Hot answers tagged

14

You're likely to find that artists that have basslines that stick out well on both proper studio monitors as well as crappy laptop speakers are utilizing a bunch of layering of sounds to create a cohesive bass sound that spans various frequencies (besides the low ones you'd expect). Even when I'm using a bass sound that is essentially a sub (sine wave) bass,...


9

I think your main issue with understanding this is that you're looking at it from too simplified a view. Frequency response curves can only be so accurate, and even within a manufactured line of a particular mic by a particular company there may be slight variations. Polar response is not identical between two different model microphones (even though they'...


8

Using a higher order filter will give you a greater roll-off slope in the filters stop-band. So a 1st order filter has a roll-off slope of -6db/octave, 2nd order filter has a roll-off slope of -12db/octave, 3rd order filter has a roll-off slope of -18db/octave, 4th order filter has a roll-off slope of -24db/octave, etc. This means the filter does not act ...


6

Your real problem is most likely recording technique and possibly the gear you're using. A good sound recorded properly doesn't need any EQ to sound professional. Where you place your microphone is the most important thing in capturing a sound and works just like EQing when in the right hands.


6

I almost always end up EQing my reverbs, although sometimes convolution reverb presets work without alteration. It truly depends on what you are sending to the reverb and what else is happening in the mix. Un-EQed reverb usually covers the full frequency spectrum, and if you're talking about many elements in a mix then adding broadband reverb can result in a ...


5

-- edit -- this question piqued my curiousity enough that I ran a test for the tonebenders podcast. Check out the results here: http://www.tonebenders.net/tonebenders-episode-seventeen-questions-ozone-and-plural-eyes/ -- edi t-- I honestly think this is a good question that's worthy of a little thoughtfulness. IMO it is possible to eq one mic's ...


5

To get the Kickdrum out of Laptopspeakers -> Layer a small click sound, rimshot, hi hat, etc. To get the Bass out -> layer it with saws or use parallel distortion or fm to get some higher harmonics out edit: also the right amount of white and pink noise can give the impression of a burst -> helps with those edm genres to give a big bass drop on small ...


4

You can use something like Waves MaxxBass or RBass to create upper harmonics that can be heard on smaller speakers. You could also saturate or distort the mid to high end on a separate track and blend it in with the original.


4

GENERALLY (because as you well know, every project is different), the difference is that I tend to use more compression on TV, because a) I have to hit a LKFS spec and b) I usually have far less time to ride levels so multiple compressors can go a long way. In film I usually start with very minimal processing on the bus... just a peak limiter and then add ...


3

There is a logic to your argument, but the problem arises from the fact that there are thousands of models of consumer speaker, all with their own way of 'flattering' the sound. If you mix on one pair, it may become bass heavy on another. The idea behind studio monitors is that the sound is as neutral as possible, so that the mix will more or less be ...


3

The membrane is an analog device. It's operation varies continuously. Thus, you cannot change the overall recorded signal to sound like what another microphone would have picked up using static post-processing. Regarding noise, different microphones also have different noise prints. Different microphones also have different housings, which affects how the ...


3

I found boosting the basslines in the 800hz area helps on laptops and only gives a little more clarity on other systems without making it overpowering.


3

Those combined EQ + spectroscopes can seem a bit misleading. The curve on your EQ isn't always what's actually happening, and similarly metering is only an averaging of the signal because audio is a much faster rate than your monitor. With a regular eq it's really more about using your ears to find something that works. You might be better off using an FFT ...


3

You would probably want to use the insert so the signal passes through the preamp on your mixer before hitting the equalizer.


2

I wouldn't always say the winner is the expensive one, like a bad mic used well is always better than a good mic used poorly. Weeelllll sometimes : P But my understanding (and I possibly think this just to sleep better at night) was that the reason you can't truly just process sound from a cheap microphone is that it may have not captured those frequencies ...


2

I hope this one helps: Your hearing localizes the directions of sounds either by interpreting frequency dependent level-differences and/or the interaural time-delay between your ears. On the horizontal plane, you mostly localize the direction by interpreting time-delays. As far as I remember the highest frequency this works for is near 1,6 kHz. On the ...


2

It's based on the assumption that studio speakers sound "flat" (and it's technically true as well, because they're designed to sound flat/neutral/clinical/accurate) and thus represent "the average" of all sorts of colorizing. I.e. if the mix is done on a system that sounds "flat", then all colorizing to one direction or another will be less compared to ...


2

First of all: An EQ can not add something to a sound that is not there!!!! This is a very important fact, as a lot of beginners feel like they need to put on a magic frequency response in the EQ to make a sound big or stand out. But there are roughly 3 situations where you want to use an EQ: On all of those as a rule of thumb: Wide Q boots and small Q ...


2

This is not possible by traditional, analogue means. As said by Bit Depth, such filters have a property called the order. What that means: the response of a filter of order n can be written as               ( an ⋅ ωn + an-1 ⋅ ωn-1 + ... + a2 ⋅ ω2 + a1 ⋅ ω + a0 ) A(ω) =  ———————————————————————               ( bn ⋅ ωn + bn-1 ⋅ ωn-1 + ... + b2 ⋅ ω2 + b1 ⋅ ω +...


2

The simplest way is to find some free gunshot sound effects online. If you need to create your own it can be done by layering 2-3 basic sounds. Start with a cookie sheet being hit against something (try to get a few different sounds from the hits). The cookie sheet will give you the metallic sound on top and should be the root sound. The next part of the ...


2

No. In fact when using EQ to enhance the tone of a track or fix problems with the track sitting in the mix, the phase shift is often part of the beneficial sonic change created by the EQ. In a live situation, the phase shift caused by EQ can actually provide more gain before feedback. Phase linear digital EQs can actually sound a little strange becuase the ...


2

Vocals sound a little dry to me, maybe add some subtle reverb or delay. The method of EQing you're doing sounds right. Dullness usually comes from a lack of top end, maybe add a couple of DBs of top end to the vocals to bring them out a touch. You could also bring the instruments forwards in the mix, and arrangement wise maybe add a bass instrument of some ...


2

What you're looking for is incredibly hard to implement. Filters always have a slope measured in dB/Octave or dB/Decade and it's a measure of the attenuation of frequencies beyond the cutoff frequency. This slope can never be vertical so frequencies next to each other can never be completely isolated. To increase the slope, we normally stack multiple filters....


1

Listen for what you want to add or remove, then equalize. It comes through experience that you learn to hear when an equalization sounds good and when there's something to adjust. Mainly it has to do with contrast (e.g. removing "mud frequencies" to bring out the essentials or to "clean" the sound, or equalizing different layers so that they either sound "...


1

If you haven't picked up on the idea from the previous two answers, HRTF is far more complicated than simple EQ. It's a complex mathematical system, and it's different for every person. That in turn leads to the issue that HRTF specific data/values do not necessarily work for everyone. There are sets that work well for a large majority of people, but they ...


1

Hey Tig, Check out Audiostage by Longcat audio, H3D also by Longcat and Panorama by Wave Arts. Audiostage is definitely the most powerful and versatile, but see if it fits your needs


1

Head-related transfer function. The "function" here implies a mathematical function and therefore it's well-defined, although there exist different approaches and approximations. In the Wikipedia page see the text under the heading "Technical derivation". If you're interested in "emulating" HRTF, then I would suggest using an existing implementation (a plug-...


1

Chris, what happens when you move the mic another button down?


1

I second Jesse's comment. The octave above the fundamental, which usually sits between 200-300 Hz is the 'box' frequency that presents so many problems. This simple roll off + Notch should fix the problem. If this is still not working then first of all check the mic is working properly (perhaps swap the mics around the presenters) and if all else fails try ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible