EQ Help

[dsealer]

I'd like to ask for help or guidance or suggestions. I've been using Reaper for a year or so now and I'm feeling pretty confident with it. That's not to say that I know or understand everything. I still have much to learn with it but at this point I can pretty much accomplish what I want to when I record.
My “ask” has to do with EQ. I realize that I am lacking in knowledge when it comes to adding eq to my tracks. I am able to add enough to make things sound as I want them to sound but that's about it.
I don't understand how to “carve out” frequencies for different things, like vocals and instruments. I don't understand much of what is involved with assigning, cutting and boosting frequencies. I'm guessing that my different musical parts share the same frequencies.
I've spent a life time playing music but now I'm not focused as much on playing (live) as I am recording my music.
I'd like to get better at recording and mixing and I realize that I need to do a better job of “eq”ing my music.
So with all that said I'd appreciate any help, guidance or suggestions anyone is willing to provide. Please be advised that my lack of understanding things leads me to ask other questions.

Thanks,
Don…..

[ashcat_lt]

I answered on HR

[DVDdoug]

EQ is mainly a corrective effect so if you have a perfect recording you don't need EQ. But of course it's human nature to tweak everything...

I don't understand how to “carve out” frequencies for different things, like vocals and instruments.

You probably shouldn't be doing that "everyday" and you generally don't want to do anything that extreme with vocals unless you're looking for a special effect (an unnatural sound).

The most obvious case for "carving out" would be bass and the kick drum. You usually don't want them both "competing" for the bass range so it's common to cut the deep bass on one and cut the mid-bass on the other, giving each one its own "space". And of course, it's also very common to cut the bass completely out of everything else.

You can do the same if you have "competing" guitars that sound OK separately but not-quite-right when mixed together, or if you have a keyboard & guitar, etc. that are not mixing nicely. If an instrument is drowning-out the vocals you can try EQing the instrument so you can still hear them both.

[g4greg]

Originally Posted by DVDdoug

EQ is mainly a corrective effect so if you have a perfect recording you don't need EQ. But of course it's human nature to tweak everything...


The most obvious case for "carving out" would be bass and the kick drum. You usually don't want them both "competing" for the bass range so it's common to cut the deep bass on one and cut the mid-bass on the other, giving each one its own "space". And of course, it's also very common to cut the bass completely out of everything else.

I have to disagree.. Frequency carving is used a lot more than you think, especially for busy mixes. The key is not to overdo it, and always listen to what you're doing in the context of the mix. If it sounds unnatural, you've carved too much.

It's very common practice to carve out the frequencies the Guitars don't need to leave room for the bass, and vice-versa. Same for vocals and basically everything else.

Of course, they won't sound good soloed out.. so you have to always listen in the context of the mix... And if an instrument has a solo part, of course, you have to pull back that nasty EQ.

Back to the OP:

This Isn't on reaper, but I really like how this guy explains stuff... Just use ReaQ to do the same stuff.
He's a bit too drastic at times, but the theory is there...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoJqNzxYQD4

[vdubreeze]

There are also different goals of what the music should sound like and what vibe or feeling it should create. Some people carve and slot the individual instruments to the max, like Roger Nichols famously did with Steely Dan records, which sound either fantastic or sterile, or in between or both, depending on who you ask. In someone else's hands Aja may have sounded more blended together and less separated because they weren't going by the same rules. Same way one engineer will want to use a different mic and preamp for everything on a track and another goes bah at that and will use the same preamps on a tracking session and the same mic and preamp on all the overdubs and it does exactly what they want and is great.

It's a question that can have different conflicting answers that are all correct if they work for someone. Find out the info but then grab some knobs and turn. Do some mixes and listen later. Repeat hundreds of times (no, seriously : ) ) Don't be afraid of making crappy mixes. Everyone's early mixes were crappy. The more you do it the better sounding it gets.

Throw on an eq and pull up a preset and check out what this particular person felt would be a good eq for, for example, "Modern bass" or "Acoustic guitar bright". Adjust to taste. Make a few from scratch.

It takes a while before it makes sense, much less starts feeling like you're in charge of what you're doing with an eq, but there's no way around that.

Enjoy getting into it : )

[Cranky Emu]

Originally Posted by g4greg

It's very common practice to carve out the frequencies the Guitars don't need to leave room for the bass, and vice-versa. Same for vocals and basically everything else.

This is very true. I think one big thing a lot of people who mix and aspiring mixers neglect to learn/understand, whether by ignorance or simply not knowing is frequency ranges (fundamental and harmonic) of instruments.

Mixes can become messy very quickly because you have instruments all sharing the same frequency space. There are dozens of websites with graphic images showing frequency ranges of various instruments. I even have some printed/laminated hanging on my wall, why? Because unless you are working with a particular instrument regularly it is easy to forget.

EQ and gating would be two of the things I use the most, typically on every mix. If there are live drums then I will always gate the kick, snare and toms.

Additionally when recording tracks I never add any eq or effects - everything goes down in it's raw and natural state. I leave the EQ and other things until the mix stage.

[Refillable]

Tom Elmhirst is interviewed by SOS about his mixing on "Back To Black" by Amy Winehouse. Some serious carving..I tried some of his eq settings, but couldn't hear the big difference tbh. But his ears are better than mine.

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniq...s-tom-elmhirst

[bucca]

Originally Posted by Cranky Emu

knowing frequency ranges (fundamental and harmonic) of instruments.

one of the basics (besides volume and pan) worth to know imo, can make life much easier, at least cut off trial and error time.

