EQing - The Ol' Boost and Sweep

[selig]

'Cutting introduces less phase shifts artifacts' is a flawed and incorrect statement.

"Cutting indtroduces phase shift at a lower level" is correct though which is basicslly what he meant. When I studied I was also taught that cutting is better because you introduce phase shift to the frequencies you make more silent anyway. But I go with what Giles said and use a cut or boost depending on what works better, I don't find the phase shift to be an in any way noteworthy "artifact".

About the OT, sweeping is very handy when you're looking for offending frequencies but again going with what Giles said, if I don't hear any offending frequency in the first place I don't do it. And by the way any frequency range sounds "wrong" if you boost it too much, so it can be very deceiving.

+1
For the record, I agreed with the fact that the level of a cut was lower in the mix than a boost, and that is why it's less "obvious" than a boost. I would definitely also agree with your view of phase shift as "artifact". Whatever you improve with EQ is not offset with any phase shift issues, which have never bothered me.

[stratatonic]

I never understood internet mixers saying for example something like 'boost around 50 for your bass', but around 50 hz is where g and g# is. So what happens is that those notes would be louder than your other bass notes. uh...
It kinda makes sense to track the notes/chords somewhat with the EQ with automation to keep levels consistent. Still learning. Relearning...

I would think this only makes sense when speaking of broad curves. All they are saying in that context is to center the curve around that general frequency. It would of course be very different if using a narrow boost! Or maybe they are suggesting a low shelf EQ , which would affect a wider area more "equally"?

I was just picking a random freq area to put in my post. It could have been: internet mixer say "boost 250Hz for punch" (or whatever), but doing so would mean the notes around middle C (depending on Q) are boosted leading to an uneven mix - note wise. Just a random observation from last year.

[selig]

I never understood internet mixers saying for example something like 'boost around 50 for your bass', but around 50 hz is where g and g# is. So what happens is that those notes would be louder than your other bass notes. uh...
It kinda makes sense to track the notes/chords somewhat with the EQ with automation to keep levels consistent. Still learning. Relearning...

I would think this only makes sense when speaking of broad curves. All they are saying in that context is to center the curve around that general frequency. It would of course be very different if using a narrow boost! Or maybe they are suggesting a low shelf EQ , which would affect a wider area more "equally"?

I was just picking a random freq area to put in my post. It could have been: internet mixer say "boost 250Hz for punch" (or whatever), but doing so would mean the notes around middle C (depending on Q) are boosted leading to an uneven mix - note wise. Just a random observation from last year.

I got it - notice I didn't mention any specific frequency and only mentioned a "general frequency". Doesn't matter the frequency, like you say, didn't intend to imply otherwise.

But unless you're talking about a sine wave, there will still be many other harmonics that are not affected by the EQ. You would also have to be talking about larger boosts (or cuts for that matter). For example, a wide (3-4 oct wide) boost of 3 dB is going to be fairly flat around the center, only being down a dB or so until you get to the edges. Another reason to be careful with narrow and large boosts/cuts/ with melodic material.

[Stranger.]

ΣΣΣ

[selig]

Dear-lord-
Announcing my belief that EQ emotional quotient=(≤) IQ intelligence quotient * Pi / Σ

Not sure how this is on topic except for the letters "E" and "Q" in your text - is this another attempt at a personal attack, perchance?
Should I assume this was directed at me?
So confoozing…
How about one of those questions about EQ you keep wanting an answer to?

[stratatonic]

I never understood internet mixers saying for example something like 'boost around 50 for your bass', but around 50 hz is where g and g# is. So what happens is that those notes would be louder than your other bass notes. uh...
It kinda makes sense to track the notes/chords somewhat with the EQ with automation to keep levels consistent. Still learning. Relearning...

I would think this only makes sense when speaking of broad curves. All they are saying in that context is to center the curve around that general frequency. It would of course be very different if using a narrow boost! Or maybe they are suggesting a low shelf EQ , which would affect a wider area more "equally"?

I was just picking a random freq area to put in my post. It could have been: internet mixer say "boost 250Hz for punch" (or whatever), but doing so would mean the notes around middle C (depending on Q) are boosted leading to an uneven mix - note wise. Just a random observation from last year.

Another reason to be careful with narrow and large boosts/cuts/ with melodic material.

Ahhh...melodic material...yeah, that's the issue isn't it? I'm usually all over the place melodically, not sticking to one static loop that builds over time sticking to one key - or even one note! I'll try for minimalism EQwise heading forward.