Hello, and welcome to another episode of Inside the Recording Studio. I am Jody Whitesides, and with me as always is Mr. Chris Hellstrom. How are you today, Chris? I'm doing good too. Hi Jody, I'm doing good. How are you? Yeah. Excellent. Excellent. What do you got going on for today? Yeah. You. I feel so privileged. Yeah, that's it. All right. Well, that's good. That's fair enough. Maybe we You in this podcast. Yeah. Yeah.
should just dive into it then. And we are talking about ways to EQ acoustic guitar What are we talking about? Mm hmm. when we're tracking them and some problem areas that that might garner a little bit more attention Sure. perhaps when it comes to that. So we'll see. So you play and record a heck of a lot more acoustic Sure. guitars than I do. So I might lean on you a little bit more on this one, but yeah, nicely done. All Lean on me when you're not strong.
Yep. I was just When we scheduled this and prepared for this, there are of course stylistic differences here, but we're talking more like general guidelines now. This is not necessarily for, "Oh, this is just a pop or a big strummy type of thing," but we're thinking more wider terms, right? Is that how you're kind of approaching this or am I reading too much into where you'd like to take this?
All right. Well, fair enough. We're talking now at mixing stage and not during tracking thinking of what are the areas to look at when you're EQing and recording an acoustic guitar and we're going to kind of keep it simple and looking at about five, four actual means of EQ and a fifth way to exit yourself out the room. I guess it'd be a good way of saying it. Yes. because we will touch on the tracking part. So start us off, It is. man. What's the first thing that you assuming that everything
has been recorded as well as possible. And that's a big assumption. I know. But in a perfect world, we've tracked guitar, the performance is good. But there's still some issues getting it to work in the mix the way you'd like. So where do you start listening? And what do you notice that there are generally problem areas first, low end? Yeah. low end, the big bottom, as Spinal Tap might say, the way I Thank you. [ Pause ]
would generally approach that, regardless, especially if I'm not using some sort of frequency analyzer, I'm going to immediately throw a high pass filter on it. Generally, I'm going to start that around the 50 Hertz area. And depending on which channel strip I'm actually using, whether it's a Neve or API, the Focusrite, SSL, what have you. Each of them are going to have a slightly different curve (silence) to their high pass filter Man, it's just a rumble that kind of lives down there, right?
and how sharp it's going to take things out, so to speak. Generally speaking, I'm throwing that high pass filter on pretty much immediately so I can take out anything below 50. Yeah. That's just gonna kind of clutter up a lot. Well, if the channel strip has it built in, you either have to know the slope or you have So when you say the slope on the EQ there, how aggressive or do you tend to go for like a 12 dB or 18 dB slope type of thing?
or are you just kind of going with whatever the channel strip is? Or. Sure. to listen to it somehow to understand how much it's actually taking. Some are gentle, some are 6, some are 12 dB, or some might even be 18. >> Right. are settable, but most of them when they have the high and low pass filters, it's just their recreation of the channel strip itself. Somewhere in the brochure is going to tell you what the
actual slope is and it's not adjustable. But on modern EQs, if you're using the Ozone 9 EQ or the [BLANK_AUDIO] dynamic EQ out of Ozone 9, or if you're going to pick up a Waves EQ of some sort or fab filter or >> Even your stock yeah. or name off some other EQs, or stock, your stock DAW filters, [BLANK_AUDIO] they usually have a settable slope, Right. but often now I'm using the emulated channel strips. [ Pause ]
So I'm just going with whatever they set their slope at, at their high and low pass filter. Generally speaking, I'm talking about the high pass filter and I'm starting it right around 50. If I feel like there's still too much low end rumble coming in, I'm gonna bring it up further. Generally speaking, the furthest up that I would go with a high pass filter is somewhere around 160 at max.
Wow. 'Cause at that point, you're starting to chew out quite a bit of stuff, but generally speaking, most acoustic guitars don't need to go that high in terms of the high pass filter. Yes. And things that we have to consider there, of course, is that the type of arrangement is that a solo guitar, that type of thing, if we're going that high.
