Hi Curt--
Glad you found it of use. The key technique is
attenuating the "standing" exaggerated tones all
through the spectrum, in order of priority. The
125-700Hz range usually presents a heap of
problems so that where I start. Seems these
garbage "peaks" are created in the recording
chain when its pressed so hard-- there's very
distant micing, low sound levels and inherent
distortion and noise from every component in the
chain right down to the speakers and room
acoustics if they are not accounted for.
Sometimes I can make a good field recording sound
much like it did on the spot (or make it sound
really, really bad!). Its time-consuming. I
typically go at a mix with three fresh starts and
compare them before I know what angle I want to
take.
A couple of folks have expressed interest in a
blog for post discussions so I'll try to get that
going. I learn a lot about the environments when
I'm mixing.
I agree. I only use Firium on the very last stage
of mastering. It is too CPU intensive and its
curves are too wide for much but final overall
wide spectrum balance. Eqium is hard to beat for
power, sound quality, pinpoint control and CPU
overhead. I routinely run 8-10 Eqium plugs with
24+ bands each in a surround mix on a G4 1Ghz
Tibook in real-time, no problem. Best of all,
and I don't know how they do it, Eqium accounts
for the latency in Logic and all of the tracks
stay in sync. Rob D.
=3D =3D =3D=3D
At 9:30 AM -0500 5/1/06, Curt Olson wrote:
>Thank you, Rob! What a presentation! It looks like we're taking pretty=A0
>much the same approach to post EQ, but yours seems to be more=A0
>sophisticated. I hope to pick your brain about this and several other=A0
>other things at the campout.
>
>Incidentally, I see you're using Firium. I spent most of last Friday=A0
>getting acquainted with it. The "learn" feature is going to come in=A0
>very handy, but I'm not impressed with the matching EQ curves it=A0
>generates. I did better by using the frequency content graphs to=A0
>generate my own match curves. It's also very demanding of processing=A0
>power -- especially on my aging G3 iBook. I have to use it sparingly.
>
>Curt Olson
>
>Rob Danielson wrote:
>
>> Hi Curt- Sure! I would very much enjoy learning about the post=A0
>> techniques you and others use too. One good way to do this is at the=A0
>> camp out in June, but I did make a QuickTime movie that introduces=A0
>> some of the assumptions I've been making:
>>
>>
>> https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/type/public/temporary/MicPreClarity125
>> -700HzTest.mov
>>
>> There's a good chance there's not be enough general interest for us to=
=A0
>> elaborate sufficiently on list. If there are a few folks who are=A0
>> interested, we could open a blog on the topic. Rob D.
>>
>> =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D
>>
>>
>> At 9:28 AM -0500 4/29/06, Curt Olson wrote:
>>> Rob Danielson wrote:
>>>
>>>> ...recording deep space in a remote location places great demands on
>>>> mics-- more than any other event I've tried to record and careful EQ
>>>> can restore quite a bit of balance.
>>>
>>> You mentioned this a few weeks ago in commenting on a test recording I
>>> posted. Would you mind elaborating a bit more on your observations
>>> about post EQ?
>>>
>>> Curt Olson
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
|