I want to know whether there is a proper way to find the clashing frequencies between two or more instruments in a mix just like Neutron Frequency Masking feature. Indeed, I want to find the clashing frequencies without using neutron. I have seen some people loading a spectrum analyzer and comparing the frequency graph of two instruments with each other, I have used this method but sometimes it is kind of rough and inaccurate although I check and compare the fundamental frequencies of two instruments in the analyzer and do the EQ plus sometimes you have to dynamically cause the instrument is covering a wider range(!) any suggestions about that? Is not there any other way to find the clashing frequencies? Any tips or tricks?
Thanks in advance

 

put fabfilter pro q2 on your master buss , then play tracks solo then together ( alternate this process with your reference track whether top 40 song or best made album in your particular genre.
once you identify these frequencies use analog modeling of tube preamp, transistor analog recording desks and tape decks gear or real versions of these to create harmonics that smooth transient response, eq wont achieve the clashing.
frequency response is independent of transient response which means eq wont accomplish it ( look at my thread on the forum "secrets of music "has detailed way do this)
when you have clashing it is the transients that clash ,not the eq shape of track( after you shape transients then you can eq a tiny bit )

 

Last edited: Sep 5, 2017

Most all track frequencies are clashing to a degree.. which is fine. Where it's critical is where the weight is. You should be able to hear which tracks are colliding too heavy with one another easily by soloing pairs and using your ears. If you don't want to use an all in one analyzer on a bus, use an analyzer as the last insert on each channel you want to analyze. View two or more instances of the analyzer at the same time to see where the fundamental frequency/weight of the tracks are. Where tracks are sharing the same frequency heavily is where you'd base your decision. And the point of investigating this far to begin with is to find a multiband remedy as opposed to just stepping on your tracks entirely. You'll know the more narrow band range to isolate specifically to sidechain during those collision moments.

As MMJ2017 mentioned above.. transient shaping will soften transients. I wouldn't recommend it for fixing masking problems because it will change the groove clock of your song if it's already clocked how you want it. Transient shaping changes amplitude over "time". EQ'ing or sidechaining a more narrow band will retain your groove clock and the amplitude of the frequencies that aren't a problem will stay the same. If and when using transient shapers be aware of the slope in ms when using them to slow attack times. It's good to know this because in most cases you'll need to set the audio track to start some ms earlier when you're done to get the groove back on lock. Timing is one of the most crucial things that can't be stressed enough. If the nuance of certain instruments in a song sound slightly early or slightly late it's the reason it won't grab listeners they way it will if every nuance is clocked well. The groove clock is much more important than what's masking. I listen to a lot of peoples mixes and that's the biggest problem with most of them.. the groove isn't clocked well. It's like no one is using their ears and nudging tracks anymore.. they just let a visual grid define the groove for them and they roll with it. None of the sounds they use truly trigger on the 1 to begin with. What they see on the grid is lying to them. In the end something always sounds rushed and something always sounds late when you zero your ears in on it. But that's another topic to discuss.

 

Last edited: Sep 5, 2017

Could you please address me to that specific tutorial on "secrets of music" topic you're talking about? I did a fast search through out topic but could not find the tutorial you were addressing.
In addition, I always thought that the frequency clashing causes the sound not to be heard in the mix, of course that includes transient clashes too. But you've already said that "frequency response is independent of transient response", what does this exactly mean? Any tutorial about this statement?

 

You've actually spotted an important thing. As you said groove clock is important. Do you have specific tutorial in mind about multi-band compression that you can address me to? I know what multi-band compression is and what it does but haven't seen a live implementation of it for softening transients in a way that removes the frequency clashes. Of course we have to make bands and play with attack knobs and probably side-chain the compressor to a signal from another instrument, correct me if I am wrong?!
In addition, playing with the neutron transient shaper would do the trick too?

