# Using EQ while or after you've finished composing with your DAW



## tiago (Jan 29, 2016)

Hi guys! I've been having some doubts regarding the way that I've been producing music and I would like to get some feedback on the matter. When composing with my DAW, I, at the same time, keep using EQ on the tracks that I'm working with, usually cutting frequencies so that individual tracks are as noticeable as possible. Everytime I add new tracks, I keep using more and more EQ (also boosting frequencies if needed) and, by the end of the composing proccess, I have a ridiculous amount of EQ instances on the project... I've been noticing that this is really messing with my workflow and it's seriously getting in the way of the creative proccess... and, very honestly, I'm really starting to think that it's not worth the effort at all. I would really like to have some opinions on this, most specifically how you guys usually deal with your composing / mixing proccess. Do you only apply EQ and start mixing when you're completely done with composing and choosing sounds / samples? When two tracks are kinda struggling within a certain audio frequency, do you guys just move the volume of one (or both) of the tracks down while you are composing and leave those details to be fixed afterwards in the mixing proccess? As always, any feedback would be much appreciated. Cheers!


----------



## dreamnight92 (Jan 29, 2016)

I seldom use eq on brass, strings, woodwinds and choir: orchestration and arrangement, mic positions and fade riding do the most part of the work...eq is limited to just some little adjustment for air and presence, not drastic cut or boost here. 
For orchestral percussions that's the same, for big trailer hits and soundesign stuff you can separate the eq and filtering that build the sound from the equing for mixing the sound. Here an example: I use to layer 6-7 big drums (kick drums, taiko, dohls and so on) to create my custom hits, but I need to shape the sound of each layer with eq and filters, especially for low frequency: these are eqs that build up the sound, while mixing I'll consider this layer as one intrument. 

Eqing while mixing is completely different: you DON'T eq the sound itself, you apply eq in the way that it fits the mix (while mixing is very very bad practice to solo the sound and apply eq, eqing MUST be set in relationship with other sounds). 

The same rules applies for compression as well (even if, again, most or orchestral stuff need few compression or none).


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jan 29, 2016)

I keep writing and sequencing completely separated from mixing. Those, to me, are completely different creative headspaces. They're both part of the bigger picture, and while there of course is some theoretical overlap, at least in my mind they are about entirely different qualities and sensiblities. My mind and ears look for and listen to different things when writing and mixing. I feel that I'm doing better work if I allow myself to be completely absorbed in the respective "zone". Trying to wear two hats on one head at the same time only clouds the vision and makes different creative energies block each other, to put it in an esoteric way.

Mixing it all up not only keeps you from letting your instincts focus in a productive way, but also makes you end up doing excess work that leads to more work, more corrections of corrections, lots of one-step-forward, two-steps-back and before you know it, you've actually created unneccessary work and scatterbrained yourself and don't really know where you stand. It sounds as if that's already happening to you.

I don't want to think about EQing and stuff while still writing or sequencing. How could I possibly know what needs to be done if there's still no cohesive, finished structure where everything comes together? How could you ever finish writing a compelling and captivating novel if you stopped yourself to proof-read every single sentence you wrote? Tell the story first, proof-read and correct spelling when you're done. I can't correct or improve something that isn't even there yet. I can't listen to relationships that haven't been established yet. That would lead to applying effects for the sake of it - which a lot of inexperienced musicians and producers do.

Staying away from effects, mixing tools etc. while writing also makes me work harder to get the arrangement part right. It keeps me from falling into the trap of trying to lever out awkward or nonsensical arrangement/orchestration ideas by manipulating frequencies etc. Some people get themselves in trouble with really elementary stuff: like using very dense close-harmony type voicings and treating them as "chord pads" with a bunch of low strings and brass etc. In a lot of cases, things like that sound awfully muddy, awkwardly undefined, overpowering and boomy. It can lead to the false conclusion that some low end cutting is what's needed, where it's actually a matter of distributing your voices and harmonies across sections in a more elegant and senseful way. That's just one example.

