do we really need a standalone hardware eq in our setup...

[gm5k]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

i understand that a limiter or compressor would be a must to control the signal as it comes in into your daw to get as much of a hot signal as you can when tracking.

with an eq, do we really need one? i understand that it can be a useful tool when sculpting and adding flavour to a sound but should eq be classified as more of a luxury hardware since you can get flavour from the mic, pre and compressor you use already.

wouldn't correct mic techniques make eq useless when tracking and eq plugins, though not comparable to hardware eqs, couldn't you still live without a hardware eq and use the plugins instead and still get quality results.

should standalone eqs be the last in your chain of high end purchases and is it a luxury. some pres already come with a useful eq as well, like the 1073 clones.

i am debating of whether getting a standalone eq like the lil freq or get another compressor to make a pair for stereo use. i already have an avalon 737sp with an eq and i hardly use that hardware eq.

i think this post poses a really good overall question. im curious to see the responses

[briefcasemanx]

if you already have a hardware eq and rarely use it, why buy another one?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

with an eq, do we really need one?

The answer is it depends.

If you are producing your own music than i would say maybe not if you are a great arranger/composer where none of your tracks have freqs that clash and all the sounds fit perfectly together.

Also you are a kick ass tracking engineer with the mic locker from god so you can pick and choose different flavors to substitute for EQ's. And you have access to some of the best sounding rooms to track in plus great instruments.

And lastly you are Andy Wallace, Bob Clearmountain and Elliot Scheiner all wrapped up in one so you are a mixing pseudo god with ears that can hear like a bat. So you can shape your mixes with little to no EQ as possible.

If none of these apply to you than yeah an excellent EQ can help in each case if you have the skills and taste on how to apply it.

[deft_bonz]

I wouldn't want to live without. I love to tweak the sound in a creative way, that you can't reach by choosing the right mic or the right synth sound. And then I still think that most of the plugins can't reach the sound of their analogue pendants. And of course I love the the feeling, touch, efficiency and direct response of hardware, that is poorly with software.

Nevertheless I'd say it's a luxury to have hardware eqs. But a niiiiiiceeeee one to have, and I would never sell my Manley and API, never ever

[TEMAS]

Recording myself, on my own, I don't consider myself experienced enough to be confident that the eq decisions I might make while tracking will be beneficial, not to mention time comsuming , so I concerntrate on the performance and mic choice and placement. In time though, hopefully I'll be wise enough to know exactly what settings to have my eqs at for each recording, which will save time and resources in the mixing stage.

[max cooper]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

i understand that a limiter or compressor would be a must to control the signal as it comes in into your daw to get as much of a hot signal as you can when tracking.

These days I almost never do this. You can turn the preamp down. Try it. You might like it.

[ine-kpro...]

depending on how dynamic the source is, i always use a compressor even if it only compresses 1 or 2 db ever so often when tracking.

i recorded a koto player once and it was played so dynamicaly, that when it was time to mix, i would end up with alot of background noise and hum on the low passages. there was not enough signal comin thru compared to the environmental noises such as computer fans, etc.

my recording area is not as quiet as a professional studio since it's all in one room and i have hums from amps, fans, etc, though minimal, it is still loud specially when i am recording.

[1monkey1]

i'm with max cooper on this one.
let go of the compressor, turn down the pre-amp, and maybe try tracking with a good eq, see if you get different results. i find that when i record without compression i'm more aware of the dynamics of my playing, and i think that's a good thing to be aware of.

if you don't like it you can always go back to squashing it.

steven walcott
Engine Studios

[666666]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

i understand that a limiter or compressor would be a must to control the signal as it comes in into your daw to get as much of a hot signal as you can when tracking.

I would not consider a compressor a "must" for tracking. Running everything through a given compressor while tracking is not necessarily a good idea. There will be times when you wish you had not compressed, or compressed less, and ther will be times when you may hear too much of the compressor's "sound" and character in the final product, and at that point you cannot remove.

Be careful doing this, don't just compress everything for the heck of it. It may seem like a good idea, but it isn't. Your best bet is to keep the signal clean and pure while being recorded (meaning no compressor or eq on thew way in), and then maybe here and there on certain tracks that you feel REALLY need a little compression or eq, use only then... but not on everything.

