Topic: How do I get rid of too much bass?

[Dede2002]

 
Hi,

I'm having a lot of hard work trying to cut/filter bass in my recordings. I'm using Audacity or Sound Studio. The thing is: if I choose the equalization option, I feel the bass roll-off will impact the other frequencies, producing a thin, hollow final product. In the other hand, I can't feel or hear ANY diferences if I use High Pass filter with Audacity or Soundos. By the way, I don't think those tools work at all. Audacity offer a cutoff starting at like 300 hz, which is way too much. Any tips. Thanks in advance.

[hummat]

Which Filter are you using in Sound Studio, Filter>High Pass Filter, or Audio Units>AU:Hipass ?
I've used the Audio Units >AU:HiPass in Sound Studio with very good results. 

[Evil Taper]

a high pass should decrease your low end significantly, otherwise you can just EQ is out by decreasing the low end.

[Dede2002]

Which Filter are you using in Sound Studio, Filter>High Pass Filter, or Audio Units>AU:Hipass ?
I've used the Audio Units >AU:HiPass in Sound Studio with very good results. 

I'm trying to use the Filter>High Pass Filter. It just doesn't take any  bass at all. Anyway, thanks for the tip. I'll give it a try.

[Dede2002]

a high pass should decrease your low end significantly, otherwise you can just EQ is out by decreasing the low end.

Yes, it should do exactly that. I don't know what's going on. Maybe the filtered files are being saved sowewhere in my Mac, because it does not appear in the Desktop.
Problem with EQ: I feel that EQing the low bass leaves the other frequencies with this hollow, metalic, irritating sound. Also, I found those filters to be not exactly user friendly ( at least for a novice user). I just don't want to mess with 2 or 3 controls to cut bass ( Frequency, number of samples etc).
Anyway, thanks a lot. It's just that I have this wonderfull sounding concert and I can't listen to it anywhere but through my Audio Technica Studiophones. In this case, it sounds terrific, almost scary. Golinf to speakers, total disaster.

[tapeheadtoo]

I've been following this thread with interest, as I also use Sound Studio on a Mac, and am forever trying to decrease the bass in my recordings.  I was wondering if someone could be kind enough to explain to me exactly what the parameters in Filter>High Pass Filter and Filter>Audio Units>Apple: AUHipass mean.  In High Pass Filter, which I have been using for a while, you can set the frequency and the steepness.  I think I understand 'frequency' (e.g. if I set the cutoff frequency at 500hz I am going to be filtering out more bass than if I set it at 200hz); however I'm not sure what 'steepness' refers to.  Also, after just reading about AU Hipass above, I am curious as to what the parameter 'resonance' (measured in dB) means.

[Dede2002]

I've been following this thread with interest, as I also use Sound Studio on a Mac, and am forever trying to decrease the bass in my recordings.  I was wondering if someone could be kind enough to explain to me exactly what the parameters in Filter>High Pass Filter and Filter>Audio Units>Apple: AUHipass mean.  In High Pass Filter, which I have been using for a while, you can set the frequency and the steepness.  I think I understand 'frequency' (e.g. if I set the cutoff frequency at 500hz I am going to be filtering out more bass than if I set it at 200hz); however I'm not sure what 'steepness' refers to.  Also, after just reading about AU Hipass above, I am curious as to what the parameter 'resonance' (measured in dB) means.

Thanks for adding your comments Tapeheadtoo. There must be an easy way to get rid of all that extra bass. The problem is that every time I try to do so, the software will likely present another problem for me to solve (steepness etc). Please, friends, I really need some advice here!

[boyacrobat]

could try Harbal v.2  -  Intuit Q feature -IntuitQ

quote-manual-harbal v.2 - intuit q

To aid in the design of harbalisation filters we introduce the IntuitQ process. This is an automated process specifically designed to remove spectrum anomalies from a given track. IntuitQ does not use a secondary reference to decide how to filter your track. In essence the frame of reference is the track itself. It looks at the current spectrum and decides upon a filter that will smooth it out whilst still preserving the peaks and dips that define the character and quality of the track.

