Har-Bal - I don't understand what it's used for!

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by RasCricket

I've said this before about HB: Do not fear it. It is not 'Godzirra'. It will not crush your town and/or steal your womens.

LOL, now that's funny!

Speaking of HairBalls and town crushing:

[RasCricket]

Hey, thanks for the desktop wallpaper

Thats really cool

[Tangible]

I'm not an ME, but I've improved my masters a lot by observing RTA's, however, I never try to match curves to any exact setting...but I do indeed think that it can give you an idea when somethings out of whack. Ultimately, I make all final decisions with my ears....but there's nothing wrong with comparing your music with professional song through visuals as well as listening.

[First Aid]

Maybe if it's an exact cover version...

[Jesse Graffam]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

No real ME would use such a gimmick, unless it were for a special effect.

A common misconception about Har-Bal (in this topic) is that it is only automatic. In fact most people use it manually. So an EQ is now a gimmick? Please explain.

Originally Posted by df1587

Although Har-Bal is capable of spectrum matching, I feel that this aspect of its capabilities is extremely minor. I view it as a linear/minimal phase spline equalizer [..] But for God's sake...it is just a tool! The most important element in using a tool is the operator!

I agree totally. This is how most people that have actually used it see it. The part I find the most funny is that the people in this topic that are saying Har-bal is useless have never even used it. I'm officially making that my "Idiom Of The Day"

[flatfinger]

It is true that the curve stealing feature was'nt even added till late in the game ; long after Voxegno curve eq had it . The advert slogan about visual mastering got under allot of peoples skin and some never got around that ; There are some intense haters of HB for sure; Kind of scary how they get so riled up about a piece of softwares that sets you back a B franklin.

If you listen to the two guys behind it , they are both knowledgable and very conservative in what they usually advise ( in fact , they have many parallel recomendations to those you might hear around here ) .

The "auto" algo's are very hit and miss ; but when they do hit , you can learn a bit about masking and critical bands. ...; Most pro's are proficient with this and can get it done faster and more often accurately plus a much higher percentage of the time than an algo .


The first and foremost thing M.E.'s would do in the old days was adjust the final spectral balance. The volume maximization did'nt become the monster it is now until digital .

The Ideal of taking an overall , full track FFT spectral view is'nt radical , and like most tools , it's up to the user to apply it wisely. You have to be aware of things like song sections or songs that start low and slow and then accelerando and get louder.

applying a generalized filter to the whole track can end up just being a dynamic eq that only reduces gain on the peak sections....A motivated and experienced M.E. can do a whole lot more than that .


Overall I find it to be pretty usefull in a forensic sort of way to help me keep track of what works and why , But I let the flaps on the side of my big cabeza make the call in the end .

Cheers

[olofd]

I'm so tired of all these pointless augments here on GS.
why does every uptight audionerd (especially in the mastering section) have to be so negative about these kinds of products!?
and the funny thing is that this kind of behavior is not restricted to GS, in all forums on the net you have the newbies, the random users and the FAN-boys how does nothing but hang on the forum hammering on their own chest.

Har-bal is what you use it for, it's not an automated system, it has built-in automated algos. (Witch you CHOOSE to use)
It's an EQ with a spectrum analyzer. And if you criticize that, you have to criticize a lot of audio plugins.

It's a tool for the eyes when you want to double-check your ears.
Everything in the audio-feild is about perception and not the most trained
Mastering-guru have a natural and even perception, the ones that say they does, are full of bullshit, the ones that think they does should stop making music.

seriously guys.. I don't see any builders using their eyes instead of a ruler!

Har-Bal can be of great help when working in a not optimized environment.
I always check my mixes in Hal-Bal before releasing it, just as I check if the mix sounds good in a pair of headphones..
often I don't have to use the app, but sometimes I've missed someting in the EQ, and then it's easy to fix.

btw. that eq sounds really good IMO.
Not the best around.. but I don't mind using it.

And for all you gurus:
YouTube - Audio Myths Workshop

[Odeon-Mastering]

Originally Posted by olofd

seriously guys.. I don't see any builders using their eyes instead of a ruler!

hardly any builder uses a ruler.
Nowadays they got laser devices for measurements (although the good old "analog" tape measure can still perform miracles)

but please, feel free to build your house using whatever works for you.

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by olofd

I'm so tired of all these pointless augments here on GS.

I'm not sure bringing up a thread that is two weeks old helps...

why does every uptight audionerd (especially in the mastering section) have to be so negative about these kinds of products!?

Maybe to balance out against the ludicrous claims of the marketing of these types of products? And also, in this case, to warn people that a standalone tool might not be the best thing for workflow especially when there are tools that do the same job cheaper as plugins.

I prefer people spend their money with Voxengo. No ludicrous claims. Very reasonable prices. Some truly amazing products. Some of them clearly breaking new ground. They don't shout as loudly and the GUIs are not the most flashy so they don't always stand out compared to the more flashy products.

and the funny thing is that this kind of behavior is not restricted to GS, in all forums on the net you have the newbies, the random users and the FAN-boys how does nothing but hang on the forum hammering on their own chest.

Luckily we have the apex of wisdom to set us all straight. But hey, Internet forums are just like real life (often) with less inhibition so you get all sorts... Well except that in real life people don't pick up 2 week old conversations that often.

Har-bal is what you use it for, it's not an automated system, it has built-in automated algos. (Witch you CHOOSE to use)
It's an EQ with a spectrum analyzer. And if you criticize that, you have to criticize a lot of audio plugins.

It isn't a plugin! That for me is probably its biggest problem. Second is the marketing. Their marketing asks for their product to be bashed. If they don't like it, they should cut out the non-sense. Just look at the first page of their site. Puke. Even the title of the page is a joke!

It's a tool for the eyes when you want to double-check your ears.

There are a dozens of free spectrum analysers. Why pay for this one? Come on. Admit it. It is all about the spectrum match.

Everything in the audio-feild is about perception and not the most trained Mastering-guru have a natural and even perception, the ones that say they does, are full of bullshit, the ones that think they does should stop making music.

This has nothing to do with whether HarBal is a good product or not.

seriously guys.. I don't see any builders using their eyes instead of a ruler!

I guess in these days of square blocks as mixes I can see how you came to this analogy. Unfortunately it doesn't work. Most experienced ME's will not use spectrum analysers. In other words, the exact opposite of builders and their (laser) rulers.

Har-Bal can be of great help when working in a not optimized environment.

No one denied that but there are better tools that you can use straight in your DAW and fix the MIX rather than trying to hammer the stereo 2 track into shape after the fact.

I always check my mixes in Hal-Bal before releasing it, just as I check if the mix sounds good in a pair of headphones..
often I don't have to use the app, but sometimes I've missed someting in the EQ, and then it's easy to fix.

Good for you but in case you hadn't noticed, this is the mastering forum. Not the right place for HarBal.

And for all you gurus:
YouTube - Audio Myths Workshop

And how exactly does this relate HarBal in particular?

Alistair

[E-Irizarry]

I don't know why a lot of you dudes on here are jumping up pissin' and fartin' over Har-Bal.

Waves LinMB does a remarkable job on tightening up the frequencies to their threshold levels when you use that plugin properly.

Voxengo CurveEQ tightens up the I/0 levels to be 1:1 in conjunctive use with Waves LinMB, and I get great results.

Waves LinMB + Voxengo CurveEQ > Har-Bal.

Real talk.

[Subversounds]

I've used Har-Bal in the studio i've used to work and it is a great piece of gear to do quick mastering jobs to clients. We were not a mastering studio, but many clients couldnt afford a good master and were not happy with cheap mastering done around here.

