The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Who's doing mixbuss EQ?
Old 29th September 2008
  #61
Lives for gear
 
strewnshank's Avatar
 

I'm crazy, I guess. I put an API 5500 on my mix almost every time. I like it.
Old 29th September 2008
  #62
Lives for gear
 
jchadstopherhuez's Avatar
 

i really like my daking eq's as the last thing in the chain on most of my mixes.

if i'm in a room with a gml or stereo pultecs...then those often get used as well.

the dakings really do the job in my world.

best,

jchristopherhughes
Old 29th September 2008
  #63
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by strewnshank View Post
I'm crazy, I guess. I put an API 5500 on my mix almost every time. I like it.
I`ve been trying that 5500 on the masterbus lately , too. I really like how it makes me use less plugin eq. It changes everything I do in the mix (I start with the 5500 on , not as a sweetener at the end) and I can`t see how this is stepping on the ME`s turf. It`s just a different way to mix.

Thomas
Old 29th September 2008
  #64
Lives for gear
 
strewnshank's Avatar
 

Yeah, a bit of air, some mud removal. I'm not beating the **** out of it, never more than "4" up or down, and normally at the .5 mix level. But it is nice, and makes me use/need less plugins as well!
Old 29th September 2008
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Audio Hombre's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirkB View Post
I don't like adding highs with digital eq's and explain that to the mastering guy
same with me. while a couple of plugins seem not that bad with minimal use, i'm pretty weary of adding hi shelf from them.i don't claim to have great, mastering quality ears, but man i sure can easily hear the artifacts when i add 5+ db of hi eq with a plugin. hardware just piles on smooth comparatively, so i'd rather the mastering guy use his uber ears and gearz and play it cool.
Old 29th September 2008
  #66
Anyone uses some particular eq curve BEFORE mixing or just adjusting eq at the end of mixing?
Old 29th September 2008
  #67
Lives for gear
 
colinmiller's Avatar
 

I use a C/Gray EQ on the mix.
Old 29th September 2008
  #68
Gear Guru
 
RoundBadge's Avatar
Still Pultecs or Fearns.still happy
usually more eq when mixing flacid Digi 002/m box tracks for other folks
Old 29th September 2008
  #69
Lives for gear
 
gm5k's Avatar
 

i like a touch of 28k or 10k(usually 28 though) and some 60Hz from my Eisen lilpeq's...after i tried it once, it's just pretty hard to resist.

id love a pair of Buzz Tonics to go along with em for this job. well id actually love the new Buzz mastering EQ instead, but that'll have to wait heh
Old 30th September 2008
  #70
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 

As with all things mixing, it depends on the tracks.

I would much rather mix through a single great EQ than fix the same room or tape anomaly on every damn track with whatever I had enough of. In that case, it's going on first.
Old 30th September 2008
  #71
Lives for gear
 
ripper's Avatar
 

Bob is reading my mind!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Using broad strokes, overall eq. can sound better than trying to accomplish the same thing using channel eqs.. What you don't want to do is surgical stuff that might only be solving your monitoring problems rather than a mix problem.

I don't subscribe at all to "leave it for later." Just don't do anything that you think makes the mix sound worse strictly for volume purposes. If high frequency "air" is needed, you may find things sound much better if you can touch up a few offending channels that you would miss if "air" was left for mastering.
Okay, this is EXACTLY what i've been thinking reading above posts!

I've done albums (albeit very Kinks/ Faces/ T-Rex style) where i used zero eq tracking or on channels and used a small amount of shaping eq on the 2 buss.