The process is divided into two parts : IntuitQ average and IntuitQ Peak . IntuitQ average attempts to smooth the average spectrum of the track with a view to reducing masking. IntuitQ peak attempts to control dominant peaks in the peak spectrum of the track with a view to reducing the harshness of the track. Together they form the combined IntuitQ process but can also be applied individually.

To make use of IntuitQ simply click on the IntuitQ toolbar button. This will apply the IntuitQ average process followed by the IntuitQ peak process. You can apply IntuitQ at any stage in the process of designing a harbalisation filter or you can use it exclusively as a means of harbalising for dummies. In general, we recommend using IntuitQ as a starting point for harbalising a track with manual editing to follow if required. If the track is already close to where it should be has far as harmonic balancing is concerned, you may well find that no further adjustment is required, though the option is there if you need it. The algorithm is sufficiently robust to work well on the individual tracks of a complete mix as well.

The degree to which a single application of IntuitQ can change the spectrum shape is limited. As such, if your track is woefully out of balance then a repeated application of IntuitQ may come up with a harbalisation that is superior to just one application. Although repeated application is possible, in cases where it is required it is usually an indicator of a poor mix. As such, better results are possible if the track is remixed to obtain a spectrum shape closer to that desired. In the limit, repeated application of IntuitQ will create a spectrum shape that is "nominally" a straight line spectrum and is not likely to be the best shape possible.

IntuitQ acts only on a specific range of the spectrum. The range of frequencies that IntuitQ touches is dependant upon the spectrum shape. More specifically, it depends upon the dominant range of the spectrum. IntuitQ will not touch of the dominant range...........

-this should detect & cut accordingly & automated.. or manually home in -----ex alt program

g.

[Brennan]

Not sure if this will be of much help to anybody, but in Audition you can look at the 'spectral' view of a file (instead of the standard waveform) and literally just select frequencies by dragging a box. Then delete.

I've found that it works well for some things, and not so much for others..

[Evil Taper]

i really don't understand what the confusion is about here.  using a high pass filter in post will decrease bass, it lets highs pass, get it?  you could use a parametric or shelf eq really easily as well.  as for what frequencies to deal with, rarely do albums have anything below 50Hz in their range.  if you remove the low frequencies the rest of the sound should gain presence.  if you were someone listening to the recording who hadn't heard the original master you'd probably like it's sound better.

[guysonic]

Using CEP and likely same in Audition, I like Scientific Filters choosing 1 Pole High pass (6 dB/Octave) Butterworth as it leaves everything above the pole frequency untouched and has smoothest natural bass reduction sound to my ears.   Has smooth phase that leaves percussion bass transient (attack sounds) in very good shape.

Good working frequency range of -3dB pole for music starts as low as 40 cycles and extends as high as 250 cycles in my experience.   I find 85 - 150 cycles is right-on most of the time for pop/rock using flat to 3 - to- 24,000 cycles baffled omni mic array.

Using a different omni-to-directional type mic in whatever array configuration should not change preferring the Butterworth HP filter, only maybe a downward shift of most useful -3 dB pole frequencies for pop/rock in the 40 -110 cycle range.

[rustoleum]

I would adjust the EQ on my stereo.  Once it's gone from the recording, it ain't coming back.

[Dede2002]

Thanks for the tips. It's not that easy though.
Audacity has a bass cutoff that starts on 100Hz and then jumps to 330Hz, too much I guess.At least in my case, the 100HZ doesn't cause any audible improvement. The same with Sound Studio.
Sometimes a file will sound great with heaphones ( after the editing/mastering) and 100% crap with speakers. Very frustrating.Anyway, thanks.

[guysonic]

Thanks for the tips. It's not that easy though.
Audacity has a bass cutoff that starts on 100Hz and then jumps to 330Hz, too much I guess.At least in my case, the 100HZ doesn't cause any audible improvement. The same with Sound Studio.
Sometimes a file will sound great with heaphones ( after the editing/mastering) and 100% crap with speakers. Very frustrating.Anyway, thanks.

