Several Keyboards EQ question

[TubaSolo]

One daunting task I often run into when mixing is trying to improve the typical Rhodes/B3/Strings (or any similar three-keyboard-together) mushy situation, in order to have each instrument blending nicely without stepping on each other's toes.

Other than panning and a hipass cutoff @ 200hz, I'm pretty much in the dark... :Confused:

Would I like to know about your seasoned pros' dos, donts, hints & clues in terms of freq & Q? You bet! :grin:

TIA

[Fulcrum]

Well, I'm still very much an assclown at the console, so take these for what they're worth, but faced with the particular combination of keys you describe-- Rhodes, Hammond, Solina-- that's actually a good combination to start with because I think the same principles I'd apply to them would apply with any combination of two or three synths.

The first thing I'd look at is the arrangement. Are the three fighting for the same range? Can you move any of the three parts up or down an octave or so? How are you panning them-- spreading them out in the stereo field or clustering them all together? Depending on how you answer, you might not need a whole lot of EQ.

If the Rhodes is doing more of the heavy lifting in the low end of the arrangement, after the high pass (wouldn't go as high as 200, maybe 100-150, but that might just be me) I might allow it to have the low end more or less untouched and low-shelf the Hammond a little bit in that range. And vice versa if the Hammond is doing more of the lurking in that range and seems to be more crucial to the arrangement there.

Either way I'd probably carve out a bit of the Hammond midrange for the Solina to live in-- bandwidth depending on Hammond activity and however many drawbars are pulled out on it. The Rhodes doesn't really have a lot of midrange to carve out: fundamental, a few harmonics above that, and the tine clink.

You'll probably want to sweep the Rhodes to find the frequency range where the glassy tine hits live (ditto the Hammond's key click or percussion attacks), and carve out bits of the Solina from what you find there.

I confess I still do a lot of this visually, using SPAN or the lovely real-time analyzer in Ozone, but the ears are always the final arbiter and I'm getting a little better with it. I'm still an assclown though.

[otek]

What Fulcrum said.


The arrangement is where it's at. A lot of times, when not acutely aware of the problem, less experienced keyboardists will play a lot of stuff, big bass octave grips, complex voicings, and then double it with the same intensity on every instrument.

Make people play less.

Listen to some of the old soul bands. You have a big band with backing singers, two keyboards, horns, guitars, and maybe even two drummers (and/or percussion), and there's still plenty of space in the arrangement.

If you are already stuck with the mess, EQ and filters are your friends, as well as panning, like you said.

You can also use level automation to place different instruments in or out of focus throughout the song.

[eagan]

What both these guys said!

A bit of high pass filtering around 200 Hz won't be a lot of help, unless, in terms of arrangement, things are really strange.

What you'll find in this kind of stuff (even more when you start adding guitars in with the keyboard pile) is stuff splattering all over each other in the midrange. Depending on specifics (like always, aren't there with you listening to an example), anywhere from 300 Hz to maybe 5K-6K can turn into a tangled mess.

In my own little personal current project, I have piles and piles of keyboard and guitar tracks, and have spent a stupid amount of time on this kind of making things coexist nicely.

Here's a little trick I do that may or may not work out well, and people have different philosophies about this kind of thing.

You can take some time and solo individual instruments, and patch in EQ. Spend time listening and going through different frequency ranges with the EQ, and concentrate on strictly subtractive EQ. What I do in this process is try to focus in on what areas are essential to the character of the sound of that instrument, and try to find areas where there might be a lot of stuff that's really just noise and crud. Start cutting the latter. Sometimes that can get brutal and extreme. Try stuff. Don't be timid. If certain ranges get cut by the maximum you can get out of your EQ, OK then.

The obvious hazard (besides any discussions of EQ artifacts) is that you can go too far and cut the life right out of an instrument's sound, but this process can help a lot. Sometimes it can be surprising how much you can carve away and still leave the character of a sound while clearing space for other things to live.

Then again, you can also go through this and discover that in some cases, you need to put some of the crap back in to preserve part of the character of something, even though, in isolation, it seems like disposable chaff.

There's no simple magic formula for this because it all depends on what you're trying to fit together, and it might take a while in trial and error, but this is one way to skin a cat.

Pretty much what Fulcrum said, just generalizing the concept a bit more.


JLE

[Fulcrum]

The obvious hazard (besides any discussions of EQ artifacts) is that you can go too far and cut the life right out of an instrument's sound, but this process can help a lot.

Yes, it can, and yes, it can.