We first did a good mix, then took a very similar music, and use harbal to quickly (really, max 1 hour, most of times less) do a 'master'. Or better, to quickly match equalization and volumes (some times we used external comps because harbal comp in nost that good).

We even did a test with the original mix and one sent to an expensive master engineer in NYC (it was kind of an epic thread here a while back). We took his good final master (second revision) and we used as source, put the original mix into harbal and tried to match (took 30 minutes). For our surprise it was very - very - close to the expensive mastering.

Harbal is fastfood mastering, but once in a while fast food is great.

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by Subversounds

We even did a test with the original mix and one sent to an expensive master engineer in NYC (it was kind of an epic thread here a while back). We took his good final master (second revision) and we used as source, put the original mix into harbal and tried to match (took 30 minutes). For our surprise it was very - very - close to the expensive mastering.

That is no surprise is it? It is the same track!

Alistair

[Subversounds]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

That is no surprise is it? It is the same track!

Alistair

Well, it is very surprising because according to ME it was like this:

ME: Original Mix + Analog EQ + Analog Comp + Digital Limiter + Computer plugins = Mastered Track

We: Original Mix + Harbal = Mastered Track

it was really close (i would say 95% of 100%). I know they came from the same original file. But i never knew a 100 dollar plugin could go so well.

And Yes, i know the hard work ME had to achieve that job and HB is just copying it. But it is a very good copy, that is what i meant.

[flatfinger]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

Come on. Admit it. It is all about the spectrum match.


Alistair

If Harbal were a football game , then spectrum match would not have entered the game until the fourth quater; The dev's resisted and did'nt want to do it before finally capitulating.

In the begining they were offering up some spectral signatures ( came with a dozen or so) as basic , genre specific guidelines only whilst Curve EQ was doing full on curve stealing.



Obviously it's debateable as to how much every genre has a singular , signature spectral slope ( Kind of unrealistic to expect that kind of uniformity out of human individuals after all !)


It seems that , as is rampant with this sort of debate , some folks haven't really cracked the tin open on this one , and are making some snap judgements.

Yes , they have an audio examination algo ( Algo's and audio softwares , hmmm.. , what an unusual combo ! tutt) that attempts to find and unmask critical bands . Yes , it's much less than perfect , but a newbie who is paying attention can use the times it gets it right to examine and learn about critical bands and masking .

Other than that It is a decent spline eq with a good FFT analyizer at heart , with some bells and whistles attached .


Not any thing a serious technician who has developed their ears and has a good room and has that room down would realistically need , but some who don't fit that description could find some utility in it........



Yes they tend to hype the daylights out of their product ( thats Sooo unusual too I suppose ?)

[df1587]

I'm not sure I get the whole curve matching thing. It seems to me that unless you have nearly identical instrumentation as well as similar tone, timbre and a similar mix that it wouldn't be very useful. The couple of times I played with it, it really did not work at all for me. I suppose that it could work in certain circumstances with standard instrumentation such as bluegrass, gypsy jazz, string quartet, etc. I would be more afraid of losing the individuality of the instrument's voices, however. Maybe it can work for totally synth based pop stuff....it just doesn't intuitively make a lot of sense to me.

I did find the generic curves of different styles to be pretty interesting in pointing out specific peaks in the spectra for differing styles of music (such as the double bass contribution in orchestral recordings, some percussive peaks in other genres). I have pulled up reference curves with -3 or -6 dB rolloffs on spectrum analyzers just to see how my curves looked in comparison but I never considered them to be anything other than a real ballpark kind of reference.

I have also used the Intuit-Q function at times. The times I have, it has smoothed the spectral or EQ curve and more often that not I have kept the change. The changes have generally been on the magnitude of considerably less than a full dB. If smoothing the transition to EQ is slightly more gradual and natural sounding then it works for me.

[RasCricket]

Thanks guys for speaking some sense on the matter.

Undertow, you fail.

