Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus? — Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

Great EQ technique

rickwaughrickwaugh
in General App Discussion

The Fabfilter gys show this in their videos, and this particular articles uses an FF plugin, but it should work on any EQ that allows you to dial in a narrow boost, then sweep it over the spectrum.

https://sonicscoop.com/2015/04/16/back-to-basics-3-simple-steps-to-improve-your-mixes-with-subtractive-eq/

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    Thanks I need to brush up on my eq etiquette :)

  • Shaken&StirredShaken&Stirred

    @rickwaugh said:
    The Fabfilter gys show this in their videos, and this particular articles uses an FF plugin, but it should work on any EQ that allows you to dial in a narrow boost, then sweep it over the spectrum.

    https://sonicscoop.com/2015/04/16/back-to-basics-3-simple-steps-to-improve-your-mixes-with-subtractive-eq/

    yeah, I like this technique as well, and I subscribe to Jason Moss's YouTube channel (the author of that article). He has lots of short, useful videos on mixing that are easy to understand.

  • DaveypooDaveypoo

    Subtractive EQing is one of the best tips to making your mixes sound clean.

  • WillWill

    This is how I do it as well.

    The article is focused on problem frequencies but the same can be done to accentuate a track's sweet spot. Find that spot (or range via a wider curve) and then you can cut the same out of other tracks to make room for it. Narrow curve example: find the range for the attack part of your kick drum and then go cut that out of anything that's ringing out over it.

  • CracklePotCracklePot

    Is this the trick to boost nasty frequencies and then kill them with a notch filter? Sounds like it from the description. :)

  • rickwaughrickwaugh

    @CracklePot said:
    Is this the trick to boost nasty frequencies and then kill them with a notch filter? Sounds like it from the description. :)

    It is.

  • CracklePotCracklePot

    @rickwaugh Excellent share. This tip is super useful. B)

  • WillWill

    @rickwaugh said:

    @CracklePot said:
    Is this the trick to boost nasty frequencies and then kill them with a notch filter? Sounds like it from the description. :)

    It is.

    Doesn't need to be a notch. Can just help you find the center frequency for any type of curve.

  • supanortonsupanorton

    @syrupcore said:
    This is how I do it as well.

    The article is focused on problem frequencies but the same can be done to accentuate a track's sweet spot. Find that spot (or range via a wider curve) and then you can cut the same out of other tracks to make room for it. Narrow curve example: find the range for the attack part of your kick drum and then go cut that out of anything that's ringing out over it.

    Gold! Thanks for this.

  • LiquidmantisLiquidmantis

    A couple of apps that I found last night that are on topic:

    HearEQ - I may have found this here... There isn't any handholding really, it's really just self-practice and testing.

    MixBuddy - this is like the peanut butter to HearEQ's chocolate. Here is the tutorial part, with no applied testing.

  • JangoMangoJangoMango

    Would some kind soul explain, in plain terms, what the deal is with subtractive eq’ing?

  • DaveypooDaveypoo

    @Liquidmantis said:
    A couple of apps that I found last night that are on topic:

    HearEQ - I may have found this here... There isn't any handholding really, it's really just self-practice and testing.

    MixBuddy - this is like the peanut butter to HearEQ's chocolate. Here is the tutorial part, with no applied testing.

    Subtractive EQing is when you use an equalizer to remove unwanted frequencies. Typically when we use an EQ we amplify or accentuate the frequencies we like, or that help a part cut through the mix, or bring out the high end/low end, etc. With subtractive EQing, you're using the equalizer to find the frequencies that are overly harsh, muddy, unpleasant, etc. and lowering the gain to make them less present in the mix.

    Hope that helps.

  • rickwaughrickwaugh

    @JangoMango, one thing that I have seen in a number of tutorials on mixing and eq, is that it's generally better to subtract, than to add. Not only are you taking away unpleasant sounds, but as @syrupcore said, removing frequencies that mask other sounds. Simply boosting frequencies can tend to muddy, whereas subtracting opens space, which is generally a good thing in a mix.

  • WillWill

    @JangoMango said:
    Would some kind soul explain, in plain terms, what the deal is with subtractive eq’ing?

    Nothing special: prefer cutting to boosting.

    Another way to look at @rickwaugh's explanation... let's say you have two tracks in a tune: guitar and vocals. You decide the vocals need more sparkle. One way: reach for the high eq on the vocals and turn it up some. The subtractive way: reach for the high eq on the guitar and turn it down. Now, the high end that already exists on the vocal take is easier to hear because there is less competing for it.

    Bonus: if you keep boosting frequencies, you'll eventually run out of head room. If you instead turn down frequencies as you go, making room for things you want to hear on other tracks, you'll end up with more headroom to make the entire mix louder.

  • mulletsaisonmulletsaison

    Another nice technique in using subtractive EQ to create room for another instrument or sound is to subtract a little, say1or 2 DB, at the specific frequency where you've boosted the instrument you want to feature. @syrupcore and @rickwaugh covered the reasons and impact beautifully; this is just a tiny trick in getting that impact.

  • JohnnyGoodyearJohnnyGoodyear

    @syrupcore said:

    @JangoMango said:
    Would some kind soul explain, in plain terms, what the deal is with subtractive eq’ing?

    Nothing special: prefer cutting to boosting.

    Another way to look at @rickwaugh's explanation... let's say you have two tracks in a tune: guitar and vocals. You decide the vocals need more sparkle. One way: reach for the high eq on the vocals and turn it up some. The subtractive way: reach for the high eq on the guitar and turn it down. Now, the high end that already exists on the vocal take is easier to hear because there is less competing for it.

    Bonus: if you keep boosting frequencies, you'll eventually run out of head room. If you instead turn down frequencies as you go, making room for things you want to hear on other tracks, you'll end up with more headroom to make the entire mix louder.

    Thank you.

  • JangoMangoJangoMango

    Awesome.. thanks.

  • WillWill
    edited December 2017

    Another fun/interesting thing to play with when EQing: overtones.

    Let's say you find 1.2k to be the frequency of concern (good or bad). Experiment with cutting/boosting at octave intervals of that frequency (double/halve to get octaves so 300hz, 600hz, 1.2k, 2.4k, 4.8k...). Say cutting 6db at 1.2k on trackB solves some other problem in the mix but leaves the trackB sounding a little anemic. You can instead try cutting 3db at 1.2k, 2.4k etc. Or, devil be damned, adding slight boosts on the source at 2.4k and/or 4.8k, etc.

    It's also how to get a low bass sound to translate on smaller speakers without boosting the overall track volume so much it blows out your subs and the rest of the low end of you mix. Hat tip: life with NS-10s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtone

  • TelefunkyTelefunky

    @syrupcore said:

    @JangoMango said:
    Would some kind soul explain, in plain terms, what the deal is with subtractive eq’ing?

    Nothing special: prefer cutting to boosting.

    Another way to look at @rickwaugh's explanation... let's say you have two tracks in a tune: guitar and vocals. You decide the vocals need more sparkle. One way: reach for the high eq on the vocals and turn it up some. The subtractive way: reach for the high eq on the guitar and turn it down. Now, the high end that already exists on the vocal take is easier to hear because there is less competing for it...

    or use older strings on the guitar, fingertips instead of nail for picking, a plektrum with a softer surface, a dynamic microphone instead of a condensor type... ;)

  • db909db909

    My special technique is to cut and boost at will depending on what sounds good

  • WillWill

    @Telefunky said:

    @syrupcore said:

    @JangoMango said:
    Would some kind soul explain, in plain terms, what the deal is with subtractive eq’ing?

    Nothing special: prefer cutting to boosting.

    Another way to look at @rickwaugh's explanation... let's say you have two tracks in a tune: guitar and vocals. You decide the vocals need more sparkle. One way: reach for the high eq on the vocals and turn it up some. The subtractive way: reach for the high eq on the guitar and turn it down. Now, the high end that already exists on the vocal take is easier to hear because there is less competing for it...

    or use older strings on the guitar, fingertips instead of nail for picking, a plektrum with a softer surface, a dynamic microphone instead of a condensor type... ;)

    Fix it at the source? ARE YOU INSANE, MAN?

  • TelefunkyTelefunky

    shit, forgot you always fix it in the mix... :blush:

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    @syrupcore said:
    Another fun/interesting thing to play with when EQing: overtones.

    Let's say you find 1.2k to be the frequency of concern (good or bad). Experiment with cutting/boosting at octave intervals of that frequency (double/halve to get octaves so 300hz, 600hz, 1.2k, 2.4k, 4.8k...). Say cutting 6db at 1.2k on trackB solves some other problem in the mix but leaves the trackB sounding a little anemic. You can instead try cutting 3db at 1.2k, 2.4k etc. Or, devil be damned, adding slight boosts on the source at 2.4k and/or 4.8k, etc.

    It's also how to get a low bass sound to translate on smaller speakers without boosting the overall track volume so much it blows out your subs and the rest of the low end of you mix. Hat tip: life with NS-10s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtone

    This

  • CracklePotCracklePot

    Have you heard about the Phantom Fundamental? It is a phenomenon where you hear a fundamental tone where one does not exist. Say you play a C4 tone with some fairly rich harmonic ovetones in the timbre. The first harmonic is the octave of the fundamental, so it is C5 in our example. Now let's say you use a high pass filter and cut off the fundamental C4 frequency. You would expect that you would now hear C5 as the fundamental and perceive an octave shift up in tone. What happens though is your brain recognizes the structure and frequencies of the original C4 tone and fills in the missing fundamental for you. You will still hear C4, even though that particular frequency is not audible due to being cut by the filter. It is some sort of Aural Illusion, sort of like a Optical Illusion, and it is related to how our brains fill in lots of missing information in the act of perception. You can apply this phenomenon to your EQ technique when trying to clarify a muddy sounding mix, just by cutting a few select fundamentals from lower register instruments.

  • WillWill

    @CracklePot said:
    Have you heard about the Phantom Fundamental? It is a phenomenon where you hear a fundamental tone where one does not exist. Say you play a C4 tone with some fairly rich harmonic ovetones in the timbre. The first harmonic is the octave of the fundamental, so it is C5 in our example. Now let's say you use a high pass filter and cut off the fundamental C4 frequency. You would expect that you would now hear C5 as the fundamental and perceive an octave shift up in tone. What happens though is your brain recognizes the structure and frequencies of the original C4 tone and fills in the missing fundamental for you. You will still hear C4, even though that particular frequency is not audible due to being cut by the filter. It is some sort of Aural Illusion, sort of like a Optical Illusion, and it is related to how our brains fill in lots of missing information in the act of perception. You can apply this phenomenon to your EQ technique when trying to clarify a muddy sounding mix, just by cutting a few select fundamentals from lower register instruments.

    Neat. Sounds like basis for the 'try to EQ the overtones' technique. Cut your bass at 100 to make room for the kick's thud and boost it at 400 and 800 (or whatever) to compensate.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    @CracklePot said:
    Have you heard about the Phantom Fundamental? It is a phenomenon where you hear a fundamental tone where one does not exist. Say you play a C4 tone with some fairly rich harmonic ovetones in the timbre. The first harmonic is the octave of the fundamental, so it is C5 in our example. Now let's say you use a high pass filter and cut off the fundamental C4 frequency. You would expect that you would now hear C5 as the fundamental and perceive an octave shift up in tone. What happens though is your brain recognizes the structure and frequencies of the original C4 tone and fills in the missing fundamental for you. You will still hear C4, even though that particular frequency is not audible due to being cut by the filter. It is some sort of Aural Illusion, sort of like a Optical Illusion, and it is related to how our brains fill in lots of missing information in the act of perception. You can apply this phenomenon to your EQ technique when trying to clarify a muddy sounding mix, just by cutting a few select fundamentals from lower register instruments.

    Psychoacoustic phenomenon. This is an area I’d love to explore more. Combination/resultant tones are fascinating. Check out the work that Mary Jane Leach is doing if you’re interested.

Sign In or Register to comment.