 

this one can find "resonating" Frequencies
https://oeksound.com/soothe/

Izotope Neutron helps to find masking frequencies and address them:
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/mix/neutron.html#&panel2-1

and of course Fabfilter pro Q 2

 

Last edited by a moderator: Sep 5, 2017

here is the tutorial for it
just want to make a note for you, make sure you disable hum form analog plugs that model the humming of gear so you noise floor is low as possible in the example below i forgot to turn it off on one of them in the demonstration.












Once your files finish downloading , open your daw fresh new track set to 220 bpm then import your files inside. Keep in mind im going to show you a workflow give it a chance to see the results and your mind may be blown. (don't get frustrated because we have to go through a number of steps once you get good at it or even right away you get quick at it ) we are going to deal with ALL the transients with great care, because when you get to the final master, that fine detail will shine through (or mess of someone is haphazard with their transients)

name your project the black crown- flame

select ALL the tracks lower the volume by -15 db on each track volume slider so that our master volume is low enough to work with.


SNARE DRUM-
------------------
Lets solo 04_snare1up and listen closely. (we can bring the volume of THIS track back to default )
We can hear in the tiny "atomic detail is all over the place . the transients are different volumes but even more importantly different "thickness" throughout the frequency response , that is to say when the crack of the snare hits there is a loose transient in the low mids that is flabby, a really tight crack in the upper mids and a loose rattle in the highs of the sound . If we approached adjusting this track as is, by throwing a compressor or eq with drastic settings those qualities would stay the same and what we adjusted would create EVEN MORE fluctuations in the "atomic detail" of the sound. we are not going to do that here.

here is example of the dry track
https://www.dropbox.com/s/aygxjajwpwl3roz/tbcf ex 1 dry 05snup1.flac?dl=0


WE are going to put fabfilter pro q 2 on our master fader, then click to have it hover in the right hand corner, this is going to be important for our work, we use it like a visual meter to see frequency response.As we go through you will see how important it is.
make sure you jave the waves plugins fabfilter plugins steven slate plugs and ik multmedia lurseen mastering module,ik multimedia amplitube 4
.

going back to the track with 04snare1up solo it glance at the fabfilter proq2 to see the frequency response balance, we listen to the dry track sound and use the visual tool for two sets of information. we listen for the transients through out the frequency response and we look at the spectrum analyzer of proq2 to see the frequency balance ( we also look at our track fader and master fader for volumes as we adjust the project.

Next we are going to add plugins to the track (04_snare1up)
First add waves NLS nevo setting. Next add puigchild 660 threshold all the way down (we not using the compressor part just the analog stages and transformer modeling), Next Scheps 73 with default settings, Next waves NLS buss mike setting,Next Kramer tape default setting,Next waves J37 settings (815, 15, in level zero +3bias),Next Abbey road vinyl default settings(turn off hum noise part though), Next puigteck MEQ default, NExt REDD37-51 default,NExt TG12345 default, That makes 10 plugins each doing a tiny but, but they all add up each is shaping and smoothing our "atomic level" of the track. We are building a harmonic foundation in order to get our transients equal throughout the frequency response , listen through this track for a moment with the plugins on your monitors.

Save the FX chain as snare analog if you can , bounce the track with the settings then a + b compare back and forth with the original dry with no fx, listen very closely.
here is example sound of the analog chain we made on the snare listen closely to the "atomic" level.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pedz9it1zfcqtr3/tbcf ex 1 dry 05snupsn analog.flac?dl=0


here is screenshot of fabfilterpr oq2 on right side (master fader) with visual of snare frequency response
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yo5ftjmuo1q5dfi/proq ex.jpg?dl=0

Here we have a picture of "pink noise" frequency that means equal energy per octave


