#1
Hi there, I was thinking we could group all of these into one thread...

Could you please tell me how to eq, adjust the volume and what sort of effects would be used on each of these to get the best sound in a mix...


Lead vox -

Backing Vox -

Lead guitar -

Rhythm guitar -

Bass guitar -

Drums -

Keyboard -

(any extra instruments added on request)


For example, lead vox - high pass would be fairly high
- low pass around mid range
- Specific amount of reverb
- etc etc etc

This original post will be updated as more and more settings are typed in


obviously, if everyone thinks this is stupid I'll just take this down
Last edited by ankthebank at Aug 3, 2009,
#2
IMO generic settings very rarely work as there are too many variables with the sound, it takes a lot of experimentation to find out what you like best for what, I would also suggest using frequency analyzers too help with EQing when you're starting out, so you know exactly where everything is fitting.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#4
google it, there are quite a few free VST plugs that do that, you can also search through the KVRAudio plugin database.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#5
I would suggest NOT getting a frequency analyzer.
It's all too easy to become reliant on numbers and charts and graphs and readings rather than learning how to listen.
It's the easiest thing in the world to hear a problem with a guitar track or something, then open a frequency analyzer, see that there's a bit too much 200hz then cut it out, but what will make or break you is your ability to listen to something and identify that 200hz problem WITHOUT an analyzer.

Develop your ear first, then just use the tech to back your instincts up.
#6
<--- Ok, useful advice there... i see where you are coming from

At the moment, I am using this eq (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-eq.php)... but I have no idea how to use it!
I know there is a thread on eqing on UG, but I find that far too long and complicated to understand... think you could break it down to simple words and help me out?
#7
To be fair man, I'm just gonna give you a one word answer:
No.

What you need to do is record some **** and just **** about with the eq and see what it does. You'll be that much more a "whole" engineer for it in a couple of years time. The only way to understand what an EQ does is to play with one and FEEL it.
I can list settings and tell you how to use it and what its for all I won't, but it won't give you a fundamental understanding that you'll feel in your bones when you use one.

I'm not trying to seem a dick or anything haha, I'm trying to be the exact opposite.
Just trial and error it for a while man, just enjoy fumbling around with a new toy.
Treat it like the first time you're going down on your girlfriend. A tad confusing but no less fun.

Enjoy
#8
Quote by Dream Pin
I would suggest NOT getting a frequency analyzer.
It's all too easy to become reliant on numbers and charts and graphs and readings rather than learning how to listen.
It's the easiest thing in the world to hear a problem with a guitar track or something, then open a frequency analyzer, see that there's a bit too much 200hz then cut it out, but what will make or break you is your ability to listen to something and identify that 200hz problem WITHOUT an analyzer.

Develop your ear first, then just use the tech to back your instincts up.


Yeah, the thing is, you learn pretty quickly what the problems are if you use the analyzer to point you in the right direction, you're actually using the tech to help you develop your ear instead of spending a lot of time getting frustrated over it, also given this guy seems new to this he probably isn't going to have very good monitors either, which makes using an analyzer almost essential, since it can point out a lot of problems that your monitors can't and you can't fix it by ear if you can't hear it in the first place.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#9
ok, i see where you are both coming from here...

Dreampin - thx, i'll have fun with my new 'toy' (so to speak). If things get a bit frustrating, I will prob turn to the frequency analyser... just to perfect things

Is this 'eqer' good enough for my purposes (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-eq.php)
#10
Use reference mixes.
I compare my mixes with a lot of Andy Sneap stuff, which sounds fairly tinny on my speakers
so I just try to recreate that with my mixes. As long as he learns his speakers fairly well it shouldn't matter too much.
I stand by my point though.
That's exactly the thing we SHOULDN'T be trying to imprint on him so early. Whether his speakers are accurate or not, he needs to get a feel for listening for problems, rather than going straight for the analyzer. It's a matter of principle is all.
#11
And as far as a good EQ plugin goes, it doesn't matter. I think it was on uh.. Gearslutz I think? There was some guy that tested a bunch of free, cheap and ultra expensive EQ's and he was able to match the sound with very little difference in the settings with all the different plugins.

Long story short. Don't bother paying for a really expensive one, because you can match the sound with a free one.
#12
Where can I get these mixes from?
Do you have any on hand - I use reaper

Thx for your help,
AJ
#13
Quote by Dream Pin
And as far as a good EQ plugin goes, it doesn't matter. I think it was on uh.. Gearslutz I think? There was some guy that tested a bunch of free, cheap and ultra expensive EQ's and he was able to match the sound with very little difference in the settings with all the different plugins.

Long story short. Don't bother paying for a really expensive one, because you can match the sound with a free one.


I would have to disagree with this, although it really just depends on how much detail you want, I don't know anyone who can replicate the results of Waves EQs with anything else, but then again I don't know a whole lot of people that really notice the difference.

Quote by ankthebank
Where can I get these mixes from?
Do you have any on hand - I use reaper

Thx for your help,
AJ


CDs or whatever, a reference mix is just a fully mixed down finished track, although when using that you need to learn to tell the difference between mixing and mastering as it shows up in the finished product.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
Last edited by Kid_Thorazine at Aug 3, 2009,
#14
kk, i'll see what i can do... i don't mind spending a long time on my mixes (well actually, i'm on my first)

As long as the end result is good, i'll spend days... or even weeks!

Thx again people,
AJ
#15
Jesus man. IT'S ****ING GEARSLUTZ.
They're the pickiest bastards ever and it was all done as scientifically as ****ing possible.

You can disagree with it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true.
#16
Quote by Dream Pin
Jesus man. IT'S ****ING GEARSLUTZ.
They're the pickiest bastards ever and it was all done as scientifically as ****ing possible.

You can disagree with it all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true.


actually it's pretty subjective, and they may be picky, but that doesn't make them right, also a lot of people on that forum are very fond of posting thier opinions as being absolutely factual, so they don't have a lot of credibility with me anyway.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
Last edited by Kid_Thorazine at Aug 3, 2009,
#18
Quote by Kid_Thorazine
actually it's pretty subjective, and they may be picky, but that doesn't make them right, also a lot of people on that forum are very fond of posting thier opinions as being absolutely factual, so they don't have a lot of credibility with me anyway.

Here's the article in question. There's really no arguing with his findings. He's able to successfully null any software parametric EQ with any other software parametric EQ. Free, cheap, or expensive.

Read for yourself.

Digital EQ Fact and Myth
#19
Quote by Matthias King
Here's the article in question. There's really no arguing with his findings. He's able to successfully null any software parametric EQ with any other software parametric EQ. Free, cheap, or expensive.

Read for yourself.

Digital EQ Fact and Myth


yeah but his findings really doo seem to mainly focus on one type of EQing (parametric) and while that is probably the most commonly used one for most people (myself included) there are tons of uses for other types as well, and in other cases (especially with LP and HP filters) they are not all the same, at all.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#21
maybe between those two, neither of which have analog modeling for the filters, which makes them sound drastically different, depending on what they are trying to emulate and how well they do it, also reaEQ doesn't seem to be able to emulate a 4 pole filter at all.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm