Who need an post module EQ to nail his tone?

[Mike P]

There IS NO "be all, end all" answer

Actually, there is.

Wow, thanks for including the ENTIRE quote. :roll:

There IS NO "be all, end all" answer to anything music related (and quite possibly, quantum physics).

Recording IS a science, so yes, there IS an "end all, be all".

But thanks for misquoting me.

 

[crankyrayhanky]

I've heard Mike's clips...I'd like to hear some clips from others utilizing their eq techniques.


eq= :twisted:

Cranky's out

 

[iekobrid]

There are too many absolutes and quasi-judgmental turns of phrase in this thread for my taste.

Would both sides be willing to agree upon a joint statement of: "Engineers ideally get the best tone possible before they roll 'tape', but since their studio time and gear selection is often limited, use of post-EQ (such as HPF to help instruments work together in a mix) is a fairly common studio technique." ?

 

[iekobrid]

But thanks for misquoting me.

Just pointing out that if Mojo's position is that there are no absolute right answers on this subject, he may have been arguing with the wrong guy.

 

[djd100]

Dude...

Console EQ is post EQ, 2 Buss EQ is post EQ, Mastering Engineer's use EQ on the mix, etc.

A HP Filter is EQ, and you even say you use them?

I don't question anything about you except for your misconceptions about EQ in general, and your mis-guided attempts to paint EQ as evil due to freq based phase shifts. There are young people here that might believe that BS. You really think you hear freq based phase shifts on a electric guitar track in the mix?

I'm not just talking only about EQ in a guitar rack, I'm talking about the entire record chain, most specifically console and plugin EQ on the tracks in question, comprende?

Why in the world should I even consider getting to a childish pissin' match with someone like you on an internet forum? I have more important things to do with my time, so good luck to you, and twist that console or plugin EQ on a guitar track just once for me LOL!

Ya'll might remember that just about every recorded guitar tone you've ever liked has been processed with post EQ (sometimes pre EQ too?), so use it if you need it (I do quite often live via the 4CM'd Axe FX Ultra in my rack, or via plugs/outboard when recording etc)!

Again, this is COMPLETELY untrue. "Just about every recorded tone", eh?

Wrong.

And who are YOU to question my engineering and production background, especially when my website and my name are listed on each and every post I make in this forum?

As a matter of fact, if anyone's credibility should be called into question, it's YOURS.

So, let's have it: Who are you, what studio gear do you own, how many major label releases have you engineered or produced, how many tracks do you have on air, etc. Please, tell us.

Oh, and why don't you provide some tracks for all of us to hear to better back up your claims?

 

[Mike P]

Dude...

Console EQ is post EQ, 2 Buss EQ is post EQ, Mastering Engineer's use EQ on the mix, etc.

Oh, just gimme a break.

You stated clearly that "nearly EVERY recorded tone you've heard has been EQ'd" and now you want to including Mastering EQ?

:?

First off, I'm not into 2 buss or mastering EQ. If you record your tracks correctly and choose the "right" mic, mic preamp, etc. for the job, mastering EQ is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, many artists in the past decade have chosen NOT to master their works.

And decades prior? EQing was up to the artist, producer and mastering engineer. But that's a far cry from stating that "every tone, blah, blah, blah".

I'm curious: How many releases have you heard pre-master? Which ones and how much difference did it make?

A HP Filter is EQ, and you even say you use them?

Depending on the source and the mic choice, a HPF is helpful to create space for other instruments. But that is NOT changing the fundamental tone of a an instrument, whether it's a guitar, bass, saxophone, etc., which is contrary to your original post.

I don't question anything about you except for your misconceptions about EQ in general, and your mis-guided attempts to paint EQ as evil due to freq based phase shifts. There are young people here that might believe that BS. You really think you hear freq based phase shifts on a electric guitar track in the mix?

Evil? No. Unnecessary? Yes.

Once again, if you choose the right mic, preamp, guitar, strings, pickups, etc., there should be absolutely NO reason to EQ and/or especially radically EQ a guitar for a "normal" mix (I'm not referring to a special effect such as a telephone, AM radio, etc.).

If you can't get a great tone to your DAW or tape with just a guitar and amp, then something has failed in your chain.

I'm not just talking only about EQ in a guitar rack, I'm talking about the entire record chain, most specifically console and plugin EQ on the tracks in question, comprende?

Once again, if a source is recorded properly with the mix in mind, little to no EQ is necessary. And "plugin EQ"? I own just about every plugin bundle ever made and I'd never use "plugin" EQ on guitars or bass. Yuck.

Why in the world should I even consider getting to a childish pissin' match with someone like you on an internet forum? I have more important things to do with my time, so good luck to you, and twist that console or plugin EQ on a guitar track just once for me LOL!

First off, you're the one that started this, by questioning MY credits while providing absolutely NONE of your own. Secondly, your statement was and still is unequivocally untrue.

Furthermore, I prefer to record my instruments properly and get the proper sounds while recording. It makes delivery of my masters much quicker and efficient, especially since I'm often times on a tight schedule.

And once again: Have you provided your credits and tracks? I'm not the only person who is curious to hear your work.

 

[djd100]

One last question Mike as I'm finished with this...

If you were mixing a song that for whatever reason needed a guitar track to be a little brighter, would you add a db or two with your console or plugin EQ, or would you reset the amp/cab/mic/pre and whatever else you used, turn up the amp's treble or presence knob, and reamp or rerecord etc?

Just curious is all?

No hard feelings Dude, have a good one!

 

[iekobrid]

Once again, if you choose the right mic, preamp, guitar, strings, pickups, etc., there should be absolutely NO reason to EQ and/or especially radically EQ a guitar for a "normal" mix (I'm not referring to a special effect such as a telephone, AM radio, etc.).

And if we were to also position the musicians, singer, and a stereo mic pair exactly right in the studio space there would be no reason to mix at all -- all the sounds would be perfectly balanced and we could record live straight to final delivery media. But how often does that happen?

 

[Mattfig]

OK, gotta ask...What's a Mensch? I get that it's a derogatory term but have never encountered it before...If it's good I would like to add it to my daily vocabulary...

Thanks!

 

[iekobrid]

I have no dog in this fight, really, it just irks me when absolutist terms like "proper" "incorrect" "wrong" or "fucked" are used when discussing methods of achieving subjective results. I would no more agree that there's a wrong way to get a great sounding guitar track than I would that there's a wrong way to pleasure a woman -- sure, we'd all prefer to be able to get the job done with just the equipment and instincts we were born with, but with each new client comes the possibility that delivering the desired product on time and under budget will call for fancy techniques and outboard gear. And I guarantee they would never react well to being told there's a problem with their signal chain. :lol:

 

[Mike P]

One last question Mike as I'm finished with this...

If you were mixing a song that for whatever reason needed a guitar track to be a little brighter, would you add a db or two with your console or plugin EQ, or would you reset the amp/cab/mic/pre and whatever else you used, turn up the amp's treble or presence knob, and reamp or rerecord etc?

Just curious is all?

No hard feelings Dude, have a good one!

Believe it or not, I'd adjust the amp and recut the tracks. But in all honesty, I suss all that stuff out once I get a new module or amp. I'll cut demos, then make notes in the Notes section of Nuendo. That way, I know exactly how to "Recall" a particular tone.

As I stated earlier, I'm usually under major time constraints. For example, I just received a call from an agency to score a commercial for a major brand. I'll get story boards in the morning. If I had to "tone chase"' I'd be hosed because they want an 8 hour turnaround.

It's particularly important when I have 10 guitars and four basses to choose from. I just don't have time to dilly-dally and don't care for post EQ, especially of the plugin variety.

 

[Mike P]

OK, gotta ask...What's a Mensch? I get that it's a derogatory term but have never encountered it before...If it's good I would like to add it to my daily vocabulary...

Thanks!

It's a Yiddish word for someone of high integrity, values, responsibility, etc. It's a very high compliment.

Of course in this case, it was used sarcastically.

