I think this is convoluted BS. People were not thinking about what they were writing based on available EQ.As it says, the plug-ins don't sound the same, they just don't. This is a small setup, it's only in order to bridge the gap between plug-ins and 90s hardware. With a small mixer like the SubZero and not the extra stuff like Eventides you can manage this setup into 4U I think. Not have all 90s hardware. So it's in essence about an "90s hardware with 70% software and 30% hardware" -setup. Better than 100% plug-ins, better than 100% hardware.I think OP did not want hardware. You did not want a load of hardware, then bought a load of hardware.It means that your prior work always works within the constraints of "having only two (or so) non-parametric shelving filters in the final channel"." so what they do is tune the instruments based on the EQs, rather than over-EQ tracks"
Was that in the same parallel universe as the "Cider ceremonies".
So the final mix tuning can essentially be just about getting everything right using those bands and nothing more. It leads to e.g. making tracks more polished earlier on and tuning them to frequencies that are suitable based on where the shelving bands are. So the mixer dictates your "important frequencies" a bit.
Over-EQ:ing is a phenomenon in DAW world, where having unlimited EQ means that you'd use more EQ than what's really necessary. And then you disregard the controls in the instruments themselves like decay times and damp controls, the tuning of your instruments, the ADSR controls, the built-in filters, ... Compare this to e.g. if you had what some consider a "real player", e.g. a violinist. Then that you'd be fine with having a lousy performance, and then think you can fix the performance using a lot of EQ. It doesn't make sense, but electronic musicians may fail to understand themselves as "real players", e.g. because they use samples and samplers.
With the mixer's limitations you will be guided to use your instruments to their full power, because you can't try to fix your mistakes later on. Like you can't try to fix lousy sequencing of MIDI by putting some EQ on the entire track to manage frequencies you didn't really want.
If you was using a high end desk you had very good EQ. And if you had a 24/8/2 variant which many did at home you had at least 2 shelfs and 2 bands of semi parametric approx spanning 400 - 10kHz and bass - 3kHz and I think the 8 bus had bandwidth/Q for 1 band.
This very strongly suggests you are writing nonsense. The EQ was perfectly usable for routine tasks.
Statistics: Posted by Synthman2000 — Thu Mar 14, 2024 10:14 am