Eq or not while tracking drums?

[cfdude]

What are the advantages or disadvantages of eqing drums while tracking? Should this be done at mixdown? I get the proper mic and placement thing, but eqing while tracking can be really expensive, due to the fact that you need alot of eq's for drums. Can the proper mic and preamp be good enough? And then apply eq at mixdown? Your thoughts please.

[Musiclab]

I record all the time with no eq during tracking. Mic placement can get you where you have to go so long as the drummmer is good, the drums and room are decent, and you have some good mics and pres and know what your doing. Of course if you have a bad drummer your screwed

[BlueRadio]

Hey man.

I'm fairly against eq'ing to tape.

Work really really hard to get the sound you want at the source. Really try to focus on these points, in order of importance:

1. Drum selection (i.e. not using a picollo snare for big bottom 60s classic rock)

2. Drum tuning. All of the EQ in the world can't replace a well-tuned tom

3. Mic placement and selection. If all of the previous things are working for you, this element is KEY.

If you do all of these things correctly, your EQ will be thousands of times easier to use when it comes time to mix.

[numrologst]

I used to be somewhat against eq'ing to tape, but now it has become a necessity.

I don't eq much of the drum kit... But i definately eq bass drum and sometimes room mics...

Most other instruments/vox get eq'd more to tape

[rwhitney]

It seems to me there was an advantage to eq'ing to tape back in the day (like pushing some highs to keep certain tracks bright). The engineers I worked with in the 1970s always eq'd all of the drums and hi-hat. It seems less useful in the digital realm, but if I had a lot of nice outboard, I'd probably still use them for tracking because I enjoyed that way of working, and I think the results differ. I know it's risky, but it's also fun to build the mix while tracking.

Note: I am NOT an expert.

[Mike Caffrey]

Why print a sound that you know is "wrong" or not the final sound?

I agree that EQ is not a substitute for a good source, but I think it's a mistake to print anything less that the best sound you can possible capture.

If you're a traking room, people are coming to you to get great sounds. If you watn to get a lot of work print sounds that are startlingly good to the engineer who opes up the session someplace else and is blowen away by how it sounds with no plugins and the faders at zero.


If your attitued is I want to leave the sounds as pure as possible until the maix an make my decisions then, fine I can agree with that theoretically. But how many sessions do you have to do before you know what things you're likely to do in the mix?

Also, you never get a second chance to use analog hardwre pre conversion or pre tape.

I can see the argument for printing conservatively if you're new, but as a general rule, I think printing finished sounds is the way to go - meaning if EQ is appropriate, print with EQ. Compression, gating and effects as well.

I also think if you're learning, and the situation permits, the fastest way to learn is from prining and making mistakes. The longer your list of mistakes to never repeat again, the better sounding your recording will be.

[rwhitney]

Oh yeah, now I remember--the drums went to a limited number of tracks so we HAD to eq. HA! Mind's gone.

[GREENFENDR]

Depends on the situation, Its rare that I don't EQ ANYTHING to tape. Usually it is subtractive EQ, looking to fix problems, rather then enhance the sound, but the previous posters are right, good drummer, right drums, right tuning and good placement are more important then what mics/pres/eq/compressors your putting to tape.

[West0n]

im with mr. caffrey on this.

if your sitting there and have a neve eq on every track, if u know your going to do something later, why not do it there while its fresh? your going to have to build the entire record on top of whatever sounds you get, and chances are those will ultimately influence all the other tones you get down the road on the record. might as well get in the ballpark.

from what ive learned to take the guess work, and random failure out my life as much as possible... is to treat every aspect of recording like there is no next step. set up your instruments like there are no mics. mic your instruments like there is no eq. eq your stuff like there is no mix. and mix your stuff like there is no mastering.

[dzara 4]

from what ive learned to take the guess work, and random failure out my life as much as possible... is to treat every aspect of recording like there is no next step. set up your instruments like there are no mics. mic your instruments like there is no eq. eq your stuff like there is no mix. and mix your stuff like there is no mastering.

thumbsup +1

[catfish11]

there is a thread on the metalica sessions, "master of puppets"
Flemming Rasmussen eq'd pretty much everything as I recall

He posted his settings as a matter of fact,

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/58664-condenser-mic-identification-metallica.html

[Jason Poulin]

I EQ!

[espasonico]

From my point of view, when you choose on HiHat instead of another one or when you choose a wood beater instead of a felt one, you are already equing the track. The same thing happens with mics when you choose one instead of another one and the same thing goes for mic positioning so if you don´t have acces to all those variables I don´t understand why you shouldn´t eq while tracking drums.

Obiously the best thing is to don´t have the need of eqing thanks to a good room, instruments, players, mics, preamps, engineer, etc but that is not always posible so it´s not a bad idea to make some eq adjustements if you know that´s the only way to achieve a sound.