Notice the resemblance with the snare's frequency response , if you look at some of your reference tracks it will be the shape and slope as well.
Now rememeber this particular snare track has a pretty low volume whcih means it is not hitting the stack of plugins very hard at all , that is a good thing we are doing a specific task in dealing with the tiny "atomic" detail of sound, it should not be a drastic difference the bounce compared to the dry it (if done correctly) becomes three dimensional, thick transients throughout smooth yet crisp. this is our fist stage that recreates going into a REAL mixing desk, yes I know right we had to use a lot of plugins to re-create that , but that is the way plugins are, a small price to pay. Next on our new bounced track add Slate virtual tape machines + 9db input 2" tape setting,Next Waves dbx 160 settings , threshold 0.957 compression 3.35 below mix setting 66.6,Next waves GW mixcentric setting INTENSITY 27, Next Waves IM pusher settings are Magic 33.2 Push 4.0 , dyn punch move right to the middle and same for Focus right in middle Body 6.0 High 2.8 and finally output is -9.0 db, Save the Fx chain as Snare COMP
Bounce the snare track with the COMP fx chain do a comparison between the dry snare track before we did anything to A+ B in order to listen closely to the "atomic" level of the sound.
notice the three dimensionality the focus yet smoothness, and most important an authenticity not a fake plastic sound or artificial it has weight and power that feels like a real drum.

we now have 2 fx chains we can use for the basis of the snare tracks and bass drum tracks , we can load up the chains and modify the order say in the analog chain for kick drum or snare bottom , and the compression settings can be tweaked they were not critical use your preference, with each drum , whether toms or overheads or cymbals. use the same methodology with slight variance and changing order of plugin stacks while listening closely. think of the ANALOG chain is stage 1, the COMP chain as stage 2, use a plug to control how hard the initial signal is hitting the chain for more or less pronouncement. I am going to get ready to move onto another instrument. once we go through different instruments for these first 2 stages of ANALOG then COMP we will continue on to stage 3 and stage 4 .
here is sample of the snare with first analog stage consisting of fx chain and second comp stage consisting of plugin chain as discussion (ignore that background noice i accidentally left the hum on for vinyl plug) listen closely to the "atomic" level of the sound then compare with the dry track we first got.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3aivum8204csapx/snare 1 up analog COMP ex.flac?dl=0
Notice the three dimenionality it has (later when we eq etc. we will have a solid harmonic overtone foundation which keeps the transients even throughout the frequency response of the whole track even if the timbre and the pitch changes volumes changes the transient is full thick and 3d. It brings out the natural sound instead of artificial sound of drastic settings on a single or couple plugins.by the time we do these 2 steps for all tracks it will be transformed and ready to move on steps 3 and 4.(chains dealing with attributes)


VOCALS
------------

next we are going to mute our snare we worked on please name it (Snare1up ANA COMP)to signify our 2 stages we will go back to it.

