[wwittman]

I say if it has a frequency range that is bugging you, cut it.
If it has a frequency range that it's lacking, boost it.

I don't get the "cutting is BETTER" concept.
WHY is it?


I believe in doing whatever it takes to make it sound great.
If that means a lot fo EQ, I EQ.
If I can do it at the amp or guitar or other ways, I do that first.
But I'm not shy to EQ.
If it starts to sound bad I'll be the first to know.


Evil?
EQ is a bit like capitalism, it isn't intrinsically evil but it's often used that way.
Especially in America {g}

I DO think that treating EQ "conceptually" rather than artistically is a mistake.
For example the idea of "needing" to carve a space for each thing instead of just listening and EQing as needed.
I've seen some guys who don't want to add 3k to the piano because that's what they added to the guitar.
It shouldn't be about RULES.