When I work with some people at some studios, I don´t need to eq but with other people and other studios if I have to eq something, I´ll do it.

Anyway, eqing doesn´t sound as good as the real eq of the instruments/mics/etc.

[peeder]

Yeah I don't see any reason to ban using it. You want to be sure you capture things well; that what you're going to get is going to work for the track. There are situations where mic selection and placement aren't going to do everything...e.g. you might need to get close to get decent isolation, but the proximity effect needs to be highpassed as a result. Or there's a particular protruding frequency that is killing your levels or ability to judge the kit as a whole.

I'm not sure I'd EQ for effect and print that way...hindsight being 20/20 I might wait until I had the mix in front of me before going crazy.

[taturana]

i almost haven´t eq anything while tracking lately... it just seems to leave me with a lot more flexible recording, which i can then eq like crazy while mixing...

that said.. eq´ing before saves a bit of time later on ( when done right, of course)

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by espasonico

From my point of view, when you choose on HiHat instead of another one or when you choose a wood beater instead of a felt one, you are already equing the track. The same thing happens with mics when you choose one instead of another one and the same thing goes for mic positioning so if you don´t have acces to all those variables I don´t understand why you shouldn´t eq while tracking drums.

Obiously the best thing is to don´t have the need of eqing thanks to a good room, instruments, players, mics, preamps, engineer, etc but that is not always posible so it´s not a bad idea to make some eq adjustements if you know that´s the only way to achieve a sound.

When I work with some people at some studios, I don´t need to eq but with other people and other studios if I have to eq something, I´ll do it.

Anyway, eqing doesn´t sound as good as the real eq of the instruments/mics/etc.

the thing is, once it's recorded, you can't change the mic choice, or pre choice, or mic position, but you CAN change the eq choice (if you don't do it till mixing). i just don't want to catch myself in the position where i cut too much of the lows, and didn't realize it on the studios monitors, and during the mixing stage i'm realizing the room mics for example are too thin.

[Improv]

I "pre-Q" and compress kick and snare a bit with some Neve/Distressor love just to get the sound, but the rest goes in unadultered. If I do mono room, I'll usually smash that and EQ a bit, too.

[PhilE]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

the thing is, once it's recorded, you can't change the mic choice, or pre choice, or mic position, but you CAN change the eq choice (if you don't do it till mixing). i just don't want to catch myself in the position where i cut too much of the lows, and didn't realize it on the studios monitors, and during the mixing stage i'm realizing the room mics for example are too thin.

I dont think anything should be drastic- make the right choices and then you are just tweaking- But if you shy away from making choices things take forever and loose their way.

[Megalomaniac]

Originally Posted by PhilE

I dont think anything should be drastic- make the right choices and then you are just tweaking- But if you shy away from making choices things take forever and loose their way.

i don't shy away from it, but in my limited experience so far, i haven't done it yet.

[PhilE]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

i don't shy away from it, but in my limited experience so far, i haven't done it yet.

I didnt mean to acuse you of it but...
That sounds like avoiding it to me!! Jump on in- thats how you will get the experience

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

Why print a sound that you know is "wrong" or not the final sound?

I agree that EQ is not a substitute for a good source, but I think it's a mistake to print anything less that the best sound you can possible capture.

If you're a traking room, people are coming to you to get great sounds. If you watn to get a lot of work print sounds that are startlingly good to the engineer who opes up the session someplace else and is blowen away by how it sounds with no plugins and the faders at zero.


If your attitued is I want to leave the sounds as pure as possible until the maix an make my decisions then, fine I can agree with that theoretically. But how many sessions do you have to do before you know what things you're likely to do in the mix?

Also, you never get a second chance to use analog hardwre pre conversion or pre tape.

I can see the argument for printing conservatively if you're new, but as a general rule, I think printing finished sounds is the way to go - meaning if EQ is appropriate, print with EQ. Compression, gating and effects as well.

I also think if you're learning, and the situation permits, the fastest way to learn is from prining and making mistakes. The longer your list of mistakes to never repeat again, the better sounding your recording will be.

Who said anything about it being the wrong sound? I go for getting great sounds without eq, then in the mix rather than than trying to get something thats not there
I already have it and I'm just carving to get a better fit. Since I mix on an analog console I sure can use my nice eqs in the mix and I do. as far as compression goes I prefer not to use until the mix, since I've seen bad things happen, and once everything is running nicely in the session I can always patch in some compressors on the return side. As far as gating goes if you lose some ghost notes on the drummer you may learn how far up your ass his foot goes. DONT EVER GATE ON THE WAY IN. You blow it on the way in its over, thats a mistake you just dont ever want to make. As it is I rarely gate in the mix, and usually its to send to a verb or key the room mikes. And if you really feel the need to print time based fx put them on their own tracks. Its not about leaving the sounds as pure as possible its about getting them right with the mic first then instead of chasing your tail your sweetening. BTW I have eq'd in the past and if I need to I have no problem with that, its just that I've learned how to record without having to most of the time.

