recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Support & discussion regarding DAWs and MIDI sequencers.

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

Hey y'all, just wondering if it's possible to record say a guitar EQ'd like if through a hardware mixer on Ardour, Mixbus, Qtractor, Reaper or any other DAW before being tracked?
I've heard that many guitarist would use say a Behringer 3 channel mixer to clean up the sound before tracking so less cutting and boosting and more find tuning in the mix.
I tried Non-Mixer and loaded a stip with an EQ but the phase sound was crazy.
Tried Carla and loaded an EQ, ran guitar through it and still phasing sound. So mimicking a hardware mixer, is that possible on Linux?
Or is it possible to load an EQ on the track the guitar will be tracked to, EQ it to taste then record it?

User avatar
milo
Established Member
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:55 am
Location: Southern Utah, USA
Contact:

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by milo »

You maybe could achieve what you want by piping a standalone Guitarix into a DAW track. Great tools for shaping your sound there, including 3-band EQ on the amps.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

milo wrote:You maybe could achieve what you want by piping a standalone Guitarix into a DAW track. Great tools for shaping your sound there, including 3-band EQ on the amps.
I did tried that before and it completely changed the tone amusing. I'm using a hardware preamp/Power Amp pedal with ir cab simulators. Basically what I'm looking for is to just clean up the sound before it gets tracked. That way I have to use less when it comes to mixing and I will be relying mostly on just tweaking instead of boosting and cutting all over the place. In other words I'm looking to create an analog set up out of virtual equipment.

franlopez
Established Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 4:57 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by franlopez »

Not sure I understand why it would be important that it happens "before" you're tracking. But, if what you want is to "save CPU/memory" by not having so many plugins running later on when you're mixing, you can put in whatever plugins you want in the channel, record the guitar part and then commit that to audio.
In Ardour you can "freeze" any track and it will render new audio in-place, with all the pre-send plugins applied. Not sure about other DAWs, but you can always record the output of one channel into another one and then get rid of the original channel.

User avatar
JamesPeters
Established Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2018 6:35 pm
Contact:

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by JamesPeters »

Whatever "input fx" you use in Reaper will be recorded. Page 68 of the current user guide.

User avatar
sadko4u
Established Member
Posts: 745
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by sadko4u »

The routing should be:
Audio source -> Ardour bus with EQ, compressor, etc -> recording track.
LSP (Linux Studio Plugins) Developer and Maintainer.

tavasti
Established Member
Posts: 965
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:56 am
Location: Kangasala, Finland
Contact:

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by tavasti »

funkmuscle wrote: I tried Non-Mixer and loaded a stip with an EQ but the phase sound was crazy.
Are you sure your connections were ok, so that there was no double connections where same signal would arrive two different paths?
Linux veteran & Novice musician

Hear my music at https://audiu.net/users/tawaste

Openmastering
Established Member
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by Openmastering »

If you're monitoring both your input and the software, it's normal that it's phasey.

I like to commit to hardware before recording, but I really don't see the point of doing it with software.
Still, if you want to do it, load a plugin host with some plugins and stick it before your signal goes into ardour. Monitoring and lowlatency are key here.

A software mixer isn't any use there except as a plugin host.
Audio mastering for open minds: https://openmastering.studio
I master music using only free/libre softwares and DIY hardware.
Contact me for a free mastering sample.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

franlopez wrote:Not sure I understand why it would be important that it happens "before" you're tracking. But, if what you want is to "save CPU/memory" by not having so many plugins running later on when you're mixing, you can put in whatever plugins you want in the channel, record the guitar part and then commit that to audio.
In Ardour you can "freeze" any track and it will render new audio in-place, with all the pre-send plugins applied. Not sure about other DAWs, but you can always record the output of one channel into another one and then get rid of the original channel.
Well from everywhere I read they always say try to make the source as clean and usable as possible. Even if I plug my pedal amplifier into alive system before the product is delivered the engineer will clean it up. Everywhere I read they Shake that tracking is clean as possible so less work when it comes to the weekend. Also I've watched videos on YouTube on the difference and I just enjoyed how it was done with a really good source back to trakt instead of just recording the guitar with sounds decent but then you got to go get rid of the mud here get rid of the Fizz over there and so on.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

