Bassline EQing issue

[Greg Dee]

so i have this problem. I'm trying to EQ a bass sample so that the 200-1000hz zone is pumped, and i cant accomplish this purely with the EQ. Instead im using a high pass filter with the freq cut pegged to the absolute minimum and the resonance about 80% of the way up, and a low pass filter with the frequency cut at the absolute minimum, with no resonance. This seems to work ok in getting the sound i want out of the sample, but it lacks punch in the frequency range im trying to accentuate. Pumping up the EQ gives me distortion from the hp filter's resonance. How do i get more punch and drive out of my sample without having this resonance distortion? If anyone has the slightest idea of where to start, thank you in advance. this s*** is driving me nuts!

:doh:

[RDR]

Just a few ideas.

1. Attenuate means to reduce, not boost as i think you meant?

2. Remove the frequencies you dont want rather than attempting to boost those you do.

3. Lower the other parts in volume

4. Look at your other parts to see if there is something interfering in the same part of the frequency domain

5. Reduce the rez on your filters, no doubt this is reducing available headroom and is certainly distorting the frequencies you wanted to leave clean.

6. Also why cant you properly accomplish this with EQ? which eq are you using? Hope it is a quality one.

7. what sort of quality is the sample you are using? HQ?

if i get any more ideas ill write em down.

[Evil G]

good points all. some compression would probably help as well.

[loopdon]

waves maxxbass? :eh:

saturation?


dist + followed by a lowpass to add charakter?

[rounser]

Could try GRM Tools Spectral Transform's Contrast plug. If you set it maxxed out, it'll flatline your EQ as much as is possible for the sample you're using (i.e. it'll turn your sample into a wall'o'sound across the spectrum as much as it can, sort of like an EQ version of compression, but not recommended if you want the result to sound clean). You can then carve away at the thing with another EQ plug down the chain.

[loopdon]

aaah, thanks, rounser, luv tipps like that :love:

[rounser]

No worries mate...I was all :shock: when I discovered what that plugin could do.

An equaliser that literally equalises frequencies, automatically...who'da thunk it?

[loopdon]

voxengo soniformer does sumething like that as well, i.e. (re-)balancing the spectrum. ;)

[rounser]

Heh, it seemed too useful a feature to be unique. Will go have a gander.

EDIT: Think I'm too impatient and/or dumb to use Soniformer, seems to require a degree in compression rocket science, and low on the all important "instant gratification" factor... ;)

[Greg Dee]

thanks for the tips guys. looks like i have this sorted now. i used a subtractive EQing technique and it worked beautifully.

[pedrod]

to best bring out your bass with EQ try bringing out the frequency of the chromatic pitch of the key you are working in

ie .. If you track is in C try raising the frequency at exactly 32.70Hz or 65.41Hz

These are what top producers call magic frequencies

I dont have a chart at hand, but you will find one if you look around on the net

[Milesy]

am i not correcting in thinking that the 200-1000hz is
a very muddy zone for bass ?

i usually cut about 700hz and then a small boost about 100/150
for bass and it sounds quite nice. then put it through the delta filter
low pass filter for a bit more roundness and phatness

[Basil Rush]

to best bring out your bass with EQ try bringing out the frequency of the chromatic pitch of the key you are working in

ie .. If you track is in C try raising the frequency at exactly 32.70Hz or 65.41Hz

These are what top producers call magic frequencies

I dont have a chart at hand, but you will find one if you look around on the net

Theres a chart in the front of a book called Mastering Audio by Bob Katz (which is an amazing book as well)

[acidsaturation]

Good tips...

to add my t'penworth...

The idea of using the filter to get a good bass sound by whacking up the resonance at the low end is quite a cool one. I do that occasionally doubling up the bassline, one with a hi pass filter and one with a lo pass filter, at one of the magic frequenicies (often done by ear though). Leaned this form DJ Glowbones, who learnt it form Sol Ray.

But... what is important is to tame this with compression and that it's an effect, not part of the EQ process.