It shouldnt take 2 or 3 pages before you yourself understand that its not about this: "Come on. Admit it. It is all about the spectrum match."

Thanks again, to the others who have been speaking logically about this matter.

Oh ~ Jerry, great wallpaper. Currently, the white kitty is winning. Once in a while, the black kitty scores a good hit, but white kitty is totally winning the battle!

[df1587]

I have found Har-Bal to be very valuable in 2 specific instances other than mastering a final recording:

Most of my music is instrumental but I record some songs where I am also the vocalist. To be honest, I have an idea of what my (not too great) voice sounds like....but not in the same way I hear other singer's voices. I find that Har-Bal makes it much easier to tweak my vocal efforts and come up with as good a vocal as one could get out of me!.

The other instance is in constructing demo arrangements of songs to audition for the band (or to see if I want to work a song up as a full recording project). I often use BIAB with Real Tracks for the rhythm section and do vocals and additional instrumentation. I do a decent down and dirty mix and then usually run it through Har-Bal, Dynamic Spectrum Mapper and Kjaerhus MPL as a limiter and do a pseudomaster. Even though Real Tracks are actual recorded clips, the whole mix does need to be tweaked, even as an audition piece. I find that I can be extremely efficient in constructing a good quality song demo in a very short time using this technique.

I think that these are a couple of examples where Har-Bal shines and makes for very efficient workflow. The end product sounds much more professional and finished. Just a couple of thoughts on the subject.

[jayfrigo]

It's just another tool. It can be useful for some things (matching ADR into a production track for instance). As long as you are realistic, it can be interesting.

What it can't do, however, is turn a bad mix into a good mix, or replace professional mastering. There's no free lunch. Every track is unique, and there's more to mastering than EQ.

And what no amount of good recording, mixing, or mastering can do is to turn a bad song into a good one!

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by RasCricket

Undertow, you fail.

Good solid argumentation there, son!

Alistair

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

"
Despite apparently all digital EQ's sounding the same I am currently demoing one of the best "vintage" EQ emulations I have ever heard so far. I guess for some though "all digital EQ's are the same", probably the same people who think analogue is always better too.

You really have to try and step back from the tools on some level and hear what the real result is without being
hung up on the devices themselves.

Have you ever used the EQ that the software is emulating?

[cooker]

Har-bal as eq is nice but the workflow sucks. Instead of requesting it to be a plug-in, it would be much better to be able to open plug-ins inside it and being able to do some editing.

Its ok to eq with it then go to the DAW, if it works for someone thats fine. But when more is needed than eq at some phase it can become a problem.

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

Hi Ben, it would be virtually impossible to hear the original unit. Do I need to? The EQ demo'd is absolutely beautiful and does things that no other EQ I have does, that has sold it to me already.

FWIW I went to hear a couple of the top choices in analogue mastering EQ's this week.

cheers

What is the original unit it's emulating? I'd be keen to have a listen as well.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

it would be virtually impossible to hear the original unit.

... does the original unit not exist anymore?

[RasCricket]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

Good solid argumentation there, son!

Alistair

Someone's gotta be worth my time, talent, and experience, Undertow. Your sir, are not
Sorry.

[RasCricket]

"I don't recall too many offers of uploaded and EQ'd audio files (and now I know why) when I made a request on these forums so I don't feel an immense need for cooperation and kinship on here, little warmth has been coming my way. I am sure this is understandable guys. It takes 2 to tango."

Hey there ~ I cant quite decipher this. Sounds like ya wanted to hear samples or examples? Dunno. I always like that kind of thing when I have time.

But whatcha mean here?

[RasCricket]

Originally Posted by cooker

Har-bal as eq is nice but the workflow sucks. Instead of requesting it to be a plug-in, it would be much better to be able to open plug-ins inside it and being able to do some editing.

Its ok to eq with it then go to the DAW, if it works for someone thats fine. But when more is needed than eq at some phase it can become a problem.

