Page 1 of 2
General EQing reference
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:04 pm
by c03
useful thread about EQing on idmforums.com
http://www.idmforums.com/showthread.php?t=11466
General:
20 Hz and below - impossible to detect, remove as it only adds unnecessary energy to the total sound, thereby most probably holding down the overall volume of the track
60 Hz and below - sub bass (feel only)
80(-100) Hz - feel AND hear bass
100-120 Hz - the "club sound system punch" resides here
200 Hz and below - bottom
250 Hz - notch filter here can add thump to a kick drum
150-400 Hz - boxiness
200 Hz-1.5 KHz - punch, fatness, impact
800 Hz-4 KHz - edge, clarity, harshness, defines timbre
4500 Hz - exteremly tiring to the ears, add a slight notch here
5-7 KHz - de-essing is done here
4-9 KHz - brightness, presence, definition, sibilance, high frequency distortion
6-15 KHz - air and presence
9-15 KHz - adding will give sparkle, shimmer, bring out details - cutting will smooth out harshness and darken the mix
loads more detail about EQing kicks/vocals/guitars etc on the actual thread
Re: General EQing reference
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:14 pm
by Brisance
C03 wrote:
4500 Hz - exteremly tiring to the ears, add a slight notch here
Tried boosting it on a track, fuck it's so correct, added a notch and everything sounded a lot more pleasant.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:17 pm
by r
not a surprise... that freq is the freq of speaking. We're so sensitive for that freq cause we hear it everyday. that's why you dont need to boost it that much. Our ears already boost it naturally. Also a reason why you dont need to boost claps/snaps that much
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:34 pm
by teqh
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:38 pm
by dexdur
nice thread
Re: General EQing reference
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:47 pm
by martello
Brisance wrote:C03 wrote:
4500 Hz - exteremly tiring to the ears, add a slight notch here
Tried boosting it on a track, fuck it's so correct, added a notch and everything sounded a lot more pleasant.
I'v never used this knowingly, but I find myself always cutting a little bit at 5000 Hz and also at 500 Hz.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:51 pm
by futures_untold
PM Daft tnuc for it to be added to the Forum Production Bible!
Good work!
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:55 pm
by caeraphym
Well done for bringing that over here, idmforums is a wicked place with some great knowledge stowed away between it's boards.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:11 pm
by macc
R wrote:not a surprise... that freq is the freq of speaking. We're so sensitive for that freq cause we hear it everyday. that's why you dont need to boost it that much. Our ears already boost it naturally. Also a reason why you dont need to boost claps/snaps that much
If someone is speaking at 4.5k then they obviously took a very hard kick in the nuts.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:21 pm
by martello
Average male voice audio spectrum power peaks near 500 Hz. Average male voice power is 10dB lower at 130 Hz and 1800 Hz than at 500 Hz. It is typically 20dB lower than peak at 65 Hz and 5000 Hz. Average female voice audio spectrum power peaks near 700 Hz. Average female voice power is 10dB lower at 300 Hz and 2500 Hz than at 700 Hz. It is typically 20dB lower than peak at 140 Hz and 5200 Hz.
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/recordi ... /89021.jpg
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:38 pm
by Pallms
Bookmarked... this is great! Thanks for bringing it here!
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:40 pm
by r
Macc wrote:R wrote:not a surprise... that freq is the freq of speaking. We're so sensitive for that freq cause we hear it everyday. that's why you dont need to boost it that much. Our ears already boost it naturally. Also a reason why you dont need to boost claps/snaps that much
If someone is speaking at 4.5k then they obviously took a very hard kick in the nuts.
u mean females ? lol !
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:04 pm
by macc
In the minge then, whatever
4.5k is the (or, an) area for sibilance, not true speech
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:07 pm
by ELLFIVEDEE
Very handy!
Thanks very much
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:10 pm
by macc
Depone wrote:
isn't 3-5khz the most sensitive hearing range, as its within the human speech range?
The ear is very sensitive there (see fletcher munson) for intelligibility, but it's not where the main energy is transmitted in speech (see above quote)
I *think* (I read once) it's related to danger/detection response, something like that.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:11 pm
by paradigm_x
you might be interested to know that the ear is most sensitive to around 1k-2k, because thats the fundamental of baby's screaming (evolution - protect the young).
edit - obv a theory, not provable - but true.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:12 pm
by paradigm_x
oh and speech frequencies are around 500-2k depending on age and sex.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:12 pm
by __________
what about Barry White? 100hz business there, surely?
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:12 pm
by caeraphym
Macc wrote:Depone wrote:
isn't 3-5khz the most sensitive hearing range, as its within the human speech range?
The ear is very sensitive there (see fletcher munson) but it's not where the main energy is transmitted in speech (see above quote)
I *think* (I read once) it's related to danger/detection response, something like that.
Yes...
Something to do with babies crying too maybe, ie: they're always loud and annoying, but without that correlation back in the day when we was wild, the lions would've gotten rather fat from eating said babies.
