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 ...


7

There are three parameters of this filter that are described in the phrase "100 Hz 12 dB per octave low pass filter". I'll cover them in reverse order. Low pass filter - This means the filter does not change lower frequencies ("passes" those frequencies through) and blocks higher frequencies. Sometimes these filters are called "high cut filters", but that ...


6

Yes and no - there is no tool that does this fully automatic - you have to set up and tweak the chain your self, but once you're done it can be used with any input (i.e. "live"). (tl;dr: good impersonation -> pitch-shift w. formant control -> matching eq) Details Like you suggest yourself in one of the comments, you have to use a mix of both a good pitch ...


5

Filtering a signal to remove certain parts of the spectrum on the face of it (and intuitively) should reduce the perceived sound level. This is what common-sense would tell us. However, when it comes to the reshaping of sound with filtering, lowering the sound level doesn't always equate to lowering the peak level. Yes, the perceived sound level may reduce ...


5

Here, is there any common low-end level that every song should has? No or Does it just set by ear? Yes. In fact, it should be set by ear, not by eyes. Don't bother with what the spectrum analyzer tells you, it is dumb and doesn't know or say very much. You have to listen for the right sounds. or Does it depend on the music genres? Definitely. Hip-...


5

Equalization will not affect pitch perception in any way. Your issue as you have correctly identified, is primarily one of direction, rather than being technical. You can use pitch manipulation tools but not to a massive extent as it will quickly become noticable. When directing these performances, try to ensure that there is a consistent level of energy ...


4

It's because it's a summed audio track. There are peaks and valleys now that have completely changed. think of three separate waveforms with totally different wavelengths. Now, you imagine the peaks and valleys getting summed together. Suppose that you remove the longest ( lowest ) wave. Now you will have parts that are quieter and parts that are louder ...


4

It kinda matters what order you put them in but everyone has a different order that they like and then sometimes you adjust for issues. Most Channel strips let you change the order of at least some of the modules. I tend to default to EQ/DYN/De-es/multiband but everyone is different. Sometimes you might need 2 of certain processes, 1 to fix an issue, ...


3

It is true that the sensitivity of our ears varies based on frequency and that high pressure sound can be more damaging without being noticed, but if you are not listening too loud it shouldn't be a problem. You just need to be really careful that it isn't actually too loud. It is possible to damage your hearing without feeling any pain when you are using ...


3

There isn't a "correct" answer to this. The general concept most people go for is called the "Wall of Sound". You want each track (instrument or vocal) to have its own place in the wall. It may be softer or louder dynamically than the other tracks around it and it may have its tone and/or sibilance at different parts of the EQ spectrum. You generally ...


3

i used no compression. just a slow attack on the ADSR :-)


3

Using an EQ for mastering should be a corrective process; so you need to know what you are trying to correct in the sound. Don't just use EQ or dynamics because that's what you think mastering is. If the sound is working, then leave it alone. If it isn't working, then you need to figure out what is wrong and what tool you need to use to fix it. If your ...


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

I would apply them in order of de-esser, EQ and compressor. The first two could be done in either order, but the compressor should generally be last. You could EQ with or without the De-esser applied, but the De-esser will offer you less control over the sound than a good EQ. The compression should be last because it deals with overall signal power, which ...


3

I dont think this is particularly a Sound Design question in the first place, but I would point out that there can be considerable differences between any two different equalisers (hardware or software) in the first place, so the notion that settings for 'an' EQ might be studied, rather than the more consistently measureable frequency content of music, seems ...


3

I don't think you will find any research in to what EQ settings will make a difference. There may be certain frequency groups that help, but EQs just apply adjustments to what is already there though and countless other things have more of an impact. Pacing of the music, how busy the music is, how complete the "wall of sound is", tempo, style, volume, etc ...


3

For a board with fixed EQs, it is going to be difficult to account for this much of an unlevel response curve. It varies based on board, but the fixed EQs tend to be very "wide", impacting a large number of related frequencies. Some boards use shelving filters on the top and bottom EQ while others use non-shelving. This response curve would certainly need ...


3

If you are using lavalier mics [tiny headset or tie-mics that look no bigger than a knot in the wire] then you should not set them directly in front of the mouth, but at the side, or even in the hair, if you really want them hidden. Hidden in clothing is also an option, though you can get a lot of movement noise that way. Example images [stolen from Google, ...


3

Side note: BRHSM (OP) is refering to Geek Technique #12 in issue 222 of Computer Music magazine. Great question, BRHSM. I have three answers for you, but only one is true. I'll let you come to your own conclusions. :) Option 1: I must confess, the video is one big deception. Everyone knows that filters always reduce amplitude and increase available ...


3

If I would approach it, I would go and try the following: First of all, FM radio broadcasting has an upper limit of 15 KHz, and lower limit of 30 Hz. So cut all frequencies outside that scope to start with a very steep filter. Then a "little desktop / clock radio" would use a very small speaker which would not reproduce any sound lower than 200 Hz, so roll ...


3

Processing always has the negative side effect of either increasing noise or taking away from the quality. The secret to processing is you want to do as little as possible to achieve what you want, and in this case that means removing steps that essentially do the same thing. As for the order here's what I would do. Normalize - This will amplify it to ...


3

(I'm not sure what you want to fix - it sounds sick and genrewise it is spot on!) Needless to say: always record with a DI so you have the option to reamp later on if something turns out too hot etc. But at this point this advice is not worth much ;-) I can think of a few things you might try out: De-clipping: Try to "restore" clipped areas. De-clipping ...


3

This isn't my genre at all - but I'd say overall the vocals are way too loud & the track constantly ducks behind them… which is entirely the wrong way round. This type of music is entirely reliant on a solid beat (far too understated in the example given) which the vox ought to stay well out of the way of. I'd look at the compression chain differently. ...


3

Audio engineering uses decibels, because they are closer to how the human hearing perceives loudness: a double energy level is not twice as loud. A linear scale would require either a very large fader or be fiddly to tune towards the lower end. If you're tuning your EQ by the numbers, you're doing it wrong. Use your ears! ;-)


2

An equalizer is a combination of filters with different shapes that you adjust in some constrained way. The FFT filter is based on the Fast Fourier Transform, which is a different way of manipulating signals. It can be viewed as having a direct control of the amplitudes of a selected number of bands (e.g. 2048 bands) in the frequency domain. In other words, ...


2

use a lot of: http://www.atsacoustics.com/item--Owens-Corning-703-Case-of-6--1004.html You cannot correct room resonances or modes with EQ, it is really the wrong approach, you can use an EQ just to fine tune the room balance. If your problem is your room sounding bad, do not buy any kind of room correction tool it will not solve the problem.


2

for 1/3 octave steps, multiply the previous band by 2^(1/3) (that's 2 to the power of 1/3 = 1.259921049895). Starting with 20Hz, you'll get 20,25.198,31.748,40,50.397,etc, up to 20480. The 'standard' frequency bands for a 1/3 octave (20,25,31.5,40,50,63,etc) are essentially just for labelling - any practical application would use the calculated ...


2

Assuming the recording and levels are good in the first place. I will almost always roll off lows and shelf the highs, even if its just a little. Human voices don't really have much below 120hz or above 12khz so get rid of it. Next I work low to high on the frequency band. It usually looks something like this: A lot of voices often have a specific ...


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