# EQing Strings?



## ModalRealist (Apr 2, 2014)

I've been spending a lot of time recently doing more critical listening, and one thing I've noticed is that in many of my favourite recordings the strings "top out" at much lower frequencies than I see in any of the sample libraries I have. (That is, the samples have a lot more high end than the recordings.) I originally thought this might be down to a lot of con sordino, but when I cross-referenced with con sordino samples, the recordings still have much, much less high end.

My question is: is this lack of high-end a "natural" effect from, say, a very warm hall, or is it more likely that the engineers on the records have applied substantial EQ?


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 2, 2014)

Good observation. Both. 

Plus ... more mic distance often in the real recordings. Plus ... tape on some of the older recordings. Plus ... different approach and taste.

Library samples are quite hyped often. Sample library makers want to deliver libraries that can 'cut through' a dense mix. Also nowadays everybody wants to have that HZ / LSO / Alan Meyerson sound out of the box (and watch what they put on their tracks here http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37594&highlight=meyerson, so their engineers go out of their way in order to make it bright. This may not always be a deliberate decision but while the rest of the recording industry is in a loudness war we here are generally in a brightness war for sure.


----------



## dryano (Apr 2, 2014)

I don't think recent string libraries are eq'd during tracking at least not in the highs. Makes no sense to me actually. I believe that effect, that samples sometimes sound brighter than live recordings is caused by the recording environment itself. If a recording stage is "full" of musicians - the whole orchestra plays - much more of the high freq stuff gets sucked by the musicians, who act as high freq absorber with their cloth etc. That effects doesn't occur with sample recordings, when only one section is in the big hall. This is at least my assumption.

On the other hand, I think its not that much that samples have too much high freq. Its more, that they have less mid and low stuff within the arrangement. If you record a string orchestra playing chords it tends to always sound thicker and bigger on the bottom end and in the mid range, than a chord played by samples. So we now think, samples are too bright, but they are only too bright, because they have less body and low mids.

So maybe the solution can be, to not high cut the strings, but improve their mid and low range.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Apr 2, 2014)

Missing the FaceBook Like option


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 2, 2014)

Hannes_F @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> Also nowadays everybody wants to have that HZ / LSO / Alan Meyerson sound out of the box (and watch what they put on their tracks here http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37594&highlight=meyerson, so their engineers go out of their way in order to make it bright./quote]
> 
> Not everybody


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 2, 2014)

Haha.


----------



## ModalRealist (Apr 2, 2014)

I am very relieved to know that it is not just my ears! Very interesting insights on the sources of the difference, and also the reasoning behind sample libraries' differing frequency response.

Would anyone be kind enough to recommend how best to pursue a "warmer" string tone? Is it a case of just doing what is necessary, albeit radical, with EQ? (And if so, any recommendations for the kind of EQ to use for this?)


----------



## José Herring (Apr 2, 2014)

Listening to the Alan Meyerson interview he's recommending to use saturation rather than EQ. I started to experiment and the results are quite pleasing. Also, he recommends using two reverbs, one set up with highs rolled off and another with lows rolled off, then mix the two via sends. It's a bit tricky but I'm liking the results so far. Though as with any new technique it takes a bit of getting use to.

As for sounding like HZ. It's not possible, and I don't believe it's a realistic pursuit unless you have what he has which nobody does. So rather take the techniques that his team uses and find your own way to make it work for your music.

So for a fuller mid to low range, I was experimenting with applying saturation to warm up the sound and make it fuller.

For tape saturation plugins Alan had mentioned the Nomad Factory one which I'm now going to look into.

But there's a new EQ with saturation by TDR that's free. I'm trying to use that, but it's also mainly an EQ so you get kind of both in one plugin. I like the Nomad Factory plug because it's more of "dial in the warmth" kind of two knob plugin, which is more my speed


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 2, 2014)

josejherring @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> As for sounding like HZ. It's not possible, and I don't believe it's a realistic pursuit unless you have what he has which nobody does. So rather take the techniques that his team uses and find your own way to make it work for your music.