Thanks everyone. I'm going to start trying all your examples and see which one suits me the best

Openmastering
Established Member
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by Openmastering »

funkmuscle wrote: Well from everywhere I read they always say try to make the source as clean and usable as possible. Even if I plug my pedal amplifier into alive system before the product is delivered the engineer will clean it up. Everywhere I read they Shake that tracking is clean as possible so less work when it comes to the weekend. Also I've watched videos on YouTube on the difference and I just enjoyed how it was done with a really good source back to trakt instead of just recording the guitar with sounds decent but then you got to go get rid of the mud here get rid of the Fizz over there and so on.
And they are really right about having the best/cleanest sound to start with, but I think you need to see this in the context of a recording. The source needs to be clean because that's how you achieve a great recording. From there, you need to optimize the hardware side. A good guitar, a clean DI box, or some good cab + mics.
Cleaning the sound of a guitar is part of the editing process, if you choose to do it before, and in the box, it's okay, but you're still using your time for this.

The other point is about optimizing your time. If you record 10 tracks, and you need to choose between xxx plugins for every track, you lose time. If you commit to a sound, your hardware ''limitations'' will become your choice. That's a really important point.

My 2 cents: if you want to do "as they say on YouTube", please don't. Or use good hardware.
If it's an artistic decision about commiting to a special sound, then do it.
Keep us updated
Audio mastering for open minds: https://openmastering.studio
I master music using only free/libre softwares and DIY hardware.
Contact me for a free mastering sample.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

Openmastering wrote:
funkmuscle wrote: Well from everywhere I read they always say try to make the source as clean and usable as possible. Even if I plug my pedal amplifier into alive system before the product is delivered the engineer will clean it up. Everywhere I read they Shake that tracking is clean as possible so less work when it comes to the weekend. Also I've watched videos on YouTube on the difference and I just enjoyed how it was done with a really good source back to trakt instead of just recording the guitar with sounds decent but then you got to go get rid of the mud here get rid of the Fizz over there and so on.
And they are really right about having the best/cleanest sound to start with, but I think you need to see this in the context of a recording. The source needs to be clean because that's how you achieve a great recording. From there, you need to optimize the hardware side. A good guitar, a clean DI box, or some good cab + mics.
Cleaning the sound of a guitar is part of the editing process, if you choose to do it before, and in the box, it's okay, but you're still using your time for this.

The other point is about optimizing your time. If you record 10 tracks, and you need to choose between xxx plugins for every track, you lose time. If you commit to a sound, your hardware ''limitations'' will become your choice. That's a really important point.

My 2 cents: if you want to do "as they say on YouTube", please don't. Or use good hardware.
If it's an artistic decision about commiting to a special sound, then do it.
Keep us updated
Yes I am using a preamp the eye with built-in Power Amp and cabinet simulators through IR. The sound M recording is the sound I want to use. I get the sound I want out of the amplifier first that I want so I get it the cleanest I need but still once it's been recorded you always got to cut a lot of the bottom end I passed that out and then do some low pass and then still sometimes boost some of the high-end. In other words I'd rather do most of the equalization on the way in because I already know the sound I want. I'm just talkin about less tweaking from a good source to recording. It wasn't just from the guys on YouTube. Other producers have red upon how they record the guitars even today as they're using a digital system they still go through the analog board. For me even though sometimes I can ask them questions if I don't know the answer and I don't ask the question I figure I'm even more dumb for doing so. It's just sometimes when people ask questions they get ridiculed for it. What I'm trying to say is that I listen to you guys, people on YouTube and a lot of people like Eddie Kramer who worked with my favourite guitar player Jimi Hendrix. I don't just take it from One Source but they all seem to have that in common on yes getting a good sound out of your Hardware first and then when they make up the cabinet they still drop some equalisation and compression and so on on it. So yes I've got the sound I want to come hang out of my direct box but I still want to fine-tune it before I track it. I've been doing it the other way like everyone else and I find I waste too much time tweaking the guitars just to get that crunch or something that matches everything else or fits in. I figure if I can get it as sweet as possible before tracking it will safely time but as you said all of it will still take time. I am willing to invest that time to get the right sound. I was one of you guys mentioned earlier there about CPU and memory saving he is correct also. I figured the last machine has to work on plugins like equalizers and things like that, the more resource I have for things like Reverb and delay. Amusing mixbus and sometimes I would still have to drop a plug-in in there to even do some more tweaking when it comes to the equalisation so if I get it as clean and as close as possible to what I want when I track it, it would be a lot less to do and the channel strip in mixbus will do what it needs to do. I may be wrong because a lot of you guys are Professional Engineers so I'm glad I'm getting help from you guys because I am all about learning and not afraid to ask even though some people get rid of kills for asking questions. In my head I basically say kiss my ass because that's only how you learned it by asking questions no matter how dumb the questions are. That's why I love coming here because you guys are always so willing to help so thank you again guys.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

