You should, you shouldn't... this is pointless on so much levels...
Do what ever suits you the best, in that particular moment
But if you want to be technical about that, you really need to know your material... key, range of instruments, arrangement, and the overall image that you're trying to get... SharkBait O-reily explained that very well

And even then, we have automations... instruments doesn't have to be filtered all song long (I'm talking exclusively about EQ)... again, depend on what you want and not on what others think that you should...

...and yes, EQ == filter and vice versa

 

Yes you are right, I was thinking about something completely different and incorrect

 

And i'm glad you feel that way and all but it's not going to change my opinion.
When someone ask "what filter did you use?" i tell them the name of the filter.
When someone ask "what E.Q. did you use?" i tell them the name of the E.Q.

When i'm in my car and i adjust the E.Q. that's exactly what i'm doing not adjusting the filter.

Peace

 

I think the biggest thing to take away here is that of phase, some instruments need some of that low end in a mix to keep everything in phase, even if it seems you don't need it

 

And thats why world can never be a peaceful place...

Peace

 

Last edited: Aug 8, 2015

If you've got some time to kill, why not educate yourself over the weekend and gain some knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalization_(audio)
If you choose to stick with Thomas Gray though, best of luck pal

 

he was right about using one compressor or eq on a bass instead of 4 guitar tracks. the rest was bollox

 

You just defined Youtube Channels about audio!

 

interesting threat - I had no idea that people could talk so much about something so simple.
I could not pay less attention to EQ or filters and like many things in music nothing is completely right or wrong.
A similar discussion would be about adding reverb to your bass or not but please let's not get into that

 

Interesting topic! From early on, I've always done HPF on instruments or auxiliary sends that don't need those frequencies in the mix via EQ (usually, whatever stock EQ is included with whatever DAW I'm working with). Generally, I've HPF'd about 80 Hz off of most instruments and up to 200 Hz from things like high-pitched strings, reverbs and delays or even drum overheads. This has helped out my mixes a lot, but cutting even that much seems to make everything sound a little thin, especially now that I'm recording everything from VIs and using samples that were already recorded (and probably pre-EQ'd) in a professional setting.

The general rule of thumb, the way I understand it, is to solo each instrument that you feel needs to lose some of the low end to sit in the mix and listen as you adjust the HPF until the offending low end is gone, but before the individual sound becomes too thin. Then, back that setting off about 20 percent, which makes sense to me, since most EQs' HPF seems to curve and affect frequencies both below and slightly above the desired frequency you're adjusting to. There's also a few plugs (and hardware EQs) with an adjustable slope for HP and LP filters, so instead of losing your entire low end below your desired frequency, you're losing half (or more, or less).

As for the analog world, some consoles and preamps do add or subtract a bit of low end, but the main part of the chain that cuts the most frequencies is usually analog tape (both two-track and multi-track), which is incapable of recording anything below 30 Hz, and also kills a bit of the high end, especially with noise reduction engaged.

 

I remember watching a Point Blank Studio tutorial once, where the students put forward their tracks (Some of which had some high level of creativity)

The mastering/ Mix-down Instructor put each track through it's paces, and know what the most common fault was he had to correct?

Bad habits picked up regarding Hi-Pass filtering.

Sure there are times you need to filter out/in frequencies for effect etc but every song is different, every instrument blends differently within each song, therefore using a filter to cut out EVERYTHING except bass and kick is too generic. It is better to put an EQ with a spectrum analyser in and use both your eyes and your ears to get that perfect sound.

It should be the equivalent of a surgeon performing an operation, except nobody's life hangs in the balance.

 

Soul you are entitled to your opinion, everyone is. Just remember that a person who is never willing to learn or change their views when they have been overwhelmingly proven to be wrong, is an idiot.

 

It depends on what kind of music you're doing, whether or not HPF or LPF is actually necessary and, really, like any other audio processing, it boils down to a matter of personal taste.

I forgot to add in my last post that the arbitrary 30 Hz HPF in analog tape, which you end up seeing in a lot of mastering EQ presets and in all analog tape emulations, is one you'd probably want to add to get your digital recording sounding more like a vintage recording, probably more crucial in stuff like rock and metal, where subharmonics don't traditionally exist … but that would be added on the mastering chain.

 

It is not a myth/mistake killer, it is another "i'm smarter than everyone else"...whereas not.
If you are cutting "at 400" everytime, you don't know what you do.
If you never use a low cut, you don't know what you do ether.

If you know what you do, you use it wisely, based on needs, mix, style and more.
There is no problem with low cut.
There is a problem with ppl thinking they know how to use a tool...whereas they definitely don't.

PS : it always remembers me my famous discussion with that stupid pseudo mastering pro on KVR saying he was NEVER low cutting his masters. I would never use his services for sure. You can check whatever video of any SERIOUS professional mastering eng : they almost always use low cut on a full track. Even if it is a "security" 18-20Hz cut.

Problem is never the tool, but who and how you use it.
PPS : cutting at 400 is a VERY bad example. I would have done it around 120Hz, as a general example.

 

Thanks for sharing!

 

I don't agree with that statement

the point is you and I know when a pad-synth-tom or snare for that matter needs it's bottom end.(or at least we decide it on our own)

Funny thing is, I agree with the video that nothing should be done by default.
but what is interesting about these common mixing advices is that one needs to know where they are came from.

 

NY is the mecca of jazz, at least it used to be.How is the scene these days, bro?Are youngsters even interested in instrumental music?
The situation in Europe is rather bizarre, as youngsters mostly take the easy route with mobile phones and internet life, instead of spending time practicing and learning an instrument.

 

Yeah.... the famous vid, the famous discovery. Now you can get a template for every major DAW where 126 tracks are already lowcut @ different feq.. and one that has an eq on every channel - completely flat (but this one is only free to try..) They even remade the algo for Neutron, so it doesn't do any lo-cutz anymore. YT is really full of these instant advices that will make your mix shiiiite, sorry - shiiiine!

 

There are 'still' pockets of the music circulating throughout the NYC landscape. Unfortunately, nowhere near its heyday. However, I'm encouraged by a renewed interest in the genre in recent years. Many of these young people have come to understand that, regardless of their music appetites, studying many of music's endless intricacies (through practice and dedication) allows them the flexibility and creative expansiveness that comes when they know why and how certain things work within music's limitless universe. Thanks, my good friend, for asking.

 

before cutting anything, ask yourself which ones will be the dominant sounds in your song, for instance the drums, the bass, the voice ...
once you've made this hierarchy everything will follow easily and logically.

as much as i like these technical discussions there's no way for audio engineers to come up with a bunch of pretentious rules that are supposed to work in any situation, there are just too many different situations.
videos like this one could make sense only if they're targeting specifically Trance or whatever other electronic genre but it doesnt make any sense in other scenarios.

besides, the artist could actually love to cut frequencies too much or not at all and that's his right to explore and experiment without sillly buggers setting boundaries or rules on mixing, if mixing was so easy it would have been fully automated already.