Years ago I used to compress and eq lots of things to tape, just a tad, but soon discovered that this approach made things a lot less flexible later, I wasn't always happy LATER about my choices of compression and eq... in the end the tracks just came out sounding more "processed" and less natural. When in doubt, either go to tape clean, or use as little processing to tape as you possibly can... and only use it when you feel it is truly necessary and/or will truly enhance the color of what you're recording.

One mistake a lot of people make is to use their high end outboard simply "because it's there". When you have a nice piece of gear sitting in front of you (like a killer compressor), it's VERY tempting to want to USE it in your signal path... but resist that temptation and be sure to use it ONLY if "necessary".

You may even want to spend your $ on another hi-end mic pre of a different color than what you already have, this would probably be a "better" approach to coloring your tracks nicely as opposed to adding compression and eq on the way in. Use your mics and pres to shape and color your input signals as opposed to adding "extra" processing.

[oceantracks]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

The answer is it depends.

If you are producing your own music than i would say maybe not if you are a great arranger/composer where none of your tracks have freqs that clash and all the sounds fit perfectly together.

Also you are a kick ass tracking engineer with the mic locker from god so you can pick and choose different flavors to substitute for EQ's. And you have access to some of the best sounding rooms to track in plus great instruments.

And lastly you are Andy Wallace, Bob Clearmountain and Elliot Scheiner all wrapped up in one so you are a mixing pseudo god with ears that can hear like a bat. So you can shape your mixes with little to no EQ as possible.

If none of these apply to you than yeah an excellent EQ can help in each case if you have the skills and taste on how to apply it.

I'm producing my own music and with all due respect it has nothing to do with being a great composer if you have to roll off some boom from a guitar track...

I finally got an API 550a for tracking and I've found it very useful. I use it in very minimal ways, a little roll off, or a little boost on a guitar or voice, and I've found that I very often don't have to EQ any more in the mix with a plug in.

TH

[oceantracks]

Originally Posted by 1monkey1

i'm with max cooper on this one.
let go of the compressor, turn down the pre-amp, and maybe try tracking with a good eq, see if you get different results. i find that when i record without compression i'm more aware of the dynamics of my playing, and i think that's a good thing to be aware of.

if you don't like it you can always go back to squashing it.

steven walcott
Engine Studios

You can easily screw things up with too much of anything on the way in, that said, I have enjoyed all the tracks I've cut going through my LA3A...vocal, guitars, you name it. Sometimes it's barely on, sometimes not, but the signal is always going through it. In the end, all of this is a matter of taste and what you want the end result to sound like.

Like comping tracks before you get to a final mix, there has to be some overall vision and if you have a strong one, it won't matter much what you do on the way in if it meets that vision's requirements and you know what you want.

TH

[soundawg]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

depending on how dynamic the source is, i always use a compressor even if it only compresses 1 or 2 db ever so often when tracking.

i recorded a koto player once and it was played so dynamicaly, that when it was time to mix, i would end up with alot of background noise and hum on the low passages. there was not enough signal comin thru compared to the environmental noises such as computer fans, etc.

my recording area is not as quiet as a professional studio since it's all in one room and i have hums from amps, fans, etc, though minimal, it is still loud specially when i am recording.

So are you saying a compressor helps in this case, doesn't bringing up the lower signals with your compressor bring up the noise too?

Me thinks you would be better off leaving in the dynamics - and trying some sort of homemade isolation - like moving blankets or something - around yer source.

As for the EQ thing - if you aren't getting any use out of the EQ on the 737, I don't see why you would use a different eq more.

Me thinks if you were using the 737 EQ - but it wasn't getting you where you want to go - and you had identified what you felt you were missing, you would then be in a good position to go shopping for that missing element.

High end EQs and Compressors are usually more than $2000... you could build or purchase an iso booth for the computer and/or musician for less than that.

Oh - and this...

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

i understand that a limiter or compressor would be a must to control the signal as it comes in into your daw to get as much of a hot signal as you can when tracking.

