Members bp Posted December 9, 2006 Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 I know that Craig likes this program. Does anyone else here use it, if so how do you use it? Any tips are welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 60hurts Posted December 9, 2006 Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 Yes, use your ears. Seeing the frequency response visually helps to instantly home in on the problem areas, but all songs are different. Use your ears.Try it on individual tracks. Like bass guitar or something. A little tweaking in Har-Bal can help something like that even better that compression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff Leites Posted December 9, 2006 Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 A har-bal!!! Try this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members offramp Posted December 9, 2006 Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 DAMN!! Jeff beat me to it..."hairball" is what I thought I saw when I first read the thread title! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 9, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 9, 2006 I use it and love it. My pointers: Learn to scan tracks in your collection that share the attributes you're aspiring to. Try to stick to the same instrumentation. Now use that scan as a reference track for your tune. Using the wide band tool, meaning the tool that has the adjustable bandwidth, widen the bandwidth all the way and raise your overall level to match that of your reference. This will NOT change anything in your track yet, it'll just create an even comparing environment (I've verified this with the developer). Now take a minute to first toggle back and forth listening to your track, then the reference track. Observe the aural differences and try to match what you're hearing with what you're seeing. Before you just crank up the high or low shelf, work in the low mid region with the adjustable bandwidth tool. You'll most likely notice narrow peaks in you low mids that your reference track doesn't have... This is what's masking all the hard work you've put into your track. Work on taming those resonances. As you do, toggle back now, between your before and after (Har-Bal in and out) of your track and note those differences. OK... Now, is your track harsher than your reference track? Look for rogue peaks in the 4-6k region. Is your bass uneven? Same routine. Try the high shelf to kick your high end up to commercial balance. Now the hard part; go back and re-mix your tune, using all the notes you've been taking with regards to your needed changes. This is such a great learning tool. After you've done that, repeat the process in Har-Bal and note how much better of a mixer you've just become. Now your mastering eq will be much more conservative and less likely to boost instruments that can cause harshness inadvertently while you were trying to make needed overall changes. Skip using it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bp Posted December 9, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 Thanks Lee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 9, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 9, 2006 For individual tracks... Bass tip: I like to import my bass guitar track and with the knowledge of what the corresponding frequencies I use in my bass track are, try to even it's response. For instance; if the tune's in E and there's a chugging low E part.You've noted the low E is anemic... kick up 41.20Hz. You should be able to clearly see the valley and it's Q. The G is still booming out; tame 49Hz. This is also a great way to fatten that high up on the neck McCartney stuff, find the notes fundamental and just below (or half it's value) and goose it. By evening out these peaks and valleys, mix eq takes on a more creative role and less of a band aid role. Snare tip: Find the ugly resonance you just couldn't seem to tune out during trackng and tame it. Typically 500 and 1k or so and very narrow. Kick tip: Instead of scooping 300-400Hz during mixtime, go into Har-Bal and find the resonances in that region and dump only those to acheive the same but improved effect. Now your kick still sounds like a drum and not the latest My Chemical Romance CD... but it works well in that modern way too. Scooped but not unpersonalized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 9, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 9, 2006 Another... Just last night. I built a track around a quick demo of me playing acoustic guitar and vox. This was just to be able to track to and not to be used as a keeper... famous last words, right? I nailed the tune on the scratch in a real, candid way that I was unable to later re-create. Technically yes, but with the heart and soul of the "demo". No. And it sounded butt. Phasey because of the quick vox, guitar, 2 mic set up. I dumped the live acoustic and kept the scratch vocal done with a 58. In Har-Bal it was easy to see / hear where the scratch was going south. I HPed the gunk, dipped the peaks from the crazy room sound and... wow. Nice vocal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mobobog Posted December 9, 2006 Members Share Posted December 9, 2006 This is from the har bal site... A well EQ'd track should never have any major peaks (yellow line) or holes (green line) in the spectrum. See this example of a well EQ'd track in Har-Bal (notice the spectrum is nice and smooth). This track will sound great on all speaker systems. Notice the spectral correction made with the intuitQ button function. The white