Heavy Guitar - Taming Low-Mids with MBC or DynEQ

[Mustang Martigan]

I was reading an article about using Multiband Compression to tame the low-mids on layered heavy guitar tracks. Something along the lines of setting the MBC to engage from 90-350Hz. Can this also be done using a Dynamic Equalizer that's set to a frequency in between 90-250Hz, with a large enough bell to cover that spectrum?

I don't have a MBC, just a DynEq, which is why I ask. Thanks,

[Nick Sevilla]

Hi,

Before doing ANYTHING to any "heavy guitar", you must read this.

http://badmuckingfastard.com/sound/slipperman.html

Then mess with it.

[Nick Sevilla]

Now,
Once you've read the above link, thorought understanding it, you may proceed.

1. How MANY guitars are in this layer? It is not a cake.

2. 90Hz to 350Hz is a whole Universe of hell. What NOTES are they actually playing? I am assuming they are
playing "power chords"? If so, you need to eq AROUND those two notes. Carve out a little of the NOT NOTES frequencies.

3. The amplification, what is it DOING??? Is it actually helping, or hurting the heaviness? Distorting heavy guitars is a Black Art.

4. As this is a Black Art, have you done the proper sacrifices to your local Dark God of Heavy Guitar??? DO NOT DELAY!!!

4. What EQ you use is important, but only after you actually pinpoint the issues.

[Mustang Martigan]

Once you've read the above link, thorought understanding it, you may proceed.

Rad. That article looks awesome.. can't wait 'til I have time later this afternoon to read it

Before I answer your questions, I should have prefaced my original post.. I was asking if this MBC technique can be pulled off with a Dynamic EQ. I'm curious about this because I have a couple different DynEq's, Waves F6 and TDR Nova, but no MBC's.

1. How MANY guitars are in this layer? It is not a cake.

I'm not referring to one particular song that I'm working on. Depending on what sound I'm going for, I could have 4 rhythm guitar tracks (maybe more, maybe less), All played thru different amps (well a POD XT; I don't own any amps.. that's a whole other issue, but let's not get off topic). Then I'll mess around with the tracks to see what sounds best.

2. 90Hz to 350Hz is a whole Universe of hell. What NOTES are they actually playing? I am assuming they are
playing "power chords"? If so, you need to eq AROUND those two notes. Carve out a little of the NOT NOTES frequencies.

This was an interesting tip I read about to clean up the muddiness of palm muted heavy guitars. I'd assume that there are more examples besides palm muting, but that's all the article mentioned.
Yes, I'm playing power chords, along with the seven regular chords, single notes.. all types of shit. When you say that I "need to eq AROUND those two notes," what two notes are you referring to? Are you suggesting that I go thru an entire song and painstakingly set up automation to bring down the specific frequencies that come with palm muting? That sounds like rip the hair outta your head territory.

3. The amplification, what is it DOING??? Is it actually helping, or hurting the heaviness? Distorting heavy guitars is a Black Art.

I don't quite understand the question. Are you saying that more is less? That something can be heavy without highly distorted guitar? I'm familiar with this, and I'm in a constant battle with the amp's knobs.

4. As this is a Black Art, have you done the proper sacrifices to your local Dark God of Heavy Guitar??? DO NOT DELAY!!!

Have you been spying on me?

4. What EQ you use is important, but only after you actually pinpoint the issues.

This is another question that I was going to create a specific thread for.. Right now I use atleast two EQs. The first is a surgical one to sweep with and cut unwanted frequencies. I've currently been into the Waves H-EQ for this. There's just something about it that clicks with me; I can't put my finger on it. There are others I like too, but I can't remember them off the top of my head.

The second is an EQ that's a bit colored and give the guitar it's character. I seem to always end up using the UA Helios 69 for this and it never disappoints. I recently demoed the Kramer HLS and thought it sounded better than UA's Helios emulation. It was the first time I preferred a Waves plug over a UA. I also like the Waves API 550A/B (haven't tried the UA yet). I love the Lindell TE-100 and Kush Electra, but missed their end of the year sales. I'm still sour over this.. especially cuz of the TE-100. There are others I use, but these are the ones that come up the most. I also just started using some of the Acustica-Audio Aqua plugins. The few I've tried sound insane.

