New Waves F6 Floating-Band Dynamic EQ

[catsass]

Have any of you picked this up, or given the demo a go? It looks promising. And at $29 USD, it won't break the pocketbook.

http://www.waves.com/plugins/f6-floatin ... dynamic-eq

.

[X-bassist]

I guess no one? It looks interesting, I'm just wondering why it's going for so little.

[byzantium]

Thanks very much Anders for the info and the links, I'd also be interested in what you think of dynamic EQ (esp the waves F6 one and how it might different from waves TrackSpacer) and how you might use it. I see WaveRider is for PT only. For ducking, do you use dynamic EQ or volume automation? (would you need both?)

Sorry a bit off topic, but I just did my first big sound mix job for an animated series and bloomin' hell it was a learning curve! I didn't have any automated tools so I ducked music (well it was my music and still in midi form) via volume automation on a Logic folder stack, which wasn't too bad. Of course this wasn't ideal as the reverb returns weren't ducked via this method, so ducked/quieter passages were more spacious! Also my earlier mixes also weren't R128 -23 LUFS metered/monitored, I had to go back and do that! It was all a bit of a rush, I didn't have a lot of time to figure it out.

I've only just figured out how to do it better in terms of routing - I had to create an aux track and route all the sub-mixes (the outputs of all the Logic summing stacks) to it, plus all the send fx returns. Then volume automate that.
You can't nest summing folders in Logic (a technical restriction but I don't know why).
.

[catsass]

I see WaveRider is for PT only

Have a peak (heh..) at Hornet's AutoGain Pro
http://www.hornetplugins.com/plugins/ho ... togain-pro

I am also fond of Peak Rider 2 from Impact Soundworks
https://impactsoundworks.com/product/peak-rider-2/

[byzantium]

Thanks so much guys, very much appreciated, and very interesting and new to me.
Do the automated tools generally do a good job?

I ended up mixing the episodes roughly like this, it was the only way I knew at the time (and still know!): (working in Logic)
- import an OMF or AAF, sync it if I need to
- set up a rough volume balance across multiple dialogue tracks
- apply in and out fades manually, incredibly time-consuming esp to take out before- and after- clicks and mic noises
- static EQ the dialogue tracks (often a compromise with poor recording / moving mic positions)
- if really different tones, split the dialogue clips into multiple tracks with different EQs
- apply compression on the dialogue tracks
- one thing that I ran into were some incredibly fast and grating transients on voices that compressor couldn't catch, and suddenly realising, oh maybe this is what those 'Transient Designers' are for! - I ended up using the free Flux BitterSweet plug-in which took the edge off most of them
- manually adjust clip gain on most audio clips, while watching -23 LUFS (but only latterly!)
- manually adjust volume automation points on music summing track
- run through it a few times beginning to end to tweak
- render out and ship off!

I've just realised I have the (free) Tokyo Dawn Records 'Nova' which I believe is a dynamic EQ but I've never used it (and wouldn't know how to use it!). I guess the theory is (?) if the signal gets loud, it's usually a 'boom' or plosive or an 'ess' and the dynamic EQ can use the increased volume on the way in, to trigger a (pre-programmed I guess) dynamic cut at certain frequencies to take it / them out?.

Thanks again, and sorry for the newbie-ness!

[X-bassist]

Thanks so much guys, very much appreciated, and very interesting and new to me.
Do the automated tools generally do a good job?

I ended up mixing the episodes roughly like this, it was the only way I knew at the time (and still know!): (working in Logic)
- import an OMF or AAF, sync it if I need to
- set up a rough volume balance across multiple dialogue tracks
- apply in and out fades manually, incredibly time-consuming esp to take out before- and after- clicks and mic noises
- static EQ the dialogue tracks (often a compromise with poor recording / moving mic positions)
- if really different tones, split the dialogue clips into multiple tracks with different EQs
- apply compression on the dialogue tracks
- one thing that I ran into were some incredibly fast and grating transients on voices that compressor couldn't catch, and suddenly realising, oh maybe this is what those 'Transient Designers' are for! - I ended up using the free Flux BitterSweet plug-in which took the edge off most of them
- manually adjust clip gain on most audio clips, while watching -23 LUFS (but only latterly!)
- manually adjust volume automation points on music summing track
- run through it a few times beginning to end to tweak
- render out and ship off!

I've just realised I have the (free) Tokyo Dawn Records 'Nova' which I believe is a dynamic EQ but I've never used it (and wouldn't know how to use it!). I guess the theory is (?) if the signal gets loud, it's usually a 'boom' or plosive or an 'ess' and the dynamic EQ can use the increased volume on the way in, to trigger a (pre-programmed I guess) dynamic cut at certain frequencies to take it / them out?.

Thanks again, and sorry for the newbie-ness!

EQ like this usually works better on a singing voice or instrument, because there are clear tones involved, a speaking voice is a little more difficult because some have a wide frequency range (like a man with a deep voice) and some narrow (like a mousy woman or child) so clear eq choices without muffling (taking out too much high frequencies) or loosing body (taking out too much low end) can be tough. Also in dialog voices must be clearly heard and understood (even if not recorded ideally) where sing voices (especially chiors or background voices) are not as critically listened to.

With dialog I usually make a pass to clean up the editing first, since most picture editors don't spend a lot of time on dialog and their systems many times are set to just edit to the nearest frame (abouf a 34ms chuck) which is far from ideal. In Pro Tools you can select many regions at once and apply small fade in/fade outs to the beginning and ends of many at once, which can help speed things up. I also double check sync at this point too, especially on ADR tracks. Normally I try to get each character on it's own tracks for eq purposes, but in traditional film they use 4 to 8 lettered tracks (Dia A through Dia H for instance) to split off characters in each scene ( usually difficult voices or characters recorded poorly get their own tracks, with ADR and othe production fx at the bottom)

If this "prep" pass is done well, it makes the mix easier, as you only have to apply eq and fx (including transient designers) on tracks that need it. But you can also automate the bypass switch on plugins that are only need fro one line, then keep it in bypass until the line comesup at have it auto turn on and off. My 2nd pass is to double check levels (I do this before final tweaks, as it usually sound better to use automation or ride levels than relying on a plugin. For general level the auto gain plugs can help, but depending on the voice I usually find ai have to tweak levels anyway, since some involve a lot of frquencies (as mentioned above with a big male voice) or so few (small boy or mousey woman) that special care is needed or th voice gets lost. Plugins can't make an aesthetic choice, and many times this is what it comesdown to in dialg- not just "does it sound good?" but "can I hear and understand it clearly?". How actors happen to say the line (and accents or technical problems) can play a big role.

That said some tools like a good de-esser (I like fabfilter) or multiband compressor can help get rid of troublesome frequencies for just those moments when they pop up, rather than fixed eq over the whole track. I've even automated the gain on one eq filter just to pull a frequency down for a beat, then return it . Which is why it also helps to have a small console with moving faders (An S20 or Avid Artist mix works well for this) to try and do moves in one pass. The good news is if you take some time wrangling in the dialog, the rest of the mix goes much faster after, since the dialog is clear and present, and gives you a "plum line" to which everything else can be placed around (music, backgrounds, fx, foley). Many times I just need a good dialog pass, music pass, and fx pass then I'm done (with a multiband compressor or Ozone on the final pass). Cheers.

[byzantium]

Many thanks X. Agree with all that. Similar process I guess. Good idea re automating bypass switches or filter gains, hadn't thought of that. What's standing out for me from your story is that it's still a lot of work to fix voices / dialogue! Agree one needs the dialogue set right first, in order to fit the rest in around it. Which is annoying if you are only doing the music and you get poor dialogue (which is usually the case). This in reference to the few short films I've done. I find I have to do some kind of fix-and-mix on the dialogue first, even if that is not part of the job, before I can do the music, so I know what space and dynamic is left over after the dialogue, and so I can deliver a music mix that should be fairly close to the end product. Then of course the music and the poor dialogue is shipped off to a post house and you are at their mercy as to what they do with the music. It would be better if the dialogue (and FX) were done first, and then you could produce and mix your music to that.

[X-bassist]

Yes, I hope someday picture editors will work harder on the dialog (or plugins come that will check sync and clean heads and tails, processing the audio files) but this has never been the case in the past (at least all the editors I've worked with in LA since 1990). Ironically most fx editors ask for music if at all possible as well- just so they know what's covered by music so they can skip it. it works both eays.

There use to be a decent audio edit stage where a dialog editor, foley editor and fx editor would work on a show or film once the pic was done and locked. So as a mixer and sound supervisor I could send a rough mix of dialg and effects to the composer to check his music against (of course he would always start when we did but get behind).

But now, because of our wonderfully fast machines, all this essential creative time has been cut from a week or two down to a day or two (someone mistakenly told the producers and executive this would save them time) if the editor doesn't fall behind. For many shows the picture edit goes directly to the mix stage, the composer has been working for just a few days off a rough cut, and everything gets sorted in a half day mix. Kind of crazy that for all the money spend on projects, they will leave audio (which can be a huge help) to a day of organized chaos (looks orderly but is actually tossing paint at a barn and hoping for Picasso).