Sounded punchy, cohesive, 3 D and VERY in phase. And it didn't require diddly
for eq in mastering.

why would 50 eq's on channels, some this way some that, sound more in phase than one cohesive, uber quality, skillfully and subtly used eq on the mix buss?

it's just a stereo file. and people act like it has to be saved for the wizard of oz in the mastering lab at the end of the yellow brick road.

it's just smoke and mirrors and i suspect it may come from a lack of confidence in monitoring or ones skill set (no offense because it's either that or a lot of people really do believe in the wizard).

my mixes translate... it's not a problem. i've never regretted using an eq on my 2 buss which i always do.

guess what? it allows me to use LESS eq overall.

i use to use a massivo but switched to a Hammer as i don't need a million bells and whistles on my 2 buss eq as i use it very sparingly (but effectively).

and i far prefer the hammer upper band of eq.

i also use a variety of buss compressors, choosing accordingly to sound of material (stc 8 for clarity, 33609 for warm and rocky, etc.)

what i work toward is ZERO adjustment of eq or compression to my mix in mastering. all i need is a level bump. which i'm finding my stc 8 and Hedd do effectively... and all in the analogue domain.

now where's that wizard?

Old 30th September 2008
  #72
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by edIT View Post
Massive Passive constantly strapped at mixdown.
Me too. Been living on my stereo buss for almost 3 years.
Old 30th September 2008
  #73
Lives for gear
 

I don't usually eq a complete mix, mind you I generally don't have great 2 buss eq's to work with....whenever I have tried eqing a complete mix, I feel that it detracts from it and I get more excited about what a good Bus comp or limiter will do to the shape....I never mix into one and never feel like it's going to improve anything too much If I really go at it....seems a lot do in here...maybe I should give it at real go.

Nick
Old 30th September 2008
  #74
Moderator
 
TonyBelmont's Avatar
 

Depends on the song and what I need to do... but, when I do use EQ on the stereo buss it is almost always the Avedis E27's.
Old 30th September 2008
  #75
Lives for gear
 
IntenseJim's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Using broad strokes, overall eq. can sound better than trying to accomplish the same thing using channel eqs.. What you don't want to do is surgical stuff that might only be solving your monitoring problems rather than a mix problem.

...I don't subscribe at all to "leave it for later."
Quote:
Originally Posted by ripper View Post
Okay, this is EXACTLY what i've been thinking reading above posts!

I've done albums (albeit very Kinks/ Faces/ T-Rex style) where i used zero eq tracking or on channels and used a small amount of shaping eq on the 2 buss.

Sounded punchy, cohesive, 3 D and VERY in phase. And it didn't require diddly for eq in mastering.

what i work toward is ZERO adjustment of eq or compression to my mix in mastering.
Sounds great and if you get the source 'right' the first time while tracking I can see this. But, for devil's advocacy, what if you want to reduce the ~300 Hz range on a bass guitar or shelve a bunch of distorted rhythm guitars below 120 or 200hz? You can't do that on the stereo mix buss EQ.

(just asking...not arguing)
Old 30th September 2008
  #76
Lives for gear
 
Player1's Avatar
 

Player1

Lately I've been using the Waves Ultra LL Maximizer with light limiting on the mix buss. Then I go to the line in of two Manley Voxbox's. Sometimes I stack transformers (4 per VB) other times not, it can definitely be too much on some cuts. Then I go to a Manley Variable Mu compressor with limiter on with gain reduction of 2db and back to Pro Tools to print the mix. It's a pretty tight setup, and do use some eq in the Voxbox's when necessary.
Old 30th September 2008
  #77
Gear Addict
 

I have the Hammer going into Ibis
Today I tried going into the L2 hardware just kissing the GR into Hedd Dig
with a pinch of pentode
Very interesting combo to mix through.
The Hammer Ibis combo is nice to mix through.
Old 30th September 2008
  #78
Lives for gear
 
RCM - Ronan's Avatar
When this thread started I was never EQing the mix buss, but I have started to do it most of the time now. It started with the Hammer and I have actually been running my mixes into a Manley Vari Mu into a pair of A Designs EM-PEQs into a Hammer. Usually the Hammer is adding a bit of air and the EM-PEQ is adding a bit of balls to the low end, and maybe pushing the mids forward a bit on a guitar heavy track.