 

[alowerdeep]

Interesting how things go and the differences in opinion...but in my experience I have noticed that if you have a good tone coming out of your amp and it is recorded properly you do not need any kind of eq and most engineers Ive read about,talked,or worked with have all said teh same thing....you do all of the eq'ing on the front end because you dont not want to have to do sigal alterations to any degreee when you mix and master..Ive noticed that over the years with amps as well,especially professional level amps.....99% of people I see live that use external eq's,soinc maximizers,aural exciters or other varoius tone enhancements do not have great tones,,,Im sure there may be exceptions to the rule,I just have yet to see any.....It sure is fun to play aorund and experiemnt with gadgets,but I have always come full circle and just dial in teh amp or said module accordingly....

 

[Mike P]

I have no dog in this fight, really, it just irks me when absolutist terms like "proper" "incorrect" "wrong" or "f&(%ed" are used when discussing methods of achieving subjective results. I would no more agree that there's a wrong way to get a great sounding guitar track than I would that there's a wrong way to pleasure a woman -- sure, we'd all prefer to be able to get the job done with just the equipment and instincts we were born with, but with each new client comes the possibility that delivering the desired product on time and under budget will call for fancy techniques and outboard gear. And I guarantee they would never react well to being told there's a problem with their signal chain. :lol:

I think that it's extremely difficult to back into a "great" recorded guitar tone.

The internet is littered with forums filled with people trying to achieve a great recorded tone. I know guys that are very good engineers and producers that really struggle to capture a guitarist's tone. And some of those people have sold tens of millions of records.

 

[iekobrid]

I think that it's extremely difficult to back into a "great" recorded guitar tone.

Agreed.

 

[Kapo_Polenton]

Kapo_Polenton, by clean boost do you mean before the amplifier? If you use it as a clean boost (without touching the EQ sliders, only the gain one) then you're not really using the EQ itself right?

DOD set right out in front of the amp. Believe it or not.. it sounds incredible. Let me get some clips up of it engaged then disengaged at some points and you'll see. It is a "coloration" tool not a "corrective" tool (then again color/correction..what do these things really mean??) Tube screamers also have their place here. Finally, the best sounding guitar is the guitar that sounds great in the mix..not necessarily the one that sounds best on an isolated track.

I can't believe we are actually arguing about EQ to this extent. I don't see EQ as a correction tool at all. It is (when used right), a creative tool. MikeP I'm afraid nobody is going to agree on this one. The reason being, everyone has a different ear. You might call Randy Rhoad's tone **** BUT it sounded good to someone. They added EQ to it afterwards to make it sound BETTER. This is not corrective in this sense.. this is creative. When you cut certain frequencies to make your guitars sit better in a mix you are applying what type of EQ? Creative or corrective?? Doesn't much matter. If not overused it is a great tool. Furthermore i may get flamed for this but as imperfect as some of the recording techniques were in the 80's, you will never hear tones like those again. While a lot of your clips sound great, with "corrective" or "creative" EQ, they might sound even BETTER to someone else's ear. There is a reason so many people chase Lynch's old tones.. Nuno's old tones etc.. etc... I guarantee that if we ask Michael Wagner if he used EQ on some clips or as part of his production I am pretty sure he'd say yes..... to make the guitars sit better in the mix which sometimes means adding some highs. There is no set play book for music creation.... everyone hears things differently. Dimebag Darrel used his furmans and EQ'd the **** out of his amps... it worked. There is no way this can be black and white. I do agree that you should strive to get the best tone you can from an amp and speaker but sometimes just that push in either direction via an EQ can make it even better.

 

[Kapo_Polenton]

Another thing.... while I do feel that dialing more treble in on an amp sounds more natural than using post EQ, I think we can all accept the fact that some players make EQ a definite part of their tone. VH with his MXR 6 band or GE-10.. Lynch STILL using that GE-10 on his board. Prior to the AFD amp, Slash was still using EQ pedals to boost the mids in his leads during the Use your Illusion stuff (not according to me, according to gear sites), Michel Shenker used to use the cock'ed wah. That is a form of EQ.. it works.

I declare this argument a tie! lol 8)

1. Dial in the best tone you can get from your amp ( the beauty of re-amping really if you want to go back and do it)

2. Apply EQ sparingly where you might need it.

3. As long as the artist is happy and people tell you the finished product kicks ***, your job is done.

4. Good luck getting killer REAL acoustic drum sounds from scratch without some EQ. That click on the kick drum doesn't just come from proper mic placement, microphones, and environment.

