Logic has all the tools you need freely available on demand.
You probably don't have problem vocalists. Most likely, you have vocalists whose power or tone exposes the weaknesses I the physical space you are trying to use.
I apply the same logic as for photography, capture all the data you can (as Elf suggests) and then filter with software because you can't add it back in later if it's not captured at all. There's a really good free EQ from Tokyo Dawn that also has multiband capability called TDR Nova... https://www.tokyodawn.net/tdr-nova/
which has a more fully featured paid version too - but the free one is really great. As is their compressor, Kotelnikov.
gplayer77 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:52 am
Thanks for your response.
What about problem vocalists that I have in at times? I thought an EQ might be helpful going in.
Depends what the 'problem' is.
Mic choice, mic placement, pop-shield, cabling, environment, monitoring, comfort reverb, maybe the roll-off switch on your mic... These all can help to get a good vocal recording, and if any of them need improving it would be a better use of such a large chunk of money.
The last thing I'd be thinking about is EQ-ing as I record. Those days are long gone.
If after thinking about what’s been said above you are open to getting a high quality software EQ, I’d recommend it as they are fantastic value for money compared to Hardware. They do make an improvement over the EQs that come built in to DAWs. I’d recommend the Kirchhoff EQ from TBT -astonishingly clear.
gplayer77 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2024 1:52 am
What about problem vocalists that I have in at times? I thought an EQ might be helpful going in.
My possibly somewhat glib answer would be to spend around the same amount of money and buy a Neumann U87 microphone. I no longer have problem vocalists (at least not in a sound sense) since I bought mine.
As an example, one male vocalist who I work with regularly, has a fine voice but experiences some "nasally/whiney" tones at around 1.5 kHz and this is one of the situations where I though an outboard EQ would be a benefit, but perhaps others do it "in the box"?
The Drawmer 1974 is a solid, affordable rack mounted four band parametric EQ with high and low cut filters if you like to turn real knobs or, god forbid! commit to a sound going in. Terribly unfashionable in some quarters I'm told though I fear I'm not a member of that club .
I can't offer any recommendations, as the dynamic EQ I use is one of Cubase's supplied plug-ins (Frequency), but the above recommendation comes up a lot. I'd also look at FabFilter's offerings.
I routinely EQ on the way in. Not sure why others are so against the idea: the closer things sound to how I want while I'm recording the better IMO; and while I will look to instrument and mic choice and technique first, there's no reason EQ shouldn't play a part in that sound.
But (a) with the possible exception of drum close mics, I tend to do it for broader tonal shaping rather than cutting unwanted resonances; (b) I'm usually tracking through a mixing console or a 500 series channel strip, which makes this approach with hardware particularly easy. As long as you have low latency monitoring (if you want to hear these changes in the monitor mix) there's no reason you can't do the same thing using software EQ.
I'd second the recommendation to tackle 'surgical' problems with software dynamic EQs later. TDR Nova works brilliantly and is great value. Fabfilter Pro-Q4 has more features and is superb, though the price reflects that.
I guess as soon as you involve someone tone precious like a guitar or something - you are going to get de facto EQ on the way in as they (we) spend precious studio hours fiddling with their amps. They'll never understand why you only want half their signal. There are so many opportunities for EQ - it's quite the galaxy in itself, just about every stage in an input chain has it's own 3 band EQ.
Matt Houghton wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2024 8:17 am
I routinely EQ on the way in. Not sure why others are so against the idea
Not against it, just don't feel it necessary. When I'm recording all I want to concentrate on is getting a clean pass of a good performance - everything else can wait.
James Perrett wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2024 12:00 am
I'd suggest spending the money on room treatment and microphones which would give you much more of an improvement than anything electronic.
gplayer77 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 20, 2024 5:22 pm
Thanks for all the replies, much appreciated.
As an example, one male vocalist who I work with regularly, has a fine voice but experiences some "nasally/whiney" tones at around 1.5 kHz and this is one of the situations where I though an outboard EQ would be a benefit, but perhaps others do it "in the box"?
Any chance of an audio example of this problem vocalist? Let's hear what you're hearing. The audio is "the real deal" and can greatly speed up problem solving from our POV.
.