Some times some of those boxes will get bypassed, some times its hitting all three. (I mix on an analog console BTW)
Old 30th September 2008
  #79
Gear Addict
 
Chris900's Avatar
As soon as I get my hands on a Hammer I'll be EQing away on the mix buss.
Old 30th September 2008
  #80
Gear Maniac
 
Fabio's Avatar
Usually my GML 8200 for the mix buss
Old 30th September 2008
  #81
Lives for gear
 
nomatic's Avatar
5500 almost always!!!!!
Old 30th September 2008
  #82
Gear Addict
I sometimes use eq on the stereo buss. I also like 5500, pair of pultecs, gml, massive passive depending on music style and availability of nice outboard eq. I can also survive without using one and leaving it to mastering.
Old 30th December 2008
  #83
Lives for gear
 
dannycurtean@yah's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichT View Post
I like to strap the UAD Pultec plug-in over my mixes and give the top end some sparkle.

Plus I like what the Pultec plug does even when it's set to 'flat'.

Cheers,
Rich
what exactly is that, boost output by 1 db? Thats what the pultec does...
Old 30th December 2008
  #84
Lives for gear
 
dannycurtean@yah's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
Before I even put a fader up to mix, I put this EQ across the 2 buss.



I like to challenge myself.

Than I bypass it and decide which way sounds better.

Than I run the whole thing out of phase but inverted and put this EQ on again.

This time with just the left side inverted.

It tightens up the low end.
I like challanging myself by not using anything but a buss compressor on the 2 buss. Thats what I call a challenge and even though I have never used an EQ on the 2 buss I dont like the idea. There are things in audio engineering that I purely call cheating. EQ on 2 buss is definately one of them. Its a cheap shortcut.
Old 30th December 2008
  #85
QRS
Gear Maniac
 

Api5500.
Old 30th December 2008
  #86
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by edIT View Post
Massive Passive constantly strapped at mixdown.

Same here. I actually have never used my Massive Passive for anything else since the day I bought it.
Old 30th December 2008
  #87
Lives for gear
 
degas's Avatar
 

I have a Hammer parked on my 2 buss.
Old 31st December 2008
  #88
Gear Head
 

Usually a 5500 there, used to be two 550's.
Works for me. And I usually add it before I do any channel EQ.
If EVERYTHING is tracked dark, I'll just add some supernice API high-end, and save a lot of time and channel processing in the mix.
Old 31st December 2008
  #89
Gear Addict
 

I want to, but don't. I find that my mastering engineer tries really hard to get a consistent sound across a project, and when I put an eq up to make it sound good to me, he might remark about the lack or mids, the glut of mids, the inconsistency, etc. Plus his ears and gear blow mine away, and I don't want to tie his hands. But I want to so bad...

I don't use a a bus comp for the same reasons (except on submixes: drums usually).

Mastered, it sounds better than what I would have done, by far!! But he's doing 1db reduction at most, and that's parallel and mixed in, plus tape. He's also using serious s 4 EQ's vs. my plug ins, and making fractional db cuts and boosts. Less WOW, but much better overall.
I'm so confused...anyway, I leave 2-bus empty unless it's a demo.

But it does help to have an ME who REALLY works HARD to get inside this music and make it as best as it can be. I trust him. Big time.
Old 1st January 2009
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
I like challanging myself by not using anything but a buss compressor on the 2 buss. Thats what I call a challenge and even though I have never used an EQ on the 2 buss I dont like the idea. There are things in audio engineering that I purely call cheating. EQ on 2 buss is definately one of them. Its a cheap shortcut.
You haven't thought this through properly. Putting it into words is more difficult than the concept, but I'll try.


The idea behind mixing is getting a proper volume balance between instruments. Eq is basically a volume boost. Now using the channel eq's I can get a perfect balance between instruments. Great!

But here's the thing, you can have a perfect balance on the dark side, on the bright side, or somewhere in between - it's really a matter of taste and asthetic. So now lets say I want it a bit brighter, you can't just shelve the cymbals or else they'll sound unnaturally bright compared to the rest of the program - so now you have to start reworking the whole mix, which is is already in perfect balance. By strapping on an EQ on the 2bus, you make overall frequency adjustments while maintaining the balance of the individual components of the mix.

If it was "cheating", there would be no such job as "Mastering Engineer". Now you may say to leave it up to the ME, which is fine. Personally, if I think I can make it sound better, I do. I don't wait for someone else.

Saying EQ on the 2bus is cheating is like saying the master volume on your desk is cheating. It makes no sense.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump