Re: [Jsonar] How to tell what frequency range on a band audio is in.

[Chris Belle]

Subtractive eqing takes a while to get your head around.
We tend to think of adding more,
I need more salt, more ketchup, it needs to be louder, bassier, etc 
and this psychology works against how our minds naturally want to go.

When you think of a sonic space and mixing, it's like a  house that 
used to be big enough, but you got so much junk in it that some stuff 
has to go, and other stuff has to be stacked better to make it fit.

And everything is relative, you measure how much bass there is 
against how much mids, or highs, what ever there is too much of, or 
not enough of tends to calibrate your ear.

So for instance, pulling the midrange out of a mid rangy sounding mix 
will make it fuller, and bigger sounding if there is any lows and 
highs in it at all, obviously this won't work on a mix where there is 
only midrange tones.

Pulling out junk you don't want so the junk you do want can stand out 
works a lot better than trying to boost the junk you do want over the 
too much junk you don't want.

Terrible grammar, but good engineering.


Eq is nothing more than fancy volume controls,
except you got volume control over each of the sections of 
frequencies, and with
the more advanced forms of eq you have control over where each band 
is, how wide it is, and what it does.

De-harshing midrange and making it sound pleasing can be a real art, 
it takes lots of listening, and yes,
in general the less eq you have to use the better, record it as close 
to how you want it to sound as you can, but for many reasons, that 
never happens in the real world, so that's why good eq techniques are 
so important.

And as with compression and lots of other processing functions, 
taking it in stages, and doing a little bit in stages along the way 
can avoid phasing problems, and runny filtering anomalies you get 
when really trying to push eq to the limit.

Usually, 6 bands of eq are plenty, but I have had situations where 12 
bands of parametric spread out over several buses has been needed to 
get me the sound I desire.

Not to mention when you got that great vocal take, but the singer 
moved just a bit and changed the sound, and you need to compensate 
for it with a little eq automation.

Those extra bands can come in really handy for that.

Some times you even want to change the tone of a vocal in different 
places in a track, say you want it nice and fat and full when the 
track is sparse, but you want more upper midrange to cut through the 
track when the music gets big, but just jacking up the volume won't 
do because the track is already pretty saturated on the low end, but 
you can hit the 4k range a couple of db, and now your vocal is riding 
right there on top of the mix,
when the guitar player is doing his best to drown her out 'grin'.

That's why I appreciate spartan minimal mixes so much, with modern 
stuff, it's mostly about getting shit out of the way so you can here 
other stuff when your supposed to.

Or splitting the different so everything can be heard some, but 
nothing really shines like it should, well, you know what I mean,
everything gets a fair shake.

it's a far cry from the old days of blue grass singers and players 
working around one mic, and moving in and out as needed.

And the tendency these days is to try and make everything sound huge, 
no matter what it is,
even with audio books, I think they put too much bass on the readers,
probably sounds ok on small speakers or ear buds, but on any decent 
speaker system, it's just too much,
I often roll off the bass when reading a book, I can read at lower 
volumes, and it cuts through any stray noise in the room better.


At 07:38 PM 7/12/2010, you wrote:
Yeah, that's where I have trouble; I seem to be a lot better at 
telling what frequencies need boosting than what needs cutting, 
which results in my tracks sounding rather harsh I think.
On 7/11/2010 3:20 PM, Mark Faben wrote:
Any audio sample, pretty much will cover a range of frequencies, E.G.,
a drum sample of a drum patturn will have high hats and cymbols at the
top end and kick down at the bottom, with snares and everything else
at various points in the middle; You will just get more used to being
able to roughly guess the frequency, even I can vaguely do this and
I've certainly not got perfect pitch. It depends a lot though what
your trying to achieve with the EQ; as I think others have said, its
better to cut than to boost where possible; removing unwanted
frequencies from a signal, rather than trying to boost a given
frequency in the sample too much.

E.G., you've got a bass line sample, but there is a overly heavy very
low frequency coming through, you could boost the higher frequencys
(though actually with Bass this will tend to make it sound 'Boxy'),
However, it works better generally to cut out some of the low end.

Similarly, if you read round on this, you'll read about complimentary
EQ use; in this you'll cut the frequency on one track, whilst boosting
it at the same frequency on another track; E.G., cutting out a bit of
a given frequency on the Bass line, in order to boost the same
frequency on the kick drum track, so it becomes more prominant in the
mix.

An easy thing to find the frequency is to use something like the track
EQ, set one band to on, and to 'peak/dip', then with the Q set quite
low, set the gain high, and sweep the Frequency from low to high (or
visa versa), and you can get into the frequency you want, or at least
find it.

With any sample/recorded track I'd tend to ensure it was as clean and
as good as possible to start with before rellying on EQ; If I record a
guitar part, and think its overly bassy, or overy trebbly etc., I'd be
more likely to go back and alter the settings on my guitar or pre-amp,
and then re-record it to get the sound as close as possible to how I
want, rather than trying to fix it in the mix...