Big +1 to that.


----------



## ModalRealist (Apr 2, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> josejherring @ Wed Apr 02 said:
> 
> 
> > As for sounding like HZ. It's not possible, and I don't believe it's a realistic pursuit unless you have what he has which nobody does. So rather take the techniques that his team uses and find your own way to make it work for your music.
> ...



Just to be very clear, I *don't have any desire to sound like HZ! *If anything, the opposite! Don't get me wrong - I think his music is very good, but it's not really my cup of tea. As a listener, I prefer for example, Masamichi Amano; example https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/21518480/15%20-%20Ending%20Theme.flac (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/215 ... Theme.flac)


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 2, 2014)

ModalRealist @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> Would anyone be kind enough to recommend how best to pursue a "warmer" string tone?



Depends what you mean by "warm". Different people have different meanings for that word. Going with the typical "definition".... saturation plugs can help a bit if not overused, and cutting some high freqs can help as well - but that only applies if there is a lot of high end to begin with. If there isn't, cutting high freqs even if by a little can actually hurt. Which is why there is no set rule of "cut this and boost that". As one ex., you wouldn't cut highs on SF's Mural.

Cheers.


----------



## ModalRealist (Apr 2, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> Depends what you mean by "warm".



See both a) the string sound and b) the overall mix in the Amano piece I linked to above.


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 2, 2014)

I think it is important to remember that the term "warmth" can have two different meanings when it comes to sound, especially strings sound. It can mean added harmonics due to saturation, or it could mean more bass and mids than treble.

Let us look at some basics: Devices like preamps, consoles, tube amps etc. produce mild distortion which shows in two forms: Added harmonics and warped frequency response. Plus they do things in the time domain like phase shifts but we will neglect those now.






(Source: http://www.alessandroboschi.eu/html/alexb/pcs_preamp_colors_saturation.htm (http://www.alessandroboschi.eu/html/ale ... ration.htm) , highly recommended Nebula stuff)

If you look at the right part of the picture you will notice a peak at 1 kHz (which is the signal that had been feeded into the device) but also several other peaks @ 2 kHz, 3 kHz etc. that are produced in the device due to nonlinear response. These other peaks are what we call 'added harmonic content'.

Now let us look at the spectrum of a (my) violin while playing a note at 1 kHz:






You will immediately notice that there is a striking similarity to the spectrogram of the preamp. Why? 

One answer is that a strings instrument is actually a sort of mechanical amplifier. The instrument body makes the vibration of the string noticeable, and due to the nonlinear amplification or transfer of the sound energy it produces its own characteristic distortion which colors the sound. Basically a violin is a mechanical wooden fuzz box - there, I said it. It follows the same basic principles and transforms sinus-like waves into rich, colored, harmonically laden sound. We as string players use the non-linear response of our instruments to make magic from what started out as a boring sine wave, and finding the sweet spot between not enough and too much of those harmonics is essential.

As it is for playing electric guitar, as it is for driving a console. It is always the non-linearities that make life interesting.

Still it is striking that the harmonics that define the violin sound are exactly the same as those that happen in the preamp: 2 kHz, 3 kHz, 4 kHz etc.. The difference is that their intensity is much higher than in the amp. 

Now what happens if we feed this violin signal into the preamp above?

The 1 kHz part of the violin sound alone will produce a spectrum as in the preamp chart. The 2 kHz part of the original will produce 2 kHz, 4 kHz, 6 kHz etc. The 3 kHz part will produce 3 kHz, 6 kHz, 9 kHz. And so on. All those new frequencies will however still be exactly mulitples of 1 kHz: 2 kHz, 3 kHz, 4 kHz etc. The result is still a signal that looks very much like the violin signal, however the harmonics are stronger now:






This, in consequence, is very similar to boosting the treble with an equalizer. Thus we have now understood why it is possible to use saturation as an equivalent to equalization.

If you have digested that we can move on to the next step, there are quite some more if anybody is interested.