(clicking) But of course, if it's a really exposed guitar, like you said, if you start at like 50, there's That generally takes care of most of the problems. very lit. Right. (clicking) not a whole lot if any of importance right there and even if you end up Mm hmm. going a little bit higher if you have the option again is to have a little bit more of a gentle slope perhaps because then you might be so let's say for Sure.
example if you're going all the way up to 150 or 160 with a steep slope that's gonna take away too much of your tone so but if you have issues going on a Yeah, a vast majority of the time that's what it is. gentler slope might work there as well but so in 50s your starting point then anyway to kind of get rid of that extra rumble. Right? Okay. How about you? Right.
That makes sense. Yeah, I do the same thing. The way I tend to record guitars and have them sitting in my songs that I do and songs that I tend to mix, the acoustic guitar is more often than not a supporting instrument. It's not the main thing where it might just be like a ballad or something. So I can usually get a little bit more Sure. aggressive with it because it's not just a solo acoustic guitar. So if it takes away a little bit
more of the low end just to make it sit in the mix a little bit better I can do that. But depending on what's played I wouldn't go much over a hundred if I can help it you know that then it's kind of drastic. So yeah, then the frequency range is different. There was one point in time where I actually approached Taylor Guitars about making me a seven string acoustic guitar. That would have probably changed things in terms of how it approached using the high-pass
Yeah, but that is an important thing to keep in mind, though. I filter. But unfortunately, or actually maybe more fortunately, I didn't get that guitar made. But there's always the future to think about. Yeah. I mean, this might garner another episode down the line, Yeah, especially with an acoustic, that would be pretty hardcore.
but thinking about EQ as it relates to pitch and how you might treat those, let's say those seven string guitars again, if you get down that low, you're going down really low in the frequency range with the fundamental of those tones. So you have to be careful. Yeah, it isn't important to keep in mind when you go like, Yeah, you're losing a lot of the fundamentals down there. Well, why can't I hear that open B string now? Well, because you high pass that 150.
So you're effectively just notching it out, yeah. Yeah. So moving on from our low end, where do we go next? But that's, yeah, I say we go up the spectrum here and just start looking at the low mids. When I'm thinking low mids, All right. I'm thinking 100 to 300 kind of range right there. That's where I start. And what are you doing in there? Okay. I'm trying to clean up some mud or some crud or just stuff that just kind of makes it boomy, I guess is a good word for it.
It's, I can also be a little bit of that boxiness where it can hinder the tonality and the clarity of the low end. If you're playing, let's say for example, if it's a part where you're strumming these big open chords perhaps and you can get a little bit muddy, it's cruddy. It's that range, right? So the question is how sharp is your Q in there? So, well, I'm gonna ring the bell and say it's content dependent, but it depends on obviously Yeah.
how well the guitar has been recorded and on the part. If it's something where somebody is Mm-hmm. really, really hitting that low E or something, right, and there's a certain frequency that is just >> Sure. being popped and hit again, then I would get a little bit more aggressive. But generally, I try to be as gentle as possible because if I have to cut out too much, chances are that it just hasn't been recorded properly.
And also it can affect how natural the instrument is gonna sound, at least in my ear. Sure. So if I get too aggressive there, Sure. but I would say probably gentler curves there, unless there's an absolute issue with something where you have to notch it. The more extreme it would get, I guess I would use a narrower curve to problem solve. I am going to concur with all that you have just said, essentially What about you? Mm-hmm.
