EQ - small Q and complementing

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"David Grant" <jmd_2003@msn.com> wrote in message
news:RdydnRKwyIbpLZ7eRVn-ow@rogers.com
> I'm trying to hone my EQ skills and am having a hard time.
>
> Many guides suggest certain frequencies to EQ to achieve
> certain effects (though I understand these are totally
> subjective they're a good starting point for things to
> try).
> I keep reading (on potentially unreliable websites found
> through goggle) that it's usually best to make broadband
> cuts/boosts to signals except when notching out ringing.
> One guide suggested making it a goal to not use a Q
> greater than 1.4
> Suppose I have a guitar track which has some 200 - 250Hz
> mud in it that I want to EQ out. Suppose the guitar
> track is also masking my vocal so I want to cut at say
> 750Hz. If I'm using Q = 1.4 like suggested then I'm
> basically taking out the whole low end of the guitar...
> it seems more logical (and sounds better to me) to do
> more narrow band (Q = 6ish) work for stuff like this.

Use the highest Q (narrowest bandwidth) that gets the job
done.

Start out broad, and narrow and fine tune the center
frequency.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

David Grant wrote:
> I'm trying to hone my EQ skills and am having a hard time.
>
> Many guides suggest certain frequencies to EQ to acheive certain effects
> (though I understand these are totally subjective they're a good starting
> point for things to try).
>
> I keep reading (on potentially unreliable websites found through google)
> that it's usually best to make broadband cuts/boosts to signals except when
> notching out ringing. One guide suggested making it a goal to not use a Q
> greater than 1.4
>
> Suppose I have a guitar track which has some 200 - 250Hz mud in it that I
> wan't to EQ out. Suppose the guitar track is also masking my vocal so I want
> to cut at say 750Hz. If I'm using Q = 1.4 like suggested then i'm basically
> taking out the whole low end of the guitar... it seems more logical (and
> sounds better to me) to do more narrow band (Q = 6ish) work for stuff like
> this.
>
> Any comments?
>
> Dave
>
>

Dave, for rock/pop music especially, if it sounds good, do it, and to
hell with the rules. For classical or jazz or other stuff that's
supposed to have a certain sound, namely a really natural sound, you
might wanna stick to the lower-Q the better rule.....that said, in
general, if you're having to make large or dramatic EQ adjustments,
there is something wrong with the recording itself that needs to be
corrected. Good luck!

Jonny Durango