volume? 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  X-tomatic
             from ze war room on 2004-06-29 17:24 [#01260444] Points: 2901 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I now know for sure that I'm too lazy in these areas of songcreation, I already find it off-putting when I think
 about having to do the stuff mentioned here.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  dariusgriffin
             from cool on 2004-06-29 17:37 [#01260462] Points: 12516 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I never really do any of these things, but I think my music sounds quite good anyway.  This is Insane.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  clint
             from Silencio... (United Kingdom) on 2004-06-29 17:44 [#01260468] Points: 3447 Status: Lurker | Followup to X-tomatic: #01260444
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yeah it is a drag... but I try to keep seperate the creating and the production.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  X-tomatic
             from ze war room on 2004-06-29 18:22 [#01260496] Points: 2901 Status: Lurker | Followup to clint: #01260468
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I'm doing a good job at that too, which is why I've created alot of songs and never actually finish one. :p
 
 "alright, this one's great, I'll sort out the patterns &
 sound details later"
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  hobbes
             from age on 2004-06-29 18:39 [#01260513] Points: 8168 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | i'm with "fabien P". it's like some people even forget to write a good track to
 go along with all the tech talk.....
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Skink
             from A cesspool in eden on 2004-06-29 19:04 [#01260548] Points: 7483 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | It kind of come naturally because i a perfectionist when it comes to creating music.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  oxygenfad
             from www.oxygenfad.com (Canada) on 2004-06-29 19:25 [#01260581] Points: 4442 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | This is funny : ) 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-30 16:09 [#01261380] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | And how to get a deep bass without loosing overall volume?
 
 Bass instruments cover a range of frequencies, play with the
 EQ to see which part you want to emphasize. If you want some
 deep body moving sound, pretty low, like 60-100Hz you want
 to play around with. There are a lot of other things that
 could help... reverb, expander, etc, etc... or maybe you
 just need a better sound from the instrument.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  X-tomatic
             from ze war room on 2004-06-30 16:19 [#01261386] Points: 2901 Status: Lurker | Followup to Sanguine: #01261380
 | 
| 
     
 
 | How about I just send you some of my songs for EQ'ing instead? ;)
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-06-30 16:51 [#01261436] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I have enough trouble mastering my own stuff... ya wanna pay me, I'll master tracks for people, but that's about the only
 way
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  fleetmouse
             from Horny for Truth on 2004-06-30 17:38 [#01261474] Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Getting a good bass is one of the hardest things! You have to of course have a big round bottom but not too loud or it
 blows out the whole track - adding some mid and lower mid is
 essential because you want to have some notiness and pitch
 instead of just a thud. I'm still not sure about the short
 decay concept of bass programming to give it a punch -
 sometimes that just gives you a quacky attack and the rest
 of the note sucks, then it's harder to fit it into the mix
 because the EQ and level change from the attack to the main
 part of the note. Then it's time for compression or
 alternately spend the evening smoking cigarettes
 masturbating and crying.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-01 21:10 [#01262908] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Yup yup... anyone else want to add to this? 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  hepburnenthorpe
             from sydney (Australia) on 2004-07-01 21:22 [#01262910] Points: 1367 Status: Regular | Followup to Sanguine: #01261436
 | 
| 
     
 
 | how much? sounds like you really know what your talking about... :P
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-01 21:44 [#01262926] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | How much what, do I charge to do mastering? Hell, I dunno... really cheap if I have time (which I will for a few months)
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  face pixellator
             on 2004-07-02 06:40 [#01263230] Points: 205 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | This thread has proved invaluable to me -- Can someone recommend me a good 30-band (or so) DX-plugin EQ? I'm
 currently using Sonic Forge's 20-band, which is good, but
 I'd like some more freedom.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Key_Secret
             from Sverige (Sweden) on 2004-07-02 07:09 [#01263247] Points: 9325 Status: Regular | Followup to face pixellator: #01263230
 | 
| 
     
 
 | shiiit ... 30-band? that'd be great. I use 10-band EQs... and filters... I don't just use one EQ,
 but I use several after eachother.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  VLetr
             from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-02 07:21 [#01263255] Points: 793 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | great thread. more please, particularly about the order in which the various processes (compression, eq, reverb etc)
 are usually done for different styles etc.
 
 where can i get a program which will allow me to see a
 frequency/dB graph for a particular point in my song? or for
 a particular channel, say synth A, snare B, etc? as far as i
 know there's no way to do this in fruity loops. i have sonic
 foundry 6  but don't know my way around it yet.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-02 12:50 [#01263677] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | If you're using a 30 band EQ step back and do the same thing with a 4 band.
 
 You might just be incredibly meticulous about getting the
 sound right, but I'd bet that your songs would be better if
 you EQ'd using a 4 band and didn't go overboard
 
 I usually use a 4 band or 10 band at most
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  face pixellator
             on 2004-07-02 12:56 [#01263692] Points: 205 Status: Regular | Followup to Sanguine: #01263677
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I don't overdo it, I'd just like to be more specific with a targeted frequency.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  fleetmouse
             from Horny for Truth on 2004-07-02 15:15 [#01263848] Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Parametric is the thing to use - I love the parametric channel EQs in FL Studio - generally every source has one
 particular resonant frequency you want to isolate and tone
 down - a good way to do this is to turn up say the midrange
 - narrow the width of the affected frequencies - then sweep
 the selection back and forth until you find the REAL ugly
 frequencies - then turn that band DOWN instead of up. Voila,
 it's de-uglified.
 