scroll down to the track labeled 24_LeadVox. SOLO it and set Volume on tracQ2 fader to default .
play through a moment to visual on fabfilter proQ 2 . scroll through see how when it gets louder the level rises up , we keep that in mind for later. We can see that the frequency response slope is correct for now.( equal energy per octave like pink noise) Now we will build our ANALOG chain of fx for this vocal track.
here is a sample of the dry vocal track as it arrived to us.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h780s6pow916frj/leadvox dry ex.flac?dl=0
Now we will add our plugins first is Waves NLS default spike, Next is scheps 73 default, Next is Puigtec MEQ5 mains off,Next is puigchild 660 setting time constant 3 mains off.( this will "kiss" the transients slightly because of the large dynamic range the time constant of 3 will be middle of road attack and release settings(smooth),Next is Waves J37 input raise to 0 db, Next is Kramer tape default input -2.2 db,Next up is waves NLS BUSS nevo setting noise button off,Next up is waves TG12345 default, Next is REDD17 default, Next is RS56 default, Next is Puigtec EQP1A mains off,Next is Kramer HLS analog OFF (that is hum setting),Last plugin is waves NLS mike setting noise off, This gives us 13 plugins, reason being is the large dynamic range (soft to loud) this allows us to use less compression later on giving more natural 3d sound.
Save you FX chain as Vocal ANALOG . Bounce your track . setup A to B comparison with original dry track vs with stage 1 (analog fx chain) Listen through the Entire ting, listen to how the dry track transients have different thickness throughout the frequency response as the pitch volume and timbre changes of the vocal, now Listen to the stage 1 (analog fx chain) version, we have built a harmonic overtone foundation for the transients to be equal thickness throughout the frequency response as the signal changes in pitch ,volume, and timbre, the sound is more life like 3d as it brings out the natural qualities of the vocal.
Here is the vocal track sample with our fx chain stage 1 . listen closely to the "atomic" level of the sound
https://www.dropbox.com/s/71cfgvwc07g4pc1/leadvox analog ex.flac?dl=0
next we will proceed to build our stage 2 fx chain on the bounced vocal.
First plugin is Slate virtual tape machines 2" tape setting input level is +1.49 db (to kiss the input with the loud parts),Next is waves Puigtec mains off setting 2(this will just barely "kiss" the peaks of loud parts) Next is waves Mixcentric intensity 17.5, Next is Abbey road vinyl turn the noise knob all the way down, rest is default. Last is Waves IMpusher settings input is -2.5 db body 2.6,high 2.0,magic 33.5,Focus right in middle,dyn punch right in middle,push 4 (clip mode),Output is -8.0db , Save your FX chain as Vocal COMP for out stage 2. next bounce the track then A+B compare to original dry track listen to the "atomic" level of the vocal track throughout. Make sure you only have the original dry and the new bounced vocal with analog stage1 and comp stage2 "baked" on the fresh bounced track.
Here is the sample of the vocal track with the stage 1 (analog fx chain) and stage 2 (comp fx chain) Listen closely to the "atomic" level of the sound how the transients are equal throughout the frequency response and it is alive with three dimensionality yet natural and detailed.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zpi53x6yp27mlgw/leadvox ana COMP ex.flac?dl=0
compare this to the vocal dry track sample as it arrived to us.
We can now use the vocal analog fx chain stage 1 as a template for other tracks with a similar range and the vocal comp fx chain for stage 2 of similar ranged instruments but where we change the order of the plugins and adjust the settings to suit that track (templates only for THIS project we build new from scratch if it was different project band song for example).
Now that we have built up a solid harmonic foundation for the vocals, when we later eq for example or other process , We will still have equal transient "thickness" throughout our frequency response and fluctuations in pitch, volume, and timbre.
Right away when we compare to the dry track, the dry tracks transients or different thickness throughout, For instance the body of the sound is loose where the sss and ttt and kkk part is very tight and fluctuates quickly , the formant of the voice changes in timbre and as the volume changes from softer to louder we have different fluctuations in transients. if we had instead threw a couple plugins like compressor and eq pushed to the max the vocal sound would be effected differently as the track changes in timbre, volume, and transient response.
By dealing with the "atomic" level , building a harmonic foundation, we have ironed out the wrinkles in a natural way, instead of Plastic Fake sounding processed sound of putting a couple plugins on a dry track pushed to the max causing the atomic level to be all over the place.
I think it warrants a long sample of the vocal with demonstration of analog fx chain and comp fx chain
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p7za8g3gu2sz1bd/leadvox ana COMP ex long1.flac?dl=0
Here is a long sample of the dry vocal as it arrived for comparison.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s25ctaikelhxqh8/leadvox dry long.flac?dl=0
Notice, with those tonal differences, we will eq the vocal in later stage towards the end where it will not effect our harmonic overtone foundation which makes the transients all the same thickness.
Before we continue onward, experiment with your new bounced vocal .What we have done is built a harmonic overtone foundation , just as a a guitar amp does for example, this thickens up the "atomic" detail of the track, experiment with some extreme compression setting,eq slamming hard into tape, tubes etc.or alterations(where you dont save the changes) on the new bounced track and compare that to the same alterations to the dry track and listen closely how different your transient response is.
For the Bass guitar DI and Guitar DI we can use IK multimedia Amplitube ( i happen to own it) hopefuly you have it also or have the ability to get it.

