EQing - The Ol' Boost and Sweep

[Peter]

How do you feel about the boost and sweep technique when you're mixing a track? I'm watching a tutorial right now and this guy is sweeping every element of a track and trying to find resonant frequencies. I think one of the arguments is that you're cutting some good frequencies when you go balls to the walls looking for frequencies to cut. I just pretty much wing it with everything I do and don't bother with EQ unless something actually jumps out at me. Is EQ sweeping a best practice or just getting carried away?

[The_G]

Well if you do it then you should use a very narrow Q. And then a lot of engineers add another EQ and boost in that frequency after the initial cut. I know--seems nonsensical (and I don't do it myself, for fear of doing it badly) but it can produce some good mixes in the right hands.

[Benedict]

I agree that a mix can benefit greatly from select boost and cut to give every part a clearer place/space.

If you start with the idea that everything has "bad" frequencies then I think you are thinking about something that is not the music you are mixing. It becomes a sort of ego thing then to kill the mythical bad freqs.

Stav is opposed to the sweep method as he says, and I agree, that the brain just can't make sense of the constant barrage. Be smart and make a guess (which over time will get better and better) and try an A/B with a chosen Frequency cut (or boosted). I think that is much better as if you Solo something then sweep you will find things you like or dislike but what relevance do they have to anything, esp the Mix?

If you want your cymbal to have more ting then you should be developing sense of where that ting is and being able to go straight to it.

[Peter]

Well if you do it then you should use a very narrow Q.

Yes...the technique I speak of.

If you start with the idea that everything has "bad" frequencies then I think you are thinking about something that is not the music you are mixing. It becomes a sort of ego thing then to kill the mythical bad freqs.

Stav is opposed to the sweep method as he says, and I agree, that the brain just can't make sense of the constant barrage.

Thanks for your input. It seems we're thinking along the same line on this matter. It also goes to show that there are different strokes (of eq) for different folks considering I don't agree with this tutorial guy I'm currently watching. I've seen it in other tutorials too. I'd actually prefer a visual spectrum approach with my subtractive EQ if something doesn't initially jump out at me. I'm very visual in my production process though.

[Benedict]

I too think that seeing the spectrum like we see in the SSL is a nice way to get a sense of what sticks out and what could use a prod in the backside. ultimately tho music is all about ears.

[selig]

I only use this "search and destroy" approach to find offending frequencies - if I don't hear any offending frequencies, I don't bother going on a "witch hunt" to try to find them!

[cosignsessions]

My opinion is it depends are what you are going for. An EQ boost is an area of the sound you want to emphasize can help mask those frequencies that are less desirable. Cutting the undesirable frequencies has a similar effect and introduces less phase shift artifacts. I've found that cutting to make room for another sound to give it dominance in any particular range helps maintain balance. My best advice is emulate the engineers that are achieving the sound you are going for. What a guy does with an electric guitar or acoustic bass is probably not gonna work out well with an EDM track

[Peter]

f I don't hear any offending frequencies, I don't bother going on a "witch hunt" to try to find them!

My best advice is emulate the engineers that are achieving the sound you are going for. What a guy does with an electric guitar or acoustic bass is probably not gonna work out well with an EDM track

That is good advice and I forget how much of a mixed bag a software forum could be but I'm surely interested in different perspective and opinions. I've seen different methods within "my realm" too so just wanted some thoughts on this particular method. Take a piano for example - I could EQ the sh@t out of piano going crazy on some frequency sweeps to the point of starting over and I've done it a few times.

[cosignsessions]

Is the piano by itself or in the mix?

[Peter]

Is the piano by itself or in the mix?

Solo'd and driving me crazy! I learned my lesson but I think I'm listening to things in the mix too much now as opposed to solo-ing them. Just can't seem to find a good balance in technique but maybe it's supposed to be that way.

[cosignsessions]

well I actually sat in on a mix session where the engineer automated the HP filter to follow the piano chords. I thought it was rather crazy but had to agree the result was pro. The piano was in the mix so it worked, imo. Now there is a plugin that does the very thing he did manually automatically....so maybe it wasn't so crazy after all!

[Peter]

well I actually sat in on a mix session where the engineer automated the HP filter to follow the piano chords. I thought it was rather crazy but had to agree the result was pro. The piano was in the mix so it worked, imo. Now there is a plugin that does the very thing he did manually automatically....so maybe it wasn't so crazy after all!

Woah that is a really good idea. I'll have to write that one down.

[cosignsessions]

Here's a chart that shows you the frequency of the notes http://www.liutaiomottola.com/formulae/freqtab.htm. This is what he used to set the HP. Basically, because the piano was not solo he didn't want useless low end info to muddy up the chords. So he set the HP to round off the lowest note (1st or 2nd octave octave if I remember correctly). Hell, he may have went up to 3rd! I guess it just depends on what is being played and how full the sound can be without getting in the way.

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[selig]

My opinion is it depends are what you are going for. An EQ boost is an area of the sound you want to emphasize can help mask those frequencies that are less desirable. Cutting the undesirable frequencies has a similar effect and introduces less phase shift artifacts.