[loopdon]

to best bring out your bass with EQ try bringing out the frequency of the chromatic pitch of the key you are working in

ie .. If you track is in C try raising the frequency at exactly 32.70Hz or 65.41Hz

These are what top producers call magic frequencies

I dont have a chart at hand, but you will find one if you look around on the net

Theres a chart in the front of a book called Mastering Audio by Bob Katz (which is an amazing book as well)


anyone able and willing to put a scan up?

[Milesy]

heres some nice tables for EQ'ing i use :love:

http://www.computermusic.co.uk/tutorial/eq/2.asp

[dan the acid man]

heres some nice tables for EQ'ing i use :love:

http://www.computermusic.co.uk/tutorial/eq/2.asp

wow, great link, cheers ;)

[acidsaturation]

Just found this with a quick google:

http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~suits/notefreqs.html

Frequencies for equal-tempered scale
A4 = 440 Hz

("Middle C" is C4 )

Note Frequency (Hz)
C0 16.35
C#0/Db0 17.32
D0 18.35
D#0/Eb0 19.45
E0 20.60
F0 21.83
F#0/Gb0 23.12
G0 24.50
G#0/Ab0 25.96
A0 27.50
A#0/Bb0 29.14
B0 30.87
C1 32.70
C#1/Db1 34.65
D1 36.71
D#1/Eb1 38.89
E1 41.20
F1 43.65
F#1/Gb1 46.25
G1 49.00
G#1/Ab1 51.91
A1 55.00
A#1/Bb1 58.27
B1 61.74
C2 65.41
C#2/Db2 69.30
D2 73.42
D#2/Eb2 77.78
E2 82.41
F2 87.31
F#2/Gb2 92.50
G2 98.00
G#2/Ab2 103.83
A2 110.00
A#2/Bb2 116.54
B2 123.47
C3 130.81
C#3/Db3 138.59
D3 146.83
D#3/Eb3 155.56
E3 164.81
F3 174.61
F#3/Gb3 185.00
G3 196.00
G#3/Ab3 207.65
A3 220.00
A#3/Bb3 233.08
B3 246.94
C4 261.63
C#4/Db4 277.18
D4 293.66
D#4/Eb4 311.13
E4 329.63
F4 349.23
F#4/Gb4 369.99
G4 392.00
G#4/Ab4 415.30
A4 440.00
A#4/Bb4 466.16
B4 493.88
C5 523.25
C#5/Db5 554.37
D5 587.33
D#5/Eb5 622.25
E5 659.26
F5 698.46
F#5/Gb5 739.99
G5 783.99
G#5/Ab5 830.61
A5 880.00
A#5/Bb5 932.33
B5 987.77
C6 1046.50
C#6/Db6 1108.73
D6 1174.66
D#6/Eb6 1244.51
E6 1318.51
F6 1396.91
F#6/Gb6 1479.98
G6 1567.98
G#6/Ab6 1661.22
A6 1760.00
A#6/Bb6 1864.66
B6 1975.53
C7 2093.00
C#7/Db7 2217.46
D7 2349.32
D#7/Eb7 2489.02
E7 2637.02
F7 2793.83
F#7/Gb7 2959.96
G7 3135.96
G#7/Ab7 3322.44
A7 3520.00
A#7/Bb7 3729.31
B7 3951.07
C8 4186.01
C#8/Db8 4434.92
D8 4698.64
D#8/Eb8 4978.03

[jesus]

yeah ive got about 5 of these all slightly different , not sure which one to use.

[acidsaturation]

Pick one as a guide, and then trust yr ears...

[rounser]

This could be a useful tool for determining what "magic frequencies" to bring out:
http://audioto.com/webhelp/mainwin.gif
Although it's an Audio-to-MIDI application, I don't put tracks through it - rather for visually determining what key samples are in, such as what note the pitch of a noisey bass drum or snare is playing, or what notes make up an obscure sounding chord (if your ears can't really tell). The equaliser doesn't work except in altering the display of the analyzer, but may be useful in judging where to sweep on a real eq.
http://audioto.com/

[pedrod]

yeah ive got about 5 of these all slightly different , not sure which one to use.

