1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

which frequencies should I cut to.....

Discussion in 'Recording' started by cabbie guy, Oct 7, 2004.

  1. cabbie guy

    cabbie guy Guest

    stop pops.....for example, I know for the p's and b's in words like "pop" or "bump" I would cut in the 60hz area but how about for the q's and k's for words like "quiet" or "kill"??? any help would be appreciated
  2. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    In the time you took to write, post and wait for an answer, you could of recorded dozens of versions of q and k sounds and sought out for yourself what works and what does not work with the eq and tools you have available to you. I will give you a hint. When you find the fundumental freq of any of the p,b k, or q sounds there will also be related freqs that can be adjusted to further smooth out the performance. It is also something that is not always accomplished with just using eq.
  3. cabbie guy

    cabbie guy Guest

    I'm constantly recording and tweaking the eq and compression settings that I apply to vox hence how I know to cut in the 60hz frequency for p's and b's.....I'm having trouble wit the q's and k's after all the experimenting I have done...that's why I posted the question....in the time you took to write and post you could've helped....thanks anyway
  4. RecorderMan

    RecorderMan Distinguished Member

    If your recording on a DAW, I zoom in to the offending consonant and find a hi-pass filter that takes away the unwanted energy. I usually hi pass up to around 200 Hz. it's only there for an instant (how long does a letter last). I "write" it into the file.
  5. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    P's and B's are not always at 60hz nor is there only one freq to adjust.

    And if I took the time to just tell you, you would not get the richness of a true learning experience that there is no one freq that applies no matter what freq I would tell you. I'll give you another hint. The best part of fixing that problem is knowing hot to avoid it to begin with. Using a mic best matched to the performer, with the right mic placement along with a performer that knows how to minimize the problem go much farther to eliminate than trying to process it out after the fact.
  6. cabbie guy

    cabbie guy Guest

    thanks recorder man I appreciate your feedback...the method you described is close to what I'm doing right now....but I zoom in and use a click/pop eliminator...I was just looking for a neighborhood range where to cut so I can "cut" down on the areas on the vocal where I would need to apply the click/pop eliminator or maybe not have to apply it all...once again thank you for your feedback...I truly appreciate it

    audiogaff, I know that not all the p's and b's can be in the 60hz range nor can any sound be pinpointed for every vocal...but I do know that most can be pinpointed to a certain range...once again I just wanted to know what frequency range people would say the q's and k's fall in....I'm using a shure ksm32 for a vocalist who has a voice that is strong in the mid/high range so I know I have a mic that suits them....I'm not a "newbie" to recording nor am I a "vet"...I just want some help on a problem I came across
  7. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    Curious, what makes you think or how is that you decided that the KSM32 is a mic that suits them best?

    Did you not hear or notice the problems you mentioned durring practice or as you were recording?

    Ok, another hint. Try using a variable/sweeping eq and note what freq range makes it worse.

    My self imposed mission is too not just give out answers as much as it is to make one think about what, how and why they are doing or having to re-do what they are doing or have done. You are struggling with a problem that most of time can be greatly reduced and even eliminated if you knew how and took the time to prevent it to begin with. It is this learning, experience, focus and skill development that makes one a recording vet.
  8. RecorderMan

    RecorderMan Distinguished Member

    I agree in theory..but in practice (my experiance of course) it's the song followed by the performance that's more important.

    My most recent productin involves an amzing artist who while being a great composer/singer/guitarist has some hearing damage. Try as I might I could not get a great perfomance out of him in a standard recording setup : out in the room, Large condensser tube mic, etc. It was allright..but not goosebumps. The sound was great, but the performance lacked conviction and had tuning issues becuase with the hearing damage he couldn't take one side of his cans off.

    Note: Volume affects pitch. the brain percieves loud as sharp so people sing flat with loud cue mixes. That's why you have them take one side off so they can hear themselves.

    Anyway, what I has to do eventually was let him sing in the control room. with an sm57 with the monitors on loud (no phase flip stuff). I did adjust the mix per section, trying to keep the Cymbs and stuff lower. I was riding the mic pre AND the monitor volume. LOL.

    This ended up much better. He worked the mic really well, "eating" it at times for a filter-y sounding effect. Andy Johns asked me what I did to get the vocal sound...it was "him" (pointing to the artist) I said.

    Mick Gusauski also asked.

    so the point is, the "sound" matters much less, than getting agreat performance. I say, don't worry about surgery you can do latter as long as you get a passable sound and a great performance.
  9. RecorderMan

    RecorderMan Distinguished Member

    if you "rock" the cursor across the area to find the splosive, you then find that they are generally "louder" and the waveform lines are thicnker (more harmonic content). That's what I find in pro tools at least.
  10. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    I fully agree with ya RecorderMan, that the song and performance is top priority above all. But I think that we also both agree that taking preproduction steps up front helps insure that both sound and performance are best captured. What you describe seems more non typical but was necessary and required to get the results you were after. It is the final results that matter, and it is the difference in skill that gets it one way or another. I'm by no means perfect and have had to do my share of vocal surgery. At the same time I've also been very pleased and gratefull when I have done the preproduction thing right and it pays me back latter.
  11. cabbie guy

    cabbie guy Guest

    the ksm32 is a "darker" sounding mic...it would sound better with a vocalist who has a mid/high voice as opposed to one who has a voice with more bass in it......the mic appeals to the low end, a vocalist with a more bass voice will be more likely to overload the low end of the audio where a vocalist with more highs in their voice would be evened out frequency wise b/c of the natural bass that the ksm32 has

    and while I appreciate feedback from anyone in the forum you can kill your hints now...I'm not being disrespectful to anyone I just need some minor help on an audio forum....I'm capable and willing to learn any tips I can pick up but I'm not your dog so relax
  12. djui5

    djui5 Guest

    Interesting thread....

    Cabbie....try zooming in on the offending letter......and ducking most of it with volume automation..........some automated eq will be helpfull also......
  13. cabbie guy

    cabbie guy Guest

    thanks bro
  14. Thomaster

    Thomaster Guest

    duuude you're totally right
    he's acting stupid. one hint=okey, but keeping being stupid about it doesnt help anyone.
    cabbie guy, the above guy just made a good advice.
    what i have done once, was to just open the vocals in an editor, and change the gain about 60% down(i even did it with the normalize-command sometimes, dunno why..) on the hard letters. dunno if this is a pro thing to do, but it worked very nice.

Share This Page