EQ matching on snare drum
- Thread starter LBTM
- Start date
DeclanWhite
Senior Member
i guess it could potentially make a slightly worse mic sound slightly better.... but not really. its a bit of a shortcut that wont actually get you to where you want it to take you anyway.
Behind
Member
- Sep 3, 2008
- 444
- 0
- 16
I know, I know. I just messed the thing with the 'quote' label. Sorry for that.
LBTM, if you are saying that these techniques are shit, it is obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about. Even more, it shows that you have no experience at all in the audio engineering world.
I can give you a few examples of some of the best records in history that have used these techniques. Even Andy Sneap, considered one of the top metal producers in the world, uses them in one way or another.
Now, it seems trendy to say 'analogue rocks, digital sucks', and all that crap which considers that you are stealing the soul of the performances. What people need to know is that every tool is valid if you know how to use it.
Concerning your question: match eq is not magic. It would not make a cheap mic to sound like an SM57. It would be like making a b/w photocopy of a coloured painting. You'll obtain the basics, but you'll loose a lot of things in the process.
- Feb 19, 2012
- 897
- 0
- 16
For holy fuck's sake when did I say that?
I just made a thread to discuss about EQ matching.
Behind
Member
- Sep 3, 2008
- 444
- 0
- 16
Clark Kent
Member
- Jan 23, 2011
- 1,425
- 0
- 36
I guess I'll have to be the one to say: "give match EQ a rest". 
Match EQ is cheating.
I've been saying it all the time: match EQ is about EQ and not the dynamics. A snare drum (for me at least) is mostly about the dynamics. The smack and sustain of the ringing etc. There's really no use in match EQing a snare drum. You can't match EQ someone to sing in tune for example. That's the same thing. A snare that's in different tune and has a different ring etc. CAN NOT BE match EQ'd to sound like another snare. That's impossible.
However... you can match EQ a certain SD2 snare (that was used by Periphery on their album) and match EQ it to sound like their snare on that album because they have the same ringing etc. Then use a transient designer to make it sound broken. But once again.. this is very advanced tweakage that has no use in the end so I don't suggest you do this.
Match EQ is cheating.I've been saying it all the time: match EQ is about EQ and not the dynamics. A snare drum (for me at least) is mostly about the dynamics. The smack and sustain of the ringing etc. There's really no use in match EQing a snare drum. You can't match EQ someone to sing in tune for example. That's the same thing. A snare that's in different tune and has a different ring etc. CAN NOT BE match EQ'd to sound like another snare. That's impossible.
However... you can match EQ a certain SD2 snare (that was used by Periphery on their album) and match EQ it to sound like their snare on that album because they have the same ringing etc. Then use a transient designer to make it sound broken.
But once again.. this is very advanced tweakage that has no use in the end so I don't suggest you do this.
Wow, this thread is turning in a bad way
To go back on the topic, I don't think it's possible to really make a cheap mic like a good one using match EQing for the reasons detailed above and in this particular situation, I think it's useless because the SM57 IS actually a cheap mic that sounds awesome for pretty much anything! But if you do your best, you can make it sound better than it's supposed to sound. I already gave you my point of view about working with cheap gear.
About your comparison (reamping, samples and digital stuff...), you have to not forget that when you deal with these techniques/tools, you really have to know what you do!!! There's actually no difference between reamping guitars after the tracking is done and making the sound then recording this source: it's called engineering in both cases. And it's exactly the same with samples (especially when you make your own samples - that's what I usually do with more or less success) Match EQ is not engineering. BUT it still could be a mixing technique if it works for you... After all, the result is the only thing that counts!
To go back on the topic, I don't think it's possible to really make a cheap mic like a good one using match EQing for the reasons detailed above and in this particular situation, I think it's useless because the SM57 IS actually a cheap mic that sounds awesome for pretty much anything! But if you do your best, you can make it sound better than it's supposed to sound. I already gave you my point of view about working with cheap gear.
