Why Mastering Engineers Don't Adjust EQ more than 1db?

[AlfaOmega_MusicalMind]

Sounds way more cohesive with the five
THANKS FOR THIS KINGHANDLEE!!!🙏☺️

[FredDeMassiveAlambic]

Sound difference is mainly due to a different resulting EQ curve and phase shifts. You can probably get the same sound with another EQ doing 6db cut, whose sound is more suited to your music.

We have different pieces of gear in order to cover a wide variety of situations, not to use them all every time. Main reason to use multiple pieces of gear is to get benefits from their own circuitry : a tube pultec tends to soften the transients, a 4K compressor to open and brighten the sound, a 2254 limiter to make if feel "in your face"..etc

This way, you can benefit from let's say pultec highs with transient roundness with GML's midrange musicality. The amount of db you boost or cut is only related to how well the gear is suited to the music. That's why some pieces of gear have became so popular : the way they can handle any source (GML eq, 33609 compressor, Ampex machines..)

Limiting yourself to 1db is a way to "not have to choose" the right tool. And I'd pay a mastering engineer for his ability to choose 😉

[StargateMax]

According to my experience (~25 years) the mix itself needs additional work if I need to tweak any frequency more than 1.5 dB in the mastering stage. The problem: boosting or cutting an unwanted frequency (or a range) in the mastering stage also affects the rest of the instruments and sounds that may not even need any tweaking, so therefore, (an example) by cutting a boxy/muddy/warm sounding instrument too much we'll end up making the rest of the song too thin and the overall balance would be ruined. Need to go back to mixing individual tracks, EQ, valume, compression, etc.

[TWEAKER]

The primary reason for minimal EQ in mastering is because a great mix shouldn't *need* too much EQ.

[GuitKayD]

Loved the video, but I`m not sure if I`m picking up exactly the difference between the two techniques

[Mitsch]

To my ears there is more spatial sound and width in the 5 EQ sample. Don't know if that is what someone wants to achieve when primarily the need was to do an EQ move. In addition you sacrifice the sound quality by putting the signal through 5 calculations instead of 1. (But I admit that I don't hear such calculation errors, anyway).

[khalilroukoz]

if that song lackin im cranking that thing, mastering or not 😂😂

[Ray_Wood_]

Thank you 😊👍 🙇‍♂️💓🍀🎶
Struggling to collect clean guitar recordings and over time I began doing this 😅. I thought I might be crazy but it seemed to help.

[POLYAL]

adjusting by these amounts (looking at the loudness of the track) is bordering
doing it for the sake of it . . 1db is the smallest noticeable change of sound in a normal
listening environment . . never mind something thats maxing out with a maximiser

[GODenWord]

Atualy i liked more when there was only 1 eq/ The sound is 1 flavored. While when there were 5 eq the sound was multy flavored.
It is likew apple pie or mutly frukt pie. Which pie you want? IU wantapple pie.

[russenduf]

The main reason why you dont boost or cut too much in the mastering....(there is no 1dB rule) is that you will mess up with phase no need to use 5 eqs to do that .Engineer's use different eqs for different tasks thats

[bobbiejohnson]

Thants. Great tip. Thanks for sharing.

[Inoxia]

Ok... Next time, try this: Use the SONTEC 432 to notch out 5 db of mud area. THEN use 4 extra EQ plugins, AND DON'T EQ ANYTHING, just let the sound passthrough and let them be active on that track.

[dannydaniel]

I had some songs I did on a 4 track cassette recorder when l was a kid and l didn't wanna replay them again..the balance was really off and the mastering engineer had to use extreme boosts and cuts to get it to sound decent

[NoQualmsTheArtist]

The one EQ sounded punchier and had better bass. The 5 EQ's sounded more boring compared. So you actually busted the myth 😂