To piggyback on what Eagan said, if you're worried about EQ sucking the life out of your instrument timbre, you might want to try this. Once you've carved out your frequencies on a particular track, if anything looks fairly extreme (i.e., above 6-9 dB of boost or cut), save it as a preset. Lather, rinse, and repeat for the other keyboard tracks. Render a full mix with those settings.

Then go back through and halve all the settings-- if you were boosting 8dB, roll that back to 4; if you were cutting 12dB, bring it back up to -6. Save as a second preset and render another mix.

Compare this mix with the first one. You may find that one mix is a touch cloudier than the other but that the timbres sound livelier, punchier, more realistic, etc. Or you may find that you didn't go far enough, or that the sweet spot is somewhere in between the two mixes.

At the end of the day you can delete all the presets you wound up not using.

[volthause]

I wouldn't suggest EQ'ing things in solo. I might start by putting the whole arrangement up with rough levels and panning, and start with subtractive EQ, perhaps a fairly deep cut with medium Q, and sweep the frequency around on one of the keyboard tracks. Notice where in the spectrum you really begin to lose the power of the instrument. These you might label in your head as no-no spots. Your centers of power, if you will.

If you find that cutting a wide hole centered around 800hz doesn't make the instrument sound appreciably bizarre in the context of the mix, then you might label that in your head a good go-to spot.

You aren't looking for your EQ changes to make shit sound different, you're looking for ways of getting rid of the shit that just doesn't matter.

I would rinse and repeat for the other keyboards.

[Fulcrum]

Good Lord, I completely forgot to mention that you don't want to be applying the EQs to those instruments out of context of the overall mix. I just assumed that you weren't soloing the channels first, which (Volt is correct) you don't want to do.

[volthause]

Fulcrum, that was weird. You must have posted while I was in the process of writing, because I didn't even see your post above mine. I was referring to Egan's post, although now that I re-read his post, it doesn't seem like he's suggesting making any concrete EQ adjustments in solo, just "fishing".

Anyhow. I'm a little slow today. :grin:

[pounce]

you guys already answered the question well, so i'm just here with coffee for volthouse and myself. cheers.

[Fulcrum]

Fulcrum, that was weird. You must have posted while I was in the process of writing, because I didn't even see your post above mine. I was referring to Egan's post, although now that I re-read his post, it doesn't seem like he's suggesting making any concrete EQ adjustments in solo, just "fishing".

Anyhow. I'm a little slow today. :grin:

No, actually, your post mentioned something mine didn't-- the reminder not to solo your tracks as you're EQing them. I took it for granted that TS wasn't soloing, so I said nothing.

And for all I know there's some n00b starting out who might be tempted to do that. (S)he should resist that temptation.

[andrew schaap]

well, since i'm a noob, can you tell me if the principle of applying eq within the mix pretty much applies across the board with all the different instruments when you're trying to create some space and clarity or is this just pretty much for keyboards?

[volthause]

well, since i'm a noob, can you tell me if the principle of applying eq within the mix pretty much applies across the board with all the different instruments when you're trying to create some space and clarity or is this just pretty much for keyboards?

I would suggest to never make concrete EQ choices while in solo, on any instrument.

[TubaSolo]

Thanks fellas. Duly noted and back to the mix.

Cheers!

[Skwaidu]

I would suggest to never make concrete EQ choices while in solo, on any instrument.

'tis funny. I seem to EQ a lot in solo... :icon_eek:

It's a freaky process that I seem to do often. I listen to the whole mix, some unsuspecting track grabs my attention... Somethings not right about it. Damn!

Well, I obviously grab the eq right away. Cut where it seems to offend and it's better... But I wanna get MORE. I wanna hear that mofo and see if I grabbed exactly the resonant sucky frequency or not. So I SOLO IT. Knowing pretty much exactly what I *want* to do but hearing the actual workings much more easily, I actually often end up applying drastic amounts of EQ in solo, checking the track in context and having to tweak it only by tiny amounts before it's like I wanted it in the first place... Freaky, ainnit?

(This with a disclaimer that I do buy the notion of being careful with applying anything when in solo... But I do feel that with experience, it's possible to maintain the big picture even if soloing a lot.)

[otek]

Like Skwaidu, I actually end up EQ'ing a lot in solo, too.

At the start of a mix, I usually go through the tracks one by one, fiddling with a basic EQ, sussing out where my problem areas are - while being fully aware that I may change it at any point later during the mix.

Then, if I hear something not working in mix, I will revisit my earlier EQ choices (again, sometimes in solo) - and many times find that I've made some really strange decisions, but at least I am more familiar with the track at that point, and what it's gonna do.