----------



## Oliver_Codd (Apr 2, 2014)

Have you tried adjusting the mic settings? If you aren't getting somewhat close to a tone you like with the available mics, you would probably be better off getting a completely different sample library. Reverb, EQ, saturation etc. can help things in a mix, but if the source material isn't cutting it to begin with... there's only so much you can do. That's my experience anyway


----------



## José Herring (Apr 2, 2014)

So true Oliver. If the source isn't there, nothing will make it better.


----------



## jamwerks (Apr 2, 2014)

Interesting info here. Wouldn't it be helpful to get some effective generic eq setting for the different libraries we all have, Strings & WW-Brass?

So are for Mural and Sable, no generic eq needed? Is that because it's recorded directly to tape?

I seem to remember reading here 8dio saying to cut mid's for Adagio.


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 2, 2014)

There is a big difference between firmly understanding principles and applying them vs. using cooking receipes. But yes, Sable and Mural are pretty much recorded and processed like some film music recordings and the tape helps (in this case partly by adding harmonics and partly by rolling off the heights).

+1 for using the main and room/surround microphone stems if there are any. It is always a good idea to mute the close mics entirely for a test (and remember that the 'full mix' that you have in different libraries includes them).


----------



## ModalRealist (Apr 2, 2014)

Hannes, your information on the violin and pre-amp is absolutely fascinating, and I for one would love to know more! Wonderful clarity to your explanations as well. Also, with regard to the distinction between different types of warmth, I think that to an extent I am looking for "fewer higher frequencies" in the sound, yet at the same time, EQing out frequencies tends to leave a very "dead" and lifeless noise (just the fundamental I suppose, if you EQ enough) and that is not what I hear on records either!

I also concur that there cannot be generic recipes - although principles and "what to look for" are, I think, very useful information for those of us who do not yet have the necessary experience.

As Oliver and Jose pointed out, there's obviously a limit to what can be achieved with processing "after the fact." That was one reason I posted the example recording of Amano: I'd like to know more experienced listener's opinions on whether they think much EQing has occurred to the mix, or whether the "marshmallow" quality is a purely natural result of the recording environment. I'd like to know so I can understand better what I'd need to do to recreate that kind of sound.

In the libraries I have with multiple mic positions (for strings, this is just Albion II Loegria) there is indeed less high frequency content. But of course you always trade off the amount of detail and flexibility. The ambient legato in Loegria, for example, is nowhere as convincing as the close legato. But this is the way with samples of course - always compromises!

The company that is able to produce samples with a "live" and warm tone, while still dodging legato-befuddling reverberation and getting detail into the sound, I'm sure will make a lot of money - if there ever is such a company!


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 2, 2014)

ModalRealist @ Wed Apr 02 said:


> with regard to the distinction between different types of warmth, I think that to an extent I am looking for "fewer higher frequencies" in the sound, yet at the same time, EQing out frequencies tends to leave a very "dead" and lifeless



Yes and I am trying to explain what to do in order to avoid that, however not as a cooking receipe aka 'cut 2 dB @ 3.3 kHz'. Instead I'd like to show you what and why, so you know what you are doing. More to come.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Apr 2, 2014)

Hannes, thank you for your insightful post on this.

This is a fascinating topic. I noticed the exact same issue when I recently tried to recreate a strings arrangement from Braveheart. Those strings (LSO, by the way) were not very "bright" and almost sounded as if they were coming through a filter (I assumed it was due to tape recording).

I changed my LASS EQ to make a big, wide cut around the 3-4k range, but I almost feel that I scooped some of the life out of the strings... I am sure there is a better way.

Anyway, I am fascinated by this topic and look forward to more posts from Hannes on it.


----------



## constaneum (Apr 2, 2014)

I would like to look forward to more posts from Hannes as well ! =D


----------



## Rctec (Apr 3, 2014)

...this is what I use - and I see no way around it: a large room with a very high ceiling. No spot mic's. the warmth comes from the natural attenuation the air (or AIR in my case) and distance gives..., great players with great instruments. The mic amps, microphones, tape, sample-rate, whatever contribute only a tiny fraction compared to the mic'ing technique of a great engineer in a great room. Alan Meyerson, Eric Tomlinson, Armin Steiner (who only uses dynamic mics!), Geoff Foster, Shawn Murphy, Pete Cobbin... I could go on, but the list isn't actually that extensive. It's an engineer that knows and is in a great room with great players. These guys are specialists. Steve Lipson - who I think of as one of the great engineers in this world - absolutely insisted that Alan would record the orchestra on my last movie.
Which gets me to the "Spitfire" sound... Of course I love what they do, because - in effect - they record the way I do. Which - be it samples or a performance - is a homogenous, orchestral sound. 
I don't know how you can do a successful emulation of a good string-sound with anything really close mic'ed (unless that's the effect you're after). And as a side-note... Remember that you are comparing a Mastered sound-track usually to your un mastered samples. And you can't master while you program. The way you're hitting the compressors is very different with only a partly 'existing' track to the full amplitude and frequency spectrum of a finished recording. My stuff is pretty bright - because I have to fight some pretty bright sound fx, usually. But we don't really use EQ to do that. It's mic'ing, orchestration and dynamics....
-Hz-


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 3, 2014)

Rctec @ Thu Apr 03 said:


> I don't know how you can do a successful emulation of a good string-sound with anything really close mic'ed (unless that's the effect you're after).



Me neither. If there are say 3 - 4 m (10 - 13 ft) of air between the microphones and string instruments these will do wonders that can not be emulated. 

Close mics are really only there to occasionally help the voices in case they are masked by others (this is true for orchestral sound strings, not necessarily for pop or tv strings). 



> And as a side-note... Remember that you are comparing a Mastered sound-track usually to your un mastered samples.



^^^ That.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 3, 2014)

First off: Very interesting reading all this info!! As I'm not reading actually that this is "sampled-only" discussion I want to chime in with: 

I recently did a violin recording for a short-movie. I did not have the money to rent a good location etc. I did everything on my own (composer & engineer etc). 

Reading the information about the "distance" from the instrument to the microphone was something I did know at the time but didn't do. Why? I did not have the actual place to do it in. 
I had a spot/close mic 1-2 meters above pointing to the "f" holes. Would love to redo this recording with more "room/air" at a time. 

Is my violin sounding "bad" here? 
https://soundcloud.com/ryan1986/kai-and ... -red-alice

The reason I ask is that I think you could come far with what you got, but also using your imagination of creating the sound you want.


----------



## Hannes_F (Apr 3, 2014)

Ryan @ Thu Apr 03 said:


> I had a spot/close mic 1-2 meters above pointing to the "f" holes.



It is such a spread out myth that the sound of strings instruments comes out of the 'f' hole. Can be read in the internet all over the place. Still totally not true.



> Is my violin sounding "bad" here?
> https://soundcloud.com/ryan1986/kai-and ... -red-alice



Absolutely not, it fits the bill for what it is intended. It is a quite close violin pushed back with lots of reverb, well suited for that dreamy solo. 

However this would not work for the type of authentic acoustic / orchestral recording that we are talking about here.

EDIT
Ryan, in order to give an example what I mean here are some string tracks that I improvised for my good friend Andrew SimonMcAllister for one of his projects and placed them behind his guitar track. This is about the distance that I personally feel ensemble strings should have, be it either a small ensemble or the front row of orchestral strings. Could be 1 or 2 ft closer perhaps, but that distance is about right for me - for ensembles. 

http://strings-on-demand.com/demos/Andr ... Mummys.mp3

Push it still farer away and there will be no orchestral foreground any more - which usually is the 1st row of 1st violins and celli. A good orchestral recording needs a foreground or else it can not have depth.

(For a dedicated solo I would place that 3 to 6 ft closer to the front than the strings in the example).

This is still all for Ryan - the point why I am babbling here is that these strings are considerably behind the guitar which serves as a good reference point, however for my taste they are not soaked too much in reverb. That is part of the art - placing it back without overreverbing - and recording with distance is a key to it.


