Old 01-15-2021, 04:16 PM   #1
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default The damn mid range

I'm looking for as many opinions as possible on this.

My honest current view is that mids are the most difficult freq area to get right, esp low mids, but let's say the 350-900hz area.

I've seen a sad amount of "how to mix such instrument" videos on YTube (just, sad) and experimenting a great deal myself, I found at least for mixing modern rock/metal stuff cutting out mids was basically the difference betw sounding awful and sounding decent. A simple example: toms. Cutting out a huge chunk of mids would make them go from vomit to sounding alright. To the point where I'd bring those mids back up to 0db again, and couldn't believe how ridiculously cardboardy they sounded. Like just morally unacceptably bad.

It's even amazing to me at times VSTs would even keep their sounds so unprocessed at times, like they're just making you do work that NEEDS to be done anyways but perhaps that's down to my particular style. I'll load up whatever synth preset on a VST plugin and not be too sure what's wrong with it, then cut out a good 5-6db around 400 to 800hz (depending) and boom, now it's tolerable. Before that: thick, almost gluttonous little jerks taking a shit on my mix. I mean to keep *some* low mids, sure, but who the hell BOOSTS the 400-600 area, on any instrument ?

Heavy hi-gain guitars seem that way too, bass as well surprisingly. The other day I had my snare hit on a tight loop and couldn't decide what was wrong, then cut out 3 (out of 10) of 800hz on the outboard EQ and tada, cleaned right up.

Then there are some who say the mids are where the power is, that it's a mistake to be too mid-phobic... but how could that be when the tests (my experience at least) seem to regularly show the exact opposite ?
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2021, 05:17 PM   #2
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

On a lot of VSTs being reasonably "Untouched..."?

Think about what you've laid out that you've done yourself.

If you had a VST that was already pretty carved out on the "EQ..." front and then you put a pedal with an EQ curve as specific as a Tube Screamer on it?

What would happen?

I'd guess that any company involved probably leaves things just "So..." processed because they know that it is not "One Size Fits All..."


As for "Toms..." instance that you described?

That is pretty "Basics 101..."

Probably a lot of the "Why..." folks are second guessing a good bit of what you say you are doing and why.
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2021, 05:43 PM   #3
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

One other sorta "Basics 101..." thing -


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
...

I mean to keep *some* low mids, sure, but who the hell BOOSTS the 400-600 area, on any instrument ?

...
Anyone who runs a kick drum through a Tube Screamer.

That's "Who?..."
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2021, 07:18 PM   #4
Stu
Human being with feelings
 
Stu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,007
Default

Honestly, if everything you hear on your monitors sounds like it needs a cut in the mids, this is a seriously strong indicator that there is a problem with your room acoustics. In a completely untreated room, you are trying to understand why you perceive a problem in the frequency area you describe, which you are hearing over speakers in a room that will make it impossible to know right from wrong. This is why everyone was suggesting you spend your money on treatment instead of a preamp.

An accurate mix environment (as accurate as you can realistically make it within budget/space confinement’s) is often the difference between a good mix and a bad one.

A preamp or outboard eq etc is the 0.5% stuff, the teeny, tiny bit of sugar on top. Maybe not even that much, to be honest.
Stu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2021, 07:30 PM   #5
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

Never mind that putting a Tube Screamer on the kick drum was apparently some sort of "Light Bulb Goes On..." moment.

While it's not anything like a lock, a lot of this whole thing seems like the midrange in the room could be suspect.
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 12:15 AM   #6
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 2,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
I'll load up whatever synth preset on a VST plugin and not be too sure what's wrong with it, then cut out a good 5-6db around 400 to 800hz (depending) and boom, now it's tolerable. Before that: thick, almost gluttonous little jerks taking a shit on my mix.
Presets are made to sound good on their own, theyre made to be examples of this great sounding vsti, not sit comfortably in your specific mix. Theyre there to get a prospective purchaser to purchase, or a new purchaser to feel good. Theyre a starting place to sound awesome and be the focus of the mix (which will inevitably smother your existing mix), not just automatically comfortably sit where one wants them. Getting an instrument to sit where you want it in the mix, or making sure its settings are correct for the given context you've put it in, is the exact job you've taken on, its not the plug ins job to do any of that automatically.

This really doesnt sound like the plugin at fault, or even the presets being the problem here.

What youre describing, the solution, to me, is just basic mixing of a full mix, and introducing a new instrument and player. There is a high chance you'll need to make space in the mix, and/or carve the sound/adjust the settings to fit in the mix or it'll just do exactly what you've described.

