I've seen several posts about "what's good and what's bad" while EQing lately. Now I don't consider myself an expert, but I think there's a few historical and practical contexts people don't notice at first.

See, though music today is louder, I think great mixes were done throughout the years for a few decades now. I'm still amazed by clarity of mixdown when any old Michael Jackson track pops out in my headphones.

Funny part is that this:
http://medias.audiofanzine.com/images/normal/ssl-eq-502-197150.jpg
...is an EQ of old SSL console. If you like any music pre 2000 there's big chance this was the EQ they used on each track. 4 fixed type bands. Almost no Q control.

You might say: "Naah, they had outboard chains for processing important tracks like vocals or lead guitars." Yeah. They did. So they can slap a reverb on it and EQ it by something like a world famous Pultec EQ. ...that looked like this: http://www.crossenstreams.com/pultec/front.gif ...again notice the controls.

Then you might say: "Ok, those are old. They were magical. New expansive mixing consoles in big studios are as much magical and have much more controls." Well no. Studios use mostly software solutions already with occasional vintage HW chains. If they don't, they use a modern console. I'm lucky enough to work with few of these (Studer, Lawo, Yamaha) as a TV technician and there's usually standard 4 band parametric EQ on them. Nothing fancier.

Really the possibilities all of us have in damn simple EQ8 in Ableton are miles away from what those massive tracks of past were mixed with. Yes, those vintage consoles and HW EQs had saturations, cross-talk and other "imperfections", but those just added flavor, they didn't help with the actual mixing too much. ...and if you need them, go ahead, there's plenty of emulations.

My point is that in all of those "how to EQ properly" trheads is a lot of over-thinking that can cause bad habbits. And that seems to me wrong.
What do you guys think?

I gotta agree, lately I've been amazed how modern some of Bruce Springsteen's records from the 70's sound. And it really puts things into perspective to see what kind of equipment they had at their disposal.

I think that these "what's good and what's bad" discussions exist exactly because the tools are so complex. If you have one knob, there aren't many ways you can screw things up with it. I do agree that there is lots of over-thinking, not just regarding EQ, and to me it seems to arise from people turning recommendations into strict rules, without even thinking about the reason behind the recommendation. Just as an example, the "subtractive vs additive" EQ meme. Basically, any comment that says "you shouldn't do X" reeks of over-thinking, because you should do anything* you want to achieve the end-goal of great-sounding music.

EDIT: * anything legal, that is
EDIT: BTW, it might be a cool exercise to make a track limiting yourself to mixing tools that emulate stuff from the 70's or 80's

Really the possibilities all of us have in damn simple EQ8 in Ableton are miles away from what those massive tracks of past were mixed with.

Nailed it.

Sometimes I think I'm alone when I say I barely touch the EQ. When I do touch it, it's either low or high pass, frequency dip between 200-300hz or some dips. I find myself to dip more in the frequencies than a boost.

I see the craziest EQ sometimes from +5 to 10db boosting all over the spectrum or tons of dips.

I try to find sounds that really fit together and barely need any EQ on them. Usually my breaks are almost without any EQ and I also use a little compression as possible (a lot of times there isn't any compression).

I honestly think I fall into the 'overdo it' category, so I've been making an effort to EQ less and less lately, and go back to the sounds themselves, the synthesis, and sample selection, and get it right there before touching Pro-Q.

It's tough to break old habits!

1. Great Post
2. Great Post
3. Less is always more. Tinker too far and you will drive yourself mad.