EQ without EQ'ing

[EnSkorSang]

As I improve my tracking skills and (to my ears anyway) arrangement, I find that I am requiring less processing, or more importantly, much more subtle processing and that rather than starting a mix with an approach of 'lets find the problems and fix them', it's more 'How can I best bring out the great stuff, while not ruining the other stuff?'.
EQ is one area in particular where my ears seem to be much more unforgiving. I find that I am using emulation-eq's or 'analogue style' eq's more as rather than using them for any drastic eq'ing, I'm paying much more to their colour/sound.

One thing in particular thats worming it's way into my mixes is the use of other processing tools to add subtle EQ enhancements. Here are some examples:

1. Tape machine on drums. Set at 7.5 ips it can get rid of some cymbal harshness and push the kick a bit. I had Master Tape on demo from waves and it did pretty much the same with the bonus of being able to control exactly how much it adds/takes.

2. Transient Designer. Paul mentioned this in his thread. Many a time now if the drums aren't poking through enough or the rhythm guitar is slightly annoying, I will cut/boost the transients rather than give an eq cut/boost in the highs.

3. RC-Tube (cut down VCC). I'm still undecided if this is much good - it doesnt seem to be quite as effective as the other models in VCC, but it can on occasion control the bass quite well (to my ears)


What other non-eq processors/techniques to people use to accomplish eq tasks?

[paul999]

This really starts with mic placement. Even though HPF and LPF are kind of eq they are what I go to first and where I spend my time. This puts the energy og the instrument in the place of my choosing.

Another general rule is if you like the sound of something but it needs eq use a multiband compressor in the areas that need to be tamed.

I will run a source through a mic pre while mixing to take on its characteristic.

Adding distortion through amp sims and other devices t be able to hear something without turning it up. For example if I need to hear a kick more but it will be odd to turn up the volume will add distortion. If a bass riff needs to stick out I'll automate distortion onto the riff.

[garww]

Speakers are also good at cutting and boosting freqs

[jay jay]

Adding distortion through amp sims and other devices t be able to hear something without turning it up. For example if I need to hear a kick more but it will be odd to turn up the volume will add distortion. If a bass riff needs to stick out I'll automate distortion onto the riff.

Cool idea. I'll have to remember this one.

[brandondrury]

I find that I am requiring less processing, or more importantly, much more subtle processing

I was mixing an indie rock project today. There was a high gain lead guitar that I went "Oh! That needs help!" I grabbed a UAD Pultec Pro and did my thing. I said, "Ahhh!" in a relaxing tone. I got it right. I checked and I had one frequency boosted by 1 (probably .5-1dB) and another cut by 1 (another 0.5-1dB). I laughed at myself because it's nice that the ears have gotten to this point.

The bitch of it is when you know something isn't 100% right and you can't let it go. I spent 90 minutes playing with 2 synth tracks the other day. It turned out I was just in the wrong frame of mind.

Another general rule is if you like the sound of something but it needs eq use a multiband compressor in the areas that need to be tamed.

I've gone back and forth with multiband comps over the years. Right now I find them astonishingly indispensable to my way of working. The UAD multiband is my go-to but the Waves C4 is excellent, too.

Adding distortion through amp sims and other devices t be able to hear something without turning it up.

I'm using A LOT of Decapitator these days on pretty much anything. It's unreal what you can do with that guy. It's one plugin that everyone should own.

EQ is one area in particular where my ears seem to be much more unforgiving. I find that I am using emulation-eq's or 'analogue style' eq's more as rather than using them for any drastic eq'ing, I'm paying much more to their colour/sound.

Obviously, compressors need to a HUGE mention here. It's amazing how much different a track with an 1176 can sit in a mix vs an La2a or Fairchild.

Brandon

[artzeal]

EQ ing without using an EQ. For Tracking: Change the input impedance on your preamp. This makes an very significant difference in how a source sounds through the mic.

For example; (based my use with a Focusrite ISA One and a Presonus Eureka): an MXL 992 sounds congested up to 1.4kΩ, sounds detailed with a nice shimmer to the highs at 2.4, and bright and cutting at 6.8KΩ. The MXL 992 is a slightly thin sounding mic, but this is ideal for getting all the detail out of a Mandolin or Cuatro at 2.4kΩ, and can do an over the top cymbal rendition at 6.8kΩ (not natural - but for fun or foley) . IF the impedance is set right its really useful; if not, sounds like dung.