The one Acid Saturation has picked is the correct one (Dont have my chart with me)

Dont pick one at Random though - Find out what key your track is in (Or at least your main key of your bass!) then ..

try the different pitches for that key - you will be surprised I guarantee

If you have Waves Plug's - the best tool for the job is RBass .. pick the frequency and off you go

OK - thats my bit to the forum .. Im going to keep my mouth shut now .. If everyone comes up with top basslines .. Ill be out of a job

:rambo:

[pedrod]

[quote="Milesy"]am i not correcting in thinking that the 200-1000hz is
a very muddy zone for bass ?

YES you are errmm not correct !!!

Muddy with what?! it can only be as muddy as the stuff it clashes with

you need a bit of that range with your bass !

[Milesy]

easy mate.. only asking a question.. what i read about bass
it always says to cut that frequency...
off your high horse cowboy.. no need for drama

[pedrod]

Hi mate

The answer was not at all being funny, far from it..

High horse ?? lol (eerrrrooohhhhh someones a bit narky!).. I simply letting you know that you need a bit in that range (And the only muddiness that comes is if it clashes with other sounds in the same dynamic range! .. If you read it again, you will read there's no pun in there at all.

Of course you dont have to listen, but im guessing the whole idea of this section of this forum is for giving advice on what you know and listening to what other people have to say! (Thats why I visit it - albeit not often! when I find 5 mins spare!)

As I said I dont have much time to fit everything in as I would like to, so some answers I may give on forums are not that lengthy (Apart from this one!), so you get short answers ..

As for reading that about cutting the range for bass! I personally have never heard that! Some of my bassliness hit the whole range of frequencies possible, as I said in my original reply, they only make it muddy if it clashes with something else.. If if you dont have a slight bass sort of sound in your mid range that alone will make you track sound low and muddy!

In a way yes .. It does need to be cut (but not all of it!) you need to have a high definition in your bass for it to sound right. Sometimes I find it best to layer your bass sounds. Ie have 2 ..One cut really low and one with a bit more mid range! (Having this mid range on your bass really does define the whole track)

Now then back to your original question.. You asked a question I simply answered, theres nothing funny with my reply at all!.. ohhh yes , but I do love drama

haha High Horse? what horse? (I think youll find that giving advice on a forum like this is far from that my friend! I give advice wherever I can, is that

Of course you dont have to take advice from people, and you can as you so wish be as ignorant as you want too, its your choice!

ENJOY LIFE

Must dash, someones in reception to pick me up - hope my spelling is ok . dont have time to check it .. chow

[loopdon]

Thanx pedro!!!

Great to have you here, m8! good advice!

on topic:

Obviously one can do some filtering to a bassline, i.e. hipass from say 40 Hz on or something and possibly limiting its range, say rolling of from 1 Kz on or so. i think it can leave some space for perx etc., if there's not much more than the bassline to your tune then that's a different topic.

some people split their basslines in two or three regions, one for the sub maybe, left very mono, maybe some chorus on the midrange bass or so and so on.

I think one can't make a general statement, it all depends on what's going on next to your bassline and what space is occupied by that. very simply put, if you have a deep kick, use a lighter bass (hipass/lowshelf) and vice versa.

maybe have a go at waves maxxbass as well and see if that worx for you.

[Evil G]

i prefer waves renaissance bass to maxx bass, tbh. but i suppose they wouldn't have made two different plugs if they aren't suited to different purposes.

[geelist]

heres some nice tables for EQ'ing i use :love:

http://www.computermusic.co.uk/tutorial/eq/2.asp


very helpful, thank you

[MARKEG]

This could be a useful tool for determining what "magic frequencies" to bring out:
http://audioto.com/webhelp/mainwin.gif
Although it's an Audio-to-MIDI application, I don't put tracks through it - rather for visually determining what key samples are in, such as what note the pitch of a noisey bass drum or snare is playing, or what notes make up an obscure sounding chord (if your ears can't really tell). The equaliser doesn't work except in altering the display of the analyzer, but may be useful in judging where to sweep on a real eq.
http://audioto.com/

that's absolutely brilliant. thanks!!! :clap:

[RDR]

In a way yes .. It does need to be cut (but not all of it!) you need to have a high definition in your bass for it to sound right.