line shows the original position. do you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 9, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 9, 2006 Originally posted by mobobog This is from the har bal site... A well EQ'd track should never have any major peaks (yellow line) or holes (green line) in the spectrum. See this example of a well EQ'd track in Har-Bal (notice the spectrum is nice and smooth). This track will sound great on all speaker systems. Notice the spectral correction made with the intuitQ button function. The white line shows the original position. do you agree? I rarely agree with any statement that includes the word never. The developer's native language isn't English. I've noticed that sometimes in his attempt to make a point he can go over the top with his enthusiasum. Sometimes making statements that are pretty alltruistic. Surely an acoustic guitar and voice with hand drums is going to have a very different curve than a hit from the All American Rejects. That hand drum might look like a resonant peak. And a dub tune from Laswell will be extended on the bottom where Dylan's new stuff won't. But his point of resonant peaks is a good one. Tame those... and your mix will open up in the high and low end. It's way better than boosting top to get clarity wouldn't you say? Make any changes without the council of your own two ears at your own peril. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted December 10, 2006 Members Share Posted December 10, 2006 A slight hijack... 1.) They still don't make a Mac version of this, do they? 2.) Purely out of curiosity, has anyone run Led Zeppelin stuff through Har-Bal? I'm curious as to how much bottom end there actually is in the Zep stuff. It seems to me that they actually don't have a lot of really low end, in yet it sounds so heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 10, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 10, 2006 Originally posted by UstadKhanAli A slight hijack...1.) They still don't make a Mac version of this, do they?2.) Purely out of curiosity, has anyone run Led Zeppelin stuff through Har-Bal? I'm curious as to how much bottom end there actually is in the Zep stuff. It seems to me that they actually don't have a lot of really low end, in yet it sounds so heavy. No Mac yet. I haven't scanned in Zep's stuff but I'm sure you're right on the mark with them. A lot of modern stuff has an equal curve down below 150Hz to 40! That sounds fat, sometimes too fat. Zeppelin seems to sound real, not hyper real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members elsongs Posted December 11, 2006 Members Share Posted December 11, 2006 COUGH!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted December 12, 2006 Members Share Posted December 12, 2006 Yes, you gotta use your ears but I'll make one exception to that: In the very low end (under 100Hz), I draw things out to be pretty much a straight line. Seems to make mixes much more "transportable" as one of the very big differences between playback systems is in the low end. Evening it out as much as possible definitely seems to help. Har-Bal is something you really do need to learn over time. One thing that's important is that I've always felt that mastering is about EQ and only minimally about dynamics. Har-Bal takes care of the EQ part for me; I find I need a lot less dynamics to still sound loud and present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joel Oporto Posted December 15, 2006 Members Share Posted December 15, 2006 hey lee, Let me get these straight, you use har-bal to check individual tracks, note the changes you make, then apply those changes to those tracks in your mixing application? Can you use harbal as a plugin to say cubase or sonar where you can then analyze and apply those changes while you are actually doing the mix? (seems that would be so much easier) or at the least save the filter file and load it up in your favourite EQ plugin and have that plugin do the EQ changes itself. Do you rely on harbal when you do mastering EQ? Just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted December 15, 2006 Members Share Posted December 15, 2006 > Har-Bal does not work as a plug-in, only as stand-alone. But I know people who process jndividual tracks through Har-Bal to get rid of things like room resonances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted December 15, 2006 Members Share Posted December 15, 2006 I just played with the demo - great program!! Gonna buy this one;) Thank you for the recommendation. cheersjohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joel Oporto Posted December 15, 2006 Members Share Posted December 15, 2006 thanks craig, just a thought, Harbal recommends that you try to flatten the peaks and valleys in the average graphs to make it more even and transportable, but I tried feeding some of the recordings that I really love into the demo, I found out that its not really the case. For example I tried Shania twain's "You're Still the one" and I got a graph with a huge 800 to 2k peak and another at the 100 to 250 hz and it was way far from being flat. I guess it is still more play it by ear than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 15, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 15, 2006 Originally posted by joel Oporto hey lee,Let me get these straight, you use har-bal to check individual tracks, note the changes you make, then apply those changes to those tracks in your mixing application?Can you use harbal as a plugin to say cubase or sonar where you can then analyze and apply