Have I been fooling myself???

    I just reamped an upcoming album four times yesterday. From start to finish... :S
    And I have been working on this album for several months so you can imagine, with the easy reamping abilities of the Kemper, that this was not really the first bat-shit-crazy reamping day :D


    But yeah, today I came to the idea that... perhaps I should try to... guess what... EQ A LITTLE?!


    Point is I have tried to get the right sound right from the Kemper. Except some HP and LP filters, I want the actual guitar tone to be perfect right out of the box.


    But is that a near impossibity? Not saying it's impossible, but I have thought of the part of post-EQing in Cubase as "destructive" and not doing any good to the source material:
    But today I tried making some wide but low boost at 300-500hz and the mids just popped out of the mix like I haven't been able to achieve with all these different profiles...


    So, what kind of person are you: EQing in the mix, not no EQ?


    I THOGUHT I was a "no EQ" guy but I must have fooled myself for several months now... :( so much time wasted... ||

    I don't know anyone who doesn't EQ in the mix (Jack White probably doesn't but I don't know him ;) ). The whole point of EQ when mixing is to make a track work with other tracks and optionally fix minor mistakes/adjust tone a little. Give something here, add there. It can be done on externally (Kemper, amp etc.) but the outcome is essentially the same, I would guess that applying EQ in DAW is more convenient.


    Then, there is mastering EQ which is artistic decision (if mix need to be heavily EQed at this stage to fix, something is definitely wrong) like colour grading in movies.



    p.s. Some people do heavily EQ in the mix to shape the tone, personally I don't like it, it's probably the same thing you referring to as "destructive". Disclaimer, I am not audio engineer, I just sit next to 5 (or 6, can't remember) of them quite often and dabble myself at home.

    Yeah the thing was I was reamping with different Kemper profiles to find "the one" that glues with the rest of the mix.
    But I guess that's almost impossible to find.


    I realized I go with the one I feel have the right vibe from the start, and a (what I believe is) good EQ across the spectrum.
    And then tweak the EQ in Cubase to


    Fully aware this is common practice:
    I have always EQd my guitar tracks in the past when I didn't have Kemper, because then I recorded the amp I had and was FORCED to post EQ because I couldn't reamp or I would have to record the entire album once again (I haven't discovered the woners of DI tracks and reamping back then)


    But with Kemper I thought: "I dont have to post EQ anymore" and began furiously reamp my recordings instead. From start to finish more often than not.

    I'd not say there is anything wrong with what you tried to do - it's just time consuming, I'ts more mental than anything else, IMO, I bet many of your "raw" tones worked really great. I like the idea of committing to the tone :)

    I think the trick is to find a sound you like, which Ceddy's done... many a time now... and then shape it in the mix so it sits right, but without messing with the original tone you loved in the first place. Carving unnecessary fat away goes unnoticed, tone-wise, in the final mix. The low-end balls of the guitar are literally imagined by the brain.


    IOW, all one "should" be doing if the original source tone was excellent-and-appropriate, is to cut away frequencies which only serve to muddy the mix, steal available energy from the limited amount available which has to be shared amongst all elements thereof, and fight with said elements.


    Another way of putting it:
    The original tone should be readily-identifiable in the finished mix. If it isn't, as an engineer, you're gonna have an unhappy guitarist on your hands... or bassist, drummer, singer and whatnot. You carve out a niche for each part in the arrangement, but try your best to hold true to the tones the musicians have worked years on making their own.


    So, Ceddy, I see no reason why you should fear losing all your hard work through EQ'ing in the mix. Try to preserve 'dem good tones, man, and carve away the tubbiness and anything else that fights too hard with other parts for attention in the mix. You'll get there, brother. I respect your ear very much.

    Id say eq only if it gets you a better end result :)
    I can not speak for every eq plug-in out there, but those that come standard in cubase, and all the ones that were out there 10 years ago, sound destructive to me.
    To me, the more eq, the more flat the sound becomes, it seems to loose "depth" somehow.


    I used to try to never boost, but only cut. So if i needed boost at xx hz, i cut around it.
    The theory was this way you avoid the negative effects of digital eq boost....maybe it was a hoax :)


    Personnally i have had many situations were, looking back, i shouldnt have eq ed in the amount that i did.