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

[afreshcupofjoe]

Wow Bduffy, that is quite a cut. You know what is funny? I'm always really nervous to do such a big cut in software where I have so much control, but back when I was recording on a digital 8-track with only crappy insert digital eqs that were printed to track, I used a preset that probably looked very similar to this on almost every track. I used this preset because it was a PITA to tweek the eq yourself, and out of all of the presets provided IT SOUNDED THE BEST. And given the circumstances under which that stuff was recorded, I think is still sounds pretty damn good. Actually, every time I listen to those old recordings, I'm blown away by how good they sound for how little gear/experience I had then. I usually chock it up to the fact that I was in such a tight kick ass band at the time, but maybe it has something to do with that silly smiley face eq preset that everyone likes to talk down.

Anyway, the lesson I'm taking away from this is "Don't fear the smiley face you pussy bitch!"

[bduffy]

YEAH! Oh man, there's a rude little joke in there somewhere between smile and pussy...

That's interesting. I was totally nervous to do this too; it's like "the 'hi-fi' dip? You're kidding!". But don't take my word for it. Here's a before and after:

Writings Old

Writings New

There are some differences in the mix but I think it clearly demonstrates how much clarity it brings to a mix, without any boost at all.

[kilroy]

Kim...good post.

The bassline doesn't need to be deep, because your fat kick (remember that?) is filling up your subs - in a thicker and more consistent manner than your bassline ever could. You can make the bassline heavier by carefully applying some saturation to add harmonics that reinforce the fundamental.

This is important stuff to keep in mind.

I generally like to keep the release envelopes fairly brief on the kicks and basses in dance genres. In particular, if the kick has any sustain at all, I do not want some low end pitch wobbling weirding out the bottom because some bass note crossed the overhang on the kick wrong...another good reason for separating the two instruments by a good margin. Also, keep in mind that in a club setting the apparent low end overhang is going to be significantly greater than what is actually on the record itself. Some of those really deep sustaining kicks can swallow the bass right up if they are too close together.

[Left Headphone]

This might help. I found it on Harmony-Central a few days ago.

No numbers on where to dip or how much Q to apply, but one can "guesstimate"...



http://www.harmony-central.com/articles ... s/Fig1.gif

[Compyfox]

Personally, I wouldn't highcut the bass. It's sometimes the "heart" of the piece. But for f**ks sake it can also be the nightmare in terms of loudness blasts if not compressed the shit out of it (accoustic bass and glides anyone?!).

For everything else, it really depends on the desired sound, and IMO the genre. I barely cut in classic (here I rather roll off or dip), but I do in pop and electronic.

[bduffy]

Is there a bigger picture there?

[No name]

To be honest I never even deal with bass because it is such a pain in the ass, as you've said. I just saturate it with overdrive, it flattens it like a pancake. I shouldn't do it all the time, and I pay for it some times. Though a lot of times when the bass is hard to tame I just use overdrive. Sometimes compressions throws me off, and I'll either get the bass compressed but it will be so low in volume and so little headroom that it kills the idea of having the bass as, well, the base. On the other hand with overdrive sometimes it is just too loud and it drowns out everything, so it's best to go between the two and see what you can get.

[Left Headphone]

Is there a bigger picture there?

Here is the article:
http://www.harmony-central.com/articles ... ous_mixes/

[bduffy]

Thanks, Headphone; looks like a good article!

No name, you must deal with the bass. You must sit in a room and stare at bass until it flinches and submits to you.

[ouroboros]

Hey bduffy: I think both mp3 links are for the old version
cool sounds though, even old.

[bduffy]

F*ck! right you are, thanks, ouroboros! How embarrasing.

EDIT: I fixed the links.

[The Chase]

I find myself cutting around those octaves the most, regaurdless of content. Around 125, 250, 500, 1000...Especially if the bass is filling up the registries around the 60's

That's kind of... unconventional, isn't it?

I find I almost always eq in octaves now...IME it's typically better to make a few smaller notches than one big one.

[ouroboros]

wow, that's quite a difference.
I must say, in all honesty, I like the wall-o-sound power of the old version in the intro more.
After the first verse, though, I preferred the new edit-it does sound sharper. I liked hearing the percussion highs and the "space" then.

Automate the EQ!
BTW, I have neither experience nor golden ears so as if I needed to say it; YMMV

[bduffy]

wow, that's quite a difference.
I must say, in all honesty, I like the wall-o-sound power of the old version in the intro more.
After the first verse, though, I preferred the new edit-it does sound sharper. I liked hearing the percussion highs and the "space" then.

Automate the EQ!
BTW, I have neither experience nor golden ears so as if I needed to say it; YMMV

Hey thanks, ouroboros! I appreciate the comments. Yeah, the old one has the huge drums, which I'm always attached to. Actually that new mix has barely been mixed, it sounded so much sharper practically straight up, just with some dipping, so I'm trying to figure out how 'clean' or 'dirty' to make it now. But I could send that out tomorrow and sleep well.

Sorry - automate which EQ?

[ouroboros]

oh, I meant if the songs were the the same, just eq'd and mixed differently, then you could not scoop out the mids at the beginning, and gradually increase the "scoop" by the first verse. I don't know if that kind of thing is done for these purposes, though.