Newc's Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

[Newc]

EQ and You:

If you're recording to a stand-alone multi-tracker and doing the Mixdown and Mastering (i.e. CD recording if your tracker doesn't have one built in) on your PC, you may find yourself asking "Should I apply EQ to each track at recording, during the transfer to the PC, or after it gets into the PC?"
Technically you can do it at any time, but the results will depend on your EQ skill. However, I would say you have greater control if you EQ it entirely in your PC editing program. If you've spent hours or days or weeks tweaking your mixer or tracker channel EQs to the point of perfection and glued the knobs in place and always use the same settings for channel/instrument EQ, then I'd say use THAT EQ during recording and/or transfer to the PC instead, and just do a Final EQ on the Mixdown;
-Do a straight Mixdown just like it came from your tracker (you can edit the tracks on the PC first to silence stray noises, timing clicks, and to balance the track levels, just don't apply any EQ), then EQ the Mixdowned track to "Finalize" it, as you might find something got boosted or squashed during the mixdown procedure that you want/need to fix, and it may be easier to fix it with an EQ over the whole thing rather than scrap it and do a new Mixdown.

EQ has two main properties:
- Tone Shaping - This is basically what a Modeler does to simulate those different amps. It's mostly EQ trickery. This is also how you turn a beefy screaming 100w stack into an AM Radio, or a Bee In A Bottle. Sadly, you can't really turn the sound of an AM Radio or a Bee In A Bottle into a beefy screaming 100w stack sound through EQ.

- Tone Fixing - This is when you have a great sound coming in and a not-so-great sound coming right back out. You would use the EQ in this case to replace or boost what's being lost in the transfer of signal, or to cut out things that were added during the transfer. This is like Tone Shaping only inasmuch as you are making minor adjustments, and not totally reshaping the tone into something it didn't start out as.

Newc

[Twisteramps]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

If you do decide to EQ tracks individually, do it within the context of the mix - while listening to the other tracks. You can eq a single track to sound great on it's own, but then it either dominates or washes out when played with the rest. When I record, I try to use as little EQ as possible, and when I do, I'd rather cut than boost. Boosting adds noise.

Pete

[Newc]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

Agreed. I left that part out - thanks Pete for the save [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/toast.gif[/img]

Definitely EQ each track in context with the whole mix - it's the same principal as when playing live; if you've got the most awesomest Death Metal CHUG coming out of your amp at home, but it comes out as nothing but buzz and hiss when you get with the band, you need to either lose the band or the CHUG. When EQing tracks, you can, as Pete said, CUT instead of BOOST which allows you to run a slightly hotter signal coming in. Want more mids? Cut the highs and lows a tad instead of upping the mids, and boost the channel Gain a hair.

I'd recommend recording each track with no EQ except that from your amp/modeler/rack if you're building the sound of each track around the guitar's tone for each track (if you're using different tones for different tracks, that is).
Most mixers/recorders allow you to set the EQ between the incoming signal and the recorder, or you can set it to only affect the playback/output and NOT the incoming signal. Setting it to affect only the output means if you don't like the pre-master-mix, you can tweak the EQ and do it again, rather than scrap a great track and have to re-cut it. Setting it to only affect the output also helps to get all the instruments working together in the mix a lot better.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

General Recording Info:

Jennifer Batten once said in an interview that she records straight into the mixer, with absolutely nothing between her guitar and the recorder such as a preamp (other than some sort of Direct Box, I would assume): no distortion, no effects, no nothing - clean as a whistle. She said "recording this way keeps you honest and makes you play as cleanly as possible, without the benefit of distortion or effects covering your mistakes"

Back in the mid 80s, before they lost all their gear in a studio fire, Anthrax used the shortest cords they could find when recording because they said the longer cords resulted in signal loss and degradation. They used 3" and 6" patch cords from their guitars into their amps, and also had speaker cables for their cabinets that were very short.
While cord design has improved over the years, I think you'll find you get a better tone with shorter cables even with today's custom cables like GeorgeL's and Monster.
If you're moshing while recording, a short cable is going to cut the party short (As Danny Spitz said he found out the hard way, and had to play without moshing, which he said was very difficult).