Headphones require just tens of milliwatts power for loud bass reproduction, but speakers demand hundreds of watts (think several 1000 watt subs) to reproduce live pop/rock recorded venue bass at listening levels where mids/highs also sound full.  So reducing the bass is only solution where speaker power is limited and neighbor relations are easily stressed.

[ethan]

I'm curious what your rig is, do you have shock mounts, what your playback system is, what kind of rooms you've been taping in and what genre of music.

My approach to low end has always to try to do as much as I can before it goes on tape. This includes running a V2 pre amp that has 2 HPF settings and can be tweaked even further with jumper cables. I have a set of hypers and cards which I use in different rooms and situations. Other things I do is to not try to get too close to a wall in a small room. I avoid X/Y stereo configs. etc..

The reason I ask about playback system is the perception of too much low end can come from the playback device especially headphones and headphone preamps.

Finally an impedance mismatch between your gain stage and recorder (if you don't run a preamp) could cause low end saturation.

-e

[Brian Skalinder]

Audacity has a bass cutoff that starts on 100Hz and then jumps to 330Hz, too much I guess.At least in my case, the 100HZ doesn't cause any audible improvement. The same with Sound Studio.

What function, exactly, are you using in Audacity?  My HPF window provides the following starting frequencies:  1, 49, 97, 145, 193, 241, 289, 337...and so on.

You may also use Audacity's EQ function.  When I look at Audacity's EQ, I'm able to define a HPF starting at any frequency I'd like and defining any user-definable slope (or curve) I'd like:  Effect | Equalization on the main menu opens the dialogue in the attached picture.  Click on the line where you'd like to start the HPF.  The click need not be precise - aftter clicking, you can slide it around to select the frequency at which you'd like to start.  Then click again on the left most point of the line and drag it down to get the slope you'd like.  Or, click multiple times and slide each point to achieve the curve you'd like.

[Dede2002]

One more time, thanks a lot for everything.
That's my rig (if can use that word):
Edirol R-09 > SP battery box (of course, no bass roll-off...) > SP-TFB-2 mics. Important: I use the mics ouside the ear. I've just got a brand new pair of Microphone Madness HLSC-1 (Sennheiser Driven) mics. Not able to test them  so far.
Playback system: Wadia 6 (CD player), McCormack Power Drive 1 (power amp)
and B&W 804 speakers (bi-cable).
Usually I tape blues/ blues-rock type music in small or medium size clubs.
Regarding Audacity, I usually go to the Hi Pass filter. Is there any other Audacity tool I can use? Audacity - in theory - is exactly what I need. But I've never been able to use it properly.
It's just that I've taped this amazing concert and just can't listen to it. If I take more bass ( using EQ), everything else left sounds metalic and lifeless. If I take less, my speakers goes crazy with the bass overload.

[Brian Skalinder]

Regarding Audacity, I usually go to the Hi Pass filter. Is there any other Audacity tool I can use? Audacity - in theory - is exactly what I need. But I've never been able to use it properly.
It's just that I've taped this amazing concert and just can't listen to it. If I take more bass ( using EQ), everything else left sounds metalic and lifeless. If I take less, my speakers goes crazy with the bass overload.

I'm not sure what slope Audacity's HPF uses.  Theoretically, fine-tuning the EQ should allow you to find the middle ground between the two results you note above.  Not much else to say at this point except:  good luck!

And, if Audacity doesn't quite do the trick for you, consider Samplitude SE v8.  It's only $50, sounds better than Audacity, has waaaay more features, better documentation, but does have a bit of a learning curve.

[Dede2002]

Audacity has a bass cutoff that starts on 100Hz and then jumps to 330Hz, too much I guess.At least in my case, the 100HZ doesn't cause any audible improvement. The same with Sound Studio.

What function, exactly, are you using in Audacity?  My HPF window provides the following starting frequencies:  1, 49, 97, 145, 193, 241, 289, 337...and so on.