Finding indepentent productions and directors that love great audio is key to talking productions back off the ledge, which has to be discussed before a season/ cycle/ project begins. This is why I always chat them up early, even if it's a small production. Educating them on how much help music and audio is still essential. Sometimes I still do an early pass on a rough scene or a few shots to give them a sample of how it could sound, also to guage how much they like or don't. Then if they like a lot I can say "well, to do this right, we need a little more time, not necessarily more money". That usually gets the conversation started, especially if they are excited by the early pass (which I try to do a full job on, but keep it short). Slowly all my clients are finding more time, or at least scheduling it in.

[trumpoz]

I've just grabbed this - I've been playing with this for about 30 minutes and like it. As Anders Wall mentioned it will be be good for carving out and ducking - I reckon I will use this one quite a bit.

[gtrwll]

I also grabbed it a while back, didn't have a dynamic EQ so this was actually bought for a need

Have been tinkering with it and like it, it's quite easy to use even with little previous knowledge about dynamic EQ's.

[Piet De Ridder]

Dynamic EQ's are incredibly useful when working with orchestral samples too. I use them all the time on things like pizzicati and harp, and often on buses where entire sections of the orchestra are summed as well.

For example, you have a harp part that consist mainly of single notes — totally harmless to your mix —, but then you want it to do a glissando (not a sampled performance, but a programmed gliss) and suddenly, due to the stacking of dozens of notes, you have this ugly bump happening in the low-mid frequencies. That's where the DynEQ comes in: to keep those low-mids under control during the glissando, after which everything can return back to 'non-EQ'ed' normal.
Same thing with (low) pizzicato: samples being samples, you might have certain notes, at certain velocities, which cause booming resonances or clutter. Quickly solved with a DynEQ (without affecting the tone colour of the rest of the pizzicati).

Another good use is to have a DynEQ subtly reduce the low mids of single or bused channels, or even the full mix, but *only* at higher dynamics. If you do that with a normal, static EQ, the sound might end up being too thin at lower dynamics, but a Dynamic EQ can be set to only spring into action once a specific dynamic treshold is reached. (Using the same technique: percussion tracks (individual or bused) can also benefit greatly from some clever DynEQ'ing.)

And another great use of DynEq's, is to use them to clean up noise in tails (of samples). Set the plug-in so that that the high frequencies of the incoming signal get attenuated when the level dips below a certain treshold. Can make A BIG difference.
That same technique can even be used to increase the expression of a phrase, by softening/darkening the low dynamics of a phrase and brightening the higher ones. Needs to be done with care though, otherwise it'll just sound like a plain velocity-modulated lowpass filter.
And with difficult to mix sampled pianos like the Emotional, a DynEQ can also be a great help.

I've always used and keep using the Sonalksis Dynamic EQ — and before that, the DynEq that was part of the now abandoned Powercore —, but if I didn't have that, I'd be very interested in this Waves plugin.

_

[trumpoz]

Thanks for posting your thoughts Piet. Im going to spend some time working with sone of the techniques you shared.

[Piet De Ridder]

I just bought the Waves F6 Dynamic EQ. I think I'm going to expand my previous post with a few audio examples (maybe even a few short video clips or screenshots) to illustrate some of those techniques I mentioned. And then post it in the 'Production Techniques' section. (Might be a few days though, cause 'plate quite full' at the moment.)

_

[byzantium]

That would be wonderful. Thanks very much Piet.

[kurtvanzo]

You can actually use Fabfilters Pro-MB as a dynamic EQ (normally a multiband compressor,) just switch it to 'Dynamic Phase" mode and it acts as a dynamic EQ. You can even just use it as a static EQ in this mode. Quite interesting as you can create flat-top and asymmetric filter shapes.

[tack]

Pro-MB can't do narrow Qs though, so if for example you wanted to notch out a frequency past a certain threshold, Pro-MB won't work well. FabFilter has expressed interest in doing a dynamic EQ plugin though (and keeping it separate from Pro-Q under the guise of being lightweight but in reality probably just improves their ability to charge for it).

[gtrwll]

Thanks Piet, that's a really helpful post! The mixing side is probably where I have the most to learn, so this kind of advice is golden.

[Markus K]

I'm curious why The Melda Dynamic EQ isn't mentioned in this thread since I use it a lot and think it does a very good job. Would anybody think the Waves might be superior to the Melda in any respect?
For deharshing without sacrificing or changing sound I use Fab Pro MB regularly (there are two deharsh presets which work pretty well as starting point). Couldn't find anything better till now. Very,very good IMO.
Thanks for the great explanation Piet.