Mud in EDM mix

[Praxisaxis]

Originally Posted by John The Cut

Nah. Thats terrible advice.

As a noob you should be learing what an equalizer does to the sound and how all the elements of a mix are affected by each other.

You should be learning good equalizer techniques and training your ears to hear specific frequencies and you will learn to recognise BY EAR where problems occur.

Dont be afraid of the equalizer. Its your best friend.

And ignore crappy advice about not using one at all.

No way dude. EQs are certainly useful, but what you've called crappy advice is actually very good. Careful sound selection is the key to crafting the overall sound of a mix. Applying EQ overall as a fix simply means that earlier on in the chain you should have been more careful. The mix is about the sum of its parts. For sure you can use EQ to sculpt a sound - that's not dissimilar to synthesis anyway - but popping it on at the end and hoping for the best is a troublesome way of doing it, whereas working on the sounds to begin with and exercising your ears mean you build things up in the right order.

[Augsy]

Lot's of synths especially ones with sustained notes will cause a huge build up of mud. Usually 200-500hz is a good starting point.

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by tekkentool

Ahahaha this advice is ridiculous.

What separates an EQ from the filters inside the synth, or the other soundshaping devices? why make the distinction between something that doesn't matter at all?

Am a bit err mythed as to why this is so controversial :S

I don't understand how some of you do not think it is feasible to achieve a quite clean mix without going without going the eq the living shit out of everything route aka carving the low mids.

1.if you focus on arrangement for starters it is quite easy to avoid "mud" by not having to many synths playing in the same octaves or overlapping notes and voices e.g err 3 synths playing triads or inversions,2 bassline synths playing in the same octave with relatively the same phase position (that's more strictly mix focussed but oh well)..and many others


2.if you focus more on your sound design especially layered retriggered oscillators adjusting the phase start position of each consecutive oscillator and playing with each oscillators level is alot more productive to get an overall balanced spectrum with your arrangement than carving notches into the low mids

just 2 case examples you want more feel free to ask...

to avoid any confusion i am by no means implying that eq is redundant when it comes to using synths,but when it comes to actually adjusting the spectral balance of a synth or synths it's better to use the synths parameters and other processes as a means of coloring and sitting sounds,in my opinion.

My only use of eq in regards to synths is to decrease the energy in the top or bottom of the spectrum using shelving filters and even then it would be a dynamic eq or automated to behave dynamically.i very rarely use bell filters to "sculpt" as it seems a little nonsensical to me considering the harmonics you are notching will shift with every key change and automating it to alternate to focus on each new low mid harmonic seems daft if it can be avoided from the get go by focussing the route problem (arrangement and sound design).i know somebody is likely to suggest to use wider q values but that brings me right back to my use of shelving over bells.

I find layering more sufficient. which in combination, with phase can be seen as a form of eq..i suppose


Johnynotknow

[AJ Reynolds]

Originally Posted by johnynotknow

Am a bit err mythed as to why this is so controversial :S

some people lack knowledge.

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by AJ Reynolds

some people lack knowledge.

wooooooooord


Johnynotknow

[kacperson]

Originally Posted by Augsy

Lot's of synths especially ones with sustained notes will cause a huge build up of mud. Usually 200-500hz is a good starting point.

thank you mate,yet another great tip in this topic

[pearlywhites]

also a good stereo width. try advanced eq techniques like 'mid side'

[kacperson]

first time i heard about this mid side technique...omg how much i still suck. Must learn it as i just saw some tutorials and results look interesting



edit:loooool this is pretty damn amazing thing if you ask me ,i obviously still dont use it properly as i must learn all the details on mid side processing but it has damn huge potential in such music

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by kacperson

first time i heard about this mid side technique...omg how much i still suck. Must learn it as i just saw some tutorials and results look interesting

I wouldn't worry about it too much it's more effective when pertaining to pre-send effects chains with reverbs and shit on

On the actual synths themselves you wanna tread carefully cause using certain filters or going overboard with settings can make sounds sound like seperate entities to the rest of the arrangement or in correlation with other sounds.i have noticed this atleast

Eqing the L-R slightly differently though can be useful to have a sound within a certain pocket of the stereo image by distributing the energy of the frequencies in favour of either the left or the right (only tends to work with marginal settings though)

When it comes to processing in general though no matter what the task it's best to have a couple of plugins do parts of the work rather than one perform the bulk of the task