5. Nobody's recordings on here will be able to match Mike P's because A. his gear is better than most people's, B. he has experience.

 

[iekobrid]

For the record, I totally get what Mike was saying about post-EQ not really having a place in his personal process. He's optimized his workflow to the point that it would be more hindrance than help, the lucky *******. Lots of AEs would kill to have a familiar, finite set of instruments and amps available for every job instead of dealing with a new band each week trying to convince them they sound awesome playing whatever Guitar Center had in stock the day they went.

 

[Mike P]

Kapo_Polenton, by clean boost do you mean before the amplifier? If you use it as a clean boost (without touching the EQ sliders, only the gain one) then you're not really using the EQ itself right?

DOD set right out in front of the amp. Believe it or not.. it sounds incredible. Let me get some clips up of it engaged then disengaged at some points and you'll see. It is a "coloration" tool not a "corrective" tool (then again color/correction..what do these things really mean??) Tube screamers also have their place here. Finally, the best sounding guitar is the guitar that sounds great in the mix..not necessarily the one that sounds best on an isolated track.

I can't believe we are actually arguing about EQ to this extent. I don't see EQ as a correction tool at all. It is (when used right), a creative tool. MikeP I'm afraid nobody is going to agree on this one. The reason being, everyone has a different ear. You might call Randy Rhoad's tone s*&t BUT it sounded good to someone. They added EQ to it afterwards to make it sound BETTER. This is not corrective in this sense.. this is creative. When you cut certain frequencies to make your guitars sit better in a mix you are applying what type of EQ? Creative or corrective?? Doesn't much matter. If not overused it is a great tool. Furthermore i may get flamed for this but as imperfect as some of the recording techniques were in the 80's, you will never hear tones like those again. While a lot of your clips sound great, with "corrective" or "creative" EQ, they might sound even BETTER to someone else's ear. There is a reason so many people chase Lynch's old tones.. Nuno's old tones etc.. etc... I guarantee that if we ask Michael Wagner if he used EQ on some clips or as part of his production I am pretty sure he'd say yes..... to make the guitars sit better in the mix which sometimes means adding some highs. There is no set play book for music creation.... everyone hears things differently. Dimebag Darrel used his furmans and EQ'd the s*&t out of his amps... it worked. There is no way this can be black and white. I do agree that you should strive to get the best tone you can from an amp and speaker but sometimes just that push in either direction via an EQ can make it even better.

1. Hated Dimebag's "tone". Sounded like a solid state toy guitar amp. Personal preference (i.e., my opinion).
2. I don't know which "80's" tones you're referring to but they're easily attainable IF you use the SAME EXACT GEAR. It's not Rocket Science.
3. My "gear" has nothing to do with my recordings. I have tracks from the 80's, 90's and early 2000's using prosumer gear and far lesser gear than I have today and guess what: I sound exactly the same.

Finally, you guys can do whatever you want. I'm not judging. But I will say that it IS my opinion, which is backed by decades of experience, that IF you have the "right" guitar, pickups, bridge, cables, speaker cabinet, speaker and amp, there is no reason for outboard EQ UNLESS it's a creative choice. It's completely unnecessary to achieve a great tone.

I can't tell you how many pickups I've had in my '93 Premium Plus top Les Paul. 12 maybe? Three bridges? In my new Warmoth/Charvel, I went through two sets of pickups in a week. My '62 reissue Jazz Bass has had two bridges and three sets of pickups. Tone chasing isn't limited to just the amp or an EQ pedal or whatever. It starts with the instrument and goes down the line. As I've stated before, I've tried NINE different speakers in my Bogner and four in Randall Bass iso cab.

It wasn't an easy journey.

 

[Mike P]

For the record, I totally get what Mike was saying about post-EQ not really having a place in his personal process. He's optimized his workflow to the point that it would be more hindrance than help, the lucky *******. Lots of AEs would kill to have a familiar, finite set of instruments and amps available for every job instead of dealing with a new band each week trying to convince them they sound awesome playing whatever Guitar Center had in stock the day they went.

Thanks and I completely agree. I could never be an audio engineer or producer for anyone other than myself.

But I'm sure you guys didn't need me to tell you that!