You may also use Audacity's EQ function.  When I look at Audacity's EQ, I'm able to define a HPF starting at any frequency I'd like and defining any user-definable slope (or curve) I'd like:  Effect | Equalization on the main menu opens the dialogue in the attached picture.  Click on the line where you'd like to start the HPF.  The click need not be precise - aftter clicking, you can slide it around to select the frequency at which you'd like to start.  Then click again on the left most point of the line and drag it down to get the slope you'd like.  Or, click multiple times and slide each point to achieve the curve you'd like.

Really appreciate your reply. How can I get to this tool you're refering too on Audacity?
My Hi Pass filter tool starts with "1" and then movers to "330" as cutting frequencies.Another question: once you use the filter ( any filter) what do you do next? Save the file on Desktop? Export the processed file to Desktop? That's what I do. Am I doing something terribly wrong?

[Brian Skalinder]

Really appreciate your reply. How can I get to this tool you're refering too on Audacity?

Not sure exactly what you're asking here...but I think you're asking how to access the interim frequencies between 1 and 330.  On my version of Audacity, I change focus to the slider by clicking it and sliding the slider all the way left so it reads 1, and then using the keyboard --> and <-- keys to raise or lower the frequency step by step.  I tried doing the same with the mouse/pointer, and couldn't achieve the same precision of movement.

My Hi Pass filter tool starts with "1" and then movers to "330" as cutting frequencies.Another question: once you use the filter ( any filter) what do you do next? Save the file on Desktop? Export the processed file to Desktop? That's what I do. Am I doing something terribly wrong?

After applying the HPF or EQ, or any other editing for that matter, simply Export to WAV, ensuring you have your sample rate, dither, and export options defined properly.  See my Audacity Workflow for tips.

[Dede2002]

Really appreciate your reply. How can I get to this tool you're refering too on Audacity?

Not sure exactly what you're asking here...but I think you're asking how to access the interim frequencies between 1 and 330.  On my version of Audacity, I change focus to the slider by clicking it and sliding the slider all the way left so it reads 1, and then using the keyboard --> and <-- keys to raise or lower the frequency step by step.  I tried doing the same with the mouse/pointer, and couldn't achieve the same precision of movement.

My Hi Pass filter tool starts with "1" and then movers to "330" as cutting frequencies.Another question: once you use the filter ( any filter) what do you do next? Save the file on Desktop? Export the processed file to Desktop? That's what I do. Am I doing something terribly wrong?

After applying the HPF or EQ, or any other editing for that matter, simply Export to WAV, ensuring you have your sample rate, dither, and export options defined properly.  See my Audacity Workflow for tips.

That's a relief. Brian, I can't thank you enough for your time and patience.
I'll try and let you know.
Have a good one

[ethan]

That's my rig (if can use that word):
Edirol R-09 > SP battery box (of course, no bass roll-off...) > SP-TFB-2 mics. Important: I use the mics ouside the ear. I've just got a brand new pair of Microphone Madness HLSC-1 (Sennheiser Driven) mics.

I know this is slightly off topic but I feel understanding how the low end gets on the recording in the first place helps avoid post production EQ/HPF'ing.

I think much of your bass is the result of using omni microphones indoors. Sound gets to your ears in three ways: direct, reflected & reverberant. With omni's the later two contribute more to the signal and reverberance more so of the two. Also reverberant sound favors the low end as high frequency sound attenuates faster.

Have you tried running "in your ears" or using a Jecklin disk? I think this may help reduce the amount of reverberant sound getting to each mic and improve the ratio of direct to reverberant.

Do you have the basic battery box or the one with level control?

I can't seem to find any information on the R-09's input impedance nor for the load impedance of the battery/SP-TFB-2 combo. Are you running line in or mic in? Is the bass you get clear or muddy? The latter could be the result of an imput impendance mismatch.

[Dede2002]

That's my rig (if can use that word):
Edirol R-09 > SP battery box (of course, no bass roll-off...) > SP-TFB-2 mics. Important: I use the mics ouside the ear. I've just got a brand new pair of Microphone Madness HLSC-1 (Sennheiser Driven) mics.