Whether it be spreading,dynamics,tonal balancing (you get the picture)


Johnynotknow

[pearlywhites]

good advice johhny. sometimes just monoing most channels can do it better.
and if you eq out a chunk you might want to compress it afterwards

[kacperson]

Originally Posted by johnynotknow

I wouldn't worry about it too much it's more effective when pertaining to pre-send effects chains with reverbs and shit on

On the actual synths themselves you wanna tread carefully cause using certain filters or going overboard with settings can make sounds sound like seperate entities to the rest of the arrangement or in correlation with other sounds.i have noticed this atleast

Eqing the L-R slightly differently though can be useful to have a sound within a certain pocket of the stereo image by distributing the energy of the frequencies in favour of either the left or the right (only tends to work with marginal settings though)

When it comes to processing in general though no matter what the task it's best to have a couple of plugins do parts of the work rather than one perform the bulk of the task

Whether it be spreading,dynamics,tonal balancing (you get the picture)


Johnynotknow

i have one friend who is a pro producer,though we live in opposite parts of country so contact is mostly by phone and skype. i asked him about midside examples and he showed me what bass he done with mid side eq...i was blown away. This is a mighty tool ,but obviously must be user properly and sparingly,long way ahead...

[johnynotknow]

Sometimes you don't want to collapse stuff completely to mono especially across the whole spectrum

Though to give the perception of width in some arrangements it does work quite well to selectively pick your sounds that cater to the width.especially if your arrangement is progressive (have a listen to some pryda,cirez-d stuff for examples of this)

Johnynotknow

[pearlywhites]

their tunes always strike me as very 'produced' stuff

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by kacperson

i have one friend who is a pro producer,though we live in opposite parts of country so contact is mostly by phone and skype. i asked him about midside examples and he showed me what bass he done with mid side eq...i was blown away. This is a mighty tool ,but obviously must be user properly and sparingly,long way ahead...

If he just showed you a bass on its own with mid/side eqing,processing that's understandable that it would sound impressive. from what you're saying it seems if though he just showed you a bass rather than a track featuring a bass

At the end of the day (this is gonna sound a little unoriginal)it doesn't matter how sounds sound individually its how they sound collectively in an arrangement and from personal experience using one processor to perform the bulk of the task never gets you there,in my opinion.

Unless you're selling sounds and trying to give them the the wow factor then it's understandable

Johnynotknow

[kacperson]

no,i have in mind amazing bass as part of whoe track,this is a great tool and i am mega glad i started this topic

[Ged]

ok sound selection is one thing - but if you have many parts at one time then it's likely EQ will be needed, it's not a crime - the trick is to cut just enough to clean it up, mostly about 2-3dB around 250hz on the synth group

[johnynotknow]

Originally Posted by Ged

ok sound selection is one thing - but if you have many parts at one time then it's likely EQ will be needed, it's not a crime - the trick is to cut just enough to clean it up, mostly about 2-3dB around 250hz on the synth group

Not necessarily

Cutting that area by a few db is one way of doing it but there is others for instance. if the parts are all playing at the same time then they shouldn't play at exactly the same time. just like when you layer kicks you don't want to have 2 transients layered that start the beginning of their envelope at exactly the same time and shape and frequency content (if you intend to use the whole envelope of the other kick),same applies to synths and even the slighest amount of attack on the adsr can slip one sound behind the other in combination with levelling also the alternate tunings can cause the phasing of the oscillators to not build up in one specific frequency area.in this case,the low-mids, if tuned properly.

Another way of doing it would be to work with early reflections to make the start of the sound slightly a wash with complex reverb information which would give the impression that the sound is perceived as behind the other.

If you're applying a 250hz db cut on your group then all i see that is doing is disguising whatever issues you have with the relative balance of the various synths parts and there is alot more effective ways of achieving seperation between the different timbres e.g voicing,tuning,ADSR,s,opposing modulations,phase position etc etc etc etc

Like stated previously, if it's energy build up from detuned oscillators or whatever shelving is the way to go as that just decreases the magnitude with a given slope setting and even then you'll wanna automate it or use a dynamic eq. as to not thin out some notes more than others.