Last edited by maxdembo; 01-16-2021 at 12:28 AM.
maxdembo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 01:13 AM   #7
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,501
Default

Perhaps having a look at Mr. Beato's video might help you understand some basics on how you should use EQ?:
Pink Wool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 04:15 AM   #8
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
Honestly, if everything you hear on your monitors sounds like it needs a cut in the mids, this is a seriously strong indicator that there is a problem with your room acoustics. In a completely untreated room, you are trying to understand why you perceive a problem in the frequency area you describe, which you are hearing over speakers in a room that will make it impossible to know right from wrong. This is why everyone was suggesting you spend your money on treatment instead of a preamp.

An accurate mix environment (as accurate as you can realistically make it within budget/space confinement’s) is often the difference between a good mix and a bad one.

A preamp or outboard eq etc is the 0.5% stuff, the teeny, tiny bit of sugar on top. Maybe not even that much, to be honest.
been looking at treating the room seriously the past couple days. But it's the same with my headphones on for eg.

OK I guess nobody else here has a problem with the mid range, which has been the main pb for me the past years. I was looking to see who might agree it might've been an issue earlier but found a workaround it.

It's where an instrument might sound flat out bad, or decent, the most for me. The area you need to get right. A snare immediately sounds bad if you don't get that right, a kick, a bass or guitars. I find dealing with the highs more obvious, there's that piercing area of 3-4K you have to look out for, sizzle around 6-8K that needs to be tamed a bit usually, and then 10-12K for air that usually works fine. The mids are more complicated to process depending on the instr. and are often a major hindrance. Take out too much and your instr feels hollow and unnatural, keep too much on and it's this cardboard amateur sound.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 04:23 AM   #9
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
Perhaps having a look at Mr. Beato's video might help you understand some basics on how you should use EQ?:
despite knowing my freq a bit, I had watched this some time ago because why not. But notice at the 14min mark onward, he's basically cutting out mids for every instrument. Esp the low mids.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 07:32 AM   #10
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,184
Default

Ahhh yes, the low mids -- aka -- the war zone

As @maxdembo says, what sounds good by itself often doesn't translate in a mix.

Everything fights in this space, mucking everything up sonically.

EQ is somewhat helpful, but musical arrangement is extremely important too in reducing this problem !

It's a battle we all fight, have for decades, and will continue into the foreseeable future, so don't feel alone, we are all involved in the same battle

One thing that can sometimes help is cutting slightly different low mid frequencies on different instruments.

We would all love to just eliminate low mids to get rid of the muck, but unfortunately, that is also where the "meat and potatoes", warmth, heart, etc., etc., comes from so we need it -- just not so damn much of it

I know this doesn't really help much, other than to say you're not alone, we all feel this pain daily
__________________
To install you need the CSI Software and Support Files
For installation instructions and documentation see the Wiki
Donate -- via PayPal to waddingtongeoff@gmail.com
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 07:37 AM   #11
Allybye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 680
Default

Oh wrong assimption, o dork one!

I do have problems with the lower mids too but that is usually in poor speakers, or room acoustics (recording and monitoring).

I could be wrong -I only watched just over half of that video- but I think you may have taken him out of context a bit. The bit about eqing drums for example he talks about holding back or enhancing various bits of the spectrum as is appropriate to the instrument, and the mix it sits in,to reduce conflict with other instruments in similar frequency ranges or to emphasise it's characteristics.
Does he do blanket lower mid eq?
Till that point he seems to only concentrate on limited genres!

I do have issues with some people who produce instructional videos either erroneously or giving incomplete information. As an example the eq filter rate should have been emphasised as dBs per Octave as that is the usual standard.
Q actually is the Quality Factor or a resonant circuit i.e. the opposite of damping and is derived from a L, C, R electronic circuit. These were how filters and eq were done when there was only analogue circuits but it is quite true to say that the bandwidth effect of a filter/eq shows the virtually same affect on the signal, usually (but not always) with asociated phase effects.

Must admit I could not understand why he waffles on about all the various eq "modules" and their greatness for so long. I did get a little tired after a while where he did seem slow getting to the point!
He is generally quite good though and far from being as bad as some you tubers who seem deluded!

I don't have a link at present but the presentations at the AES that are on youtube from some other real audio greats are much more to my liking!
Allybye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 07:56 AM   #12
ggrey
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Upstate NY USA
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
.........But notice at the 14min mark onward, he's basically cutting out mids for every instrument. Esp the low mids.
Back in the 70s I began multitracking on a Teac 3340S and found "BOOM" was everywhere. Big bloated music from almost every track and mix...what was wrong...what do I do?? Finally came upon an article that stated Teac intentionally adds a 6 db boost in their low/mids.

So right then and there I started EQing the Low/mids down and you know what....success. I have been focused on that area ever sense and 50 years later it is still a challenge.

As Geoff says above...it is THE war zone and always will be. Almost everything fights for this space and it mucks every mix until you learn how to address it.
ggrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 08:37 AM   #13
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,561
Default

Higher frequency sounds are more directional. Mic position can be critical to pick up focused sound in balance all the way up. The low mids will always come through though even with the mic in the next room.