those changes while you are actually doing the mix? (seems that would be so much easier) or at the least save the filter file and load it up in your favourite EQ plugin and have that plugin do the EQ changes itself.Do you rely on harbal when you do mastering EQ?Just curious Good question. I wasn't clear... I use Har-Bal on individual tracks all the time. Check out my bass, kick and snare examples above. In those cases, I don't try to get a final sound, I only do surgical resonance removal. I then re-import that new eq'ed version back into my session. It won't work as a plugin, though it's been a heavy request from the beginning, apparently the technology is too unwieldy to implement this way. So for now it's... open individual track in Har Bal, cleam up unwanted resonances, import back into session. It's unwise to try to do final eq work as you'd want to obviously do that in the context of your mix. I look at this as my 2nd chance to "track" the sound the way I want it. When the tune is done and mixed, I then open my first draft mix in Rar-Bal and note where I'm getting away from where I like to be in the spectrum and go back and re-mix. This happens less and less as I've learned where my perception was off, or my room was off, etc. Then I'll use Har-Bal as final mastering EQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 15, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 15, 2006 Originally posted by joel Oporto thanks craig, just a thought, Harbal recommends that you try to flatten the peaks and valleys in the average graphs to make it more even and transportable, but I tried feeding some of the recordings that I really love into the demo, I found out that its not really the case. For example I tried Shania twain's "You're Still the one" and I got a graph with a huge 800 to 2k peak and another at the 100 to 250 hz and it was way far from being flat. I guess it is still more play it by ear than anything else. That is a fantastic point and one that clarifies the phrase "use you ears". I do the same, import tunes I love the sound and vibe of, and I find the same thing. those peaks are frequently something I love about the sound of those tracks. The Mutt Shania track is a great example. Those peaks are that thing that goes on in her voice that make it jump out at me. They make it pop. Kill them... and you've killed the vibe of the track. What I've found is you've got to learn what you want to keep as much as what you want to tame when it comes to taming the resonances of a track. This is why I concentrate my attention in the low mid area. It's frequently where my work gets a bottleneck that ends up masking the rest of track. There and the lows for even power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joel Oporto Posted December 16, 2006 Members Share Posted December 16, 2006 thanks a lot Lee!! After putting in the mutt shania track, I did get to thinking that maybe I should try the harbal on a mix sans the vocals or any upfront leads first, (backing tracks only) then add them later but using them on individual tracks would pretty much be more useful. Having that thought in mind, it seems that if there was a plugin that would graph the average frequency levels like harbal does and when you do EQ changes in another plugin say waves Q10, those will immediately show in the graph, much like an advanced version of the PAZ frequency analyzer, then that would be killer. Does the roger nichols stuff do that? just curious. So you think that harbal is good enough for mastering EQ then? I tried remastering a few of my previous recordings (with the "eliminate peaks and valleys" idiom in mind) and didn't get good results so again, at least it doesn't make us or our ears lazy. I'm definitely going to try a mix using individual tracks filtered in harbal before the demo expires and see how it goes. thanks again lee and craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted December 16, 2006 Members Share Posted December 16, 2006 BTW - the purchased version is very different from the demo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joel Oporto Posted December 16, 2006 Members Share Posted December 16, 2006 really? in what aspects? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 16, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 16, 2006 Originally posted by John Sayers BTW - the purchased version is very different from the demo. I've never seen the demo... so Joel, I'm not sure what John is referring to, but if by chance the demo is the 1.0 version and it hasn't kept pace with the current release, then I'd have to agree. There have been a lot of changes. They've added something called "intuit" something or other that is an auto eq. I don't like it. Fortunately, the two features that made me interested in the first place and ultimately made me a champion of it are still there. A representation of the frequency spectrum averaged over the length of the tune, and a phase linear eq controlled by that very same display. That's all I need it for. The rest is just bells and whistles... to me. But that's more than plenty for me. Har-Bal's whole paradigm is it's very strength and value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted December 16, 2006 Members Share Posted December 16, 2006 The demo is only 8 bit to start with. It gave a different curve on a song than the real version - it really is just a demo. The rest is just bells and whistles... to me. I agree. There is also a limiter and a HarBal "Air" control that sounds like a cheap reverb to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.