[Judders]

Originally Posted by vdubreeze

There are also different goals of what the music should sound like and what vibe or feeling it should create. Some people carve and slot the individual instruments to the max, like Roger Nichols famously did with Steely Dan records, which sound either fantastic or sterile, or in between or both, depending on who you ask. In someone else's hands Aja may have sounded more blended together and less separated because they weren't going by the same rules. Same way one engineer will want to use a different mic and preamp for everything on a track and another goes bah at that and will use the same preamps on a tracking session and the same mic and preamp on all the overdubs and it does exactly what they want and is great.

It's a question that can have different conflicting answers that are all correct if they work for someone. Find out the info but then grab some knobs and turn. Do some mixes and listen later. Repeat hundreds of times (no, seriously : ) ) Don't be afraid of making crappy mixes. Everyone's early mixes were crappy. The more you do it the better sounding it gets.

Throw on an eq and pull up a preset and check out what this particular person felt would be a good eq for, for example, "Modern bass" or "Acoustic guitar bright". Adjust to taste. Make a few from scratch.

It takes a while before it makes sense, much less starts feeling like you're in charge of what you're doing with an eq, but there's no way around that.

Enjoy getting into it : )

^^^ This.

Also to say that if you are an experienced musician, you will already know about arrangement and how to effectively blend parts as well as make them stick out and be distinct.. EQ is just an extension of that really.

If your arrangements are well thought out, you will end up having to do less carving, as a general rule.

[frood]

one thing I've found, especially with ReaEQ, is that it almost always (perhaps always?!) sounds better to cut the competing frequency of the instrument you want to mask, rather than boosting the frequency of the instrument you want to highlight.

for example, if your guitars are clashing with the vocal in the mid-range frequencies, it is far better to cut the mid-range of the guitars than it is to boost the mid-range of the vocals. similarly, if the bass is indistinct it sounds better to cut the low-end of the guitars rather than boosting the low-end of the bass guitar.

the whole "use your ears" maxim certainly still applies here - it is essential, in fact, to make anything sound 'right' - but the visual aspect of a graphic eq is really useful as a starting point. as has been mentioned, it's handy to know roughly where the fundamentals lie for different instruments (e.g. in this image: https://i.redd.it/ez2km0qyoj101.jpg).

another thing to consider is the amount of energy in the low-level frequencies (150hz and lower) which can mess up a mix, especially with compression applied (but that is probably a story for another thread, so I'll stop here!)

[serr]

I think this has already been said above...

It's intuitive to identify something in your head that you want to ADD. Stop. Flip that around in your head to: What's getting in the way of the element (frequency band in this case) that I want to hear louder?

Now CUT the thing getting in the way instead of boosting the thing you want more of. Turn the level of the track up as needed after cutting what offended you.

[lunker]

Good advice about "carving out" a frequency range for the most important sounds.

If your ears aren't good enough to recognize the frequency range(s) that cause a problem, a spectrum analyzer like Voxengo's Span or Stillwell Audio's Schope (written by Cockos' very own @schwa, IIRC) are a big help for seeing where the problems are.

Send the tracks in question to the spectrum analyzer on different channels, so that each track gets a different curve in the display. Then you can see which frequencies need to be addressed, and make cuts in the right places.

[vdubreeze]

Don't get carried away with the "carving" though. It keeps instruments and vocals out of each others' place, but sometimes you WANT them to be in that place together. Context and desired presentation is everything. Follow the rules to the letter and a Pantera album will leave the listener feeling like they just heard slightly aggressive smooth jazz. If that's the goal, success.

[Judders]

Originally Posted by vdubreeze

Don't get carried away with the "carving" though. It keeps instruments and vocals out of each others' place, but sometimes you WANT them to be in that place together. Context and desired presentation is everything. Follow the rules to the letter and a Pantera album will leave the listener feeling like they just heard slightly aggressive smooth jazz. If that's the goal, success.

Yeah, I often find myself at odds with other amateur mixers, because most think that separation is always the ideal, whereas I've listened to so much classical and old big band jazz that I often love to blend instruments so that they feel like a single instrument bigger than the sum of its parts.

[lunker]

++ to both of the previous two posts.

The key is to know when there is a conflict. If you are constantly turning up/down a track and can't get it to fit in the mix, chances are good that you have different instruments competing for the same frequencies, and need to do some "carving" (which, by the way, could be done with multi-band compression and a side-chain, so that the offending frequencies are only carved out when they are in the way of something else).

But always carving out frequencies so that instruments never overlap is like salting your food before you taste it. If it sounds good, leave it alone.

[Judders]

Originally Posted by lunker

But always carving out frequencies so that instruments never overlap is like salting your food before you taste it.

Well said.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by lunker

But always carving out frequencies so that instruments never overlap is like salting your food before you taste it. If it sounds good, leave it alone.

I was about to post about how much I hate the term "carve" before I saw this post. People show up to the party with knife in hand - it's entirely possible to need little or no carving at all if the music was sufficiently arranged and recorded (rare I know). Maybe that midrangey guitar shouldn't be stepping all over the vocal to begin with, or that bass/kick drum recorded with more complimentary frequencies to begin with. That problem may be as simple as lack of budget to spend that time up front or the gear available, but it is what it is.

It's never perfect mind you (there's always something) but I think we should be aware of why we need to carve, how'd we end up there.

[vdubreeze]

Originally Posted by lunker

But always carving out frequencies so that instruments never overlap is like salting your food before you taste it. If it sounds good, leave it alone.

Originally Posted by Judders

Well said.

Yes, that's a great way to put it : )

[ashcat_lt]

Originally Posted by ashcat_lt

I answered on HR

...