Then add in the concept of multitrack. Get up close on multiple sources for detail and mix control. But now you have a copy of the low mid room tones on every track! Not only are the low mids easy to capture, they kind of stack up with a multitrack recording. You kind of have to decide what sources that need to keep that frequency area so you don't end up magnifying a lot of mud.

Just a couple of generalizations.
Plenty of people are adept at recording clear tracks and making arrangements that mix themselves and all that. (And will probably reply and tell you all about it!)
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 10:56 AM   #14
rncwalker
Human being with feelings
 
rncwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: South Fl.
Posts: 793
Default

I think, that to sum up everything that everyone has said, is that you really have many things that need addressing to make your Music sound good.


To me a true Professional knows all about these problems and knows what needs to be done to make the Music sound good.

There will never be a "DAW", "VST" or any other product that will solve these problems for you.

Robert
rncwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 11:59 AM   #15
JohnnyMusic
Human being with feelings
 
JohnnyMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Twin Cities, Mn
Posts: 384
Default

-Most of this has been touched on in one way or another, but you asked for any and all opinions...

-Paying attention to build up in the low mids is an oft mentioned tip you read about, and for a good reason.

-I think it just comes down to the fact that most sounds have a good amount of energy in the upper bass / low mids, whereas fewer intruments have tons of energy lower or higher.

-So there is just this natural build up in that area that you have to deal with somehow. You don't want to remove it completely,you just want to get it under control. I think that is what people were referring to with being mid phobic. Because if you overdo it, you will lose some vital power or fullness. You do need those frequencies in there!

-One way is to choose an arrangement of instruments that just works with very little tweaking, probably the most difficult way to do it, but something you can learn with experience and experimentation. For example if you have a beefy synth pad, maybe your guitars have less low mids so that they don't clash. That said, some tweaking and balancing to some extent will often be needed.

-Then beyond that,in the mix, you just have to pay close attention to that area and decide which instruments will provide that frequency to the mix. There is no right or wrong here, it's whatever you think works. It's the idea of balancing the instruments in a given range so they aren't clashing and masking one another and building up to much in a given range (unless you want them to...).

so to sum up:
1) Thinking about what instruments and VSTs are going to be in the arrangement and how much energy they have in the low mids is the first thing you would think about to deal with this (yes this affected by everything from the room, to the instrument, to the mic, etc, but this is assuming you already know that and what sounds you are getting)

2) Then in the mix, deciding where you're low mids are going to come from and balancing that out so that it is enought to sound full and powerful but not building up and sounding muddy or causing a bunch of masking you don't want.

3) There is no shortcut to solving this, it is just a part of mixing. There are just too many options to say, ok use this vst and this pad and it will always work. Now this said, again, as you gain experience with this if you have certain instrument and sound combinations that work for you, maybe you stick with those and return to them, and develop a style or sound that works for you.

-I will recommend reference tracks that are set to the same volume as your track, so you can a/b and check if you are achieving the results you want.
-Also, for a rough check, throw on a frequency meter and see if you have a nice even mix, or at least similar to your reference tracks with no massive dips or peaks.

I think if you think of it this way, you'll get good at balancing this range.

John
JohnnyMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 12:54 PM   #16
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,501
Default

Perhaps something similar might be of use for you:




I'll echo the sentiment that you should get your basics down first.
Pink Wool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 05:28 PM   #17
Stu
Human being with feelings
 
Stu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
been looking at treating the room seriously the past couple days. But it's the same with my headphones on for eg.

OK I guess nobody else here has a problem with the mid range, which has been the main pb for me the past years. I was looking to see who might agree it might've been an issue earlier but found a workaround it.

It's where an instrument might sound flat out bad, or decent, the most for me. The area you need to get right. A snare immediately sounds bad if you don't get that right, a kick, a bass or guitars. I find dealing with the highs more obvious, there's that piercing area of 3-4K you have to look out for, sizzle around 6-8K that needs to be tamed a bit usually, and then 10-12K for air that usually works fine. The mids are more complicated to process depending on the instr. and are often a major hindrance. Take out too much and your instr feels hollow and unnatural, keep too much on and it's this cardboard amateur sound.
Well the monitoring question is an important one - which headphones? Are you using Sonarworks? If not, do you know the frequency plot so you understand where your headphones are heavy on certain frequencies? All important questions, and specifically geared towards your OP which discusses the small 400 to 800hz range rather than mids in general.

Midrange will always require the most work because it is where most of the musical content is regardless of which instrument. Understanding what to do with it is an ongoing process and most engineers would probably say that they never stop learning in this regard, Geoff summed things up very well.
Stu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 10:21 PM   #18
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
...

I'll echo the sentiment that you should get your basics down first.
On this very front(along with a couple of particular things pointed out in that thread...) -

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=236515


Quote:
Originally Posted by SonicAxiom View Post
...