ELECTRIC GUITAR DIRECT INPUT DI
---------------------------------------------

Next we are going to scroll down to 19_elecGtr1DI. we are going to solo it set volume on track to default.We are going to load the plugin IK multimedia Amplitube 4 we can use it for bass and guitar(IF you have to, use another option).First we load soldano amp set knobs noon (50 percent
In bottom right hand corner is Master knob of plugin set to -10.1 db,Next on top click on CAB A select mesa boogie 4x12 traditional, go to each speaker select Brit Vintage 16b for all 4 speakers.Click the second microphone make it Dynamic 57 and put on center of that speaker (will be 2 Dynamic57 in middle of speakers one top left other bottom right speaker) Now we are going to save this fx chain as Guitar inital amp1. we can apply the chain to the next DI pan each 80 percent left and right. then when we take the guitar track already of amps pan them each 100 left and 100 percent right (big stereo field)
We will consider this (amp sim part) creating our sound then we will treat it like we did before, bouncing once we happy with it. building a analog fx chain to build a rich foundation.

 

Last edited: Sep 5, 2017

any examples I have ever heard of "clashing frequencies" between tracks , was literally that (say it was 2 tracks clashing) each track needed 15 tiny adjustments in different ways. they needed adjsutments to iron out the fine grain detail of the transients, that the transients were not the same thickness and width throughout the whole frequency response of the track example ( a plain snare hit the high treble with thin click the mids body was wide and the lower bass to mids of the snare was flabby and wide transient, i would use tiny adjustments in order to make the transient hit the same thickness from lows to highs all the way through , same can be said for vocals or any sound that exists you want to work on the tiny fine grain detail iron out the wrinkles using harmonics to make the transients same thickness throughout the track , once you have done that it be impossible for that track to clash with another unless they competing ( say 2 snares very similar in a song or 2 vocals in the same panning space same frequencies same notes etc.)

listen to the top 40 songs like number 1 song and number 2 song how it sounds compared to your track for example listen to the fine grain detail of a big song that lot of money was put into making like a top 40 song listen to the tiny aspect of the sound and notice there no wrinkles in the sounds thats what you want to perfect yourself to have professional records

 

Last edited: Sep 5, 2017

In the picture above, on the top right hand corner there are two arrows pointing down, one labeled PEAKS and the other one labeled TRANSIENT, what exactly is transient? what is the difference between the PEAK and TRANSIENT in the picture above?! What does it mean when you say "transient is all over the place" ? Could you please clarify this term for me?
I read your tutorial and compared the examples you provided, have to get my hands dirty and test them myself too. It has been great! But I don't clearly understand what is meant by transient since this term is too ambiguous for me I don't fully grasp why transient processing and thickening can PREVENT FREQUENCY CLASHES.
So if you tell me what's exactly meant by transient I will have better feeling about the overall result of the tutorial.
Thanks for spending time and shedding some light about these important topics.

 

all 4 arrows on the top mark just the peaks of the different transients, this aren't 2 different things.

from wikipedia:

A transient event is a short-lived burst of energy in a system caused by a sudden change of state.

The source of the transient energy may be an internal event or a nearby event. The energy then couples to other parts of the system, typically appearing as a short burst of oscillation.

The typical sound of some musical instruments is also characterized by transients, which can be heard when striking a percussion instrument or the strings of a string instrument.

this is another genius vid by dan:

 

Nice tutorial. Thanks for sharing it.
However, the questions I asked above still remain unsolved. Even if the transients are those picks or burst of energy at the start of a hit like percussion or click in a kick or anything else of same nature, why is it the cause of masking?

 

i have no idea, lets wait for MMJ

 

Transient (acoustics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In acoustics and audio, a transient is a high amplitude, short-duration sound at the beginning of a waveform that occurs in phenomena such as musical sounds, noises or speech.[1][2] It can sometimes contain a high degree of non-periodic components and a higher magnitude of high frequencies than the harmonic content of that sound.[citation needed] Transients do not necessarily directly depend on the frequency of the tone they initiate.[citation needed]


here examples.

in a vocal recording the transients are the sss ttt kkk sounds
in a drum hit it is the moment the stick hits the drum
in a guitar it is the moment the pick hits the string
on a bass it is the moment the finger slaps the string
on a piano it the moment the you hit the key the lever hits the string etc.

