Record With Outboard EQ, Or Correct Equalization Problems Later In The Mix?

[days]

I have a project studio in which I record a lot of acoustic guitar (strummed and picked). The room I record in is well treated, but small (12X15X9). When it comes time for mixing, I often find myself having to cut a lot in the low-mids (and elsewhere) on the recorded acoustic guitar tracks. I mix inside the box, primarily using Sonnox for EQ.

I was wondering whether a better approach would be to try to correct the predictable low-mid problem at the recording stage by adding an outboard EQ to my recording chain, directly after my preamp (usually a Pacifica). This would hopefully give me a much better recorded track, and one with EQ issues that would be easier for me to deal with later in the mix. I don't expect the outboard EQ would eliminate the need for EQ adjustment in the mix, but I would hope it would make such adjustments easier to make.

I guess my questions are: Does this sound like a reasonable approach? What would be your preference in such a situation (i.e., would you use outboard EQ or would you try to correct the problem entirely with an EQ plug-in in the mix)?

Also: What hardware EQs would you recommend (below $2500)?

Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.

[bigdoghat]

It's not a bad idea to do a little eq'ing while tracking only because if you have to do drastic eq in mixdown things can start to sound a little weird and phasey or swirly. I regularly track a martin acoustic and always have to cut 120hz and 280hz because of a boominess that comes out of that particular guitar. So a small-ish amount of those frequencies always get cut while tracking. Don't go too far though with tracking eq because as we all know, there's no going back after the fact and you can't put back in what hasn't been captured in the first place.

[RCM - Ronan]

I rarely EQ while I track but I mix OTB and have good analog and digital EQs at my disposal at mix. Your idea is fairly sound, especially since the analog EQ will bring something different to the table than your plug ins.

There are lots of great options available in your price point and it comes down to taste. For clean and transparent the Emperical LilFreq is amazing. I am a big fan of the A Designs EQs (Hammer and EM-PEQ) but the Avedis could be a fantastic all arounder. Fo It depends on what kind of sounds you are into.

You might also find some interesting boosting options opening up with a high end analog EQ.

[vernier]

Forget eq. Position the mic differently, further back a bit.
'

[princeplanet]

I say learn, by trial and error, what you like and don't like about the following:

1. EQ while tracking only
2. EQ while mixing only
3. EQ for both, invent your own "method"
4. EQ for neither.

There are many successful practioners in each camp, infact, you can shift camps for the appropriate gig.

[AlphaDingo]

I will second the changing the mic position, position.

[dhiltonlittle]

Originally Posted by vernier

Forget eq. Position the mic differently, further back a bit.
'

i agree, why record something that you know is or is going to be problematic? get it right then hit the record button.

[Kronos147]

Sounds like a HPF may help during tracking.

[days]

Thanks for all the input.

[Terry McInturff]

My rather limited experience has shown me that a good HPF is a good friend indeed!

[Bob Olhsson]

If eq. sounds way better, is an obvious correction and you know that you can trust the monitors, eqing on the way in is probably a good idea.

If it's just an apples vs. oranges subjective preference, it's better to wait for the mix because there is no way to know what the right eq is going to be until the entire arrangement is in place.

[ScumBum]

What mic you using ?

What mic position ?

[days]

Originally Posted by ScumBum

What mic you using ?

What mic position ?

I typically use a Pearlman TM-1 when I'm picking; when I'm strumming, it's either the TM-1 or an AT 4047.

The microphone is usually eighteen inches in front of the guitar, pointing at the 10th fret.

[dannycurtean@yah]

Originally Posted by Kronos147

Sounds like a HPF may help during tracking.

why......in the world........would you use a hi pass DURING tracking?

That sounds INSANE to me! As far as eq, yeah but if you need to cut anything over 2 db then move the mic. If that doesn't work, sell the mic and get another one. If that doesn't work......start carpet cleaning. LoL, just kidding but if you say your room is treated and you try all of the above, seriously look into studing the problem more.

Cheers!

[Mike Brown]

Originally Posted by dannycurtean@yah

why......in the world........would you use a hi pass DURING tracking?

That sounds INSANE to me! As far as eq, yeah but if you need to cut anything over 2 db then move the mic. If that doesn't work, sell the mic and get another one. If that doesn't work......start carpet cleaning. LoL, just kidding but if you say your room is treated and you try all of the above, seriously look into studing the problem more.