Acquiring listening experience, knowing how to interpret what you are hearing and knowing what tools to reach out for to get closer to a commercial mix requires a lot of time (several years) and never comes to an end. You'll be able to discern more and more subtleties over time and get used to knowing what tool you need to conquer certain issues. A combination of good ears, a lot of listening experience, decent tools to work with and a decent listening environment is key. On top of this, don't always follow rules but experiment with settings and don't be shy to try even the most extreme ones.

Good luck!

.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxAsteria View Post
It's just practice. The main thing to keep in mind at all times is that volume boosts fool your ears into thinking the sound is "better" when it's only louder. So stay well away from clipping your meters, try to use EQ cuts instead of boosts when possible. Taking away problematic frequencies can clean up the sound easily and fit tracks into the mix without fooling your ears. So learn to listen for that. E.g. if the sound is "muddy" try cutting around 200-250Hz. That's an easy one.

...
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltonight View Post
One thing that took me way too long to learn was to high-pass filter pretty much everything. And get rid of excess low end on every track but the ones you want to carry that frequency range (e.g. the kick and bass). There's usually extraneous mud and rumble on everything, so cutting the low frequency stuff that isn't musically important makes room for big, clear low end for the instruments whose job it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
A few thoughts...

Frequency based Ear training is VERY useful. Here is one example https://www.trainyourears.com/

EQ your tracks in context. That means avoiding the solo button most of the time. It doesnt matter what your tracks sound like solo'd. It only matters what they sound like in the mix.

Reference tracks will cut the mixing learning curve down TREMENDOUSLY. I wish I understood this when I started. With no real experience you have no idea what a good mix sounds like without a reference. Comparing your mix (at equal volume!!) to a commercial mix will get you in the ball park quickly.

ISOL8 is great for comparing your mix with a commercial mix in different EQ ranges. Now you can hear how your low end stacks up with a great mix; compare your mid range balance between guitars snare and vocals or see how loud and how bright your hi hat is compared to a great mix.
https://www.tb-software.com/TBProAudio/ISOL8.html
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2021, 11:27 PM   #19
panicaftermath
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltonight View Post
One thing that took me way too long to learn was to high-pass filter pretty much everything. And get rid of excess low end on every track but the ones you want to carry that frequency range (e.g. the kick and bass). There's usually extraneous mud and rumble on everything, so cutting the low frequency stuff that isn't musically important makes room for big, clear low end for the instruments whose job it is.
I high pass pretty much everything. My basic default track has a ReaEQ instance with a high pass and low pass with a few flat band passes in between, all ready to go. I start weeding out that stuff from the start. It's pretty rote. If I go too far, it's obvious. You're always tweaking and re-tweaking anyway. (Working at lower volumes makes it easier to assess, and mitigates room problems.)

With it understood that presets are just generalizations and starting points, I note these two stock presets in ReaEQ. If those were the only EQ settings applied across an entire project, that alone would start bringing a mix into focus, or creating the conditions for the focus.

panicaftermath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2021, 04:21 AM   #20
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington View Post
Ahhh yes, the low mids -- aka -- the war zone

I know this doesn't really help much, other than to say you're not alone, we all feel this pain daily
indeedleedoo. And yes arrangements are key. Sth I still struggle with. That tendency to throw in too many tracks at once.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ggrey View Post
Back in the 70s I began multitracking on a Teac 3340S and found "BOOM" was everywhere. Big bloated music from almost every track and mix...what was wrong...what do I do?? Finally came upon an article that stated Teac intentionally adds a 6 db boost in their low/mids.

So right then and there I started EQing the Low/mids down and you know what....success. I have been focused on that area ever sense and 50 years later it is still a challenge.

As Geoff says above...it is THE war zone and always will be. Almost everything fights for this space and it mucks every mix until you learn how to address it.
I see. But then, I must ask. What style do you mix ? If it's modern rock, with modern tone heavy guitars and synths and that modern drum sound, or anything sonically similar, I'd be curious to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Higher frequency sounds are more directional. Mic position can be critical to pick up focused sound in balance all the way up. The low mids will always come through though even with the mic in the next room.

Then add in the concept of multitrack. Get up close on multiple sources for detail and mix control. But now you have a copy of the low mid room tones on every track! Not only are the low mids easy to capture, they kind of stack up with a multitrack recording. You kind of have to decide what sources that need to keep that frequency area so you don't end up magnifying a lot of mud.

Just a couple of generalizations.
Plenty of people are adept at recording clear tracks and making arrangements that mix themselves and all that. (And will probably reply and tell you all about it!)
Yes that's a good way to deal with it too. Certain tracks bring out the meat while others are cleaner and less congested with low mids.


JohnnyMusic Thx for that. It isn't obvious which instrument should be boosted in the low mids though, so I'll just have to figure it out. Most instr sound like crap in that 400-600hz area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
Perhaps something similar might be of use for you:




I'll echo the sentiment that you should get your basics down first.
I agree with every adjective used at the bottom. I'll keep that one in case although I already have a couple, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu View Post
Well the monitoring question is an important one - which headphones? Are you using Sonarworks? If not, do you know the frequency plot so you understand where your headphones are heavy on certain frequencies? All important questions, and specifically geared towards your OP which discusses the small 400 to 800hz range rather than mids in general.

Midrange will always require the most work because it is where most of the musical content is regardless of which instrument. Understanding what to do with it is an ongoing process and most engineers would probably say that they never stop learning in this regard, Geoff summed things up very well.
yes, what you hear as you're mixing is definitely important so it comes out sounding good on any device. Not using Sonarworks, no.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2021, 07:37 AM   #21
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

I`m an ex-pro bass player & one of the hardest things in the world for us is staying audible when surrounded by over-driven guitars playing through 4x12s.
Guitarists always want massive amounts of low end, which is why a lot of metal etc sounds like the kick drum is a tambourine with a click & the bass doesn`t exist.
Rant over
__________________
Ici on parles Franglais
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2021, 08:05 AM   #22
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
I`m an ex-pro bass player & one of the hardest things in the world for us is staying audible when surrounded by over-driven guitars playing through 4x12s.
Guitarists always want massive amounts of low end, which is why a lot of metal etc sounds like the kick drum is a tambourine with a click & the bass doesn`t exist.
Rant over
Sound of god metal is truly hard to mix right and make properly ferocious!
Probably why there are so many "metal" albums where the instrument arrangement is apparently: mid-scooped beer commercial guitar and typewriter.
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2021, 10:12 AM   #23
OLSHALOM
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Austria
Posts: 443
Default

OMG that topic make my thoughts rotating like hell.
I could think, discuss and write about that term all day long after 25 years lifetime investing into mixing.
And all I can say, I should better go for the girls.

By trying to keep it short:-) and open-minded:


I WOULD GO AN OTHER DIRECTION AND SEE THE PROBLEM NOT IN THE MIDS, IF THERE EVEN IS ANY PROBLEM AT ALL!!

For sure everybody who's mixing tries to handle the too honky, too muddy, too cloudy aspects of a Sound and a Mix. Which, as others already stated, comes from clashing of all the sounds in that Range.
To much proximity-effect not enough harmonics.

I would admit, I see the most potential and difference of a weak compared to a professional full-sound mix in that range. But also saying all the frequencies are important.

Sure, I'm a booster!!! That's it!! And I might go crazy with it. It depends.

I just never liked the sound of dipping mids.
Sure, in certain circumstances it's the ticket.
But the way, to look at first what's to much and then cut out maybe really good things, is totally wrong in my opinion.
Alot of it is judging to.

I WOULD RATHER GO FOR WHAT'S MISSING INSTEAD OF CUTTING OUT FUNDAMENTALS !!

There are certain VERY IMPORTANT psycho-acoustic aspects of perceiving frequencies and its balance.
For example 500Hz and 3k is perceived as near, while a peak at 800-1k is giving the impression of further away.
For me cutting 500 is pulling things further away, even in a bassdrum.


Let's say a loud maybe even screamed vocal has a high peak at 800-1k by it's nature and sounds far away. To much of the vowel(?) "A"?
What would you do?
Go against nature?
In this circumstance I like to use a pultec-style low-shelf to mimic more of an proximity-effect to even out the energy below 1k.
Sure, it can get a bit overly warm. What's to do against it?
Add 3k for more bite and presence, along with a peak at 12k?
Or a High-Shelf boosting everything above 1k?
YOU JUDGE AND DECIDE !!

Then the different colours and characteristics:
Yeah sure, in a heavy-metal mix it seems a bit odd, to go for a woody 500Hz BD and Tom Sound. But, cutting puts it further away.
You Like it Full, Big, a Fat LowEnd and Fundamental.
Along with cutting thru dense-distortion-guitars, which let no room for weak Drum-Hits and give a pressure and stereoids.
So you need bite and presence and the metal-characteristics of the Sounds.
3k, 5k, 8k, 10k.

If a Peak or Shelf suits the sound better?
Well, by there's a simple fact to boost(or Cut) with a peak which gives one frequency more energy than the others, along a shelf boosts(or cut) everything beneath or above a frequency, there's again some psycho-acoustic effects going on and they give different perception.

Psycho-acoustics = YIN YANG

Adding Top-End makes your LF and LMF seems thinner.
Adding Bass makes it more dull.
Adding Presence makes it sound weaker and smaller.
Adding 10k let seem to let 500 cycles disappear
5k relates to 200, 8k to 300, 1,5k to 80-100.
etc

But if you have a dull or boxy sound, adding presence and shimmer goes against it.
Some good for some bad.
But there's not really a good and bad, just a white and black YIN YANG.
It's always relation and perception.


