Saxophone EQ Problem

[Low Note]

Hey-

I recorded a demo for a rock band and I needed to REALLY close mic the saxophone to avoid bleeding from everything going on around it. As a result I got a really harsh sound that's bothering me.

The only thing I could think of to try and soften the sound was to give the Sax an upward sloping EQ to emphasize some of its higher Harmonics. But that didn't work too well. Here's the track. Any thoughts? About any of it. I know there are still some mix problems with parts sticking out, and its still a work in progress so anything you've got would be helpful.

---

03 There and Back.mp3
Description:
Filesize:	8.21 MB
Viewed:	1424 Time(s)
▶ Play    ⇩ Download

---

[elektro80]

Which mic did you use?

[bugfight]

hey

i like this, reminds me of bersuit...

if you want to warm up the sax, boosting highs is the last thing you want. i'm guessing you put a mic right up in the bell, which results in a pretty harsh tone. i would try cutting highs, and sweeping a parametric with a wide q and a little boost around the mids to find the sweet spot...

compression may help (hehe that ought to bring out some critics), and remember the old proverb "reverb hideth a multitude of sins" in this case maybe slapback would be better...

not that you can go back in time, but i got a nice sax sound with a d112 on the bell (yeah it's a "kick drum mic" so what?) and a c1000 across the keys

i'm no pro, just zis guy, you know?

[Low Note]

MXL 991 running into a Firepod into Cubase SL 3.

I'm using Cubase's Graphic Equalizer.

For the rest of the recording:

Piano and Accordian was plugged in direct usingpatch cables.
Guitar and Bass were recorded by micing the amp cabinets with SM 57s.
Drums were recorded using an MXL 990 and an MXL 990s above the cymbals and a Samson Q Kick.

[elektro80]

I don´t know that mic too well. AFAICR it is a decent airy SDC which kinda works great on acoustic guitar. It might however have a slight boost way up there which simply can be way too much on some sources.

Bugfight has kinda the right approach here.

You don´t want to boost the hi freqs. And you don´t want to use an airy cheap mic that "adds sprakle" to guitars. Such mics are great to have around, but they usually don´t work too well with horns.

That is why mics with a subtle hi freq rolloff and little ringing and grit are often preferred. There are good quality ribbon mics that are perfect for just this. However I don´t know of any budget ribbon mics that do this well. Certain dynamic mics might be excellent as well.

Ayways, do try to set up a few screens or whatever in order to reduce bleed. Then try to work a few hours with the saxophone player in order to find good mic placements. One on the bell slightly off axis .. you will find the sweet spot.. and one on the keys.. a c1000 is great for just this.

You might want to look into compression later.
Right.. and you might also want a highpass set at say 60-120 hz.

[elektro80]

I called the MXL decent. Keep in mind that I mean decent in the sense that this is a ultra low budget mic that doesn´t sound as bad as many others in the same product segment. That being said, the hard work is usually mic placement and the gain structure. If the mic is half decent then you will be able to make a usable recording.

[elektro80]

It sounds to me that you might want to use a compressor in order to smooth the honky peaks and to bring up the meaty body of the saxophone sound.

[elektro80]

You might experiment with pre compressor eq in order to get rid of bass bleed from other instruments and to roll off the highs a bit. Then you might use another EQ post in order to target the good stuff in the sax.

I also think that you might want to add some reverb to the individual instrument tracks as well. very subtle just in order to widen the stage a bit and to define each instrument better. Individual reverb is usually better for stuff like this because then you can handle the room for each instrument in a more realistic way. A global reverb wash on the master buss will not help much.

[Low Note]

Thanks for all the comments!


As for mic choice, I would have ideally wanted to use one of my SM57's close (1 ft or so) and a 990 a bit farther back, but the band insisted they wanted to record everyone at the same time. So I was left with one input spot on my Firepod and also only one mic left (not counting some 9 dollar dynamic mics I got as freebies when buying other things).

And as for placement, I was using my isolating walls to block the drums from everything else and something to absorb sound once it left the amps. The sax was in the same room but on the opposit side, with the mic just on the edge of the bell.

I'll do some work on the EQ later today and then mess around with Reverb. The people I was recording also insisted we do as little as possible. They're 95% happy with everything already, but I want to keep tweaking until *I'm* happy. So I'll experiment with some reverb tonight.

I'll upload something with these comments in mind soon.

[dewdrop_world]

This sounds like a job for the disturbingly named "destructive EQ."

With the mic down in the bell of the saxophone, you probably recorded resonant frequencies inside the bell itself. Destructive EQ can identify those frequencies and notch them out, so that you don't have to lose the instrument's sparkle but clearing up the harsh sound.

I had to do this to a recording of a Thai so-duang that I was using in a track (the so-duang is much like the Chinese er-hu) -- the instrument itself has a kind of nasal sound, and recording it in a bedroom without proper baffling didn't help. I thought the mix was okay until I turned it up, and then that sound made my ears bleed.

The basic technique is to open up an EQ effect and start with it flat. Then take one band, set it to a narrow bandwidth and raise the gain by several decibels (maybe 10 or more). Sweep the center frequency through the high-end until some frequency really pops out. That's an unwanted resonance. Switching to a negative gain will then effectively remove that peak from the sound.

In my case, I had to use four or five bands worth of EQ before I was satisfied, but it really worked. What had been an unlistenable recording became quite smooth to the ear, but it didn't lose any presence either.

Without the unwanted peaks, you can also think about shaping the sound with "constructive EQ."

It takes a little time and patience to tune an EQ this way, but it's well worth it. It's also good for drums and other sounds that have strong resonances.

My two cents --
James

[Low Note]

Too much EQ? Compression?

Using Cubase's Reverb A, I set the reverb to Small, then changed the mix of wet/dry to 40/100. I also changed the room size to my liking - ranging from 30-100.

After mixing it down and listening to it now on my laptop speakers (great reference, I know), I'm hearing bizarre volume decreases. I can't tell what that might be from. I know i didn't notice it while mixing.

Example: right about the 2 minute mark.

Because I didn't want the bleed from other instruments getting reverbed on every track, I added some audio gates. Maybe that's the source.

[Sam_Zen]

Sometimes according to the demands the best microphone is a poor microphone.
Like the type you get when buying a cassette-recorder.
Because of its lack of sensitivity beyond a certain range. Of distance and tone.

[ROBOTSARETHEFUTURE]

the problem isn't usually in the eqing

the problems usually come in the recording considering that if the there was nothing wrong with the sound then you wouldn't need to eq.

try a dynamic mic close to the sax and a condenser from a distance (not too far)

the dynamic will ultimately give warmer sound
and the condenser's sound will be more bright

try getting the best mix between both signals

i like the SM 57 and the Bottle Microphone from Blue Microphones


http://blacwalli.podomatic.com/