On the other hand an Oktava MK319 is smooth, yet woody at 600Ω, full and balanced at 1.4kΩ, but seems compressed and slightly off balance at 2.4kΩ

The Blue Bluebird has a full, dimensional character at 600Ω to 1.4kΩ, but by 2.4kΩ the highs and upper mids get brittle.

Getting an appropriate mic placed right, knowing what input impedance is a good match for the mic and how it will convey the source into a quality preamp, has pretty much eliminated the need for outboard EQ for my recording projects.

Yes, indeed; as pointed out: compression affects EQ: multi-band compression is a form of dynamic equalization.

[shackman]

Adding distortion through amp sims and other devices t be able to hear something without turning it up. For example if I need to hear a kick more but it will be odd to turn up the volume will add distortion. If a bass riff needs to stick out I'll automate distortion onto the riff.

While it doesn';t quite match, your comment brought me to thoughts of what nbands used to do before we had ITB post-recording production.

You suggest using a mb compressor in place of eq. That's kinda like saying the eq is what you "should" use, but try a comp instead.

A bit like the Beatles deciding a sound was wrong so getting George Martin to reverse the tape to get the tails right. (STrawberry Fields)

I've always worked on the principle that WHAT the tool is doesn't matter, it's what it DOES for the song that counts.

Like distortion on the bass. I'm with Danny D on that. NO WAY. But if it works for you, excellent.

[garww]

"Yes, indeed; as pointed out: compression affects EQ: multi-band compression is a form of dynamic equalization".

Compression IS EQ, for certain. Any tape jock with a Dolby or DBX and tell you that.

With low output devices, the impedence can be a big factor, but this effect can often be heard even with mundane audio devices. Amp output circuits to speakers is a fairly common concern

[IMF OnSite Recording]

This really starts with mic placement. Even though HPF and LPF are kind of eq they are what I go to first and where I spend my time. This puts the energy og the instrument in the place of my choosing.

That is 100% right on the money. I don't include HPF and LPF as part of the EQ process, but more of a gold standard, given step in tracking and mixing.

Adding distortion through amp sims and other devices t be able to hear something without turning it up.

That's another wonderful, underrated practice. Distortion scares a lot of people and many think of high gain guitar amps when they think distortion. I like Dave Pensado's version better: A rich collection of harmonics.

EDIT:

Compression IS EQ, for certain. Any tape jock with a Dolby or DBX and tell you that.

If we're talking EQ without EQ, than multiband is out of the question. The multiband is a complex graphic EQ that has varying attenuation on each frequency range. I will say a single band compressor can be used instead of throwing in an EQ. You aren't actually picking frequencies and adjusting them.

We could spend all day digging deep into technicalities of what the meaning of an EQ is, or how something that isn't generally veiwed as an eq is technically still an EQ. The topic is pretty much... what would you use instead of an EQ (you know??? those things where you select frequencies that you intentionally raise or lower).

I like compression as opposed to eq at times. Adjusting attack times allows things to cut through the mix, making them seem brighter. Did I take 2k and raise it 3db on a 12.0 Q? No. I didn't. I wasn't using an EQ.

EDIT: Compression can also make things sound darker and less noticable... smoother, etc. All without picking frequencies and adjusting them.

[brandondrury]

The title of the thread is EQing without EQ and that kinda sorta implies that the default/first method for processing is EQ. I guess it's fair to say this isn't necessarily incorrect. However, the entire point of all the color we always hear about isn't just a random discussion. It's not just dudes with too much money or time deciding they want yellow as if they are going to repaint their kitchen. That "color" often takes a not-so-awesome track and makes it, indeed, awesome....or at least closer to that stage.

I find that color is THE answer when regular ol' EQ doesn't get me there. A good example is "tightening" up the low end. The SSL 4k compressor has this way of automatically reducing low end without sounding then or any of the characteristics I didn't like about the EQ'd version.

Brandon

[IMF OnSite Recording]

I find that color is THE answer when regular ol' EQ doesn't get me there.

Lately, I've been striving for adding color as opposed to boosting\reducing frequencies. Color provides exceptional balance.