I always try to see it like this: the better your arrangement is, the less need there is to fix things with effects. The music has to sound good, healthy and balanced without any effects on it at all. No need to rely on effects to "make" the music. If something just doesn't sound right: fix it in the writing stage! It most definitely has something to do with your writing. The professional libraries we use today already sound quite "proper" as they are, there isn't much there that is in dire need of fixing because the recording is problematic - like it could happen if you were a sound engineer that receives a bunch of home-recorded tracks from a band and some of it is noisy, burdened with phase issues, recorded badly with poor equipment etc.

Working with samples actually puts you in a comfortable position where you rarely have to "fix" things, and instead can work with plugins to make things prettier and more exciting. You can use them to make a good piece of music shine even more and make it more attractive on an audio level. But to do that, there must be a finished piece of music first. And when the music is working out on its own, you'll notice that the things that one can do with EQ, saturation, reverb, stereo imaging, compression etc. to make it sound a bit prettier, are actually quite subtle. It really doesn't have to be this ridiculous minefield of plug-in instances and radical intervention.


----------



## nas (Jan 30, 2016)

Context is what determines how and when EQ... or anything else is generally applied. It may be tiny tweaks along the way that will work together to yield an overall effective result. The context includes the various libraries and instruments used and getting them to sit well together, the orchestration style, tempo and overall vibe I'm going for.

I tend to have a general pallet of sounds as go-to's that I know work well together within a specific context. In this case, I may have specific instruments or libraries preEQ'd / filtered and appropriately bussed, as well as having the reverbs set and EQ'd / filtered. I find that when it sounds like it's nearly "there" from the start, it inspires me and makes for a more motivating compositional and orchestration experience. It also evolves as the orchestration starts to take form and by the time I'm ready to mix, I'm halfway there.

Having said that, by far the most critical and first point of reference will always be the arrangement/orchestration and that will always take precedence and dictate the overall sonic landscape with respect to applying EQ and effects.


----------



## tiago (Jan 30, 2016)

dreamnight92 said:


> I seldom use eq on brass, strings, woodwinds and choir: orchestration and arrangement, mic positions and fade riding do the most part of the work...eq is limited to just some little adjustment for air and presence, not drastic cut or boost here.
> For orchestral percussions that's the same, for big trailer hits and soundesign stuff you can separate the eq and filtering that build the sound from the equing for mixing the sound. Here an example: I use to layer 6-7 big drums (kick drums, taiko, dohls and so on) to create my custom hits, but I need to shape the sound of each layer with eq and filters, especially for low frequency: these are eqs that build up the sound, while mixing I'll consider this layer as one intrument.
> Eqing while mixing is completely different: you DON'T eq the sound itself, you apply eq in the way that it fits the mix (while mixing is very very bad practice to solo the sound and apply eq, eqing MUST be set in relationship with other sounds).



Hi there! Thanks for the comment. My question was indeed just about using EQ in order to make tracks fit with eachother, not to shape the sound of individual tracks. I do understand that EQ has a completely different usage in each situation. From what I read in your comment, it's also very clear to me that I had been overusing EQ in my tracks by cutting too much frequencies... I'll definitely try to change my current habit of constantly using EQ and doing drastic frequency cuts. Cheers!


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 30, 2016)

I use an eq in all channels, always. Depending on what sound you after, built more than one template! I always mix while I compose ... .


----------



## tiago (Jan 30, 2016)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I keep writing and sequencing completely separated from mixing. Those, to me, are completely different creative headspaces. They're both part of the bigger picture, and while there of course is some theoretical overlap, at least in my mind they are about entirely different qualities and sensiblities. My mind and ears look for and listen to different things when writing and mixing. I feel that I'm doing better work if I allow myself to be completely absorbed in the respective "zone". Trying to wear two hats on one head at the same time only clouds the vision and makes different creative energies block each other, to put it in an esoteric way.
> 
> Mixing it all up not only keeps you from letting your instincts focus in a productive way, but also makes you end up doing excess work that leads to more work, more corrections of corrections, lots of one-step-forward, two-steps-back and before you know it, you've actually created unneccessary work and scatterbrained yourself and don't really know where you stand. It sounds as if that's already happening to you.
> 
> ...



Hi Jimmy! Thank you so much for your very detailed and insightful comment. You really gave a lot of useful information and made me realize that I should focus much more on the writing / composing process and not so much on the effects / EQ until the mixing process requests it... Cheers!


