bduffy's tip - cutting 500 hz. im actually amazed

[EoN604]

Hey all,

Purely out of interest, I looked at a spectrum analyzer reading of a number of tracks across 3 mastered cd's in the genre of progressive trance (progressive house/minimal edge) released on a label whos mastering quality has always been superb, and all the tracks seem to generally have slight (wide) PEAKS around the 500hz mark rather than dips?!

Also noticed, which is quite interesting, is some of them seem to have a bit of a dip somewhere between 150 through to 3/400 - almost 'seperating' the bass from the rest. Although all of these varied quite a bit.

[bduffy]

Hey all,

Purely out of interest, I looked at a spectrum analyzer reading of a number of tracks across 3 mastered cd's in the genre of progressive trance (progressive house/minimal edge) released on a label whos mastering quality has always been superb, and all the tracks seem to generally have slight (wide) PEAKS around the 500hz mark rather than dips?!

Also noticed, which is quite interesting, is some of them seem to have a bit of a dip somewhere between 150 through to 3/400 - almost 'seperating' the bass from the rest. Although all of these varied quite a bit.

Yeah? I don't know...dance music looks mostly like a slalom hill to me! The 300-ish range is commonly referred to as the "mud" area, so you're sure to see dips there. I think most recordings have plenty of 500hz, just that those low-mid areas are of particular concern to us home/DAW-mixers, without the greatest gear or rooms in the world. So it's worth taking a look at those spots in a busy mix. I will say I've found cutting there much more useful in rock/pop than Dance.

[Barbarossa]

Hey all,

Purely out of interest, I looked at a spectrum analyzer reading of a number of tracks across 3 mastered cd's in the genre of progressive trance (progressive house/minimal edge) released on a label whos mastering quality has always been superb, and all the tracks seem to generally have slight (wide) PEAKS around the 500hz mark rather than dips?!

What analyzer do youuse? Be careful with the analyzer. They often allow different resolutions und window settings and it could be, that they show pure mathematical graphs you do not hear, because of certain averaging settings.

Cutting the 500s that much out, that a dip is the result will most probably be too much. If a rule of thumb should be applied, i'd say it's better to reduce it only that much, that the spectral energy becomes the same as in the higher frequencies (flat frequency response).
BELOW the 500s, around 250-450 many dance tracks have a slight dip.

Also noticed, which is quite interesting, is some of them seem to have a bit of a dip somewhere between 150 through to 3/400 - almost 'seperating' the bass from the rest. Although all of these varied quite a bit.

Well observed! That's indeed the 'muddyness' area being cut out on many tracks. On fat solo-hooksounds (i.e. Scooter) this can be seen even better.

[Dayl]

Ahaa, and this is why I'm back (one of the reasons) been having trouble with a mix-down...this thread is still a goodie, even after all this time haha.

[bduffy]

Yeah, there's certainly tons of good ideas and speculation here, but I must insist that "the 500hz cut" method is nothing I would endorse any longer, as I don't really do this anymore.

Just follow best mixing practices, get the best monitoring solution you can afford, and trust your instincts. I tend to deal with "mud" more on a per-instrument, per-frequency basis now. I think at the time I had identified a problem spot in my monitoring, but then again, it was a very insecure time for me. Take with a grain of salt.

[Rottweiler]

I thougth this is such a common knowledge... :S

[edit1: I mean the notching out of freqs.]

edit2: But also take care of your monitor/room , it can happen you are tryin to remove such resonancies which arent there in reality.

edit3: So use a freq analiser to aid yerself, if you dont have proper monitors/ treated room.

OR, know your system in and out and compensate it in head.

Okay, enuff from the give away today, happy Xmas from meh...

[Dayl]

Oh for sure guys, its not so much the 500hz dipping technique that I liked about it but the conversation that followed, lotsa good info and a constructive chat.

I was actually looking for the instrument freq ranges that I posted on page 10 as I lost the file and wanted a slight refresh.

Apart from the occasional misshap I'm more than satisfied with my mixes.

You didn't sound too insecure at the time duffy I remember getting a fair bit of good advice from you.

Rottweiler, good advice from the book of studio 101

cheers lads merry xmas

[bduffy]

Oh for sure guys, its not so much the 500hz dipping technique that I liked about it but the conversation that followed, lotsa good info and a constructive chat.

I was actually looking for the instrument freq ranges that I posted on page 10 as I lost the file and wanted a slight refresh.

Apart from the occasional misshap I'm more than satisfied with my mixes.

You didn't sound too insecure at the time duffy I remember getting a fair bit of good advice from you.

Rottweiler, good advice from the book of studio 101

cheers lads merry xmas

Yeah, I haven't gone back and read it (will have to sometime!),maybe I was of sound mind, but I know my fascination with the 500hz-thing came about during a difficult time, trying to mix my album on my lonesome. Funny thing, my mixing improved immediately after I was done. Mental blocks, eh?

And merry Xmas to you too.