You got any EQ suggestions? Or other effects you like on electric guitar.

[joninc]

Good topic - I always find that mixing dense guitar heavy rock is always a challenge.

I think when Nick says "2 notes" he is referring to the 2 notes in the power chord in whatever key you are in.

plugs:

I like the H eq for cutting freq a lot too - the visualizer is very helpful. Make a tight, deep cut and slide around until things feel a bit clearer and then reduce the depth of the cut a bit. It it's not a really specific freq and more of a zone then using a wider Q to pull down a region (150-250 or whatever).
also using the HPF to cut below 100 or 150 sometimes can be helpful.

I like Kramer and API for boosting higher mids and highs. sometimes the clariphonic can be good for higher freq air type stuff.

Using a dynamic eq is really helpful when you're trying to fix something that's happening intermittently - if it's too muddy all the way through the tune you are better off to use a eq and just carve away the mud. If it's something that swells up occasionally then a MBC or dyn comp can be helpful in reigning it in. I have been using the F6 a lot in the past few months and find it helpful. I find the m/s feature helpful too in isolating specific elements
without affecting everything else (on a buss or mix).

Making good clear choices in recording is always the best path to a great end result - ie: not using the same guitar/pickup/amp/pedal/modeler for 4+ overdub layers - Choosing registers to play in and complementary contrasting tones is key in arranging a sound that will translate clearly - but we don't always have the luxury...

[Mustang Martigan]

I like the H eq for cutting freq a lot too - the visualizer is very helpful. Make a tight, deep cut and slide around until things feel a bit clearer and then reduce the depth of the cut a bit.

I've never tried to sweep like that.. it's the opposite of everything I've read on the topic. Sweeping with a narrow cut and listening for clarity vs. sweeping with a narrow boost and finding unflattering frequencies.

It it's not a really specific freq and more of a zone then using a wider Q to pull down a region (150-250 or whatever).

What do you exactly mean here? In the sentence prior you mention cutting specific frequencies with a tight Q. Isn't it a little of both?

Using a dynamic eq is really helpful when you're trying to fix something that's happening intermittently - if it's too muddy all the way through the tune you are better off to use a eq and just carve away the mud. If it's something that swells up occasionally then a MBC or dyn comp can be helpful in reigning it in. I have been using the F6 a lot in the past few months and find it helpful. I find the m/s feature helpful too in isolating specific elements
without affecting everything else (on a buss or mix).

Totally. The point of the thread is about taming intermittent palm mute chugs.. and similar playing techniques than can turn a great tone into boomy mud for a split second and then, just as quickly, turn it back to great.

I'm just curious if you can match the outcome of my example by using a Dynamic Eq and setting a band to 220Hz (the freq in-between the 90-350Hz crossover I mentioned in the original post), making the Q wide enough to cover this particular frequency range and finally to set the threshold so it only engages when those boomy/muddy tones come thru.

I forget if I already mentioned it, but I don't have a MBC, which is why I'm so interested if this technique will work the same with both effects.

Thanks,
-Adam

[Mustang Martigan]

What NOTES are they actually playing? I am assuming they are
playing "power chords"? If so, you need to eq AROUND those two notes. Carve out a little of the NOT NOTES frequencies.

I never thought of it like that. So, for example, if the guitar's playing a true A, you'd create two dips on either side of 440Hz? Obviously you can't do this throughout the entire song, so when does it make the most sense to you it? Maybe at the beginning of an intro, verse, chorus and/or transition.. to give that section some added balls? Or am I missing the mark here?

[Nick Sevilla]

What NOTES are they actually playing? I am assuming they are
playing "power chords"? If so, you need to eq AROUND those two notes. Carve out a little of the NOT NOTES frequencies.

I never thought of it like that. So, for example, if the guitar's playing a true A, you'd create two dips on either side of 440Hz? Obviously you can't do this throughout the entire song, so when does it make the most sense to you it? Maybe at the beginning of an intro, verse, chorus and/or transition.. to give that section some added balls? Or am I missing the mark here?

Well, consider this: You can Automate your EQs, so they change as the song moves along. This is why DAWS are so awesome.

Say, if you have a 3 chord progression, you EQ the first chord, then the second, etc, then you can simply copy paste the automation of that EQ onto the next identical section. No need to manually go thru each progression.

