The new 2.3 way of eqing

Having problems using the greatest Visual Mastering software of the century? Use this area of the Forum to post your technical questions to Earle and Paavo regarding Har-Bal or ask questions regarding how to work on a certain area of the software? Post away!
Post Reply
MERLIN
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:19 am
Location: Brighton

The new 2.3 way of eqing

Post by MERLIN »

Hi .

Ive just installed 2.3 and ive just finished the advanced tutorial. Im wondering:

> On the cuts and boosts, are you always holding down M for 100% Q?

>Are you listening to it while doing these wave corrections?

>How to know how far to go in terms of cut and boost?

...

>How you have the IQ to come up with this? > Just joking. You are a genius.
MERLIN
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:19 am
Location: Brighton

Post by MERLIN »

Sorry, i almost forgot:

In the tutorial, you mention at the end chart comparison, that although the spectrum looks completely different ,ALL the troughs are still where they originally were.; However they are not ALL where they originally were, only MOST of them. How is this?

Sorry, but im a bit lost. :)
HarBal
Site Admin
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 8:18 pm
Contact:

Re: The new 2.3 way of eqing

Post by HarBal »

MERLIN wrote:Hi .
On the cuts and boosts, are you always holding down M for 100% Q?
Most of the time yes. Some of the time not. The not time cases are driven mainly by "gut feeling".
MERLIN wrote:Hi .
Are you listening to it while doing these wave corrections?
Generally no. I usually do most of it first without listening, just concentrating on getting a relatively uniform 1/3 octave spectrum. Then I listen to it and make minor adjustments while listening. If the blind adjustment sounds bad I rip it up and start again making only a few adjustments at a time and listening to the result to make sure I'm going in the right direction.
MERLIN wrote:Hi .
How to know how far to go in terms of cut and boost?
I generally try to keep boosting and cutting (but boosting in particular) below 6dB. Above that level and colouration can become obvious. If it needs more than than then the mix has big problems that should really be fixed at the mix stage. I generally take a look at the frequency response view regularly and if I've introduced some really big peaks I listen to how it sounds when cutting them back to lower levels. Through careful listening yuo can generally figure out if it is a problem or not.
[/quote]
MERLIN wrote:Hi .
How you have the IQ to come up with this? Just joking. You are a genius.
Genius? Debatable and probably not a very useful phrase. Too much congratulations can lead to lack of perspective so talk like that usually makes me cringe.

I'd say I came up with this out of persistence and annoyance. Hearing music you like presented badly and having a notion of an idea on how to make it better is what drove (and continues to drive) it. The rest is just trial and error and a lot of listening.

If others haven't come up with similar approaches it isn't through lack of technical ability, just not asking the right questions or perhaps not asking them at all. I still have plenty of questions I'd like answers to, just need the time to dedicate to answering them.

Cheers,


Paavo.
MERLIN
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:19 am
Location: Brighton

Post by MERLIN »

'Too much congratulations can lead to lack of perspective so talk like that usually makes me cringe'.

Actually, i totolly agree. Sorry. It is clever i think though.
Post Reply