DRUNKEN RAMBLING....START...
.
Pedro is right.

the reason relates to a slight distortion in the mid range. irritating the upper harmonics of a bass track creates frequencies which are better at being heard by human ears. this can be achieved through OD or DIST. but not in the sub 200 hz range


also someone said earlier on that muddy is a certain range. it really depends on where your EQ'ing sits. There are certain frequencies that make a human ears react in certain ways. I cant give you a list cos i dont have time but i know that 1khz is the most piercing (BTW most of the UK lighthouses now emit a 1khz test tone for 2-3seconds rather than a 100hz tone, as was before - i work in bridlington, believe me its fucing hideous..)
and 250hz makes things, especially bass sound 'honky.'

as with everything in EQ, if you want to boost a frequency, dont boost, cut tghe other stuff away, prune! boost only a little bit..

DRUNKEN RAMBLINGS...END...

[rounser]

as with everything in EQ, if you want to boost a frequency, dont boost, cut tghe other stuff away, prune! boost only a little bit..
It would be nice if an EQ with some sort of "makeup gain" existed. i.e. the more you prune, the more the gain bumps itself up a little bit to compensate.

EDIT: Actually no, I take it back - that's a dumb idea. It would just create more illusions if you didn't push up the slider yourself.


that's absolutely brilliant. thanks!!!
NP :)

[j_s]

In a way yes .. It does need to be cut (but not all of it!) you need to have a high definition in your bass for it to sound right.


DRUNKEN RAMBLING....START...
.
Pedro is right.

the reason relates to a slight distortion in the mid range. irritating the upper harmonics of a bass track creates frequencies which are better at being heard by human ears. this can be achieved through OD or DIST. but not in the sub 200 hz range


also someone said earlier on that muddy is a certain range. it really depends on where your EQ'ing sits. There are certain frequencies that make a human ears react in certain ways. I cant give you a list cos i dont have time but i know that 1khz is the most piercing (BTW most of the UK lighthouses now emit a 1khz test tone for 2-3seconds rather than a 100hz tone, as was before - i work in bridlington, believe me its fucing hideous..)
and 250hz makes things, especially bass sound 'honky.'

as with everything in EQ, if you want to boost a frequency, dont boost, cut tghe other stuff away, prune! boost only a little bit..

DRUNKEN RAMBLINGS...END...

sorry to be a pedantic bastard but the human ear is most sensitive to freqs around 3khz.

[j_s]

as with everything in EQ, if you want to boost a frequency, dont boost, cut tghe other stuff away, prune! boost only a little bit..
It would be nice if an EQ with some sort of "makeup gain" existed. i.e. the more you prune, the more the gain bumps itself up a little bit to compensate.


that's absolutely brilliant. thanks!!!
NP :)

that would be safe as ****.

however, the extra cpu use against the effort it would take to adjust the fader might not not be favourable...

[RDR]

In a way yes .. It does need to be cut (but not all of it!) you need to have a high definition in your bass for it to sound right.


DRUNKEN RAMBLING....START...
.
Pedro is right.

the reason relates to a slight distortion in the mid range. irritating the upper harmonics of a bass track creates frequencies which are better at being heard by human ears. this can be achieved through OD or DIST. but not in the sub 200 hz range


also someone said earlier on that muddy is a certain range. it really depends on where your EQ'ing sits. There are certain frequencies that make a human ears react in certain ways. I cant give you a list cos i dont have time but i know that 1khz is the most piercing (BTW most of the UK lighthouses now emit a 1khz test tone for 2-3seconds rather than a 100hz tone, as was before - i work in bridlington, believe me its fucing hideous..)
and 250hz makes things, especially bass sound 'honky.'

as with everything in EQ, if you want to boost a frequency, dont boost, cut tghe other stuff away, prune! boost only a little bit..

DRUNKEN RAMBLINGS...END...

sorry to be a pedantic bastard but the human ear is most sensitive to freqs around 3khz.

Mammals are unique in having three ear bones. The incus and stapes are derived from bones of the jaw, and allow finer detection of sound.

These bones form the linkage between the tympanic membrane and the oval window that leads to the inner ear. The tympanum turns vibrations of air in the ear canal into vibrations of the ossicles. The ossicles in turn transmit the vibrations through the membrane of the oval window into the fluid of the inner ear. The ratio in area between the tympanic membrane and the oval window results in an effective amplication of approximately 14 dB, peaking at a frequency of around 1 kHz. The combined transfer function of the outer ear and middle ear gives humans a peak sensitivity to frequencies between 1 kHz and 3 kHz. The tensor tympani muscle and stapedius muscle of the inner ear contract in response to loud sounds, reducing the transmission of sound to the inner ear. This is called the acoustic reflex.