Second, yes, I was talking about getting RID of frequencies NOT the note, in this case the power chords, say for example an "A" which is A plus E. You'd find the muddiness anywhere those are NOT, say, you EQ outside the range of those two notes. IS that clear at all? A is 110Hz, 220Hz, 440Hz, 880Hz etc. E is another frequency set. THey all double as you go up the octaves, and half when you go down the octaves. Simple, really.

Here is a handy interactive chart, with all the notes and their respective frequencies, along with different tuning standards other than A = 440Hz:

http://pages.mtu.edu/~suits/notefreqs.html

The trick here is to NOT affect the actual notes being played, but to REDUCE the surrounding frequencies which are making things muddy.

You can use a wider Q for removing frequencies, instead of less musical narrower Q (bandwidth), which is really only to be used when you have a very specific frequency to get rid of. From your original post it seems you have a wider set of frequencies that are problematic.

Cheers

[vvv]

Somewhat OT, but Nick, do you ever use that frequency chart to augment stuff on mixdown?

Like, say, to tune toms or even the kick on already-recorded drums?

[Nick Sevilla]

Somewhat OT, but Nick, do you ever use that frequency chart to augment stuff on mixdown?

Like, say, to tune toms or even the kick on already-recorded drums?

To tune the drums, yes but not that "frequently". Ba Dum Chi !!!

Sometimes, I have to EQ a few notes more, like on some guitars that are arpeggiated, and one note does not come through enough.
when compression does not do the trick, EQ can do it. That chart is handy for that too.

I'm lucky in that the artists I have gotten to mix already have it together 99% of the time. Good people.

[Mustang Martigan]

Second, yes, I was talking about getting RID of frequencies NOT the note, in this case the power chords, say for example an "A" which is A plus E. You'd find the muddiness anywhere those are NOT, say, you EQ outside the range of those two notes. IS that clear at all? A is 110Hz, 220Hz, 440Hz, 880Hz etc. E is another frequency set. THey all double as you go up the octaves, and half when you go down the octaves. Simple, really.

So going by your method, a dynamic eq would be the ideal choice, because in my original scenario you just want to compress the low mids when they jump out during a palm mute/chug section. The MBC would also be compressing the frequency of the notes being played. Do I have this correct?

You can use a wider Q for removing frequencies, instead of less musical narrower Q (bandwidth), which is really only to be used when you have a very specific frequency to get rid of. From your original post it seems you have a wider set of frequencies that are problematic.

My original post was referencing a video on youtube that explained a method of getting rid of the mud created when playing a palm mute/chug. He was showing how to setup a MBC to only compress the instances of the chug muddying up the low mids.

[Nick Sevilla]

Try it, see how it goes.

[Mustang Martigan]

Try it, see how it goes.

I'm definitely gonna try all the tips I've gotten; there are some great ones.

And eventhough those tips went above and beyond my expectations when starting this thread, my original question remains unanswered.. that being, will a dynamic EQ render the same results as the MBC used in the scenario I referenced?

The MBC was setup to engage when the frequencies between 90-350Hz rose beyond a defined threshold. Could you yield the same results with a Dynamic Eq? By setting a band to 220Hz (the middle frequency of 90-350Hz) and making a wide enough cut to include the targeted spectrum (90-350Hz)?

While there are other, possibly better ways to do this, I'm still curious if a Dynamic Eq can replace a MBC in this scenario.

Thanks.

[Nick Sevilla]

will a dynamic EQ render the same results as the MBC used in the scenario I referenced?

No. They do different things. So, try each one to listen ans see which one you prefer.

Cheers

[Mustang Martigan]

will a dynamic EQ render the same results as the MBC used in the scenario I referenced?

No. They do different things. So, try each one to listen ans see which one you prefer.

I didn't have a MBC until just now, which is why I initially started the thread.. I couldn't make the comparison on my own. Any of you familiar with the Xfer OTT? It's a free MBC. I haven't installed it yet.

I need to read up more on the difference between a MBC and DynEq (besides the MBC using crossover frequencies and a DynEq being able to manipulate a specific frequency). Everytime I think I understand it I try to explain it.. and realize that I don't know.