 

MaXe said: ↑
"Nice tutorial. Thanks for sharing it.
However, the questions I asked above still remain unsolved. Even if the transients are those picks or burst of energy at the start of a hit like percussion or click in a kick or anything else of same nature, why is it the cause of masking?"


the reason is that "masking" is just a word you are using to describe what is actually many things happening anywhere from 15 to 20 or more things all happening your shrinking down to a concept you call "masking".

what these 15 or 20 things or more are, is transients in each track fluctuating and changing each with different thickness and width throughout the frequency response ,when you then combine multiple tracks all those "wrinkles" get messy.

what you want to do is one by one "iron out the wrinkles" from each track (make transients same width and thickness throughout the frequency response of each track)then when you add your tracks together, "masking" is not even possible .

(what could be possible instead is the need to raise or lower the volume of one of the tracks ( one adjustment)
or what could be possible once you iron out the wrinkles ,is to make your track frequency response the slope of pink noise equal energy per octave.

once those 3 steps are done move on to adding 3 dimensionality with reverb delay to fit each track in a location in space etc.

take a snare drum when hit there is a hi pitch click very thin, there is a snap wider thickness and lower, then a crack that is looser lower still, then a thud lower still that is flabby, so you have one moment in time where the transient of the hit is different thickness throughout the frequency response due to the physical nature of the drum and the physics of the stick hitting it dispersing the energy into the room creating sounds waves by moving the air.
each instrument is like this and not only that each transient generation is unique each time this all comes together to be a lot of variation that has to be ironed out within the tiny aspect of the sound the fine grain detail which exists at the atomic level of the sound.
by the time you add multiple tracks together on top each other in that condition , it adds up to blurry mess, fluctuations crashing into each other adding and cancelling at different locations based on the variations happening in the moment of time the 2 tracks play together .

what happens when we use harmonic tools , we shape the transients at the atomic level and smooth and even transients out at the individual sample level, unlike compression limiting other tools that work on the large structure(more exaggerated changes over larger period of time)

 

Last edited: Sep 6, 2017

So that's the cause of masking? and frequencies have nothing to do with masking? Is there any audio book explaining these sort of issues instead of teaching how to use plugins and gears? It is still unclear for me the role of the transient in masking issue plus what frequency has to do with it? If masking is caused by transients why do we EQ? or if masking is caused by having two instruments in the same frequency, what transients have to do with it? and finally is there any relation between the EQ frequency graph and the transients peaks shown? As we know, higher frequencies have shorter periods, so transients would show themselves in the high frequency range but since in the definition of the transients it is addressed that they can be non-periodic too, I don't have enough information about the effect of the non-periodic waves on the frequency spectrum. Besides, we often observe masking in low frequencies too, is that caused by transients too? It is some sort of vague and unclear. Anyways, I appreciate your willingness to share knowledge.

 

first you have to recognize "masking" is a word your using to describe many things at once.
frequencies do have something to do with it in the sense that transients that have different width and thickness throughout the frequency response in each track when combined with other tracks of that same condition creates what you calling "masking".

thousands

just what i explained above and in the comment right before you posted this one.

we don't.

not at all , they are 2 independent aspects of your sound of your tracks with no connection to each other. they have to be adjusted separately, and what you do to one has no impact on the other
I'll give you an example. I can take a bass drum hit recording that the transients all over the place have the lows booted real high , next take that same kick drum hit except iron out the wrinkles so that the transients are same thickness through frequency response next i lower the lows quieter than highs, when i compare these 2 tracks the first kick even though the frequency graph shows lot energy in lows it is wimpy and weak with loose flabby lows thin slit of a clickcompared to the other track that frequency shows lows are quieter but because the transient is same thickens throughout the lows mids highs have equal impact and no flabby no think click the whole sound has wide rich impact on hit independent of the slope or shape of lows mids highs volume lovels.