Cheers!

? Its super common. People do it all the time around 80 hz or lower. Or even higher for some instruments.

[Keire]

I rarely boost while tracking...

I find myself getting rid of lumpy bass freq. or harsh highs. Ill do most of the real shaping during the mix.

[Daft]

Originally Posted by dannycurtean@yah

why......in the world........would you use a hi pass DURING tracking?

That sounds INSANE to me! As far as eq, yeah but if you need to cut anything over 2 db then move the mic. If that doesn't work, sell the mic and get another one. If that doesn't work......start carpet cleaning. LoL, just kidding but if you say your room is treated and you try all of the above, seriously look into studing the problem more.

Then why do many manufacturers include a HPF on their microphones?

[beginagain]

I have a small room and I know it contributes a certain (not so good) sound to the guitar .... ac gtr can be boomy .... so find out the places in the room at which it sounds best ....

Next, get a friend to play it and move around trying to hear the best spot for a mike or two .... get down on your knees and check out the sound from the body of the guitar, from down low, over the players shoulder, out further directly in front, etc ....

I use two mikes ,,,, an E47 8-10" from the neck/body join pointed at the soundhole and a UM900 about the same distance pointed at the body behind the bridge .... both in cardiod or omni depending on the guitar .... realign them in the daw if it sounds phasey ....

I don't eq ac gtr or vocals on the way in unless I hear a problem that I can't fix with mike choice or repositioning or moving the player/singer (to another room) .... or I really know what sort of sound I want come mix time ....

The Great River/API 5500/Lil Freq EQ's are great .... I also have an IBIS which is sweet on ac gtr but exxy .... The Speck EQ is supposed to be great for the bucks .... the Hammer is very sweet but you can't get too mad with it .... especially boosting .... I reckon the RN Designs Portico EQ would kill as well .... Pultec would be cool but ....

Experiment .... your Pearlman is excellent (try a ribbon or SDC as well) .... you could suss it all out in a day .... get a friend over to play for a couple of hours and go for it, just hit record and describe your changes as you go .... and you will eventually find the best possible in your room with your guitar and gear ....

Good Luck

Michael V
Just Jammin' Studios
Hobart - Tasmania - Australia

[Kronos147]

Originally Posted by Mayor999

? Its super common. People do it all the time around 80 hz or lower. Or even higher for some instruments.

Yes, and the VSI protptype pres I use the hell out of have the HPF at 40HZ or gentle roll off starting at 70Hz. Both are useful at times.

[ScumBum]

Originally Posted by days

I typically use a Pearlman TM-1 when I'm picking; when I'm strumming, it's either the TM-1 or an AT 4047.

The microphone is usually eighteen inches in front of the guitar, pointing at the 10th fret.

That sounds like it could be a room problem like you said or the guitar itself produces too much low mid or bass freq .

My dad has an old Gibson acoustic which sounds great but it has some bass problems , its TOO full of a sound . So a little corrective EQ cut always needs to be done for that guitar .

So maybe try using an another acoustic guitar ,

As far as your EQ question , DON'T waste your money if your only looking to cut a few freqs for corrective EQ . People like Outboard EQ for boosting , adding to the sound .

I have the Sony Oxford EQ plugin , same as the Sonnex , and its prefect for corrective EQ , cutting out some low mid build up .

[engmix]

usually it's difficult to know creatively what type of eq is needed early on in a mix. for instance, you may want to make an acoustic guitar all about the midrange, or make it sound like it's coming off of an old record player. you could dial in those sounds from the start, but it could be done enough on the monitor end, so you can further tweak and commit the sound at mix time.

obviously there are no rules. but, i have certainly gotten myself in more trouble eq'ing prior to mixing, than leaving eq'ing for mixing. also, the way you approach eq is very dependent on style of music. in general music today sounds very different than it did a decade ago. learning good mic placement is extremely important, but is only one part of the equation to getting a good sound, that ultimately sits in a mix. don't be afraid to crank the knobs..all of the way up if needed...if that's what it takes to get what you're hearing in your head out of the speakers.

for flexible eq, i go for my tonelux eq. it's extremely musical, and semi surgical if needed. if i need to get stupidly surgical, i use a sonnox eq plugin. that way, as the mix progresses, if i need to back off or move a freq around, i have that flexibility all the way to the end.