Let me stop you right there…
This is a common "audio myth" that is simply not true - cuts and boost have exactly the same (but opposite) phase shift or they wouldn't produce the same difference in dB. The thing to remember is that EQ actually WORKS by shifting phase. If two curves are the same, it means the phase shift is the same! If a cut is symmetrical to a boost, it means it's the same amount of phase shift, just inverted. Neither one is better or worse…

OK, continue…

I've found that cutting to make room for another sound to give it dominance in any particular range helps maintain balance. My best advice is emulate the engineers that are achieving the sound you are going for. What a guy does with an electric guitar or acoustic bass is probably not gonna work out well with an EDM track

There is no right or wrong - I like your advice to emulate those who's work you admire!

I'll add that for me, I try to do equal amounts of cutting and boosting so that no single EQ band is pushed more than it needs to be pushed. I take the same approach to mixing, meaning I try to do equal amounts of boosting what's too soft and cutting what's too loud - this keeps the overall mix levels more consistent as you work, which helps to eliminate "run away" levels (and clipping) when you work with only turning up what is too soft.

[selig]

Here's a chart that shows you the frequency of the notes http://www.liutaiomottola.com/formulae/freqtab.htm. This is what he used to set the HP. Basically, because the piano was not solo he didn't want useless low end info to muddy up the chords. So he set the HP to round off the lowest note (1st or 2nd octave octave if I remember correctly). Hell, he may have went up to 3rd! I guess it just depends on what is being played and how full the sound can be without getting in the way.

There has to be a better way than using a chart to know what frequency to EQ…
I mean, there SHOULD be a better way…
I mean, I'll shut up now…

[Peter]

There has to be a better way than using a chart to know what frequency to EQ…
I mean, there SHOULD be a better way…
I mean, I'll shut up now…

Can anybody recommend any good interactive resources on ear training?

[cosignsessions]

[/quote]

There has to be a better way than using a chart to know what frequency to EQ…
I mean, there SHOULD be a better way…
I mean, I'll shut up now…
[/quote]

There is a better way, I just don't know if there is something comparable in Reason to the 'piano keys' on the H-EQ? Given that I am just a musician that mixes out of necessity tools like these are helpful.

[Peter]

Given that I am just a musician that mixes out of necessity tools like these are helpful.

Oh yeah I need something like that in my life too.

[cosignsessions]

[/quote]Let me stop you right there…
This is a common "audio myth" that is simply not true - cuts and boost have exactly the same (but opposite) phase shift or they wouldn't produce the same difference in dB. The thing to remember is that EQ actually WORKS by shifting phase. If two curves are the same, it means the phase shift is the same! If a cut is symmetrical to a boost, it means it's the same amount of phase shift, just inverted. Neither one is better or worse…[/quote]

I'm no expert, but I do know that you can make rather severe/narrow cuts in a sound and our ears do not perceive it as harshly as if you were to invert it instead. Who knows. Maybe Bob Katz has it wrong and Joe Barresi has it right....

[avasopht]

I do this a lot to get rid of bad room sounds (at least that's what I think I'm doing ).

I also found it made it easier to find and understand different frequency components of instruments. Sure there are charts, but I feel that nothing beats hearing it for yourself (even if using the charts as a guide).

[Peter]

I do this a lot to get rid of bad room sounds (at least that's what I think I'm doing ).

Nice! Maybe you can take my project file for the Reasontalk album to see if you can identify any bad frequencies.

I just have to produce the track now - it'll be my next project.

[selig]

Let me stop you right there…
This is a common "audio myth" that is simply not true - cuts and boost have exactly the same (but opposite) phase shift or they wouldn't produce the same difference in dB. The thing to remember is that EQ actually WORKS by shifting phase. If two curves are the same, it means the phase shift is the same! If a cut is symmetrical to a boost, it means it's the same amount of phase shift, just inverted. Neither one is better or worse…[/quote]

I'm no expert, but I do know that you can make rather severe/narrow cuts in a sound and our ears do not perceive it as harshly as if you were to invert it instead. Who knows. Maybe Bob Katz has it wrong and Joe Barresi has it right....[/quote]

Does Bob Katz say there's more phase shift with boosts than cuts?

You are basically saying the turning down something makes it more difficult to hear than turning it up, which is totally logical, no? Also consider that you are talking about two completely different changes to the audio signal! To more fairly compare the two, you would have to compare a single band of boost to (at least) two bands of cut. And which do you think produces MORE phase shift (if that's something you're worried about), one boost or two cuts?

[selig]

Given that I am just a musician that mixes out of necessity tools like these are helpful.

Oh yeah I need something like that in my life too.

This is something I've been advocating for a long time, that musicians relate more to pitch than frequency. Thinking of the audio spectrum more in terms of octaves and even semitone as opposed to Hertz has always made more sense to me, once I realized there was a direct relationship when EQ'ing.

[cosignsessions]

You're the expert boss. I fail to see how, other than quoting a myth as an opinion, has drawn so much of your attention? I guess that's why they created linear phase EQs (but many would argue that it's a myth as well). Think that's why it's called music theory....no?

So here is something that is completely true. Music sounded so great that man invented equalizers and the use of which has spawned a database worth of opinions/myths/facts/science etc etc. Other than my mention of phase shift, do you find anything wrong with what I suggested?

Now that the thread has become about my opinions maybe it's best to lock the thread or move it to the general discussion board?

To your question. I first learned about subtractive EQ while watching a tutorial on standing bass notes presented by Bob Katz. He suggest turning it down rather than turning everything else up. Then there is Joe Barresi. He was asked about subtractive eq and he said he only turns his eq's to the right and would rather move the mic than turn the eq to the left. Even the greats can disagree (even disagree if either of those guys are truly great or just a part of the vast subjective universe of music)