[eagan]

Reading the stuff since, including the point Volthause raised about EQ while soloing tracks, I'll clarify what I said.

I was definitely talking about doing what I described while listening to that particular instrument soloed.

But for folks following along interested in this, I probably should make it clear that this is only for the process of trying to clean and trim the sound of something, to get rid of the weeds and clear space for other things in the mix.

That's just that particular "cleanup" process. Not getting the overall EQ for the mix.

Now, myself, I will actually work on EQ for an instrument, for general tonal character, with that soloed at moments now and then, just because I find it easier to hear changes as I tweak. BUT, that's for maybe a few seconds of tweaking and then I bring back the full mix so I'm hearing things in context.

The process I described of subtractive EQ while listening soloed is only for cleaning out frequencies that don't contribute so much to the essential character of the instrument's sound, but clog up the mix when present. Don't look at what I suggested as part of the mix process, but rather more of a mix preparation process, like cleaning tracks and comping multiple takes and so on.

JLE

[volthause]

'tis funny. I seem to EQ a lot in solo... :icon_eek:


Like Skwaidu, I actually end up EQ'ing a lot in solo, too.


I think we'll all admit that at a certain point in your experience level, you learn where and when to break / bend / amend "rules" or "practices".

I think we'll all also admit that if someone actually has to ask if it's okay to EQ in solo, that person is not at that point yet. That's all I was really addressing.

Also I don't think I really said "don't EQ while in solo." I just said to not make concrete decisions while in solo. Perhaps that's splitting hairs though.

[nomad]

Don't forget that one of the best EQ's ever made is the MUTE button.

[Charles Dye]

You're looking for ways of getting rid of the shit that just doesn't matter.

That's the bottomline right there. Great advice, vh.

I call this focusing. IOW, when making room for all the parts in a full production, get rid of the frequencies on instruments you don't need, + keep or accentuate the essential elements of the sound that communicate the part in the final mix.

In solo a part can sound like @ss, but if it sounds great in the mix then you're golden.

In mixing... a "bad sound" can often sound great.

Great thread + lots of killer advice here.

Excellent posts everyone! :Thumbsup:

[mattian]

an example about something that sound bad in solo and great in the mix..

eqing in the mix i boost a lot a freq, maybe on kick, and it sounds great. but if i solo it i hear that it distorting, don't clipping the eq, or maybe meters don't says that, maybe i'm at -6 or less.. but it distorting because there's a distortion on the original sample that you can't hear, but you hear it if you are boosting a certain freq..

it's good or not?
what i mean is that distortion is ugly in solo, but you don't hear too much it in the mix.. but my fear is that it gives something bad somewhere even if the kick is really better with that great boost.

[Charles Dye]

The ONLY thing that matters is how it sounds in the mix.



The ONLY thing that matters is how it sounds in the mix.



The ONLY thing that matters is how it sounds in the mix.



:)

[mattian]

okayokay don't beat me ;)))

[elborgan]

Get him...... :Mad:


I think the 'don't EQ in solo' suggestion is only to stop people falling into the trap of making individual tracks sound the best they can and then move onto the next one. Once mixers get a bit of experience under their belt they soon realise that indivdual track can sound crap when solo'd.

(basically, what charles said up there ^. I hope this post doesn't get moved onto the next page or I'll look like a right tit!)

[mattian]

hihihi, yes i know, i've made this example because what i want to know is if more important also if in solo you hear some strange effect...

but yes.. in this period i'm listening careful at britney spears albums just to learn (oops i like her a lot) and i listen that a lot of times there are things (that i'm trying to listen individually) that distorting not always in a pleasant way.. but in the mix goes well, probably also thanks to the mastering..

[weedywet]

One daunting task I often run into when mixing is trying to improve the typical Rhodes/B3/Strings (or any similar three-keyboard-together) mushy situation, in order to have each instrument blending nicely without stepping on each other's toes.

Other than panning and a hipass cutoff @ 200hz, I'm pretty much in the dark... :Confused:

Would I like to know about your seasoned pros' dos, donts, hints & clues in terms of freq & Q? You bet! :grin:

TIA

do:
Arranging.

don't:
rolling off below 200 (unless there are no notes played there. i.e. an octave below A440)

[Ethan Winer]

Make people play less.

No kidding. When I used to record professionally (100 years ago), I recall a rock band with a ham-fisted piano player. Everything he played was big pounding chords centered in the octave below middle C. Well duh - That's why the bass sounds muddy and the mix is a boomy mess!

--Ethan