KVR Audio

Kmeister · Post by **Kmeister** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 3:26 pm

HanafiH wrote:
What would we do without EQ? Watch Roger Nichols lose weight.

Coming soon the new SplattyBumIzer.

Oh he'd probably just find something else to get fat on.

rodgetkfp · Post by **rodgetkfp** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:45 pm

But anyway, peace to Roger Nichols.

He gave me some useful knowledge. Especially about EQing.

Greetings,

Rodge

Maadfoo · Post by **Maadfoo** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:13 pm

HunterKiller wrote:
What would we do without EQ..?
Vomit?

Commit suicide?

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:52 pm

There are a couple of things:

1. Spend more time getting sounds right at their source (e.g. cut the lows from a guitar amp rather than hipass, cut the deep lows and the highs from the bass at the amp, etc.)

2. Spend more time on mic selection and placement

3. Lots of volume automation

Krakatau · Post by **Krakatau** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:07 pm

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Lots of volume automation

a marvelous way to learn to knit, isn't it ?

also a marvelous way to learn zen meditation ?

so has been my experience...

Dean Aka Nekro · Post by **Dean Aka Nekro** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:21 pm

batcave wrote:how does a live symphony or choir
or barber shop quartet exist without
eq, compession, even delays etc

all these things are Written, and Played.

do you think it takes a lot of eq to record a live jazz band?

or classical?

it's frowned upon, because all the good frequency placing stuff
is already there, in the arrangement

Along With Quality Microphone Placement/Choice Of Mic/Microphone Pre-Amp/Good If Not Outstanding Acoustics...Etc.

The Answer I Would Give Is Get The Sound Right At The Source, In An Idealistic World Where Every Room Or Space Had Wicked Acoustic Properties.

However there is EQ in this world, has been for along time. If I Don't Need To EQ An Element In A Mix Then I Am Ultra Happy! Yet I Do Not Hesitate To Cut When Needed As Unfortunately Not Everything I Record Or Mix Is Always In Good Enough Shape For Me Not To Use EQ On The Material: I Simply Cannot Afford Amazing Acoustics

Nor The Ideal Choice Of A Stash Of Great Microphones, Pre-Amps...Etc. So I Use EQ

Probably Still Would Do Even If The Above Ideal World Existed...I Mean Why Not?

rodgetkfp · Post by **rodgetkfp** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:06 pm

"1. Spend more time getting sounds right at their source (e.g. cut the lows from a guitar amp rather than hipass, cut the deep lows and the highs from the bass at the amp, etc.) "

Yes, nice thought.
But remember, related to the topic of this thread,
it would mean that there is no "tone-control" in an amp.
Also, no high cut and no low cut (not pre- and not post- amping).

Greetings,

Rodge

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:20 pm

rodgetkfp wrote:"1. Spend more time getting sounds right at their source (e.g. cut the lows from a guitar amp rather than hipass, cut the deep lows and the highs from the bass at the amp, etc.) "

Yes, nice thought.
But remember, related to the topic of this thread,
it would mean that there is no "tone-control" in an amp.
Also, no high cut and no low cut (not pre- and not post- amping).

Greetings,

Rodge

right, but for some reason it's not being considered as "eq" it seems.

Cordelia · Post by **Cordelia** » Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:35 pm

Polybius wrote:It took me a couple of faceplants before i figured out that i needed to properly program the filters of my synths before EQ-ing. Proper filter programming of your synths is half the battle won.

Just to clarify, are we imagining a world with no EQ, therefore a world with no synth filters, or a mix with no processing EQ?

rodgetkfp · Post by **rodgetkfp** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:11 am

rodgetkfp wrote:
"1. Spend more time getting sounds right at their source (e.g. cut the lows from a guitar amp rather than hipass, cut the deep lows and the highs from the bass at the amp, etc.) "

"Yes, nice thought.
But remember, related to the topic of this thread,
it would mean that there is no "tone-control" in an amp.
Also, no high cut and no low cut (not pre- and not post- amping).

Greetings,

Rodge"

"right, but for some reason it's not being considered as "eq" it seems."

That's why I said "tone-control" (in brackets). Of course, no EQ(ing) is "allowed".
That's the reason why I said "in a world without EQ".
So, the question still remains, what to do in A, to get to B, without skipping back?

Greetings,

Rodge

Stairsteps · Post by **Stairsteps** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:27 am

EQ instruments?? never!!! I EQ the heck out of vocals sometimes. but my concept on the use of EQ is subjective, It's is all up to the user to incorporate into the mix as they see fit. there is no way to have a perfect way of doing things, there is only creation and to that effect EQ is great as long as YOU the user thinks so.

every sound has a eq characteristic in it and depending on your dynamic playing style or singing style it EQ can or should be used to complement the sound or mangle it!!!

rodgetkfp · Post by **rodgetkfp** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:40 am

rodgetkfp wrote:
"1. Spend more time getting sounds right at their source (e.g. cut the lows from a guitar amp rather than hipass, cut the deep lows and the highs from the bass at the amp, etc.) "

"Yes, nice thought.
But remember, related to the topic of this thread,
it would mean that there is no "tone-control" in an amp.
Also, no high cut and no low cut (not pre- and not post- amping).

Greetings,

Rodge"

"right, but for some reason it's not being considered as "eq" it seems."

That's why I said "tone-control" (in brackets). Of course, no EQ(ing) is "allowed".
That's the reason why I said "in a world without EQ".
So, the question still remains, what to do in A, to get to B, without replacing the mic again, without re-arranging,...

(of course, your meanings about "how to get a great mix without EQ" -besides this thread- ain't wrong)

I personally can't even imagine how to really(!) get a "great mix" without EQ...Of course I'd still be able to get from A to B" (without EQ, but if I'd have the choice, I wouldn't even think about mixing without EQ...). But this is a thread about your opinions.
That's the reason why I started this thread. Of course, proper mic placement (and, of course choosing "the right mic"...) is really important (and some couple of 100.000 other things as well...).

Greetings,

Rodge

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:43 am

Cordelia wrote:
Polybius wrote:It took me a couple of faceplants before i figured out that i needed to properly program the filters of my synths before EQ-ing. Proper filter programming of your synths is half the battle won.
Just to clarify, are we imagining a world with no EQ, therefore a world with no synth filters, or a mix with no processing EQ?

When it's all pretend, anything is possible.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:05 am

well, we could get by without a Q, we can replace it with either a C or K. But I'm sorry, we just couldn't survive without an E...it's just too important.

Seriously though the question is interesting but all the ideas mentioned here are forms of equalizing whether it be by mic placement, arrangement, mixing, baffles, it's all a way to balance or equalize the frequencies. The only way we could not have any form of EQ is if frequency didn't exist. By definition sound cannot exist without frequency even if it's only one frequency. So the answer to the original question is nothing because it wouldn't matter.

rodgetkfp · Post by **rodgetkfp** » Mon Oct 12, 2009 2:33 am

"Seriously though the question is interesting but all the ideas mentioned here are forms of equalizing whether it be by mic placement, arrangement, mixing, baffles, it's all a way to balance or equalize the frequencies.

Absolutely, yes.
But even using a compressor, is affecting your frequency response.
(e.g. I'm sure most of y'all know about what happens, if choosing and using a 1176...

...remember that slight boost in the 7k spectrum...)

Greetings,

Rodge