Mark

On 11/07/2010, Drew<amock...@gmail.com>  wrote:

Audio exists at many different frequencies at once. I suppose the
question you're looking for is what's the dominant tone, in which case,
yeah, probably easiest to just use your ears. You can try twiddling the
EQ knobs at various areas and hearing the difference or lack of, but
that's rather time consuming and not all that accurate considering the
bands have frequency ranges and not specific frequencies as such. If you
need help honing them, try the Golden Ears series; there's pink noise
that gets boosted at various frequency levels so you can tell at what
pitch corresponds with what level.
On 7/11/2010 12:44 PM, Andy B. wrote:

Pre and Post? All I wanted to know was:

1. How do you tell in Sonar 8.5 what frequency level an audio clip was at,
or do you really need to use the ears to tell?
2. After Q1 was answered, I wanted to know if you should add fx first, or
clean up all the dry signals first?

Neither one of them were intended to create a fight at all. If Chris wants
to withold any or all of his info to create money for himself, that's his
business I guess. I don't think I would be interested in paying him, just
probing for a few answers here and there.

-----Original Message-----
From: jsonar-boun...@jsonar.org [mailto:jsonar-boun...@jsonar.org] On
Behalf
Of Drew
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2010 3:07 PM
To: i...@accessibilitytraining.co.uk; JSonar -- JAWS Scripts for Sonar
list
Subject: Re: [Jsonar] How to tell what frequency range on a band audio is
in.


This is all very fascinating, but I think the real important question
here is:

what's the difference between pre and post?
On 7/11/2010 11:15 AM, Phil Muir wrote:


Chris wrote: Ok, now that I've had a belly full of the crap, let's
just put things in perspective and lay them out on the table.

Phil replied: before you do I unreservedly apologise if I have said
anything that upset you.  I especially would like to apologise for
saying, "Chris, me thinks you may wish to take a little more time out
to study Sonar's architecture before posting inaccurate stuff like
this, especially if you're teaching students."  I was flat out wrong
to post that so, sorry.

However, I stand by my comment about being able to access all 6 bands
of the track/bus EQ in the track inspector which, I don't feel you
explained thoroughly.

Chris wrote: The real deal is that you just can't stand anyone having
a different idea about how to do things than you, I've seen it
displayed even with very gentle knowledgeable people, who never go toe
to toe with anyone, isn't mentioning any names, but I will say he's a
cubass user and uses another screen-reader than the all glorious holy
jaws 'grin'.

Phil replied: not about to get into talking about others who are not
on list and are therefore, not part of this discussion and not in the
position of answering for themselves as that's not fair.  I won't put
words in other peoples mouths if they aren't here to agree/disagree.
However, I will state that you and I did come to full agreement on a
separate issue with regard to components not being fully revealed by a
PC vender who builds PC's that came up on another list so, in spite of
what has been posted here, Chris and I do agree on things quite a lot.
Further more, Chris is using a PC built by another vender that I
recommended to Chris, a guy called Jim Roseberry over
at:

http://www.studiocat.com/

Chris wrote: You love to discredit me because you just can't stand it
that I charge half or less than you do, and give better value, and
I've stolen some of your students.

Phil replied: better value is always a debatable point.  If we weren't
doing something right then, clients wouldn't keep on coming back.
Sure, competition is a very good thing indeed.

Chris wrote: Competition buddy, I even put out friendly feelers to
work with you even giving you my first version of session drummer 3
but all I got from you was, oh, it's junk, I can do a better job of
it.

Phil replied: at no stage in the conversation with you Did I ever
state that.  What Chris wanted to do was offer that set to the freely
available HSC sets and that would be as Chris stated his "contribution
to  the cause."

Chris wrote: Well, mister know it all, that prompted me to make it
better and put it out myself, but thanks to people like Roy, and Tom
Kingston, and folks who aren't threatened by a little competition, and
who can work with others doing the same thing they are sometimes it
turned out just fine. I was even going to split profits with you, but
no, you couldn't be bothered.

Phil replied: this wasn't a conversation that I ever had with you so,
I think it's easy to state inaccuracies after the fact.

Chris wrote: Despite the brush-off, you still get free rain to
advertise, and share special stuff on my private list, and to your
credit, at least there, you don't act like such an know it all,
probably because you know the biggest brains are watching, I'm
privileged to have some such on the list.

But you need to quit it, whether you like it or not, there are other
ways of doing things, even with sonar, and some of them may work
better for some people than your sanctioned way, for instances,
trashing the idea, yes you did, of using more than one bus to get
extra eq, well, if we weren't supposed to use eq in this manner, why
is it there?

yes, you can turn on automation and record your moves, but why not do
precision snapshots, and why not put strategic eq in specific places
where it is needed, maybe behind a d s bus to help the d s processing.

And the ability to move it anywhere in the chain. Bet you never
thought of that, you just told me it was a wrong thing to do.

Phil replied: can't remember stating anything like that.

Chris wrote: Well, tell it to cakewalk sonar, they invented it, and
it's even mentioned in the help that the inspector pane is a useful
thing, even sighted people do things this way buddy.

Phil replied: yes, we all know that.