The workflow? And youre saying HarBal should be able to open plug-ins??

See, here I am ~ a totally peaceful guy. I dont want to fight with people here at teh 'Slutz. And then I get confronted with this level of logic and thinking from people here. His statement is wrong on multiple levels.

Its obvious I dont need to speak about HB anymore at GS as the depth of knowledge about it is merely a shallow puddle from most of the users of this forum. I just need to be thankful for my skills and the tools in my arsenal, like HB, that makes my material sound good. Have fun

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

I don't recall too many offers of uploaded and EQ'd audio files (and now I know why) when I made a request on these forums so I don't feel an immense need for cooperation and kinship on here, little warmth has been coming my way. I am sure this is understandable guys. It takes 2 to tango.

If you provided frequency and Q points that could be roughly matched on an analogue EQ maybe some one would have. Also, how is anyone supposed make a comparison sound wise if you don't name the analogue emulation that you are using? you have to compare apples with apples. You use a Pultec, then someone with a Pultec could match it, then compare and share your 'valuable' insights.

[RedTuxedo]

Originally Posted by RasCricket

....Why would the Key of the song matter one lick of how the frequencies will be played back on multiple systems? Answer, it doesnt my friend....
Please let me know why the KEY of the song matters with HarBal? Does a song in A require a different EQ print to sound good over multiple speakers than a song with a key of E?

Not one bit.

Really?

Chart of Equal Temperament.

See those notes? They are all potential song keys. They have frequencies associated with them (A 440 for example).

Knowing the key of a song tells you some EXTREMELY important frequencies related to that song.

When that chorus comes in, with the first chord on the tonic, and it lacks impact, knowing the key of the song may very well allow you to use .2 dB at the right frequency than 2 at the guessed one that adds more problems in other parts of the song.

Hal-Bar? Not everyone can take mastering seriously, and I guess this would work for some...

[Odeon-Mastering]

Originally Posted by RasCricket
....Why would the Key of the song matter one lick of how the frequencies will be played back on multiple systems? Answer, it doesnt my friend....
Please let me know why the KEY of the song matters with HarBal? Does a song in A require a different EQ print to sound good over multiple speakers than a song with a key of E?

Not one bit.

You call yourself a musician????

That's basic knowledge to musicians.

Ok since i pretend to be a musician (not so successfully) and you like to pretend you know about mastering, I ll ask you to make a test.

record the same track, but use 2 different tonalities (try the key of La (A) and then the key of Mi (E))
when you finish analyse the spectrum with your preffered tools.

[RasCricket]

Originally Posted by Odeon-Mastering

You call yourself a musician????

That's basic knowledge to musicians.

Ok since i pretend to be a musician (not so successfully) and you like to pretend you know about mastering, I ll ask you to make a test.

record the same track, but use 2 different tonalities (try the key of La (A) and then the key of Mi (E))
when you finish analyse the spectrum with your preffered tools.

Now, now you two. Youre gettin all fiesty for nothing. Odeon, boy you really need to pay attention. No where do I claim to know anything about mastering. Youve obviously not been reading this thread.

Ahh, yeah - now I see what you two are getting at. The key of the song isnt really that big a deal when using HB for what I had previously detailed which was preparing songs for play over a large sound system for bass response purposes. Its really not that major of a factor for what Im using the tool for.

Boys...if you really want to be critics, how 'bout you critique my guitar playing in my link. "Ska One"...give it a go
Then tell me all you want about how Im not a "real musician".

Frankly, I could give a rats behind about the key of a song when Im taking a quick look at some bass frequencies. I have taken the info from people into considereation for the next time I need to prepare a playlist for such an event. Trust me, you can try to nail me to the cross for my lack of care about the matter of the key for what Im using HB for. Im not trying to "Master" anything, as previously mentioned. But to knock my musical skills, you need a lot better ammo than this, to be honest.