EQ->COMP or COMP->EQ, when do you and why?

[Bapu 4,836]

If you sometimes chain EQ->COMP and sometimes chain COMP->EQ, when and why?

Edited September 17, 2021 by Bapu

[antler 1,289]

COMP->EQ most of the time: compression can change how an instrument sounds, so EQ goes after to let it fit better in a mix.

If something's hyped somewhere and is going to unnaturally trigger the compressor, then EQ both before and after.

I don't usually do EQ->COMP only.

[Bapu 4,836]

That's pretty much what I thought, thx.

[Heinz Hupfer 154]

HI:) 

Mostly Comp--> EQ, but sometimes as a Deesser for example the other way. Boost a frequency and it get's more compressed.

Accoustic Guitars for Frequncies you doesn't want, Boost on EQ, then use Compressor. 

Now I have this in the 2 way Deesser in the Schepps Omnichannel. Very helpful!

 

Bassman.

 

[DeeringAmps 1,725]

2 hours ago, Heinz Hupfer said:

Frequencies you doesn't want, Boost Cut? on EQ,

I think "fix" problem frequencies first, then compress, then "sweeten" to taste?
I guess every track is different.
I definitely High Pass first, get the mud out, if a track needs it...

t

[bitflipper 2,303]

EQ generally last because it's the one you're more likely to continue tweaking as the mix progresses. EQ changes levels, which assures you'll have to go back and readjust the comp threshold. Putting EQ last means you're less likely to screw up something else down the chain.

This has long been the standard for hardware consoles that feature integrated channel compression, including my current Yamaha stage mixer. Of course, such compressors are primitive and don't offer anywhere near the flexibility of software compressors - such as sidechain filters.

The exception to the EQ-last rule is if the compressor doesn't have a HPF on the sidechain input. In that case, EQ should precede compression, especially if you're cleaning up mud by rolling off lows on guitars and vocals. 

 

[Miguel Carzola 33]

You may have to use several instances of both on the same track so the “rules” become null.  There are no right answers.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Miguel Carzola

[bitflipper 2,303]

Anarchist!

[Miguel Carzola 33]

49 minutes ago, bitflipper said:

Anarchist!

😂👍🏼

[batsbrew 430]

if you have a kick that has too much pop at, say, 50 hz....

 

and you compress that....

 

the kick and signal from 50 hz is what will make the compressor work.

 

if you EQ the kick 1st,

and calm the 50 hz in line with what you really need,

the compressor works less hard.

 

and so on, ad naseum.

it's all dependent on the track, and the need.

[bitflipper 2,303]

Worst-case scenario is a full mix with a lot of accidental subsonic content. If you don't EQ that out before compression, you'll be left scratching your head wondering why your mix sounds so lifeless. Fortunately, mastering compressors usually have a HPF in the sidechain for just that situation, so even then EQing first isn't always necessary.

[Mark MoreThan-Shaw 479]

Filter - Compress - EQ - Limit

Something like that. It doesn't really make a huge difference - there are plenty of things in a mix of greater importance  

[batsbrew 430]

you can ruin a mix, by putting a compressor behind a track that needed eq first.

drives the compressor nuts.

bottom line, like mark said, you need to have the mix right to start with.

that's why i like to mix into sub busses, so i can treat the different parts of the band on their own sonic merits.

if i eq'd individual tracks right, there shouldn't be a build up of eq at the sub bus level, but sometimes it happens.

[jackson white 223]

An example of both @ 5'30"

 

[telecode 101 1,354]

COMP -> EQ is what I use. But I have seen more and more that there is no general standard. When I watched some of the more experienced engineers online, who actually know what they are doing as opposed to me, I get the impression they approach software and plugins differently than hardware. it seems to me they will just use a combination that sounds good to them and gives them the sound they are looking for. Maybe it's the flexibility of software and the fact that its not hardwired so you are really free to do whatever you want. The only limit is the system resources of the computer you are using. If 10 compressors in a row give you the sound you need, Just go for it.

The FX ordering Fillipo did here really made be re-think what I am doing with the software I use.

 

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by telecode 101

[Tezza 453]

I tend to use some sort of notch eq before the compressor and then sweetening afterwards. I found when recording my acoustic guitars and vocals quite a bit both from mic and direct from the guitar, there was always some harsh dominant frequency or 2, probably because I don't use top line high end equipment, when I notched that/those out a bit it acted a bit like a compressor creating a smoother sound and wave form. Just sounded smoother to me and easier on the compressor which doesn't then have to work so hard to compress horrid harsh dominant frequencies.

[DeeringAmps 1,725]

Here's another link, <disclaimer> I have not watched it yet, probably mostly an advert for Waves</disclaimer>

t