The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tracking with EQ
Old 5th August 2014
  #61
Lives for gear
if you're a "newbie" and you've just been asked to take over recording U2, or something else huge and important that could ruin your career if you screw it up?
well then, yes, don't commit unless you have to,
yet

but for the other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of you?

commit.
if it sounds 'wrong' fix it, either by moving the mics or changing the mics or changing the instruments and players, or choosing a different room... OR by EQ when it works.

if it sounds 'better' (and you should ALWAYS determine that after carefully level matching the pre and post eq'd signals to compare, so that simply louder doesn't fool you), then use it.

because part of the lesson is that the NEXT thing you overdub and add, will have to live with that first choice.
and you will learn what works and does not, and what causes you problems later and what solved problems later and so on.
that skill of making each NEXT thing live with the previous decision is a large part of what record making (with overdubs) is about.
but that's also the good news.
it's a lot easier to get the right guitar sounds when the right drum sound is already established.
it's much harder to deal with just a pile of 'raw ingredients' that aren;t taking shape into anything.

I'm for committing as MUCH as you can (even guitar effects and such) as soon as you can, and then making all subsequent decisions based on that.

And I'd argue that's how way MORE classic records were made.
yes, in part by necessity. But those forced decisions turned out to be a GOOD thing.

and the bottom line is that you probably didn't get the U2 gig and so if the choices you make aren't perfect, it ISN'T going to ruin your life while you're learning.
Old 5th August 2014
  #62
Gear Guru
 
Sounds Great's Avatar
 

Always good to hear from someone who has actually done it.
Old 6th August 2014
  #63
Quote:
Originally Posted by wwittman View Post
if you're a "newbie" and you've just been asked to take over recording U2, or something else huge and important that could ruin your career if you screw it up?
well then, yes, don't commit unless you have to,
yet

but for the other 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of you?

commit.
if it sounds 'wrong' fix it, either by moving the mics or changing the mics or changing the instruments and players, or choosing a different room... OR by EQ when it works.

if it sounds 'better' (and you should ALWAYS determine that after carefully level matching the pre and post eq'd signals to compare, so that simply louder doesn't fool you), then use it.

because part of the lesson is that the NEXT thing you overdub and add, will have to live with that first choice.
and you will learn what works and does not, and what causes you problems later and what solved problems later and so on.
that skill of making each NEXT thing live with the previous decision is a large part of what record making (with overdubs) is about.
but that's also the good news.
it's a lot easier to get the right guitar sounds when the right drum sound is already established.
it's much harder to deal with just a pile of 'raw ingredients' that aren;t taking shape into anything.

I'm for committing as MUCH as you can (even guitar effects and such) as soon as you can, and then making all subsequent decisions based on that.

And I'd argue that's how way MORE classic records were made.
yes, in part by necessity. But those forced decisions turned out to be a GOOD thing.

and the bottom line is that you probably didn't get the U2 gig and so if the choices you make aren't perfect, it ISN'T going to ruin your life while you're learning.
Awesome! I agree to 100% with you! I'm all for trying to nail your ideal sound as soon in the production line as you can. If you're not able to get it 100% right you're at least very much closer to that sound you want. And as you said, it's a lot easier to dial in guitar sounds when your drums sound great.

The thing is that sooner or later in the process you'll have to commit to one sound, so the only thing your doing when you're not committing when you're tracking is that you're just pushing the decision away from you to deal with it later. Or even to let someone else take it.

Before everyone jumps me and tells me that you don't always know what you want, as far as sound goes. I get that and that's ok. The more you record and try to commit you learn what works and what not. At least try to get rid of parts of the sounds you don't like, at least. Like rolling of low end of instruments that isn't bass instruments. Only that alone will save you some trouble down the road.

Another thing about committing to guitar sound with FX and stuff. I'm all for that. And one of the most common question's is whether or not I want the DI signal of the guitars or the mic signal with FX and everything, the same goes with Bass. Guess what my answer is? Yes, I tell them that I want the committed sound. I occasionally also take the DI signal if there is one. Just in case I want to re-amp or something. But the thing in my mind is that determine sounds is part of the production and recording phase of the process. Mixing is all about balancing tracks against one another and do the last shaping of the sound to make the song sound beautiful.

And if you as a band/artist or whatever don't really know what sound you want, how do you think that the mixer you hire will have a clue on what sound you want if you send 'em a dry guitar or bass signal??? Even if you're not 100% happy with your guitar sound, send the sound that you've got and preferably a DI signal so that the mixer re-amp. But with the committed signal you'll give the mixer an good idea on what you're aiming for.

Sorry about the long and partly OT post, but I just had to get it of my chest!

The bottom line is if your recording try to commit as much as you can tracking with EQ and sometimes Compressor already on the way in. As wwittman so wisely said, if your not risking to ruin your life with a decision why not try. And most people here I think are just recording in their home and no direct budget to take in to consideration. It's a great environment to practice your recording skill, if it doesn't turn out great you can always record again.

Alright, sorry again to bore you with this long post
Old 6th August 2014
  #64
Lives for gear
 
12ax7's Avatar
 

.
The question is not WHETHER to commit, but rather WHEN to commit.

Knowing when to commit comes from good judgement.

Good judgement comes from experience.

Experience comes from poor judgement.
.
Old 6th August 2014
  #65
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
.