Which brings to the last Point:

DIMENSION:

Bob McCarthy of MeyerSounds write in his System-Engineering book about the 3rd dimension.
There is indeed a relation of perception to this inside of a frequency balance.
IN YOUR FACE is what alot of guys want to be heard.
But it's also great to "let you sit" on a bass-sound and hang over it in a way
Of cours often sounds seem far way not really touching you without presence and detail especially when there are alot of sources.
To muddy, to boxy, blablabla...

SEE EQ AS A CREATIVE TOOL TO SCULP THE DIMENSION OF YOUR SOURCES !!

justmy2cents

EDIT: Ou, it's pretty long :/
OLSHALOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 05:28 AM   #24
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
I`m an ex-pro bass player & one of the hardest things in the world for us is staying audible when surrounded by over-driven guitars playing through 4x12s.
Guitarists always want massive amounts of low end, which is why a lot of metal etc sounds like the kick drum is a tambourine with a click & the bass doesn`t exist.
Rant over
Yeah. There are ways to go about this, most advise to scoop the gtrs like crazy and let the bass come through the middle there. Never quite got this to work. Ofc to do this, your guitars need to be super tight and I think you need a quality physical amp for that. I use Neural DSP sims.
I focus more on the pick attack cutting through so the highs on the bass rather while the low end just serves as a foundation but isn't fully audible and just supports the track.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLSHALOM View Post
OMG that topic make my thoughts rotating like hell.
thx for that, will keep some of those instructions in mind. I hadn't thought about the following:
" For example 500Hz and 3k is perceived as near, while a peak at 800-1k is giving the impression of further away.
For me cutting 500 is pulling things further away, even in a bassdrum."

That's true. It's funny too because I DO have issues with my mixes sounding like some instr are a bit "far away", not quite at the front of the mix, and the two freq you mention there 500hz and 3K are some of my most hated and consistently cut out. 500hz in my mind is pure mud and 3K is the harsh/aggressive freq.


I've tried sth new yesterday:
on the master bus, butting out some 500hz as usual, but BOOSTING some 700hz, and a lot of warmth and energy came back into the mix. I'll start mixing individual instr with more of that high-mid area. Cutting out low mids individually and master bus will just make a mix sound a bit lifeless, so there NEEDS to be some sort of mid presence there. It's a matter of balance, once again.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 04:31 PM   #25
GtrGeorge
Human being with feelings
 
GtrGeorge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: New York (Long Island)
Posts: 206
Default Same problem....

I too have problems with low mids. Congestion seems to happen and things get muddy in the master.
I blame my Event 20/20 active loudspeakers, my room and myself. ..in reverse order.

But I have heard worse records than mine..so I feel I'm pretty close to a good mix after I work at it for a while.
hear my stuff at bandcamp and all the others.If you dare.
GtrGeorge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 04:41 PM   #26
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GtrGeorge View Post
I too have problems with low mids. Congestion seems to happen and things get muddy in the master.
I blame my Event 20/20 active loudspeakers, my room and myself. ..in reverse order.

But I have heard worse records than mine..so I feel I'm pretty close to a good mix after I work at it for a while.
hear my stuff at bandcamp and all the others.If you dare.
lsnd to this:
https://georgebarry.bandcamp.com/tra...-is-not-enough

About the mid range part and GTRs:
I'd imagine that is an amp and cab you're recording, not sims ? There's that mid range meat there, and with actual amps there's a sort of natural articulation that gets picked up and less EQ moves need to be made vs amp sims where one will be looking to make the gtrs as sharp as possible and start cutting out areas, in pticular the low mids. The gtrs sound full here. Nice chorus btw, switching to a sadder minor mood like that.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 04:44 PM   #27
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
...

the two freq you mention there 500hz and 3K are some of my most hated and consistently cut out. 500hz in my mind is pure mud and 3K is the harsh/aggressive freq.

...
You liked the Tube Screamer on the kick.

It absolutely boosted 500hz.

You need to seriously consider rethinking some of what you "Think..." you believe.

When you aren't going in with that assumption? You seem to be be just fine with the sound that a pedal that absolutely boosts 500hz gave you.
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 07:41 PM   #28
JamesPeters
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 3,943
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
You liked the Tube Screamer on the kick.

It absolutely boosted 500hz.
Plus probably threw some harmonics in that general range from the fundamental.

That is, unless he didn't use any overdrive at all from the pedal.
JamesPeters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2021, 07:52 PM   #29
numberthirty
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
Plus probably threw some harmonics in that general range from the fundamental.

That is, unless he didn't use any overdrive at all from the pedal.
Certainly possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
...