Newc

[Twisteramps]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

great page on EQ, just ignore the vetta references [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

http://www.vettaville.com/equalization.htm

Also, if you have a dense mix with more than one guitar track, you may want to notch some frequencies on one guitar and boost them on another to help with clarity and keep the mud out. For example, if you had two guitars playing a rhythm part, taking a few db out of the mids on one and boosting the same frequency on another, and THEN setting levels of each guitar can help the mix breathe. This is important with other instruments too... Listen to AJFA by metallica, you don't hear the friggin' bass because the guitars are so beefy sounding. Most rhythm guitar tones in a mix have more mids and less highs and bass than you'd think. Also, pulling mids out of any instrument makes it fall back and not be as prominent. Adding mids helps instruments jump out. Another way to create depth in a mix is with reverb... more reverb, further back it sounds. Too much just makes a mess, however. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Pete

[Newc]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

What I usually do for the EQ thing Pete mentioned (2 different EQs on each rhythm track) is select a different but close frequency for each rhythm track rather than both guitars in the same range just with different levels of boost/cut.
For example: one track's freqs are set at 300Hz, 1.02kHz, and 10kHz, while the second track is set at 400Hz, 1.3kHz, and 8kHz. This keeps the Mids fairly close together to keep them both up front in the mix, but the Lows and Highs of each one do more to separate and define each guitar.
If you listen to Iron Maiden and pick apart the guitar tones, you'll hear that one guitar has less highs while the other has less bass than the other.
Also, if you can use two different Gain settings, that further helps to separate each rhythm guitar. See Judas Priest for a perfect example of using LESS Gain to get MORE Crunch.
Listen closely to the opening chords of "You've Got Another Thing Comin'" - it's not a very Gainy distortion, but sounds like it'd die out if he had held that chord a bit longer. Yet with the bass and the other rhythm guitar underneath, it's got a great driving crunch underneath and chord changes are easy to follow, as opposed to someone like Rhoads, who had such a saturated tone that unless you know where they are, it's hard to pick out the chord changes (plus he's doing full Major chords on a lot of stuff, which means all 6 strings are going at full saturated Gain).

Newc

[guitarshredder]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

And Newc does it AGAIN!!! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/fart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/toast.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[skarhead]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

somebody PLEASE put BOTH Newc's topics as sticky :o

great job [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[guitarshredder]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

[ QUOTE ]
somebody PLEASE put BOTH Newc's topics as sticky :o

great job [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[Newc]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermediate

Thanks for the Pins [img]/images/graemlins/toast.gif[/img]

Newc

[CodeOfHonour]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermed

[ QUOTE ]
..., and when I do, I'd rather cut than boost.


[/ QUOTE ]

Right. I had to learn that the hard way.

[ApeDosMil]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermed

What is better? Recording Loud (but not cutting out Db thing) or recording low and Amping it?

We did our first recording, and I like the way it turned out, but I know the next time can be loads better.

[Newc]

Re: Newc\'s Home Recording H-book - Lv 2 - Intermed

If you're going straight into a PC, I'd record low and amp it in software IF you're getting more tone than noise (hiss/buzz/etc).

Definitely try it both ways and see which works best for you.
I go into the PC fairly low (medium to medium-low) and boost it in there, and I've got all my gear finally set so it doesn't hiss or buzz too much, if at all.

[Newc]

Alesis 3630 settings I use

Alesis 3630 settings:

Threshold -20dB to -15dB
Ratio 2:1 to 3:1
Attack 6ms
Release 50ms to 150ms
Output -10dB to 0dB

Buttons:
Peak
Hard Knee
Input
Comp

Your mileage may vary of course, so tweak to suit your needs and given situation.