Chris wrote: so you loose 2 bands of eq, but you don't really because
you can always open up the plug-in, or use another bus, how ever suits
you best.

Phil replied: and that's my point.  At no point did you state that you
can still access all 6 bands of the track/bus EQ in the track
inspector.  If you had then, I wouldn't have posted anything on this
as there would have been no point.

Chris wrote: So talk about miss-leading people, my way of doing things
is accessible to all screen readers too, and hnot just your precious
hsc files, which don't work some of the time anyway, and yes, they
have errors in them too.

Phil replied: all software has bugs /errors.  There will be a massive
update for all free HSC sets coming out very shortly indeed which,
should hopefully address any current issues.  Those particular sets
shall remain free. Talking of which, Chris, got anything HSC or
otherwise that you would "like to contribute to the cause?"

Chris wrote: So just admit, you can't stand any competition, and you
have it easy, because your little sighted wife shows you everything
going on on the screen,

Phil replied: I am not about to make any disparaging comments about
anyone's family members as that's way below the belt.  I will say this
though, any sighted help that I do have is extremely limited and I too
have to spend a lot of time, coaming the screen for buttons etc as you
do.

Chris wrote: I don't begrudge you that, but I bet you couldn't get as
far without your built in eyes as some of us have by ourselves.

Phil replied: wild speculation on you're part.  The fact is that we
would all get a lot further with all of this stuff with sighted help.

Chris wrote: Not that that's a big deal, but it's worth mentioning
when you feel it necessary to pull others down to make yourself look
better.

Phil replied: well it's obviously a big deal to you.  Wasn't me who
mentioned it.

Chris wrote: I think that's even been said to you on list by someone,
even recently, it might have been by the same friendly humble
non-offensive cubass user

I have never but lifted you up and even encouraged people to use you
for tutoring when I couldn't do it,k or even if i thought you might be
better at something, for instance, with hsc, you are undisputedly the
king.

But you are so insecure, you have to slam me publically, and can not
pay equal respect.

Phil replied: as you well know, I have posted publicaly before about
how much respect I have for you.

Chris wrote: Well, not supprisingly when the going got tough you
couldn't even stand up for your own faith, choosing to be politically
correct instead of just correct.

Most on here won't know what I'm talking about, but you sure will
Philly boy.

Phil replied: I am not about to defend my faith here as 1, it's not
the place and 2, people who really know me, know exactly where I stand
on that so, no need to defend anything.

Chris wrote: So whether I get kicked off her for calling you out or
now, I'm not putting up with it anymore,\ if you think I'm not right,
and really not right, yes, i can accept correction, and I'll be the
first to say, hey, my bad, I said something wrong.

Phil replied: as I stated before, you didn't cover the fact that you
can access all 6 bannds in the track/bus EQ from within the track
inspector.

Chris wrote: But this was just plane lame, and just flinging a pile of
crap there was nothing technically wrong in what I stated.

Because setting your options to open a plug-in and or manually
insertintg it amounts to just about the same thing, in the inspector
pane you get 4 and in the plug-in you get 6, and that was my point.

Phil replied: again you miss stated the facts.  You can access all 6
bands of the track/bus EQ in the track inspector which you did not
state.  Plus, you can switch the Track/Bus EQ from pree to post in the
track inspector which, could be another good reason for using that
over inserting a separate EQ such as the Sonitus EQ.

Chris wrote: So in an edited version of my little brother Damon's
famous nhb radio salutation, f you, f you, and f you again.

Phil replied: That was edited?  Seriously though, it's possible to bhe
eliquent without having to stoop to using the F word.  May you have a
blessed day.

Chris wrote: Thank you for the in put of your giant brain.

Phil replied: It's the same size as everyone elses brain.

Chris wrote; No body knows as much as the great mighty Muure.

Phil replied: why thank you!  Seriously though, I sure don't know
everything.  Every day's a school day and if I don't know something
then, I will be up front and say that.


Regards, Phil Muir
Accessibility Training
Telephone: US (615) 713-2021
UK +44-1747-821-794
Mobile: UK +44-7968-136-246
E-mail:
i...@accessibilitytraining.co.uk<mailto:i...@accessibilitytraining.co.>>>> 
uk>
URL:
http://www.accessibilitytraining.co.uk/


_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at
jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org



_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org


_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org
http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org



_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org
http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org






_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org
http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org




        WARNING!!!

This email could contain innocent phrases which, if taken out of 
context, or read from an existing inclination to be hostile, or an 
overly politically correct world view could induce cursing, abusive 
language, or other indications of less than desirable behavior in a 
public venue.
No ill will is intended.
The sender takes no responsibility for mis-interpretation or 
otherwise extrapolated extended meaning, intent, or purposes implied 
or imagined from said phrases.
The receiver of any such email containing such phrases is solely 
responsible for good
interpretation and intelligent deployment of subsequent responses to 
the above communication.


_______________________________________________
Find JSonar and Sonar FAQs, articles, guides and downloads at jsonar.org.

Jsonar mailing list
Jsonar@jsonar.org
http://jsonar.org/mailman/listinfo/jsonar_jsonar.org