with that area in the same, pretty much the same general area from about 100 maybe 300 up to possibly 350 ish is really having to pay attention to the arrangement Sure, of course. of what else is happening with the acoustic guitar. If it's all by itself and it's not ringing out in weird resonances, I probably don't touch it at all. But if it's inside a fairly dense arrangement and other things are kind of getting in the same way with the kick, the bass, some sense, the piano,
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because I mean, the wider notches that you whatever it is that's riding along with the coattails of the acoustic guitar and what its importance is in the mix, I'm likely to be cutting there gently, usually with much more narrow notches, but yeah, same. Mm-hmm. get there, you're again, you're removing tone, right? You're not you're sculpting, you're not kind of making something nicer Yes. Yeah. No, I agree. or taking care of the problems that can be there.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But here's also one of those things where Yeah. Yeah. like split EQ would be great. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. Where you can just get the transient, right? Mm-hmm. And you massage that a little bit more Yeah, yeah, yeah. and leave this sort of fundamental kind of attack Yeah, yeah. or intact. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So, you know, again, depending on playing style or what's going on there. But that's a great tool for that type of stuff. Mm-hmm. Yeah? Yeah, yeah. So, right?
Yeah, yeah. Well, then we're talking about upper mids. And where do you go next? Let's move up the register here, shall we? [ Laughter ] [ Pause ] We're talking into like the 800 Hertz to the 2K range. And this is the quality area of the instrument is probably a good way to denote that range on the acoustic guitar. And generally speaking, a vast majority of really good acoustic guitars. This is where they are super abundant in their sonic juiciness, I guess would be a good way of saying it.
I'm gonna steal that sonic juiciness. Start a new juice bar with sonic juiciness and all you serve is music. Yeah. Merch idea. Yeah, that's true because that's where, to my ear at least, that's where the clarity is. It's not the weight, it's that mid-range where everything kind of lives. Yep. It's an area that can, and this probably depends on the instrument as well, less on perhaps the I have a partner.
player, but the quality of the instrument where you can hear everything going on. I might be more She's. I'm not really sure what it's like, but like, likely to have gentle boosts here perhaps to bring out certain things if it calls for it of course, I really feel like she's about to make me feel healthy in general. but there can be issues here as well. But if I want to bring out a little bit more, let's say that Yeah.
this is a picked guitar part. I would listen for that to kind of get if I want that attack Yeah. prominent or not. That's where I would go. Generally speaking, if there's vocal going with this guitar, I'm going to watch out right in the 1.8 to 2K range of whether or not I'm going to scoop that guitar or not right in that little area with a fairly narrow cue just to leave room for the vocal. just to leave room for the vocal.
But if there is no vocal, then that's where I'm going to likely take a narrow Yeah. Right. boost due to articulation of the pick hitting the strings in a sense. That's where you get a lot of that energy right there. And if it feels like it needs to be shifted because you do have a vocal, well, then I'm more likely to shift it a little further down into the one range to get that boost in there somewhere. That would be me. Yep. Yeah, two and a half - Right, yeah.
But when you say that you make room for the vocal or you say you might dip a little bit, how much are you talking about there? You're only talking about a few dB, right? Yeah. max one one to two mostly in that range ish area little adjustments yeah It's kind of interesting how those seemingly minor adjustments can make a big difference, right?
Everything's stepping all over themselves, you don't so but again of course you have to make the decision there I mean if it's a vocal it's obviously the vocal is going to win every time right because that's right well assuming that Hopefully.
Sure. that's the most important part which it generally is right unless you're a guitar player then of This is why guitar players generally don't sit in on the mix, course the guitar is always the most important part you know but yeah yeah where is all the right? It was automated out. the guitar, I did a pick scrape here, why can't I hear that? Yeah, because everybody's against me. But in all seriousness, (laughs) And with all that importance,
that's an important range. So there's clarity, that type of thing. So we have to use a little caution there, I think, to make sure that it plays well with others. I'm thinking Sheen, the nice, not Charlie, but the acoustic guitar type of Sheen. let's take a word from our sponsors. And we're back. We're gonna move on to the next level in our acoustic guitar EQ spectrum. What would that be? Not Charlie. Yeah.