About your comparison (reamping, samples and digital stuff...), you have to not forget that when you deal with these techniques/tools, you really have to know what you do!!! There's actually no difference between reamping guitars after the tracking is done and making the sound then recording this source: it's called engineering in both cases. And it's exactly the same with samples (especially when you make your own samples - that's what I usually do with more or less success) Match EQ is not engineering. BUT it still could be a mixing technique if it works for you... After all, the result is the only thing that counts!
antares disagrees http://www.antarestech.com/products/amm.shtml
but then again i think the cheapest mic there is the sm57
just get another 57. it will save you from alot of disappointing results
http://www.antarestech.com/products/amm.shtml but then again i think the cheapest mic there is the sm57
just get another 57. it will save you from alot of disappointing results
Nimvi
Member
In LBTM's defense, I think we are dealing with a miscommunication here. When LBTM used the word "shit" in reference to mentioned techniques, I don't think he insinuated that those techniques are shit. I think he just used that term as a blunt variety of "stuff". When I read the sentence that way, it turns into a pretty normal question, altough perhaps coming from a lack of background information or experience (no offense, LBTM).
As others have said already, match EQ, just like many other things, should be seen as a tool for the job. Just like any other tool, you need to realise its strengths and weaknesses, and use it in an appropriate manner.
By nature, match EQ may sound like an easy way out. But like has been mentioned, it only captures a small part of what makes something sound the way it does. It can help you understand what topnotch engineers aim for when sculpting tones EQ-wise, but it is important to keep in mind that there is so much more to that awesome snare or kick you hear. It has been captured and treated in a very unique way, influenced by thousands of circumstances. Moreover, it has been made like that to fit to that specific project, so chances are it doesn't even work very well outside of that context.
Back to the original question, although I think it has been answered already:
Microphones have many factors that make them sound the way they do. This can result in more or less rejection of the sounds in the room, different pickup patterns, precision of captured transients, dynamics that are flatter or more alive, proximity effect, etc.
Even 2 mics of the exact same type can sound quite different. So the more different 2 microphones are, the more you would have to mangle a signal to try and make them sound alike.
Depending on the type of mic you use, certain frequencies might not even be captured at all, which would result in hiss or rumble being boosted by 60 db to match the spectrum analysis of the other mic. Even in less severe cases, there may be audible artifacts because of the sharp boosts and cuts needed to match an EQ curve.
So one would really have to ask the question: what am I trying to reach by using this technique? In your example, I think it's clear you like the way an SM57 sounds on a snare. So there's probably only 2 reasonable things to do: either get another SM57, so you get exactly what you want, or like Heabow said, try if you can get different desirable results with the other microphone, and have a fun learning experience in the process. Good luck either way
As others have said already, match EQ, just like many other things, should be seen as a tool for the job. Just like any other tool, you need to realise its strengths and weaknesses, and use it in an appropriate manner.
By nature, match EQ may sound like an easy way out. But like has been mentioned, it only captures a small part of what makes something sound the way it does. It can help you understand what topnotch engineers aim for when sculpting tones EQ-wise, but it is important to keep in mind that there is so much more to that awesome snare or kick you hear. It has been captured and treated in a very unique way, influenced by thousands of circumstances. Moreover, it has been made like that to fit to that specific project, so chances are it doesn't even work very well outside of that context.
Back to the original question, although I think it has been answered already:
Microphones have many factors that make them sound the way they do. This can result in more or less rejection of the sounds in the room, different pickup patterns, precision of captured transients, dynamics that are flatter or more alive, proximity effect, etc.
Even 2 mics of the exact same type can sound quite different. So the more different 2 microphones are, the more you would have to mangle a signal to try and make them sound alike.
Depending on the type of mic you use, certain frequencies might not even be captured at all, which would result in hiss or rumble being boosted by 60 db to match the spectrum analysis of the other mic. Even in less severe cases, there may be audible artifacts because of the sharp boosts and cuts needed to match an EQ curve.