Knowing when to commit comes from good judgement.

Good judgement comes from experience.

Experience comes from poor judgement.
.
Hey, that's a good one!
Old 7th August 2014
  #66
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12ax7 View Post
.
The question is not WHETHER to commit, but rather WHEN to commit.

Knowing when to commit comes from good judgement.

Good judgement comes from experience.

Experience comes from poor judgement.
.

True! And buy leaving it as it is can also be a commitment if it already sonds good!
Old 7th August 2014
  #67
Here for the gear
 
kalegreen's Avatar
 

Microphones are inherently "eq's".
Close placement to source eliminates "room ". Save using eq for the mix. You can easily spend a day finding "sweet spot" ...great for that particular source...does it translate well to mix though?
Choices that make difference are Mic type and placement. If your able, and recording piecemeal...why not use your whole Mic selection.
For example, for a guitar cab, omnidirectional in room, sm57 on center, (side of cone, etc), use a large diaphragm condenser too on speaker...any high SPL Mic type of your choice ad nauseum...record track(s)....near field monitor ad infinity...combo / mono your fav' !!!
Soon you too will discover your choice"go to" setup. It's only time.
Old 11th August 2014
  #68
Gear Addict
 
Sgalb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musiclab View Post
Some of the punches on the Sgt Pepper track are really nuts.
What do you mean? I own that CD so I want to listen for it.
Old 11th August 2014
  #69
Lives for gear
 
skillz335's Avatar
Thanks. I think I get you guys, really no matter what we do with a signal chain, regardless we still are committing something, be it either a mic, a room, a placement, baffles, diffusion, on or off axis ext. All of which is altering/adding to character of the source anyway.

Personally, I think I have to commit going in and stick with it. otherwise I put myself in a position to go ape**** with processingheh but since Im still learning/experimenting its ok sometimes. On the other hand I think the problem is there is so much you can do ITB that you can get lost down a bad road, I know I have many times. I tend to get this plug in that plug in syndrome I still try to get it right at the source, but if I dont I try to do the best I can with my mistakes.
Old 11th August 2014
  #70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgalb View Post
What do you mean? I own that CD so I want to listen for it.
If you heard the 4 tracks separately you'd see what I mean, like the lead guitar and the horns are on the same track.
Old 11th August 2014
  #71
Lives for gear
 
lestermagneto's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgalb View Post
What do you mean? I own that CD so I want to listen for it.
It's not on Sgt Peppers, but listen to Strawberry Fields Forever, at exactly 1:00 you hear them go from one complete mix to another that were in different keys at different tempos, that Sir George Martin brilliantly varispeeded the different versions to make a fairly seamless cut. It happens on the "...let me take you down..."... brilliant.

they had 2 different versions they liked, the top of one, and the end of another. John suggested using both. Sir George said, "well John, they are in different keys and in different tempos so...."... and John was like, "Great! It can be done, make it work", and he did it.....
Old 11th August 2014
  #72
Quote:
Originally Posted by skillz335 View Post
On the other hand I think the problem is there is so much you can do ITB that you can get lost down a bad road, I know I have many times. I tend to get this plug in that plug in syndrome I still try to get it right at the source, but if I dont I try to do the best I can with my mistakes.
I'm 100% with you on that!
Old 12th August 2014
  #73
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yumid View Post
Ok serious time now. The only thing we can tell you for sure about SOMEWHAT of a formula for EQing is in most cases, but not all cut the 3rd harmonic. It does the same job as the fundamental(original formant harmonic of the sound) so when you cut it; the sound maintains its formant/original sound but it is a lot less cloudy opening up room for other instruments.
Is this true for all sources? While a formula for eqing is a big derp, does cutting the third harmonic act as a strategy for warmth across all sources?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender412 View Post
Not to sound judgmental, but considering the fact that you're posting in the newbie section, and based on the questions you're asking, I would recommend not EQing on the way in. I understand why you want to, but it's a little dangerous unless you're really confident in what you're doing.
I'd tend to agree. Unless you're incredibly savvy with an eq, you're going to want to trade off the extra round trip on the converters in order to maintain the flexibility in your mix.
Old 12th August 2014
  #74
Gear Addict
 
Yumid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fifagifs View Post
Is this true for all sources? While a formula for eqing is a big derp, does cutting the third harmonic act as a strategy for warmth across all sources?
Its been working great for me since Ive learned it, I'm not experienced enough to say it ALWAYS works but in theory it should. Just learnt it in school a couple months ago, but it hasn't done anything but make EQing easier for me. Ive yet to run into a situation where it doesnt help or at least gives you an unnoticeable subtractive EQ, which is always a positive.

Sometimes I switch it up and see what happens if I boost the third and cut the first, etc.. but its a nice tip to keep in mind and always give a shot when eqing anything. And throwing in variations or little 'edits' of it like i mentioned. Maybe try playing around with the 5th too. It all just comes down to integrating EQing with basic harmony guidelines.

Same idea as if you were going to drop a degree of a basic piano triad and replace it with a string note. Drop the 3rd harmonic of the frequency spectrum to still maintain the fundamental sound but make room for other instruments in that area of the spectrum. (which brings us back to the point that cutting the 3rd harmonic opens room and makes it less cloudy; just like replacing the harmonic in your triad with another instrument on that note)
Topic:
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