What software to use to find optimal EQ settings?

[Rivers]

I am trying to find what the best EQ settings are for my acoustic guitar but rather than selecting each individual frequency (which I have no idea where to start), I was thinking of using a graphical EQ software that would allow me to confirm what would be the changes I require.

Does any one have any recommendations on what software could potentially do this? I have access to Cakewalk and a friend's Ableton Live 10 Suite.

Thanks.

[rick-slo]

Use the equalizer presets and listen if any of them gets you in the ballpark. If it's available try using spectrum matching to a reference recording.

That said I just try to get a good recording and then work with that by ear. Often I use just a light amount of reverb and perhaps a low and high
pass on the equalizer. You can listen with a narrow band (high Q) frequency sweep to to look for offending bands.

[Larsis]

I think iZotope Ozone can do it. It has some kind of automatic recognition of the track, that is playing and helps choose the best settings including EQ. However, it doesn't work well in every case, so it's better to correct some nuances the sound by your ears. But interersting function for starting point.

[TBman]

iZotope's Ozone has reference matching where you use a reference recording that you like and it will attempt to apply the eq of the reference to your recording. I use Ozone as a plug-in with Rx7 Standard which I just recently upgraded from Rx 7 Elements.

[Chipotle]

You could try find automated software. But what would it tell you? A parametric EQ plugin, like the one you pictured, may have an acoustic guitar preset that would give you a starting point. But even then, to get what you wanted, you'd have to use your ears. Here's how to do it:

Open the recording of your guitar in the DAW (Ableton, Cakewalk, Reaper, Protools, Logic, whatever... any should work). Add the parametric EQ to the track.

Now, take one of those nodes and increase the "Q" (narrow the bandwidth) like the red node in your picture. Now grab it and drag it all the way to the top to really boost those frequencies. Now drag the node side-to-side, listening carefully.

If you find spots where the sound is "bad"--tubby, boxy, nasal, or shrill--put a node that that spot and bring it down to cut those frequencies a bit.

When you find spots that are pleasant--give sharpness to the attack, add "meat" to the midrange, "air" at the top end--then boost those frequencies a bit.

When you've found such "good" or "bad" frequencies, you can also fine tune the Q (width of the hump) and amount later.

I would also add that EQing in one arena (with a recording on a computer running through speakers) may not translate well if what you are really after is tuning your live sound (maybe through effects pedals and into a guitar amp). You really need to EQ with the setup you want to use.

[jim1960]

Sonible smart:EQ 2 may be what you're looking for. It uses some kind of internal AI to suggest an EQ curve based your track. I own it and it does a pretty good job in most cases. At worst, it brings you to a good starting point.

[min7b5]

I think number one for me was watching a bunch of tutorials on EQ, and EQ'ing acoustic guitar in particular. Groove3 is a good pay sight ($15 a month) with something like 1200 hours of music production tutorials to check out. Many are DAW specific, many are not. But either way listening to people talk about how to listen, seeing pros do it, and yeah even coping a few settings as starting points, is good. But the main thing for me was learning about frequencies and learning and practicing listening. It would be great if there was just a magic setting that worked on every guitar in every room, but that's not happening of course. And many great recordings of acoustic guitar have little or no EQ at all, just time spent listening in the mic placement phase of the process.

That sad, for me personally, I use Fabfilter Pro Q3 for my eq. I have a template I've made as a starting point that I use that roughly has a high pass at about 66 because I live on a busy street in old house and I'm a foot taper, so that gets a lot of the rumble out. I have a fairly surgical cut at 118 because that's where some of the boom of my particular guitar in my particular amateurly treated room is. And lastly I have a gradual lift at about 3.3 to get the melody notes on the top strings to pop with a little more sheen -all of which is just a starting point..

Another random quick thought is to also look at advice on recording solo acoustic *piano* online if you’re interested in recording solo guitar, because so much of the content on recording/processing acoustic guitar online is coming from the assumption that you’re trying to capture a strumming mono acoustic guitar to sit in a larger mix, which is a totally different thing than a solo acoustic guitar recording or something else that really features acoustic guitar. I just find a lot of I find people saying about getting a big stereo solo piano sound, how to compress it, etc, is meaningful to me as someone that wants a somewhat larger sounding solo acoustic guitar recording. But I digress

[Doug Young]

You don't say what kind of music you're recording, or how you're capturing the guitar, which could make a difference.

For solo guitar, I do about the same as Eric. I start with a high pass filter, there's nothing interesting coming out of the guitar below around 40Hz, so I cut that. Maybe a very slight high frequency lift. Beyond that, for solo guitar, if I feel like it needs more, something's wrong, and I go back to mic placement, guitar and mic choice, etc, maybe even my playing. A solo guitar recording shouldn't need much EQ if recorded well.

Occasional boomy notes are also best handled with mic placement (and room acoustics), but I do sometimes use Dynamic EQ - basically an EQ/compressor where you can trigger an EQ cut only when a threshold is exceeded. So if I have, say a boomy low G note that pops out, but other notes around it are fine, I can dial in a cut triggered by that note. That way I'm not cutting the bass overall, just "fixing" that note. This can happen due to some guitars, room modes, and so on. Ozone can do all this.

If you do need to EQ because something is bothering you, a useful trick is to boost a narrow frequency and then sweep the frequency until something sounds the worst. Then cut that frequency. It takes trial and error and just listening. If you do any EQ, it helps to A/B back and forth with and without the EQ, to see if it's really an improvement. We can trick our ears easily. Sometimes I do this to find a bad note, then go to the dynamic EQ to fix it, rather than the constant EQ.

I have tried Ozone's auto-mastering feature, which basically suggests EQ, compression, etc, and will let you use a reference recording. It's a decent starting point, but I usually find the EQ especially, is way off for solo guitar. I get the feeling it is trying to make up for a missing "band", and usually boosts the bass and treble way up, as if it's searching for a bass player and high hat. So it's kind of fun to see what it thinks I should be doing, and then I generally say "nope" :-) and do it myself.

EQing in a mix with other instruments is a whole other ballgame, where you're dealing with masking effects, and everything gets involved - levels, panning, EQ. It doesn't take much to change our perception. For example, when mixing the Duet CD I just did with Teja Gerken, the opening tune has me on a regular guitar, Teja on a baritone. Listening to my track solo'd it sounded good, no EQ needed. As soon as the big baritone came in, suddenly my guitar sounded thin and tinny. I'd have to back and look at how I handled that, but I think it was a combination of EQ on both guitars, panning, and dynamic adjustment of levels to make sure that both guitars were clear.

On the other hand, I just did a collab video with Anton (posted over in show and tell), with 5 instruments, and I don't think there's any EQ beyond on any track maybe the low cut - each part and instrument was different enough that they just fit without any issues. There were some level adjustments for different sections.

[Bob Womack]

Waves F6 Dynamic EQ visually superimposes a real time analyzer (RTA) over your EQ curve. You can see any response peaks and set the EQ to adjust to dynamically to any peaks that come or go.

But I'll be honest, as a recording engineer/producer since 1981, I learned using Doug's technique back in the big console/analog multi-track days. Training your ear is the first step. I use F6 but the RTA mostly confirms what my ear is telling me and helps me home in precisely. By the way, the latest version of Waves Rennaisance EQ is a simpler paragraphic EQ and offers the overlaid RTA.

Bob

[MikeBmusic]

Like Doug says ^^^ for solo acoustic guitar, capture it well and you should need no EQ shaping. Remember that the further out from the guitar the mics are, the more 'room' they will pick up. If your room sounds good, this will add nice ambiance, if your room is 'normal' (i.e. a room in a house that doesn't have acoustic treatment - not just carpet and a sofa!) this will not be ideal and you will be trying to fix the room resonances.

Of course when mixing acoustic guitar with more instruments (or guitar tracks) EQing can carve 'space' into the mix for each instrument and prevent 'mud' (build up of low-mid frequencies).