how/where do you use outboard eq?

[the kid]

Have been looking to buy a Great River EQ-2NV for use with the MP-2NV. Reading (to my surprise) in these forums how few engineers use EQ when tracking, I realized that I don't really use mine too often (but not never). Audio sources include mic'ing of mostly vocals & acoustic guitar ... rest from sound modules.

So the question is: What questions do I need to answer/satisfy in assessing whether I should add this EQ to the chain?

Believe me, I'm looking for every reason on the planet to buy this thing, but if it's greatest use/primary function is EQ'ing an entire mix (which I do ITB w/ UAD-1), then it may not be a wise investment for me (and leave this signal chain MP-2NV/Distressor).

Of course any additional comment/history with this EQ is welcome.

Regards,
Mitch

[JonCraig]

i, like others, rarely eq to "tape". i'm of the mind that mic placement is the best eq you can use. however, once it's to tape, and it comes mix time, sometimes you decide you want a little something extra on a track. if that's what we're talking about, then i propose this: it is FAR easier to find a suitable eq sound in a good piece of outboard gear than with a plug-in.

a good example: i'm a MTSU student. when i'm working on a project at home, i'm using the waves plugins and others. however, when i'm up at school, i'll use the buffet of outboard gear we have there. i was recently compressing and eq'ing the kick in a project. what took five minutes of tinkering in the box took about 45 seconds with the millenia origin comp+eq. every time i have an experience like this is say, "aahhh.... so this is why guys refuse to give up outboard gear. it works better and sounds better."

i hope this gives you an excuse to buy the great river box. i've used dan's MP2-NV pre, as well as his first box (the model escapes me). they were both absolutely wonderful.

--jon

[the kid]

Thanks for the responses ....

Mic placement is definately key .. but as much of my recording comes from sound modules at the moment, I don't have that part of the improvement equation. It'll still come down to applying some EQ on the way to tape or during mix.

I use UAD-1 plugs ITB ... but I'm not sure how they'd compare agst outboard gear, no less an EQ-2NV.
I use Nuendo - I've never taken tracks/the mix OTB for processing ... I guess it can be done. I ought to look into that.

[JonCraig]

whether or not you can do that will depend on the interface you're using

soo.... which interface are you using?

--jon

[the kid]

Have RME interface to the DAW ... I have no doubt it's possible ... I've just never done it - and not sure if there would be latency issues ...

[olli]

Logic platinum has a simple but very useful i/o plugin. You can take audio out from whichever plugin slot, and back in to the same slot. Works with plugin latency compensation. It´s been there for years. Nuendo 3 should have something similar, according to steinberg site:
> External FX plug-ins: Nuendo 3 offers direct integration of external hardware effects processors into the VST audio mixer, allowing you to use your favorite outboard gear just like plug-ins – including delay compensation

[Fletcher]

While I generally try to avoid EQ when tracking [good source coupled with the appropriate mic placed in a good spot with a pre amp that compliments the tone to the recorder] there are times when I check it all in "one speaker mono" that I will start to find a build up in a certain frequency area. This seems especially true with drums.

Usually it's just one, maybe two of the lines that are giving me this build up... so, while still monitoring in "one speaker mono" I'll start to shut off returns on or two at a time until the audio clears up... then I'll take an equalizer and remove a bit of the offending clutter from those one or two tracks prior to hitting record.

There are other times when I have found a mic that just loves the midrange component of a voice but may have an "issue" with getting all the top/air I'm looking for... enter Mr. Equalizer

There are other times when I'm tracking where I'll want to get two instruments to 'separate' out a bit more... in those times I'll find the frequency where the two are conflicting [or turning to shit] cut a little from one, boost a smidge on the other... instant separation.

Then there are times when a little 'tone control' help doesn't suck.

While it's a great excercize to spend a couple of years not touching equalizers... after you've learned to live without them they can be absolutely fabulous tools. From my perspective, the whole thing about engineering is to learn to do it turning as few knobs as possible... but knowing what all the knobs can do for you. With this skill set and this knowledge you're not reliant on the knobs to get the end result, but can now use the knobs to enhance the end result as a creative tool.

Best of luck with it all.

[Musiclab]

I tend to work on fairly dense mixes. I prefer to not eq on the way in, but in the mix eq helps clear things up and make it nice and shiny. Also like compressors, different eq's have different characteristics, they add to the pallette.

[wallace]

How do you guys feel about running tracks outside the box to process with outboard compressors and EQs? Do you think the added DA/AD conversions outweight the benifits of the sound of outboard gear?

[Jules]

Favorite for me is once outside the box to stay outside...

IMHO - "fixing" things with ext eq then re recording them back in can work.....it just seems like a time consuming PITA.

With the 'keep it outside method you dont need to wory and mess around with the re-record levels - just the sound..

Naturaly..... recall goes out the window, but 2 sides of A4 and a pencil can log pretty much everything in my setup.

[dave-G]

Originally posted by wallace
How do you guys feel about running tracks outside the box to process with outboard compressors and EQs? Do you think the added DA/AD conversions outweight the benifits of the sound of outboard gear?

No, but I guess it depends on what you're trying to do.. I've found that even with "pretty good" converters, the benefits of very good outboard EQ and compression outweigh any conversion-cycle downside. IE: I find that going out of a Digi 192 to something like a Lang PEQ-2 and back again is well worth the trip.

I print it back to a track and store a digital photo of the settings for recalls. Piece o'cake.

-dave

[the kid]

wallace - I had the same question .. thanks for asking

have a feeling I may regret asking this, but here goes: how close, if at all, is the sound quality between UAD-1 Cambridge plug and a good outboard EQ (in regard to applying some shape to a mix)?

fletcher - exactly the kind of answer I was looking for - thanks. Not to get OT, but in a previous post you noted using a preamp --> comp --> eq chain ... I already know you're not a fan of eq on the way in, but was curious why you find comp --> eq better than eq --> comp ...

thanks and happy thanksgiving