I use HarBal as an initial process on all my mastering projects. One area I have particular problems with is about the 1k to 3k range. Any significant boosts in this spectrum through HarBal will create a thin, tinny sound in my mix. Curiously though, in nearly all of my mixes HarBal indicates a lack of relative energy in that range. I find I must be very conservative in any boosts to this area while attenuating adjacent frequencies to establish a pleasing harmonic balance. Consequently, the HarBal graph will visually indicate a lack of balance in that area, but my ears tell me different.
I was curious if others have encountered this kind of issue and what approaches you might take to address it.
Thanks,
That darn 1K to 3K range.
Danny,
I think you are reading Har-Bal wrong. There is no such thing as one definative spectrum shape that you should always end up with. The idea will always depend on a whole range of factors including instrumentation, music style and personal taste. It might just be that most of the stuff you've been working on has little in this area, in which case boosting it will cause problems.
The other thing to consider is your monitors and monitoring environment. If this is weak in the low frequency end or bright at the high frequency end then all you mixes will end up that way. The point to consider then is what do your mixes sound like when you play them elsewhere? If your monitoring characteristics aren't representative of average listening environments and you are judging it by ear then your mixes might not be very portable. You then have two choices. Fix up your acoustics and monitoring issues, or use quality headphones as a reality check on the tonality. The later is the cheap option if you can't afford the time and money to sort out your acoustics.
Regards,
Paavo.
I think you are reading Har-Bal wrong. There is no such thing as one definative spectrum shape that you should always end up with. The idea will always depend on a whole range of factors including instrumentation, music style and personal taste. It might just be that most of the stuff you've been working on has little in this area, in which case boosting it will cause problems.
The other thing to consider is your monitors and monitoring environment. If this is weak in the low frequency end or bright at the high frequency end then all you mixes will end up that way. The point to consider then is what do your mixes sound like when you play them elsewhere? If your monitoring characteristics aren't representative of average listening environments and you are judging it by ear then your mixes might not be very portable. You then have two choices. Fix up your acoustics and monitoring issues, or use quality headphones as a reality check on the tonality. The later is the cheap option if you can't afford the time and money to sort out your acoustics.
Regards,
Paavo.
Paavo,
For monitors I'm running a pair of Mackie HR 624's with an MAudio Studiophile SBX subwoofer. My listening environment is small 15 x 20 carpeted studio room with insulated walls to deaden any ambient bounce to the monitor output. At least to my ears the reproduction I hear is very full, clean, crisp, and void of significantly discernable environmental coloration.
Perhaps I was reading Har-Bal incorrectly. For some reason I was under the impression the the ideal spectrum balance was a rather rounded graph where obvious peaks and depressions were to be corrected. I was always aiming for a semblence of that ideal shape, but let my ears be the final judge. I will re-read your documentation in an effort to get a better understanding.
Thanks,
For monitors I'm running a pair of Mackie HR 624's with an MAudio Studiophile SBX subwoofer. My listening environment is small 15 x 20 carpeted studio room with insulated walls to deaden any ambient bounce to the monitor output. At least to my ears the reproduction I hear is very full, clean, crisp, and void of significantly discernable environmental coloration.
Perhaps I was reading Har-Bal incorrectly. For some reason I was under the impression the the ideal spectrum balance was a rather rounded graph where obvious peaks and depressions were to be corrected. I was always aiming for a semblence of that ideal shape, but let my ears be the final judge. I will re-read your documentation in an effort to get a better understanding.
Thanks,
I'd suggest that you use HarBal to analyse a large range of commercial tracks that you like the sound of, preferably of differing styles. This should give you a better idea of the range of possible spectrum shapes. You should basically aim to preserve the "general" shape of the spectrum but just correct the wide holes or peaks in the spectrum. What "general" means is a bit tricky to explain but you won't need to wait much longer. HB2 with IntuitQ will give you a clear idea of what you should be doing and that should be released within a few weeks.
Cheers,
Paavo.
Cheers,
Paavo.