----------



## tiago (Jan 30, 2016)

nas said:


> Context is what determines how and when EQ... or anything else is generally applied. It may be tiny tweaks along the way that will work together to yield an overall effective result. The context includes the various libraries and instruments used and getting them to sit well together, the orchestration style, tempo and overall vibe I'm going for.
> 
> I tend to have a general pallet of sounds as go-to's that I know work well together within a specific context. In this case, I may have specific instruments or libraries preEQ'd / filtered and appropriately bussed, as well as having the reverbs set and EQ'd / filtered. I find that when it sounds like it's nearly "there" from the start, it inspires me and makes for a more motivating compositional and orchestration experience. It also evolves as the orchestration starts to take form and by the time I'm ready to mix, I'm halfway there.
> 
> Having said that, by far the most critical and first point of reference will always be the arrangement/orchestration and that will always take precedence and dictate the overall sonic landscape with respect to applying EQ and effects.



Thanks for commenting! I think that what you're doing with EQ during your composing process is a much more moderate version of what I'm currently doing. I'll try to limit my EQ usage to "tiny tweaks" in order to maintain a coherent sound in the project, but leave the more complex stuff for the mixing process. Cheers!


----------



## tiago (Jan 30, 2016)

germancomponist said:


> I use an eq in all channels, always. Depending on what sound you after, built more than one template! I always mix while I compose ... .



Thanks for commenting, Gunther! I'm not planning on completely stop using EQ while composing, but, after reading some comments here, I really understood that I was just overusing EQ and I really think that I need to stop working with this bad habit that I somehow got. Just for curiosity, if I may ask, do you also immediatly apply reverb to your tracks while composing or leave it for when you're done with the writing process? Cheers!


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 30, 2016)

Also this depends, but mostly not. (Of course, I hear it in my head) I always hear the ready mix in my head when I compose.


----------



## RiffWraith (Jan 30, 2016)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Mixing it all up not only keeps you from letting your instincts focus in a productive way, but also makes you end up doing excess work that leads to more work, more corrections of corrections, lots of one-step-forward, two-steps-back and before you know it, you've actually created unneccessary work and scatterbrained yourself and don't really know where you stand.



Not me! 

Mixing while I compose actually lets me focus on what I need to write... as I build my track, I get a clearer picture of where I want to go, and what I want to do. Def not one-step-forward, two-steps-back here. It's all forward for me - b/c I mix as I go.


----------



## pixel (Jan 30, 2016)

I use EQ and other processing while composing. Not that I'm doing final mix but I'm shaping sound to my taste. Like changing timbre, add specific character etc. As long as it's not compression on groups and master then it's ok 
For me EQ is the part of composing/artistic process


----------



## geoffreyvernon (Feb 1, 2016)

I mix as I go, because I look at it as part of the writing process. Mixing is an art, just like composing is and to me mixing is composing. My mixes may not always be the final mix you hear on my tracks because budget mostly allows for a hired mixing engineer, but it always helps me get to where I want to go with the cue.


----------



## Jon K (Mar 9, 2016)

Doing zero mixing or editing at all while writing does not work for me at all I need to hear the delay on a guitar or the lush reverb, it immediately inspires me and tickles me in a creative way.


----------



## ghostnote (Mar 14, 2016)

I have different presets spread across all groups. I tweak them while I mix. One might argue with ye olde "You can't standardize EQ presets for every instrument!", but while that's definetely true, there are also istruments who always have trouble with specific frequencies. I'm sure my string group preset will work with symphobia 90% of the time, the rest can be tweaked.


----------



## Flux (Mar 15, 2016)

So when you guys use EQ, are you using a different instance on every single instrument, or do you EQ all instruments together or each section of the orchestra? I only work with piano and strings at the moment so it's not as crucial right now, I usually just EQ each instrument a little bit if any at all, but I've always been curious about this when I eventually get to the whole orchestra.


----------



## Jon K (Mar 15, 2016)

Like many others I have my instruments routed to different group tracks and have been applying EQ that way unless there are certain instruments that need specific attention. I use a lot of EQ maybe too much I dunno I just find my east west libraries kind of muddy especially in the low.


----------



## pkm (Mar 15, 2016)

Flux said:


> So when you guys use EQ, are you using a different instance on every single instrument, or do you EQ all instruments together or each section of the orchestra? I only work with piano and strings at the moment so it's not as crucial right now, I usually just EQ each instrument a little bit if any at all, but I've always been curious about this when I eventually get to the whole orchestra.