if we want it there or not. Again, content-dependent. But now I'm looking at higher up in the register. We're going up, I'm thinking maybe like 2 to 4 maybe even 5k in that area. So how do you treat (silence) that? Because you do this, like I said, you do this a lot more than I do. What's your sort of Depending on how dense this arrangement is mentality when you go in there and what are you listening for?
for. Again, another line esoteric volume level. All and how important I feel this acoustic guitar is in this arrangement, I will treat that area with a boost. And the reason for that is, is that you can get a good deal of esoteric volume level. Esoteric volume level. (laughing) All right. Well, you can give its perceived value So what you're saying is that you're making it more prominent a bit of a boost here without really bringing the volume really ridiculously loud.
And by boosting in that range, Yes, that's probably a good way of saying it, which is better than saying esoteric volume, and you hear it more without having to bring the fader up one or two dBs. You can have it sit and add a little bit more presence. Is that where you're? Yeah. All right. but it is kind of esoteric volume. Esoteric volume is much better on the Scrabble board, isn't it? Than presence. You're bringing up a section.
Yeah, it's certainly not going to do the weight thing, right? Yeah. The idea of it there is that when you bring it up in that area, you get a couple of things happening. more of your attack signal, the shine on the attack, and you get a bit more of perceived volume without bringing out a substantial amount of weight, I guess is a good way of saying it to define my esoteric volume. (laughs) (laughs)
Alright, I'll play along. Yeah, I think that's right. But again, it depends on for me, at least the way I would treat this is I think if you overdo this, this is one of those things where I think was Dave Pensado that said once about this sort of frequency range. that's the sound of expensive, you know. But yeah, but have to be careful there somewhat though, That's a good way of putting it. Shrill.
because once you start getting up into that like 5k range, I think if you get too aggressive, you start sounding just brittle and you can potentially just add that sort of Mm-hmm. noise really to the instrument or the track. And also depending on what the vocal is doing at that [ Pause ] point. In my opinion the vocal always wins. So that's always in the driver's seat. So I'm careful in that range. It would really be a reason for me to do any kind of boost there.
It's a sound of expensive but be careful because you can easily make it sound brittle and just piercing. And I think it's one of those things also where our guest Adam here a couple episodes ago were on and he was talking about taking breaks and things. If you don't at that range that can Mm hmm. Sure. easily starts on "Ooh, that sounds really exciting, that's really really good" and then you come back
and all the dogs in the neighborhood are just like going rampant, right? So be careful there but In that two to five K range, where is your most useful portion to you? yeah. Probably a little bit lower than the five and I'm trying to stay out of that vocal then about two. (silence) That would be my go-to range in there as well. So if I have to do something in that area, I might look at like three maybe? Yeah. The one spot that I tend to be very wary of Explain yourself. is about the 4.1 range.
If there's a, well, that's where a lot of harshness Yeah. 8k. Wow. That's... you're mad, sir. You're mad. actually builds up for a lot of instruments. So a narrow notch right there is generally a good idea, but for boosting for the clarity or the sake of getting some extra sheen, it's either three, or if I'm really feeling avant-garde, I might go to eight to get more of the air out of it. Yeah, serious sheen. mad. Yeah, no, I would, I would, I should never say never. Right. That's mad scientist.
I don't do it drastically, though. Sure. Well, she's never say never. But I would say I would never go that high on acoustic guitar. Because to me, I was like, yeah, there's nothing good happening up there. Right. So now we're talking about, you know, I'm thinking at least when we're talking acoustic, I'm thinking steel string acoustic here. That's how I'm kind of validating my decisions here. My other assumption of going up that high has more to do with the actual recording But -- Okay.