you are doing just fine, these things take time to figure out haha ( almost 3 decades working everyday on it on my end)

well when you reffer to "masking" you not talking about a single thing that actually exists , instead your using a word to describe a complex series of events of cause and effect , "masking" is not real not an actual thing , just a word
so all the things that make low frequencies unique whether transients or frequency are going to be different when you use "masking" to describe what you are experiencing, just try to remember "masking" is many many things your brain is short-cutting to a word. there is no actual one thing that exists called masking.the only thing that exists in reality is all the variables (wrinkles to iron out) they then add up in your experience you use one word to describe what is happening, but to fix it you have to see it for what it is in reality.(all those variables)
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS
if you dont have playback speakers clear enough to have you hear what is really happening you cannot possibly succeed adjusting transients because you can't hear any of the fine grain detail at all.( people that go through this having no ability to hear what is happening with transients can't do anything about it to fix the problems so they try to use just eq and larger changes to compensate best they can, those never come out same at the best records on top 40 or made in pro studios the sound is like sandpaper rough and scratchy and fuzzy(if you just completely ignore fixing transient problems at the fine grain atomic level fo the sound and then use exaggerated eq comp limiting to attempt to compensate)
luckily thios day and age we have cheap inexpensive speakers to mix on still good enough to hear finest grain detail of sound. here is example of super cheap set speakers.
http://www.equatoraudio.com/D5-Monitors-Pair-Iso-Pads-Carrying-Case-Cable-p/d5-k.htm
these allow you to hear every part of fine grain detail, they the cheapest i know of for best quality .I have never heard a set twice as expensive that sound as good as these before.
here is the cheapest in ears that will give you the fine grain detail as well that i know of.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Westone-UM-...249326?hash=item212b2c606e:g:-swAAOSwFFZZehFj
then once you get speakers clear enough , constantly alternate between reference material and your projects. while having the song visual to you in fabfilter pro q 2 in order you can hear the transients and see the frequency response of many reference songs of the highest quality you can find.
I recommend the first few songs on billboard top 40 charts even if not your fav because the quality of recordings are top notch level that is your reference tracks ( also the most renouned albums of the year in any genre)

 

Last edited: Sep 6, 2017

The video above was some sort of rough explanation of what we discussed in this topic. I just posted it for the other people to watch and figure out the overall thing.

By the way, in your tutorial you have used some plugins that I don't have or I cannot afford. Like puigchild 660 or Puigtec EQP1A. Is not out there some alternative available FX chains so I can at least provide from audioz?

Finally, thanks again for your detailed explanations

 

sure, fine sir

you can use anything that is analog modeling of tube preamps, transistor mixing desks, tape machines,
or real versions of these they all work at the atomic level
https://audioz.download/software/win/
you can "demo" plugins at your own leisure from here.
just buy them when you find ones that work for you and valuable
(try before you buy)

 

Last edited: Sep 6, 2017

I just want to mention something rare that could possibly happen, where you find a track arrived to you so horribly "miced" or recorded it actually has a weird huge spike or dip in the frequency response ( this should have been scrapped and re-done right) that be the only time to ever "eq" to attempt fix it but AFTER you deal with the transient response , making same thickness through frequency response then and only then can you see how much of a boost or dip it really has and adjust accordingly this rare event .
these days i only EVER use eq at all at any time as a create tool or effect i want to change the sound in some way to make it different ( like that telephone sound you hear) thats it for eq for me. i dont use compression only once in a while and only use limiting in mastering tiny bit . when you perfect the tiny detail of a track the rest falls in place you dont need to do drastic changes ( if was recorded right if miced right in good room, OR good samples to start with.
nig part train your ears good speakers and in ears to best reference tracks you can find. then compare your own recordings to them listen very close to differences between them.( while seeing visual in fab filterproq2 of frequency response )