What first, compressor or eq?

[praveen]

can somebody explain what's ment by eq ?




hihi

equalization of frequencies. hi low mid Q blah blah.

[IIRs]

can somebody explain what's ment by eq ?




hihi

Its a measurement of how clever you are with computers.

[mauseoleum]

there's IQ and there's EQ.

how come you didn't know that

[foosnark]

An EQ plugin that actually did equalize frequencies across an entire spectrum automatically might be cool. Or it might suck.

More than half the time I use "E"Q to unequalize

[9b0]

i'm on the compress first, EQ after side.

Here is the same signal, where i raised several bands with an EQ (Voxengo EssEQ was used for the screenshots), with the same level.



Who can tell by any signal what the peak level will be if the frequency of the squarewave changes? If the level of the Squarewave changes?

If i compress the signal and optimize it to -6db i always have a clear overview of what the peaklevel of the track (or master) is. Like in this 2 pictures:





EQ is the tool to boost frequencies, while the compressor is for reduce dynamics and unwanted peaks. Mostly.

Edit: EQ is the tool to boost frequencies, while the compressor is for reduce dynamics and unwanted peaks. Mostly... for me.

[verstaerker]

there's IQ and there's EQ.

how come you didn't know that

i was just kidding

[shamann]

An EQ plugin that actually did equalize frequencies across an entire spectrum automatically might be cool.

Probably would suck. Equalizers were originally designed to boost diminished frequencies for communications devices, so they did exactly that (hence the term equalize). But EQs tend to be applied more creatively (ie make it sound better) in the recording process these days rather than to compensate for signal loss.

[boin]

I tend to eq before compression most of the time, especially when doing a lot of cutting in the lower frequencies. This way the compressor isn't compressing based on frequency levels that aren't going to be there anyways.

Same here, for the same reasons.
Back in the old days there were other issues to take into account, like the noise generated by the (hardware) compressor and/or equalizer (if active). Nowadays with software plug-ins it is really a matter of what sounds best.
In fact lately I've been using less and less eq and compressing when finishing/mastering my songs. I don't know if my mixing skills are improving or if I'm just giving up...

[Galleoneer]

to all,

basically if compressors would not bump in above a certain treshold value there would be no difference if you eq->comp or comp->eq.

but if you eq first than you can put certain levels of the signal above or below the treshold so the comp does not compress on regions it would have do or vice versa.

so the treshold concept makes this operation non-associative.

so its quite easy to understand the technical background.

[Galleoneer]

...

nice scope. where to get it?

[9b0]

nice scope. where to get it?

Nowhere.

It's the built in scope of my modular host.

[Galleoneer]

nice scope. where to get it?

Nowhere.

It's the built in scope of my modular host.

[Saturation]

chorus first. fully wet.

[Elfs1der]

Try using unity gain EQ. This is when say if I have a boost of 6DB then lower the whole EQ line to -6DB so its only boosting to 0db because you are really making an EQ a preamp when its not made for that so you can compress after without screwing up the sound of eq...