and the type of mic that was used to record that guitar. Yes. Some mics are going to do it much better than others. Now, if it was done with an SM57, I'm not likely to be boosting 8K. Mm-hmm. Right. However, if it's done with a KM 184 or a C 12 or a 260 or something like that nature Shrill or piercing or where the high end is a lot more pleasant than griddle or aggressively shrill. Yes. So it's dependent upon what comes next in our little discussion here, which is if I
Yes, I'm right with you there. It obviously is dependent on that. If you find yourself that have gotten to a point where all of this EQ for the low all the way up to the sheen has gotten radically aggressive in either boosts or cuts. I have to rethink, does this need to get rerecorded? (laughing) your if your EQ curve looks like it's an ad for an EQ. Yeah, That's a good one. Never heard that before. well, it always strikes me as like who EQs like that, you know, Sure.
but if it looks like that, it's probably a problem with a recording. If possible, then take all the information that you're now armed with and perhaps rethink, if possible, the re-recording of the guitar, right? Could be mic placement, all of those things that we've talked about before. Could be room placement. I mean, where you sat the guy in the room to actually play the thing and then you'd put Sure. Yeah. the mic up against it, that kind of thing also creates an issue.
That's the Al Schmidt method. Yeah. Make sure that shit sounds good right in front of the mic. Yeah. Yeah. You know, as we're talking about sort of stepping away from now, but the high end or the high mids, I think, and I'm repeating myself, or I know, but I'm thinking, the better the quality of the instrument, you're perhaps less likely to have an issue in those areas. Sure. Same could be said for the mic that's actually miking the darn thing. Because perhaps a...
Oh, of course, yeah, all of these things work together. Yep. But let's say that if you're using a mic that might, even if it's not like a 57, but something that can be seen like a little bit more of a duller sounding mic, you can perhaps get away with boosting a little bit in that area. If you want to bring out a little bit more clarity, then it's really a matter of poor mic choice, perhaps, when we're overtracking. Okay. But of course, again, devil's advocate, Okay.
if you only have one mic, that's the mic that you have to use, right? The best mic to use is the one that's in your hand, right? It fits your only choice, yes. So you go... Yeah, it goes through that. Hmm. But besides the EQ ranges here and what we talked about, the guidelines that we tend to think about here. How much of this changes for you It's still a generality.
if it's instead of a picked part, if it's like a finger style type of part, do you find that it's pretty similar or does it change how you think about it? Because the transients will obviously be different. Yeah. So it becomes that phrase that we like to use, program dependent, even if I'm using a finger pick portion or part. I'm thinking in terms of do I need the finger striking the string to be more articulate or not? And that's still gonna happen in the sheen area of the 2K to 5K range.
Right. Okay. If I want more air out of the situation, I'm still gonna go up towards that 8K range. If I need to think about the body of what's happening. Now, there's a difference between how a pick is going to attack the string and a finger is going to attack the string. And that's going to affect that eight to 2K range of the upper mids. 'Cause the finger striking the string is going to have generally a much more dense reaction with the string.
Yeah. It's gonna give it more meat, so to speak, You start looking at those ranges immediately if you hear these issues that might arise and that's your go-to and then tweak from there. because you're using more meat to attack, to excite the string to make it sound. So it does come a bit program dependent. Those general areas are still the focus points of the acoustic guitar sound when you're EQing it for a mix.
Mm-hmm. Yeah, and I guess the thing with picked versus fingers type of thing that might also be instead of an EQ fix might be something that you you just deal with any compression differently but that's not the scope here right but that might be a different tool for that type of thing. Right. Mm-hmm. So, yeah. So there you have it. Those are the ways you want to start looking at EQing your acoustic guitar when you're There you go.
getting ready for your mix of your next big hit of acoustic guitar material. Sounds good. And with that, yes. And with that, we're going to move on to our Farii Day Finds. Well, it's been out for a little bit if you're listening at the time of this episode being released, Chris, what have you got this week? Hmm. but I have played around with (silence) Heaviosity's Foundation Piano. They actually released a free piano and Mm.
in true Heaviosity fashion. It is awesome because I like Heaviosity and everything Sorry evil. about Heaviosity, but it is cool. It is more than just a sort of gentle piano. It has some bells and whistles in there. It's got some cool arpeggiators and rhythmic gating that you can do with it. And I thought it was really cool. I just [BLANK_AUDIO] just came up with an idea immediately when I loaded it and to me when inspiration strikes when you're just kind of loading it in that's a cool Yay, free.
instrument and in this case at least for the time being it's free go check it out Foundations Piano by Heavyocity is my Friday fun for this week yay free yay I'm going to take it back to 1985 ish with a movie called Crossroads starring Ralph Machio. good and free. What about you? What do you got for us Jody? Mmm nice.