I've never had a kick drum that sounded as real as right now, processed through the Tube Screamer. It sounds "analog", realistic, almost like it's been lifted off that flat basic mixing landscape. Just that subtle grit that isn't quite distortion but that more focused/slightly dirty tone acquired from the TS808. Same with the bass guitar. And the Tumnus for eg. has improved the voice nicely: the highs aren't shrilling and the bass on that pedal is nice and round. Gave it more presence. Sth I really struggle with plugins is getting the voice not to sound thin. If I compare my mixes from before outboard gear and after, there's that fullness in the voice, a bit of low-mid presence I'd totally forgotten about mixing with just plugs that's made a subtle reappearance.
Perhaps in the future, I'll know how to achieve those effects without the gear.
I did get a modest chuckle out of that what D.L. is describing sounds a lot like putting a pedal in front of an amp to "Tighten..." the bottom up back in the Thrash Metal..." days.

Kinda the exact opposite of going for ab "Analog..."/"Realistic..." sound.
numberthirty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 05:17 AM   #30
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
Plus probably threw some harmonics in that general range from the fundamental.

That is, unless he didn't use any overdrive at all from the pedal.
Tone to near max, and about 2 on the OD. Really nice result for kicks.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 08:48 AM   #31
DVDdoug
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 2,779
Default

Quote:
My honest current view is that mids are the most difficult freq area to get right, esp low mids, but let's say the 350-900hz area.
EQ can be used as an "effect" but IMO it's mostly "corrective" and shouldn't be over-done.

In an ideal world with a perfect performance with a perfect microphone we shouldn't need any EQ. Of course that situation rarely exists, and we can't resist "tweaking the knobs"...

There's very little EQ when a band plays live. It's up to the musicians (and maybe the band leader) to get a good sound from their instruments and "give space" to each other and play together in a way that sounds good. The "sound guy" may make some small EQ adjustments to compensate for the microphone, PA system and room. There no EQ with a live classical orchestra.

In a recording, the bass is a special situation... Because of loudness constraints you usually have to "make room" for the kick drum and bass guitar to work together and you usually have to make some "unnatural" EQ adjustments (and maybe ducking) that wouldn't be used live.

And of course, it's common to filter the bass out of everything else because for non-bass instruments & vocals any deep bass is just noise/garbage.
DVDdoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 09:09 AM   #32
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,561
Default

Heh...

You might be surprised at the level of bionic eq'ing going on with live performance PA support!

Sure there are the rare unicorn live venues where construction through sound treatment through system install are so dialed you can hold your vocal mic 2" from your monitor with zero eq and have no feedback.

I'll pause for the laughter to die down...

For everywhere else with poor acoustics in the room (and maybe even a glass window behind the stage), it's aggressive brute force eq'ing all the way!
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 09:29 AM   #33
panicaftermath
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVDdoug View Post
In an ideal world with a perfect performance with a perfect microphone we shouldn't need any EQ.
But in that "ideal world," modern electric and electronic music either wouldn't exist, or every instrument and piece of gear used to produce it would need to be custom designed and built for each and every performance and recording.

EQ, compression -- all of it distortion and artificial relative to the sound natively produced -- is the very essence of modern "non-acoustic" music.
panicaftermath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 02:53 PM   #34
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVDdoug View Post
EQ can be used as an "effect" but IMO it's mostly "corrective" and shouldn't be over-done.

In an ideal world with a perfect performance with a perfect microphone we shouldn't need any EQ. Of course that situation rarely exists, and we can't resist "tweaking the knobs"...

There's very little EQ when a band plays live. It's up to the musicians (and maybe the band leader) to get a good sound from their instruments and "give space" to each other and play together in a way that sounds good. The "sound guy" may make some small EQ adjustments to compensate for the microphone, PA system and room. There no EQ with a live classical orchestra.

In a recording, the bass is a special situation... Because of loudness constraints you usually have to "make room" for the kick drum and bass guitar to work together and you usually have to make some "unnatural" EQ adjustments (and maybe ducking) that wouldn't be used live.

And of course, it's common to filter the bass out of everything else because for non-bass instruments & vocals any deep bass is just noise/garbage.
Yes nothing beats a great take. Listening to pro songs it doesn't sound like this battlefield of a mix with struggles and compensated flaws, it sounds like the guitars are tight enough as is, the bass sits perfectly at the back naturally, the drums, voice etc... but for us plebs, EQ is a must and that mid range is whew. I reckon but am not sure at all if this is true, that if you get the mid range right at the source during the take, that you can easily get the lows and highs right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by panicaftermath View Post
But in that "ideal world," modern electric and electronic music either wouldn't exist, or every instrument and piece of gear used to produce it would need to be custom designed and built for each and every performance and recording.