So what is the right answer then?

this is the link i got this from..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear

sorry to be so pedantic too... ;) :lol:

[loopdon]

what you all on about :shock:

just joking :twisted:

[RDR]

im being serious... ;)












































Sorta... :neutral:

[j_s]

Mammals are unique in having three ear bones. The incus and stapes are derived from bones of the jaw, and allow finer detection of sound.

These bones form the linkage between the tympanic membrane and the oval window that leads to the inner ear. The tympanum turns vibrations of air in the ear canal into vibrations of the ossicles. The ossicles in turn transmit the vibrations through the membrane of the oval window into the fluid of the inner ear. The ratio in area between the tympanic membrane and the oval window results in an effective amplication of approximately 14 dB, peaking at a frequency of around 1 kHz. The combined transfer function of the outer ear and middle ear gives humans a peak sensitivity to frequencies between 1 kHz and 3 kHz. The tensor tympani muscle and stapedius muscle of the inner ear contract in response to loud sounds, reducing the transmission of sound to the inner ear. This is called the acoustic reflex.

So what is the right answer then?

this is the link i got this from..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear

sorry to be so pedantic too... ;) :lol:

Haha. fair play. guess the actual figure lies somewhere between the 2......

[RDR]

i also wonder if the human ear can get tired as in a temporary threshold shift whether it would be worth investigating how to overcome this shift.

Also how long does it take to recover the ear? how long does it take for the ear to reduce in effectiveness to certain frequencies...

psycho acoustics... etc etc, big field, lotsa scientists not sure i can handle it.

[Evil G]

i also wonder if the human ear can get tired as in a temporary threshold shift whether it would be worth investigating how to overcome this shift.

Also how long does it take to recover the ear? how long does it take for the ear to reduce in effectiveness to certain frequencies...

psycho acoustics... etc etc, big field, lotsa scientists not sure i can handle it.

i've read that the human ear does have something like a trim that is automatically turned down whenever we hear something really loud. not sure what time scale it operates under, but they do say that hard panning of really loud parts (like kick drums) is a no-no because when using headphones, the quiet on one side can confuse you and make both ears go into high gain mode, then the loud part on the other side blasts you because your ears should be in low gain mode. hearing damage can result.

another interesting but probably useless tidbit - the distance between our ears and shoulders is said to play a part in why we hear best betweeen 1 and 3khz. those frequencies are apparently amplified by bouncing off our shoulders on the way to our ears. also, the human voice lies in this range, so it seems natural from an evolution standpoint that we hear each other better than we hear other sounds. great for things like coordinating an attack on a heard of mammoths. but i digress.... :crackup:

[Milesy]

yeah thats something most dj's know well...
always carefull with the monitors or earphones cause
ive done it too many times where it seems like its
getting less volume and i have to keep increasing
the volume... :nono: if i notice the volume dipping
i put the volume right down and then raise a little
after a while

[Ritzi Lee]

I'm really interested in a substractive EQ system / plugin.
Maybe some people at Ableton can implement this.

On the other side, it wouldn't be an art anymore to achieve a nice clean mix.

[RDR]

I'm really interested in a substractive EQ system / plugin.
Maybe some people at Ableton can implement this.

On the other side, it wouldn't be an art anymore to achieve a nice clean mix.

Agreed. I think ill stick to my EQ of much mystery!

[j_s]

I'm really interested in a substractive EQ system / plugin.
Maybe some people at Ableton can implement this.

On the other side, it wouldn't be an art anymore to achieve a nice clean mix.

i've never really considered mixing to be much of an art form. of course there is some creativity involved, but to me, levelling and eqing has always seemed to be more of a technical excercise.....

[Basil Rush]

Nah - it's blatantly an art, otherwise it'd be easy :)

I mean there's a hell of a lot of craft thrown in too but you can change a lot of things in a mix and a track can sound good in many different ways.