[scotty-o]

I EQ to tape as well.
Usually I'll have a good idea about the way I and/or the band wants things to sound based on hearing the band and hopefully from some pre production of sorts.

I'll get the drums tuned up, get desired sounds out of the amps, choose the mics and fire up the EQ's and compressors. I'm starting to get into almost mixing while I'm tracking. Shaping sounds at the source and at the console during overdubs and the basic tracking stage so it works well together. It takes some practice but I love working that way.

The big trick to that is I'm familiar with my monitoring environment.
I trust what I'm hearing and am becoming increasingly comfortable making those kinds of decisions (EQ, comp) at the tracking stage.

I also have the luxury of using a nice console and EQs. So that helps too. (API 2488)


It really can make the mix come together rather quickly

-Scotty

[Mike Caffrey]

Originally Posted by Musiclab

Who said anything about it being the wrong sound? I go for getting great sounds without eq, then in the mix rather than than trying to get something thats not there
I already have it and I'm just carving to get a better fit. Since I mix on an analog console I sure can use my nice eqs in the mix and I do. as far as compression goes I prefer not to use until the mix, since I've seen bad things happen, and once everything is running nicely in the session I can always patch in some compressors on the return side. As far as gating goes if you lose some ghost notes on the drummer you may learn how far up your ass his foot goes. DONT EVER GATE ON THE WAY IN. You blow it on the way in its over, thats a mistake you just dont ever want to make. As it is I rarely gate in the mix, and usually its to send to a verb or key the room mikes. And if you really feel the need to print time based fx put them on their own tracks. Its not about leaving the sounds as pure as possible its about getting them right with the mic first then instead of chasing your tail your sweetening. BTW I have eq'd in the past and if I need to I have no problem with that, its just that I've learned how to record without having to most of the time.

I hope you didn't think my post was directed at you.

I pretty much don't gate anything, but I'd print it if it seemed like the right sound.

If you're printing EQ when necessary, but not when unnecessary, I'd view that as boosting/cutting by zero. Meaning, not having a policy of not EQing, just EQing as necessary.

I find it strang that the assumption is the Eqing during tracking means something won't be there in the mix. Two people have commented on that.

[Drumsound]

If I feel a sound needs EQ while tracking I do it. If i don't think it needs it I leave it alone. The drums might sound great with no EQ, but then I add the bass player and the guitars (while setting up for basics) and realize a couple tweaks will improve the tracks I got for it.

[Jules]

From another thread..

Originally Posted by Jules

A lot of people set up a few 'mix tricks' to cheer up the raw sound during the tracking & overdub stages of a project.

How much you set up is a matter of taste and time you want to put into it.

Here is a 'basic' for me..

1 x reverb send
1 x delay send
Drums grouped to an aux channel (stereo bus) with the following
a) Smile curve eq to lift (quite a lot of) HF and (a little) sub bass - to 'slick up the sound'
b) a compressor - to glue the drums together and tame transients a little
c) a tape simulator plug in..for extra pfattness.

In an all analog situation - I would have the reverb, the delay and set up a stereo bus for all the drums with a compressor strapped across it.. (an SSL compressor) HOWEVER.. if you are short of outboard gear, it may be difficult to justify using a stereo compressor on the monitor side when you might want to employ it on the record side.

Doing this helps me hear / feel more of a 'finished' type of sound while the project is on-going..

"cheering my drums up" on the monitor side as described above I find, leads to less eq-ing at the tracking stage. I find this suits me.

[ScottTunes]

I try to avoid outboard EQ when tracking.

[Ozzy]

I've developed a technique of a little eq, and a careful placement. I find i can get the cleanest raw recordings that way, with very kitle spill. I've never tried compressing on the way in as i try to achieve the cleanest sound with the least spill, surely a comp will bring up the other elements of the kit? I'll try and get an mp3 up here of a rock/metal band i did recently with no triggers! Oz

[AllAboutTone]

Yes to eq. if it needs it.

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

you never get a second chance to use analog hardwre pre conversion or pre tape.

For me, as an ITB guy, I need to take advantage of my few precious outboard pieces on the way in......so a little EQ for flavor seems appropriate on most instruments and even vox.
Sorry...I know we're supposed to be addressing drum tracks.

Also.....I like to do my tweaking a little at a time, in stages.

[indie]

Don't do it if you don't know what you're doing! Because you'll be boned later.

I eq like crazy on drums during tracking -- because I know what I want.
I want the drum tracks to sound like a record when I push up the faders.
I don't know why people are so freaking scared of committing eq and compression to tape/disk!
I just tracked drums on a Trident 80b yesterday and the eq was ROCKIN...sounds like a record.thumbsup What a great drum tracking console!!