EQ, compression -- all of it distortion and artificial relative to the sound natively produced -- is the very essence of modern "non-acoustic" music.
Right. The requirements of modern music are such that aggressive EQing is a must. Most ppl with a few years of Reaper under their belt can do a decent job with, say, an acoustic guitar, bass, light drums and a lead voice. But throw in some distortion guitars in there, drums on top that have to sound punchy and present, and then some synths and you're looking at a totally different animal.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 03:02 PM   #35
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
The requirements of modern music are such that aggressive EQing is a must.
Bullshit.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 04:35 PM   #36
Dork Lard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Pizza Hut
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Bullshit.
Explain then.

What I've seen is electronic music is - nothing - but - EQing. So anything that has synths, electronic drums, anything with elements of EDM. Modern metal is a ton of EQing: drums are super processed, bass and guitars are super processed, vocals sound little to nothing like what the vocalist might sound like in real time in the studio. Modern rock is the same way from what I hear, only a tad less because the organic feel is so crucial in that style. Radio music sounds EQed to death. What are you thinking of exactly ? And if the argument is "modern music requires a lot of EQing", then how is the answer no it isn't, when you've got so many items in the mix that are thrown in together that shouldn't; or that don't actually exist and are themselves 100 processed; and the instruments no longer forms an organic harmony with the mix space they share. Were you thinking of ... modern country perhaps ? Well no, actually, super processed too.
Dork Lard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 05:04 PM   #37
domzy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dork Lard View Post
Explain then.

What I've seen is electronic music is - nothing - but - EQing. So anything that has synths, electronic drums, anything with elements of EDM. Modern metal is a ton of EQing: drums are super processed, bass and guitars are super processed, vocals sound little to nothing like what the vocalist might sound like in real time in the studio. Modern rock is the same way from what I hear, only a tad less because the organic feel is so crucial in that style. Radio music sounds EQed to death. What are you thinking of exactly ? And if the argument is "modern music requires a lot of EQing", then how is the answer no it isn't, when you've got so many items in the mix that are thrown in together that shouldn't; or that don't actually exist and are themselves 100 processed; and the instruments no longer forms an organic harmony with the mix space they share. Were you thinking of ... modern country perhaps ? Well no, actually, super processed too.
Maybe that's more to do with people's impatience & lack of vision etc.
ie just stick it all together now and fix it later if it doesn't quite work, rather than spend time carefully planning, arranging, choosing sounds etc
domzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 05:06 PM   #38
panicaftermath
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 538
Default

I think a reasonable case can be made that, allowing for maybe a touch of generalized hyperbole, everything being said here....

Quote:
What I've seen is electronic music is - nothing - but - EQing. So anything that has synths, electronic drums, anything with elements of EDM. Modern metal is a ton of EQing: drums are super processed, bass and guitars are super processed, vocals sound little to nothing like what the vocalist might sound like in real time in the studio. Modern rock is the same way from what I hear, only a tad less because the organic feel is so crucial in that style. Radio music sounds EQed to death. What are you thinking of exactly ? And if the argument is "modern music requires a lot of EQing", then how is the answer no it isn't, when you've got so many items in the mix that are thrown in together that shouldn't; or that don't actually exist and are themselves 100 processed; and the instruments no longer forms an organic harmony with the mix space they share.
...could as easily be said of all popular music since the middle of the last century, if not earlier.

Which is NOT to say that "nothing has changed" since then, except to the extent that it's only become more true over the decades.
panicaftermath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 05:09 PM   #39
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Dork Lard:

Do you have these original tracks/mixes and their EQ settings as reference (such as the recall sheet) for multiple "modern mixes". Can you post them?

Aggressive EQing... does it get done, sure here and there when it is needed but it's also a whole lot of mundane subtle EQing. Is it a given, no. It's like another term which I despise "carve" when people talk EQ, also internet bullshit. Do mids pile up in the 200-600 range, yes, and with most any genre throughout history. Why? Because almost every instrument contains those!! Should we be aware of that, yes. Should we conclude modern mixes require aggressive EQing, no - depending on whos definition of "aggressive". I can promise you this, this entire ballgame is not rules and EQ philosophies - you can learn that the easy way or the hard way, your choice.

I love your zeal but I think what would help you most is to refrain from adopting such blanket statements as your hard and fast rule(s). It's like you come here asking for questions, then pretty much ignore everything seasoned pros here tell you, then just make up your own answers. That can't turn out well.

Take care!
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2021, 05:12 PM   #40
domzy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by domzy View Post
Maybe that's more to do with people's impatience & lack of vision etc.
ie just stick it all together now and fix it later if it doesn't quite work, rather than spend time carefully planning, arranging, choosing sounds etc
and i wasn't saying i necessarily disagree with you, that's just the way music is made these days (and i agree with panicaftermath that it's been like that for 70yrs or so.)
Also, i think that the evolution of electrical listening & reproduction equipment has influenced this, of course.
domzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.