Yesterday, I went down the rabbit hole and found the clip of the what they call cutting heads duel [BLANK_AUDIO] between the devil's guitar player in the movie, which is played by Steve Vai and Ralph Macchio. Yeah, just guitar nerdism. It's always fun to watch that just for the sheer sake of like fun guitar playing. That's a good way of saying it. (laughing) So I think that sparked a lot of new guitar players, yep.
Yes, in watching that and in knowing some of the history [BLANK_AUDIO] behind it, I've always been under the impression that Steve Vai played his parts, That's how I understood it. and apparently Ry Cooter played Ralph Macchio's parts. But in going down the rabbit hole, [BLANK_AUDIO] (chuckles) I learned that that is not necessarily true.
(chuckles) Ooh. And while the clip that I sent you [BLANK_AUDIO] has the epic, epic, epic comment war going on on it about who's right and who's wrong, [LAUGHTER] what I did learn actually is that Arlen Roth, [ Pause ]
It was a fantastic guitar player who back in the day created something called hot licks. It was one of the progenitors of that He was the primary guitar player and music supervisor music writer for the guitar in that movie like of all the guitar stuff and There is some interesting stuff that goes on behind The scenes with all of that in that the classical guitar portions of that movie were actually done by [ Pause ] I'm probably gonna butcher this name, [ Pause ]
but Bill Kaingeiser or Kana Geiser. I've looked him up and watched some of his stuff [ Pause ] on YouTube. The dude is a phenomenal classical guitar player. [ Pause ] And having spent a little time being my first early years [ Pause ] of formative guitar playing as a classical guitar player, it's fun to watch that guy play. He's really good. And it makes sense in the context of the movie that he was brought in to do that stuff.
And then there's the whole fight of everybody thinking that Ry Cooter did all of these slide guitar licks and everything. And the general reality is that that is not necessarily true. Ry Cooter did have a hand in writing and creating some of that stuff. And then Steve Vai did have some hand That's cool. in creating some of the stuff that he played. But a vast majority of this was all done by Arlen Roth. So it's just interesting they bring in for guitar players to do all of this stuff.
And then the other thing that's fun about the rabbit hole is that there is an original take to that cutting heads duel that didn't even involve Steve Vai. That's cool All right It involved Ry Cooter going up against Ralph Macchio, so to speak, in the movie, but they cut that and put it on the cutting room floor and then brought in Vai to do something a little bit more probably entertaining. 'Cause I really don't know how entertaining Ry Cooter is to watch.
So that is my Friday find, That yeah, it's a little bit of history there because yeah cuz I had to plead ignorance because I like so many other people thought it it was just to rent that movie. While we've got your attention, was Rycooter and Vi that did that. So I'm going to enjoy checking that out because you did send that to me. So. (sighs) [ Pause ] we ask that you go to inside the recording studio.com and sign up for our mailing list.
Doing so will get you weekly reminders (Applause) about the Tuesday tips when they come out . and we'll make sure that you don't miss . any future episodes of the podcast. [silence] Send us an email at goldstar, G-O-L-D-S-T-A-R at inside the recordingstudio.com with the word acoustic and you'll get something cool back in your inbox.
If you have a topic or suggestion for Chris and I to explain in a future episode, contact us at the contact page and we'll put it into consideration for a future episode. And with that, I'll say, see you next. week. Thank you. hear me back inULE Have a good one Jody, thanks for listening everybody! [ Pause ]