I know this is slightly off topic but I feel understanding how the low end gets on the recording in the first place helps avoid post production EQ/HPF'ing.

I think much of your bass is the result of using omni microphones indoors. Sound gets to your ears in
three ways: direct, reflected & reverberant. With omni's the later two contribute more to the signal and reverberance more so of the two. Also reverberant sound favors the low end as high frequency sound attenuates faster.

Have you tried running "in your ears" or using a Jecklin disk? I think this may help reduce the amount of reverberant sound getting to each mic and improve the ratio of direct to reverberant.

Do you have the basic battery box or the one with level control?

I can't seem to find any information on the R-09's input impedance nor for the load impedance of the battery/SP-TFB-2 combo. Are you running line in or mic in? Is the bass you get clear or muddy? The latter could be the result of an imput impendance mismatch.

You're absolutelly right in your remarks.
I normally running Line In. The bass is pretty much on the clear side. In this particular case, even at the very moment I was taping, the bass was overwhelming.The venue itself has great acoustics, is a brand new theatre. To my ears, the bass player or/and the soundman were excited about the great acoustics and push to much the bass EQ and Volume. Bass was very, very loud.
My Edirol takes care of the level. No level on my battery box.
The omni thing is what made me move to the Sound Madness HLSC-1 mics (cardioids). Also, I got another battery box, this time with Bass Roll-Off. Yes, I've been told that I will not need roll-off with those mics, but I think is always good to have options.
I was not using the mics inside the ear because doing so you end up with a great sounding headphgone sound, but sometimes terrible when listening with speakers. Besides, it's awfull to play marble statue the whole show. You just can't move your head if you don't want to mess up your recording.
Excuse my lack of knowledge, but what exactly do you mean with "impedance mismatch"
Thanks

[ethan]

Excuse my lack of knowledge, but what exactly do you mean with "impedance mismatch"

If you're running line in then there's not much chance of an impedance missmatch. It's a topic for another day.

[vince]

Just wanted to tag along here, this thread is just what I was looking for. I have been out of the game for a while and pulled what I thought was a nice recording last night in a little club called Jammin Java. After reading Ethan's post about avoiding X-Y I know that may have contributed to my boomy recording. I also did not use the rolloff on the mics (AKG 391 Cards) nor did I use the HPF settings on the V3. I was on a mic stand about 8' in X-Y at maybe 70' from the stage standing just slightly to stage left with mics pointing to center stage (right next to the board). Anyway...I have a decent recording (Alternate Routes ad Sons of William) but it is boomy and I was about to start trying the same things DeDe2002  is trying in Audition 2.0. I am thinking of trying the parametric EQ.
Ethan, What config will help in a small room? and Which HPF is better, using the Mics rool off or the V3's.

Peace,

Vince

[Krispy D]

Thanks for the tips. It's not that easy though.
Audacity has a bass cutoff that starts on 100Hz and then jumps to 330Hz, too much I guess.At least in my case, the 100HZ doesn't cause any audible improvement. The same with Sound Studio.
Sometimes a file will sound great with heaphones ( after the editing/mastering) and 100% crap with speakers. Very frustrating.Anyway, thanks.

welcome to post production!  this is a great quote for anyone who thinks sound engineers just sit around turning knobs.

[rdflash]

neat topic.

[aris95]

Hello in Audacity program there is menu choice under "Effect" called "Bass and Treble..." and simply dragging the bass slider to the left (minimum bass) cuts the annoying bass off. Clikc Ok, and then Export the .mp3 as a new file

- aris95-

[F.O.Bean]

In WaveLab, I normally use the VST Plugin 'MultiBand Compressor' and that way you can easily adjust the lows/mids/highs in 3 sections and can determine where you want the lows/mids/highs to start/end[on certain frequencies is what I mean]! I normally remove -3 to -5db of lows in the lowend section of the MBC, if my recordings need it! But its very easy to do and doesn't take too much time to get right