EQ only what needs it. If 2kHz is a problem in the violin 1, dont take it out of the cello or the flute too.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 15, 2016)

tiago said:


> Hi guys! I've been having some doubts regarding the way that I've been producing music and I would like to get some feedback on the matter. When composing with my DAW, I, at the same time, keep using EQ on the tracks that I'm working with, usually cutting frequencies so that individual tracks are as noticeable as possible. Everytime I add new tracks, I keep using more and more EQ (also boosting frequencies if needed) and, by the end of the composing proccess, I have a ridiculous amount of EQ instances on the project... I've been noticing that this is really messing with my workflow and it's seriously getting in the way of the creative proccess... and, very honestly, I'm really starting to think that it's not worth the effort at all. I would really like to have some opinions on this, most specifically how you guys usually deal with your composing / mixing proccess. Do you only apply EQ and start mixing when you're completely done with composing and choosing sounds / samples? When two tracks are kinda struggling within a certain audio frequency, do you guys just move the volume of one (or both) of the tracks down while you are composing and leave those details to be fixed afterwards in the mixing proccess? As always, any feedback would be much appreciated. Cheers!



Oh man it depends so much on what you want to achieve and what source material you have available respectively the libraries I am speaking here. So there is no general answer to that at least in my opinon. Surerly when a virtual Instrument has some problematic frequencies - and that depends also on dynamics and range - then I tend to scoop out the spots. I rarely boost frequenices I have to say. Sometimes I do that but rarely. What I think is more important to spent the focus on achieving a natural balance first before you touch the equalizer I have to say. The Eq is a powerful tool but often leads mixes to flat sounding experiences "in wrong hands". Having said that I think eq is by far the most overrrated tool in mixing and ecspecially I feel it is often used too much in a wrong way to achieve the sound you earger for. So my advice before touching an eq check everything else like orchestration, room settings, the dynamics and so on. When there is still something unpleasant frequency building up or too less then you can try on and work with an eq. I don´t know if that makes sense to you but that is my philosophy. I can give you some examples so in case you see better what I am talking about?


----------



## tiago (Mar 16, 2016)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> So my advice before touching an eq check everything else like orchestration, room settings, the dynamics and so on. When there is still something unpleasant frequency building up or too less then you can try on and work with an eq. I don´t know if that makes sense to you but that is my philosophy.



Hi, Alexander! Your philosophy does make sense to me, as I now understand and agree that EQ should be used only as the last resource in order to avoid its overuse that could cause the track to sound a bit "flat" (as it was happening to me). Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 16, 2016)

I used to mix more often as I go but I realized that I ended up having to undo most of it. As Jimmy Hellfire said mixing is just a different headspace. For me, probably because it is the skill I developed last.

The libraries I use, also, just don't need much EQ unless I am going for a special effect, because the engineers who recorded them know what they should usually sound like together.

This, btw, is a mistake a lot of people make in my opinion. When you solo and play sampled orchestral instrument, the tendency is to focus on how good it does or does not sound alone but perhaps more important is how it sounds in your mix.

I will now tell you a story I that EW Lurker didn't  When I got Hollywood Orchestral Woodwinds, I was disappointed in the sound of the english horn and oboe and if I solo them and play them, I still don't love the way they sound. But when I do a composition with the whole Hollywood series, I sense that they do what those instruments _should_ do in a more dense mix without being EQ'd. And that is little doubt in my mind that is because Shawn Murphy meant it to be like that.


----------



## tiago (Mar 19, 2016)

Ashermusic said:


> I will now tell you a story I that EW Lurker didn't  When I got Hollywood Orchestral Woodwinds, I was disappointed in the sound of the english horn and oboe and if I solo them and play them, I still don't love the way they sound. But when I do a composition with the whole Hollywood series, I sense that they do what those instruments _should_ do in a more dense mix without being EQ'd. And that is little doubt in my mind that is because Shawn Murphy meant it to be like that.



That's a very interesting opinion! The fact that some instruments might not sound so good when played alone but might do the job quite well when being played with the rest of the orchestra really reinforces the fact that EQ should be used with a lot of caution. Thanks for the comment!


----------