...is wrong, unless you are working at 16bit.

Do some looking into bit rates and recording levels, you'll see.

Soundawg

[Reptil]

I've found hardware indespensible in my studio, it just is part of my sonic universe. It feels better, and I waste less time to make tracks fit. To say "I don't use my avalon much, so why would I need yet another hardware eq?" I can only say that this question is not correct. An avalon and for instance an API are night and day. Plus it is how you use the piece of hardware; are you going in hot, or moderate level, what are you doing; corrections or shaping, or both? It really depends, there is no clearcut answer. Maybe a bunch of software will get you where you want, generally IMO it involves a different approach and more tweaking. You might want to invest in an (endless) knobby controller to get the feel (back)...

For Dynamics there is no equivalent to hardware. Software is shite. Sorry if that is not what ppl. want, but that is just the way of the universe.

[ine-kpro...]

Originally Posted by soundawg

So are you saying a compressor helps in this case, doesn't bringing up the lower signals with your compressor bring up the noise too?
Soundawg

no, it means i can close mic the instrument to get a louder signal on the quiet passages from the instrument if i compress or limit the signal when tracking. if i place the mic closer to the instrument, i would clip the signal if i did not compress or limit it.

[Stitch333]

There are certain eqs that just by passing signal through flat will color and define the sound in a way that no plugin can touch (for example try a W395/W695, EQP1a, 31105, etc...)
Let alone the capability of scuplting the the frequencies of a sound to fit in a mix.

[soundawg]

Originally Posted by ine-kpro...

no, it means i can close mic the instrument to get a louder signal on the quiet passages from the instrument if i compress or limit the signal when tracking. if i place the mic closer to the instrument, i would clip the signal if i did not compress or limit it.

OK, So you are recording a sound you like - with the method you prefer then, right on - thatz cool, I myself are with the other posters who are in favor of not having to compress and hitting the AD hard - but whatever is floating your boat.

However, I still think from the progression of posts above - the single largest problem you have identified is the noise in your space, and no matter what you do...

Won't this continue to pis u off until it's gone?

All I'm saying is, you really should think about spending your money on fixing the noise issue you have identified, because the sound of your room is more crucial than all of this back and forth about eq or compression or levels or whatever...

Now, the eq you mentioned in the first post is about $1800 or more, nice eq so I've read - but no eq or compressor (at any price) is gonna remove the noise. Plus, the 737 may not be the most loved piece around these here parts but the eq section of the 737 is... thatz a pretty sweet eq you got there already.

I'm quite sure you could figure a way to fix the noise issue for less than $1800.

This is like building a house, maybe don't start to decorate before ensuring your foundation is sound?

Get it? Before your foundation is sound AHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! ! ! !

sorry

Soundawg

[u b k]

every guy doing this gig alone in his own room would do really well to make friends with multing. after your pre, split the signal out; record one direct to daw, record the other thru some comp and/or eq. don't be afraid to process heavily, the direct track is your safety net.

come mixtime, you can blend the two sources as needed, and you'll probably need less plug-in treatment (if any) to get what you want from the sound.

win/win.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[bcgood]

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

The answer is it depends.

If you are producing your own music than i would say maybe not if you are a great arranger/composer where none of your tracks have freqs that clash and all the sounds fit perfectly together.

Also you are a kick ass tracking engineer with the mic locker from god so you can pick and choose different flavors to substitute for EQ's. And you have access to some of the best sounding rooms to track in plus great instruments.

And lastly you are Andy Wallace, Bob Clearmountain and Elliot Scheiner all wrapped up in one so you are a mixing pseudo god with ears that can hear like a bat. So you can shape your mixes with little to no EQ as possible.

If none of these apply to you than yeah an excellent EQ can help in each case if you have the skills and taste on how to apply it.

LOL

[Sigma]

i like the sound of things compreseed thru stages rather than once..
plus
sometime ya want the eq before the compressor when ya gotta suck stuff ya know ya want out and the compressor need not see..other times after cuase you can tweak and not affect compressor threshold

personally I like to make what comes of the drive sound as good as it can first..if that means using eq and compression on the front end so be it

..the goal dictates the course