 If you do that for every channel, you'll hardly have to EQ
 at all in the mastering stage. Mostly I end up having to dip
 the bass a bit and compress to even things out across the
 spectrum.
 
 And still my music sucks because I suck! Ha ha ha!
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  weatheredstoner
             from same shit babes. (United States) on 2004-07-02 18:12 [#01263925] Points: 12585 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | For drums, I'll usually do things in this order... 
 compression > eq > expansion (very rare, only if required in
 certain situations) > delay/reverb
 
 For everything else I'll almost always use EQ to make sure
 there aren't any interfering frequencies... I use EQ a lot.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-07 21:44 [#01269771] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | More people should input here... and ask questions 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  VLetr
             from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-07-08 04:45 [#01270040] Points: 793 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | obviously if you want nice fat, full sounding drums you compress them all separately, then all together.
 
 but should the bassline be added to this latter compression
 or not? of course it all depends on how the individual song
 sounds, but i'm interested to know what people usually do.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  fleetmouse
             from Horny for Truth on 2004-07-09 14:51 [#01271701] Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Good one I saw on the Reaktor forums: apply a 200 Hz hipass filter to everything but the bass drum and bass. Gonna try
 that this weekend to clean up a couple of congested sounding
 tracks.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  oxygenfad
             from www.oxygenfad.com (Canada) on 2004-07-09 18:17 [#01271899] Points: 4442 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Do what you think sounds good, thats what I say. There is a ton of shit that is mixed well that still sucks. We would
 all be listening to a lot of turd for music if that were the
 only thing that makes a good song.
 
 Awesome thread by the way : )
 
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Drunken Mastah
             from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2004-07-19 02:41 [#01280146] Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | could you put out a before/after sample of something you've mastered? two 10 second thingies or something?
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Sanguine
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2004-07-19 04:07 [#01280178] Points: 859 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I master as I go... I EQ things to make them more clear until it sounds right, then I move on to the next part
 
 I got to a point where I was -incredibly- pissed off with
 the way my tracks were sounding... point in case... go
 listen to Kadath
 
 Kadath is really badly mastered. Granted it was one of my
 first pieces and I didn't know what the heck I was doing,
 but it's muddy, the parts aren't apart from each other, lots
 of peaks in the wrong places. The worst part is all the
 overlapping sounds.
 
 Since then it just annoys me if it doesn't sound the way I
 want. So most of my "mastering" is on the fly, then I do a
 full post master just to get the levels correct, tweak some
 of the finer EQ values and get the volume up to where I
 want.
 
 And I'm definitly not the best person to master things... a
 lot of my tracks aren't really well mastered, at least from
 a professional standpoint, but I'm going in that direction.
 That's why I put these threads out... lots of the tricks you
 guys mention on here I fool around with, helped me out quite
 a bit
 
 I'll see what I can do about finding an old track that isnt'
 well mastered and posting a pre and post mastered version
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Ceri JC
             from Jefferson City (United States) on 2004-07-19 05:34 [#01280226] Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to Sanguine: #01259352 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | If your bass sounds too "watery" and lacking punch, rather than just compresisng it to excess or turning it up so loud
 it clips, turn the bass down a bit, boost the treble (just
 on the bass' channel) and the gain up slightly. It makes the
 high end harmonics a bit easier to hear and works
 particularly well on string based bass sounds.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Gonzola
             from Stockholm (Sweden) on 2004-07-19 07:56 [#01280300] Points: 917 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | Key_secret, you wrote that you use several eq's after each other... i'm not criticizing you or anything, but if there's
 one good advice i have considering eq'ing, it's if i notice
 that i'm using several eq's on the same channel it's a sign
 that i'm totally overdoing it, or more likely the sound on
 the intrument itself is wrong...
 
 nice thread!
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  Gonzola
             from Stockholm (Sweden) on 2004-07-19 08:05 [#01280309] Points: 917 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | hmm...but i just realized that several eq's could be useful in some situations. For example if you want intentional
 hissing sounds without the actual high freqency sound of the
 instrument
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  giginger
             from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2005-03-29 06:24 [#01546131] Points: 26335 Status: Regular | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | OK. The topic 'Mastering Tips #2: Equalization ' has been added to your favoritesYou are now being transferred back to
 the topic, otherwise click here
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  virginpusher
             from County Clare on 2005-03-29 06:59 [#01546163] Points: 27325 Status: Lurker | Followup to giginger: #01546131
 | 
| 
     
 
 | I have to use the favorites in the browser because i had filled my xltronic favorites right up!
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  giginger
             from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2005-03-29 07:04 [#01546170] Points: 26335 Status: Regular | Followup to virginpusher: #01546163 | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | You can add 69 now though! 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         | Messageboard index
 
 
        
 |