#1
Hi there,

I just wanted to know - how do you use a frequency analyser to help with eqing the mix (like voxengo span)?
Also, are there any better ones than voxengo span?

If it makes a difference, i use 'classiceq' from here (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-eq.php)

I will be using one of these due to how i don't have good quality monitors at home to mix and master - frequecy analyser will help a lot

Thanks,
AJ
#2
Sorry, really need some help with my eqing... and this has gone unnoticed for a day.
bump!
#5
You shouldn't get in the habit of using your eyes to judge what something sounds like, use your ears. You dont say "wow that song looks good" you say it sounds good.
Epi Les Paul-APH1/Mean 90
MIM Strat

Korg DTR1000
ADA MP-1
Mesa/Boogie Quad Pre
Mesa/Boogie Midi Matrix
<power amp>

Quote by rhcp_freak
If you're EQ'd loose, you'll sound loose anyway.
#6
I agree, spectral analysers can lead you to mix by sight instead of hearing, but they can be useful for for example telling you if a lead guitar part has some hidden bass.

Here's I have in my plugins folder: smexoscope (I think that's actually an oscilloscope, nice though), reaFIR (SA & EQ combined), and most importantly Schwa's Spectro. You get that one with Reaper, or you can buy it off Schwa's site.

But I think this would be of more help to you
#7
Hey, thanks for your help... i found that frequency chart very cool and easy to use. (thanks above poster )

I never really understood parametric equalizers... do you think graphic equalizers (like classiceq) would still be good enough?

Thanks
AJ
#8
Quote by ankthebank
Hey, thanks for your help... i found that frequency chart very cool and easy to use. (thanks above poster )

I never really understood parametric equalizers... do you think graphic equalizers (like classiceq) would still be good enough?

Thanks
AJ


the big problem with graphic EQs is that they can only control preset frequencies, whereas a parametric EQ can control any frequency you set it to. You really need to learn how to use both.
make Industrial and/or experimental electronic music? Join my group!

Last.fm
#10
I find graphic EQ's easier, but everyone has his favourites. The difference is that parametric EQ's can make more precise changes, while graphics EQ's are intended to "shape" the sound.

PA guys love graphic EQ's, because they can shape the sound to fit the ent differcharacteristics of each venue, while mastering engineers use graphics because they get sent the entire track together, so they want to make general changes like more acoustic guitar, less bass for example.

When mixing you'll mostly use parametric EQ's, since they let you do things like for example remove a tiny frequency section (say the mic stand sqweaking) while dropping the overall volume above 3kHz and cutting everything below 800Hz.
#12
Well, for example say you're mixing an acoustic guitar, and there's loads of pick noise. So you set one of the EQ bands to a really narrow (using the Q setting), set the gain high and sweep through the frequencies till you hear the pick noise amplified, lets say that happens around 1kHz. So that's where the pick noise is, so you set the gain to the lowest, cutting it out.

Now you realise the acoustic guitars too bassy, and that's mucking up the bass guitar. You set another EQ band to "low shelf", set the frequency to say 80Hz, and bring down the gain, thus removing a lot of the bass.

However your guitar could sound better, so you turn to that frequency chart and look up the guitar. It says "Body: ~240Hz" - that's what we want. We have another band give a gentle boost to that area, and we end up with something like in the attached image.

Of course that was completely made up, and if you used that eq on an acoustic guitar it would probably sound ****. EQ settings will be different for EVERY recording you come across, and you'll have to use your ears to decide what sounds best (word of advice - moderation is the key). But you can see how you'd use it.
Attachments:
eq.jpg
Quote by Tombe
With pedals you can throw your guitar down for an impromptu pedal drone solo, whereas if you did that on a rack it would just look like you were programming your washing machine.
#13
Thanks, so essentially... you are making space for each of the instruments?
What parametric eq plugins would you recommend?
#14
Exactly, trying to improve the sound but at the same time trying to keep the instruments apart with a combination of EQ, panning and reverb/volume.

I'm not one of these people who have 25 different EQ's (although there are reasons for having a few) so the one I keep going to is Electri-Q. It's payware I think but you get a free version (along with loads of other plugins) with every copy of Computer Music. But by all means do a search on KVRaudio.com, download a few and try them all out.
Quote by Tombe
With pedals you can throw your guitar down for an impromptu pedal drone solo, whereas if you did that on a rack it would just look like you were programming your washing machine.
#16
It could be a possibility, but try out a good few anyway. I never "got" EQ until I tried Electri-Q, might be the same with you and another piece of software. Anyway with so many free EQ's you might as well try some out... (I've saved that search for myself )
Quote by Tombe
With pedals you can throw your guitar down for an impromptu pedal drone solo, whereas if you did that on a rack it would just look like you were programming your washing machine.
Last edited by Union Of V at Aug 21, 2009,