Also,unless some of you work in the same key all the time then 250hz shouldn't occur as a constant problem in mixes...food for thought perhaps (cough cough your room and or speaker position)


Johnynotknow

[Kindred]

If you don't trust your ears, use a spectrum analyzer eq like Fabfilter Pro-Q - you can then cut & boost as required. Or you can use something to add high end sheen with less precision like a Softube Focusing Equalizer.

But agree with other posters...get the individual tracks sounding right rather than eqing or compressing a whole mix

[kacperson]

Ok i tried to apply some changes ,trying to use some advices from here.


I hope its somehow better

Technoish track,looking for feedback

here i started a topic hoping for somefeedback,but it seems dead since yesterday so maybe some of posters from here will help just check how it develops,how bass sounds now at beggining, and later when some synths are introduced . How it sounds mixingwise ?

[John The Cut]

Originally Posted by John The Cut

As a noob you should be learing what an equalizer does to the sound and how all the elements of a mix are affected by each other.

You should be learning good equalizer techniques and training your ears to hear specific frequencies and you will learn to recognise BY EAR where problems occur.

Dont be afraid of the equalizer. Its your best friend.

And ignore crappy advice about not using one at all.

[kacperson]

e ok i get the hint,just try to elaborate a bit :P

[Heyclown]

Is this your muddy mix?
4 gearslutz demo by Kacpro on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free

Really don´t sound too muddy to me. But it lacks definition. The only sharp/high sound is the perch and thats FAAR in the back. And the bottom is undefined. You need sharper sounds. And spread your sounds over the whole spectrum, but make sure you apply subtractive EQ so that sounds shine in their specific area without cluttering in areas where other sounds is king. Pan more. Use some delay/reverb but only on chosen elements and use with caution.
Most of all; sharpen it up with more crispy perc/snare/claps and fatter bottom/kick. Everything is dull now very much because of the arrangement and chosen sounds.

And make u´re track downloadable so people can take it into a DAW and fatten it up a tad and repost

[kacperson]

e no it is not the first one,it is the one improoved. first one was real mud mate . And arrangement wise i know it sucks ,i just wanted to check if i got rid of mud somehow. I am looking now for some more interesting sounds,and hats too

[Heyclown]

Ok. Best of luck. If you want input, make it downloadable and I might get inspiration to spend 15 minutes on it

[kacperson]

THX buddy now i must gtfo to sleep,its already 2 am here in poland

[platinumaudiolab]

"mud" is subjective. Usually what you are referring to is an under-representation of high-frequency content relative to lower frequencies (say, sub 600hz). So, obviously you would try cutting across 100hz-600hz to see if this helps. As always with eq'ing, if you find yourself using drastic numbers across your entire mix, it means your mix is broken and you should probably revisit it.

Also consider the stereo image of your track. If the width isn't there, it could seem like your entire mix is competing with the center (mostly low-frequency content) and you may struggle to lift it out of the... 'mud'.

Consider trying some mid-side processing on the final mix. If you're not too technically inclined try Brainworx Digital V2 (free trial). Don't try too much with it if you're not familiar with how to use it. Just boost the high band on the "Stereo" side of the EQ and A/B with the dry mix to see if it helps lift it out of the mud.

[kacperson]

i tried mid side eq and more or less i know how and when to apply it,though i still suck in it i believe In this mix i applie d a bit of mid side EQ on tracks . This mix prob gonna be wider when i process hats etc better and eventually add few sounds. I already got a lot of great advice here,this topic is gold for me

[dlmorley]

In my experience it is usually a combination of things, but please don't ignore the arrangement. All elements need space not only in the mix but in the arrangement. Some arrangements are too busy "down there" (ooeer missus!)

[kacperson]

Originally Posted by dlmorley

In my experience it is usually a combination of things, but please don't ignore the arrangement. All elements need space not only in the mix but in the arrangement. Some arrangements are too busy "down there" (ooeer missus!)

this is rather problem of my eqing,bc bottom is only kick and bass,processing of this bass/eq/effects might give the impression there is too much of something,but whole bass is actually one synth . I must though suck with processing it if you get impression its too busy Maybe it is beacuse it lacks something more crispy in there, "bite" like one user said correctly,i thought about adding there a thing more "moogish" sound like moog does with bit of noise

[dlmorley]

I haven't actually listened to the track I'm afraid. Just commenting on mixes I have heard where low end is an issue...
I'll check your track out (soundcloud say it is not available)