----------



## jamwerks (Apr 3, 2014)

Rctec @ Thu Apr 03 said:


> ...the warmth comes from the natural attenuation the air (or AIR in my case)


 :mrgreen:
@Hannes_F Actually, I am kind of interested in some "cookie receipes" eq settings for different libraries. I was thinking about slapping an eq in the return (from VEP) in Cubase for each library, and it seems this should be possible depending on which library it's for, and what mic's I use.

From what I'm understanding, on all my SF strings using the mains, no generic eq is needed. My tastes are changing and I'm starting to like a tad of close mic's in there (20%). I'm wondering if then some kind of generic eq setting might apply?

I'm thinking that violins and celli & basses might not need the same general eq setting, in which case I'd make for more than one return for each library. Or I suppose I could do some eq'ing in VEP.

Ideally, I'd set some general eq's for each library (HOW, HB, BWW, Adagio, Cinestrings, etc.), then of course eq'ing as needed on the master buss. Is this what you do?

FWIW, I don't use my VSL stuff anymore, but I remember reading here that given the recording space size, proximity, etc., that cutting 3db in the 5-6k area was the ticket, and that indeed sounded good to me.

Cheers


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Apr 3, 2014)

Hannes_F @ Thu Apr 03 said:


> > And as a side-note... Remember that you are comparing a Mastered sound-track usually to your un mastered samples.
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ That.



Good point! I should have realized that... thank you, Hans and Hannes! =o


----------



## Ryan (Apr 4, 2014)

Hannes_F: Great. Next time I'm going to record some strings. Be prepared to get some messages in your inbox :D

The sound you got was very soft and clear at the same time. I like it!!

My use of EQ on strings is trough a API 560 (at this moment. It happen to change a lot). It really makes the strings sound much clearer when theres much going on! 
There is something the API gives that I like more then others right now.

This is with the API on the strings (all Spitfire, by the way):
[mp3]http://ryan.tronder.net/karyan/VIC/Mp3/1m1%20-%20DIPS%20(TC.0.00.00.00)%20(uten%20FXS).mp3[/mp3]


----------



## Peter Alexander (Apr 4, 2014)

For Visual Orchestration 3 I think I've done 300 mini mixes based on a 6-bar string example written in the style of William Walton for his Shakespearean films. Violins and violas are voiced down in triads while cellos and basses are in octaves playing an independent part. I've tested 7 different libs including Berlin and Mural, but mostly with Vienna.

TEACHING OBSERVATIONS 
1. We record with that which has been previously recorded.
2. every lib, including VSL, has early reflections from the room in which it was recorded.
3. every lib has been recorded in rooms w/different rt60s
4. every lib has been processed based on the aural vision of the developer.
5. nearly all libs struggle with multipart vertical harmony whether close or tree.
6. NO 2 string libs sound alike!

You can get close to a recorded string sound but you do need several good recordings to benchmark with, and having a score does help.

Based on empirical testing, before eq'ing, seperate the string sections until you begin getting a more recorded sound. The one tool I've found that helps with this is Spat.

HTH


.


----------



## AR (Apr 4, 2014)

I'm using Magnetic 1 here and there. Sometimes a little bit of spl transient Designer. For celli & basses not often but sometimes the c6 sidechain. Working mostly with spitfire nowadays. Best tone which does not need eqing is the ambient channel in my opinion. I'd love to put it on the front channels but then having certain problems like 1) no audio for rear channels 2) legato is muddy 3) it has too much "predelay" ...so my tipp for spitfire users: use all mics (except maybe close) and constantly work with faders in phrases. This also creates an moving effect in a surround field


----------



## Will Blackburn (Apr 22, 2014)

Two fantastic Nebula libraries. o-[][]-o 

http://www.nebulapresets.com/?product=henry-olonga-nv-stringymathingy-192-khz

http://rhythminmind.net/STN/?page_id=1733


----------

