It's a free world. Horses for courses. If something lacks highs, it just seems more convenient to just add highs. To me, atleast..
We're really just nitpicking semantics here.
Is bright mix without additive EQ possible?
- Thread starter nezvers
- Start date
It's a free world. Horses for courses. If something lacks highs, it just seems more convenient to just add highs. To me, atleast..
We're really just nitpicking semantics here.
Nuno Filipe
You talkin' to me?
You cant be more wrong. Just by putting high pass filter in all drum parts brings much more brightness. So I dont even going to talk about drastic cuts here and there.
It's true. Absolute values do not matter, it's just: High end > low end = bright sound and low end > high end = dull sound. Basically, there's no fallacy of perception, it's only perception. But I guess both approaches work. It's just that using just narrow subtractive EQ has always sounded more natural to me.
^
Also doing low-shelf attenuating around 4k or whatever and pulling overall gain same amount would be equal as doing hi-shelf boost, but instead of that it counts as subtractive EQ right? (I hope this bugger picking wasn't taken for serious)
Also doing low-shelf attenuating around 4k or whatever and pulling overall gain same amount would be equal as doing hi-shelf boost, but instead of that it counts as subtractive EQ right? (I hope this bugger picking wasn't taken for serious)
egan.
daylightdies.com
Luke Hertzler
Member
In theory, yes, a very bright mix can be achieved using only subtractive eq and fader gain adjustments. Whether or not you want to spend the time doing this is your decision. I usually start with subtractive to "clean it up" and then boost to push the mix to the next level.
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
Just think of the way passive EQs function - namely the classic Pultec. Without a preamp at the back end of it, that thing is only capable of cutting gain. Yet through cutting lows, and then compensating with overall gain you end up with more high frequencies. Magic.
It's all about perception and economy. What's the most economical way for you to get to where you're going with the least steps involved? The answer is fairly simple. It's usually a combination of boosting and cutting.
Then there's the matter of perception. For those like me who commonly hear source signals as containing unnecessary 'junk', we're more predisposed to cut rather than boost. I think about the source in terms of what it doesn't need, rather than what it does need. I usually find what it needs becomes apparent once the 'junk' is removed. The CLA methodology is quite different. He boosts like crazy. That being said, he is in a position to use tools which generate euphonic harmonics when being pushed, so it's also a matter of practicality.
Mixing is an expression of personality, and this is no different.
You are correct but even at the risk of repeating myself: It's complitely a matter of reference points.
We don't mix and create music in a void. We all have our subjective references and memory traces what is bright and what's not. In a mix we rewiew tracks and their attributes against each other.. And to some degree knowing it or not, against other mixes.
If I have a mix running, and everything is fine and dandy, except that the snare could use some high end shimmer, then cutting low end won't do the trick. Then I'd have a thin snare which doesn't have enough shimmer. Crancking the hi-shelf instead indeed does do the trick.
As I stated earlier, it's just a matter of references.. And in context of a mix, cutting and boosting are very different.
It's just semantics. And methodology.
E: Ermz, good notion about the passive eq circuitry. Hadn't really thought that thing through.
But if we consider shear economics, the most economic way to add highs is to add highs.. One can argue that every track has something unnescessary that needs cutting.. And it's everyones own thing how they wiew their sources. The less buttons I need to twist, the better.. Or in reality the less sliders on the screen I need to drag the better. But as I said, it's a free world.
This took me a while to grasp. An EQ is just a special volume knob. Lose the lows and turn up the track, it gets brighter.
Sounds like frog is also correct "It's just semantics. And methodology."
Tom
also dont confuse brightness with correct lows. Its easy to think you want to brighten stuff up for clarity, but then it hurts. getting the low end right usually means that the highs sit better on it. For example I tend to boost the low end of kick and bass. Then if you do boost the highs just a little makes it all sit together.
jangoux
Member
- May 9, 2006
- 1,808
- 0
- 36
IMO, it really depends on the source instrument. On the place I usually track drums, the overheads always end up very dark, even when using bright mics. So I always end boosting a good amount of highs (well, sometimes 6db or more. To me, that´s a lot at least) AND cutting some honk mids and lots of lows. Otherwise, it doesnt sound at all like many modern records. On the other hand, when I boost guitars, I always end up with nasty shit all over the place, so I do my best to just try to remove junky resonances. But this is really what works for me and what works with the sources and rooms I usually work with..
But like Ermz, I always try to remove the junk first before doing any boosting EQ. This way , I avoid un-needed boosting (and sometimes distortion) most of the time and then just some minor EQing on the master bus (1.5db max here and there).
But like Ermz, I always try to remove the junk first before doing any boosting EQ. This way , I avoid un-needed boosting (and sometimes distortion) most of the time and then just some minor EQing on the master bus (1.5db max here and there).
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
This. Mixes start for me with general 2BUS shaping in the form of gently high/low shelves, and it's not like that's a novel concept by any means - I got the idea from other people to begin with.
When you cut something at the same time you boost something else (cause you make room for the other frequencies so they can be heard easier).
That said, yes there are many times that I got some brightness by cutting only.
But if this is not enough a gentle high shelf would do the trick.