Hey guys, thanks a lot again but none of the above works so I'll just stick to the old way of getting a good as possible sound out of my direct box and then I will do the surgery on cleaning up the sound after. Thanks again guys.
Also sorry if a lot of what I was saying didn't make sense because of a lot of typing mistakes. It's mostly voice to text because I'm currently multitasking so please forgive me for anything but didn't make sense there. Just want to say that all you guys are awesome and thank you so much.

finotti
Established Member
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:07 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by finotti »

I think that the point is to have a "clean" signal before it hits the amp/amp simulation. The point of the preamp/mixer before the interface is exactly that. So, if you put EQ (specially HP/LP) as the first thing in your DI track (or recording bus, as suggested by sadko4u) you should accomplish the same result, minus any analog or particular coloring coming from the hardware mixer/preamp. (You might be able to fake it with some plugins, but I can't say for sure...)

If you are talking about using the mixer for mic'ed guitar, the same goes: just put the EQ as the first thing in your recording track to clean it up before it hits the remaining FX. (Again, you'd just miss come coloration from the mixer.)

At least that's how I understand it.

User avatar
funkmuscle
Established Member
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 2:30 pm

Re: recording EQ, compressors, etc plugins

Post by funkmuscle »

finotti wrote:I think that the point is to have a "clean" signal before it hits the amp/amp simulation. The point of the preamp/mixer before the interface is exactly that. So, if you put EQ (specially HP/LP) as the first thing in your DI track (or recording bus, as suggested by sadko4u) you should accomplish the same result, minus any analog or particular coloring coming from the hardware mixer/preamp. (You might be able to fake it with some plugins, but I can't say for sure...)

If you are talking about using the mixer for mic'ed guitar, the same goes: just put the EQ as the first thing in your recording track to clean it up before it hits the remaining FX. (Again, you'd just miss come coloration from the mixer.)

At least that's how I understand it.
What I was aiming at is the way they would do it in an analog Studio or if you are about to go on stage. You've already got that nice clean sound coming out of your amplifier or the sound that you want but still when they put the microphone in front of it they still tweak to make sure what's coming out of the PA system or if it's in the studio what is getting tracked is tweek enough so that when it comes to mixing you don't have to do that much. I understand what you guys are saying but I've been playing live since I was 15 and I'm now 56 so I know the whole rundown on what it's like to set that amplifier up and put the microphone in front of it and still sound needs to be tweet. I've been in analog Studios enough times I just have my amplifier sounding the way I like and then having it bleached before going to tape. That's the tweaking I'm talking about.
It's all good because I'm sticking to just the way everybody else does it and that's the direct box into the interface and then track the audio and then clean it up from there. It's actually not a strange thing because Pantera's guitarist or when he was alive Dimebag actually had to run home and get his Behringer mixer to connect to their studio interface which was just a USB I think if I can recall the conversation correctly just to get the right sound to track. They tried all plugins and everything like that the sort of re-amp histone but nothing beat having the sound tuned or tweet before going to track.

Post Reply