[rockstar_josh]

Originally Posted by dannycurtean@yah

why......in the world........would you use a hi pass DURING tracking?

I guess the same reason you would use any EQ during tracking. If it helps reach the goal, go for it. I would just try different things and find out what works. All these ideas in this thread are valid, and one of them will be a good solution.

[FadersmakmeHappy]

I have had the same problem tracking acoustic guitars. I found that different mics really affect the low end, so the mic you are using may be a factor.

Personally, I like having an eq in the recording path for acoustic guitar especially when mixing in in the box. Experience and mucking around has taught me what I am looking for in the mix and I go for that sound. The other thing an eq can do is add some nice colour and "polish" on the front end and get rid of the low end rumble.

I personally use a Great River eq, but I own a Pacifica pre and am sure that Pacifica eqs are stellar and pair well. I like the API eqs alot too and I think they are pretty cheap.

[Jules]

When recording acc gtr I like to wear headphones and move the mic around the player (a lot usually) until I find a ready made 'perfect' sound to go with the track / song.

If you are the performer and your own engineer - an office chair with wheels might help!

You might have to try a few mic's too...

if the mic has a bass roll off feature - try it!

[vernier]

When recording acc gtr I like to wear headphones and move the mic around the player (a lot usually) until I find a ready made 'perfect' sound to go with the track / song.

If you are the performer and your own engineer - an office chair with wheels might help!

You might have to try a few mic's too...

if the mic has a bass roll off feature - try it!

That nails it.
'

[DeepSpace]

Originally Posted by beginagain

The Great River/API 5500/Lil Freq EQ's are great .... I also have an IBIS which is sweet on ac gtr but exxy .... The Speck EQ is supposed to be great for the bucks .... the Hammer is very sweet but you can't get too mad with it .... especially boosting .... I reckon the RN Designs Portico EQ would kill as well .... Pultec would be cool but ....

LOL Michael.

Not sure what you were trying to say there, but that sure is a nice shopping list, straight up!

[Mike Caffrey]

People who talk about phase shift and mic positioning and not being able to predict the sound you'll need in the final mix are essentially all right.

Philosophically, I think it's wrong to print something that doesn't sound the best it can to your ears.

Yes it's possible to print the wrong thing, but it's also possible to print perfect ounds after perfect sound be way ahead when it comes time to mix.

[Joram]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

People who talk about phase shift and mic positioning and not being able to predict the sound you'll need in the final mix are essentially all right.

Philosophically, I think it's wrong to print something that doesn't sound the best it can to your ears.

Yes it's possible to print the wrong thing, but it's also possible to print perfect ounds after perfect sound be way ahead when it comes time to mix.

thumbsup You're very right. Fix it before the mix.

[DeepSpace]

Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey

Yes it's possible to print the wrong thing, but it's also possible to print perfect ounds after perfect sound be way ahead when it comes time to mix.

I agree with this. A mix can be more than the sum of its parts, but it nevertheless contains the sum of its parts - and each one should be as good as possible going in.

Mixing a collection of beautifully recorded instruments can still be challenging, but at least you're starting from quality!

[Karl J]

Yes it's okay to use HPF during tracking.

Yes it's okay to EQ during tracking. Potentially problematic freqs should be should be noticeable. I would do more cutting than boosting. Be conservative with your EQing during tracking.

Are you using your mic in cardioid, omni, fig 8 ?

As far as positioning, instead of pointing AT the 10th fret, point it back towards the body/sound hole of the guitar. Also, try lowering the mic so it's more at the height of the G-B-E strings (or sometimes at the bottom edge of the neck). Instead of moving the mic further away, I say move it closer, like 8-10" (As Beginagain said), let the mic get more of the direct guitar sound and a little less of your boxy room sound. This usually works for me in my crappy far from perfect room.

As far as equipment goes, I like my API eq, but I have the 550B, not the most flexible but sounds great. Something with adjustable Q is what you need. Also, you can use a cheaper eq (GS blasphemy) to do your cuts as you will the eq less when cutting as opposed to boosting.

When all else fails, sometimes less is better. When my good mics aren't doing it for me, I go back to the SM57. No, it's not as sparkly as a good condenser, but it ends up sitting well in the mix. My 2 cents.

cheers