So one would really have to ask the question: what am I trying to reach by using this technique? In your example, I think it's clear you like the way an SM57 sounds on a snare. So there's probably only 2 reasonable things to do: either get another SM57, so you get exactly what you want, or like Heabow said, try if you can get different desirable results with the other microphone, and have a fun learning experience in the process. Good luck either way
Behind
Member
- Sep 3, 2008
- 444
- 0
- 16
- Feb 19, 2012
- 897
- 0
- 16
XxSicRokerxX
Gabriel R.
The reason why this cannot work is because you are simply capturing a moment (snapshot) in time. You will not capture the attack, sustain, boing, sizzle, snap of the snare. Although you may make it sound partially similar it will not be the same. Give it a shot an let us know what you come up with but I highly suggest just learning how to mic a snare properly.
Nimvi
Member
Glad to have cleared that then
And yes, I cannot keep myself from writing walls of text, sorry about that haha.
- Feb 19, 2012
- 897
- 0
- 16
Well, I was talking about doing the eq match in the same snare with the two microphones, if this wasn't clear.
mva801
Member
- Nov 18, 2009
- 1,870
- 13
- 38
Well everyone has sure jumped down your throat about it, so I'll just say this: It may get the raw sounds of the two mics pretty close, but as everyone else has said, there's much more at play here. Say you match eq this mic and it adds a presence bump in the upper mids to sound like the 57. Cool you think. Well, maybe not. Think about what will happen with everything together. Your hi hat is going to bleed into the snare track, and you've just assigned it a nice big boost in an annoying spot. Transient response may also be quite different, which is a big part of the snare sound. The polar pattern will be slightly different, so it may even pick up more of the high hat than a 57 would.
It's not a terrible idea but when you really get into the nuts and bolts, IMO you're FAR better off just listening to the two different mics on the kit in the mix. Listen to what's different. Adjust your mic position and/ or eq until you have an acceptable sound and level of bleed. What works for one mic will not necessarily work for another. This method will teach you so much more about how to capture a good snare sound than the old match eq. And who knows, you might even like the other mic better on the snare. A 57 isn't the only snare mic in the world...
That's how everyone learns to record. Trying different things and making the best decision you can for your vision of the sonics. If you're resorting to pre-match eqing everything to sound like what you think you might want, you'll more than likely shoot yourself in the foot....
It's not a terrible idea but when you really get into the nuts and bolts, IMO you're FAR better off just listening to the two different mics on the kit in the mix. Listen to what's different. Adjust your mic position and/ or eq until you have an acceptable sound and level of bleed. What works for one mic will not necessarily work for another. This method will teach you so much more about how to capture a good snare sound than the old match eq. And who knows, you might even like the other mic better on the snare. A 57 isn't the only snare mic in the world...
That's how everyone learns to record. Trying different things and making the best decision you can for your vision of the sonics. If you're resorting to pre-match eqing everything to sound like what you think you might want, you'll more than likely shoot yourself in the foot....
Trevoire520
Member
Not likely
Thank god!
In case it hasn't come across I fucking HATE 57's on drums because the cymbal bleed they pick up is horrendous!
ArthurD
Member
Take your 57 and sample the snare.
If you have money to buy ozone you might have money to buy slate's trigger.
If not, just get aptrigga (free).
Done.
If you have money to buy ozone you might have money to buy slate's trigger.
If not, just get aptrigga (free).
Done.
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Not likely
Thank god!
In case it hasn't come across I fucking HATE 57's on drums because the cymbal bleed they pick up is horrendous!
Not sure which mics you've been using, but a vast majority of 57-replacements I've tried on drums have inducted way more cymbal bleed.
mva801
Member
- Nov 18, 2009
- 1,870
- 13
- 38
Indeed. The i5 isn't much better, and I use an sm-7 and km84 often, both of which bleed more...
mva801
Member
- Nov 18, 2009
- 1,870
- 13
- 38
