TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- 7band EQ?

7band EQ?

how realistic is this?

i was lookin thru stantons site to see if they have any announcements as far as possibly making improvements on the 3000 headphones as mine still havent come in yet and ive been waiting for em since xmas!

anyways, took a look thru the mixers and noticed the new models...

the old RM-22 and 402 both have something ive not seen on other mixers, 7band EQ...

kinda stands out to me since im a control nut and a perfectionist so any chance at being able to tweak more than 3 frequency ranges gets my attention(esp since my mixer only has a trebble and bass Eq )

not looking to buy the thing, just wanted some feedback, true its a stanton... but beside that fact how usefull would you guys find it?

http://www.stantondj.com/alpha44/load.asp?page=rm402

hmmm i don't even use the 3 iv'e got most of the time lol.

Older djs mixers used to have graphics on each channel and a main one long before they had eq pots on each channel...

nothing new.

Hard work using it as quickly to be honest and the benefits neglible unless you want to try some bizarre comb filtering. I doubt the bands are fine enough or enough of them to create any real comb effect anyway.

i cant filter sweep on a 7 band EQ. the only EQ ive been able to do this is with is a paragraphic or parametric EQ. set a notch. and move it up and down the entire frequency range to simulate a full filter sweep effect.

things i use 7 band EQs for - rough tonal and EQ adjustments for production purposes. unless you keep mixes in for ages, i dont exactly see how you can use this to full effect. transitioning would also be fucking slow if thats your aim using all 7 bands.

you do have more control over the tonal output of the song though. its just a case of whether you can take full advantage of that in the time that most DJ's spend transitioning between songs (i use EQs mainly for transitions, bringing elements out of one track and in for the other broadly using each band to introduce hihats (treble), leads/vocals/pads (mids) and kicks/bass (bass))

with a 7 band EQ you now have control over (broadly):

1)sub bass (0 to 65hz approx. all suuuuub baby)
2)bass (65 to 250hz. kicks and the top end of most deep basses)
3)lower mid (250 to 1500hz. bottom end of speech recognition around her. lower order harmonics here. most leads/vox and stuff have their bottom end around here)
4)mid (1500hz to 3000hz)
5)upper mid (3000hz to 6000hz. upper end of most leads/pads and the clarity and definition on vocals)
6)lower treble (6000hz to 8000hz)
7) treble (10,000hz +, all air on leads/vox, sibilance on hihats)

so instead of wiping in the hihats over the course of a single phrase you can subtly bring in the sibilant hats and say, half way through the phrase start bringing in the klangy part of the hats (upper mids). then if you want to glide in a vocal you can bring in the top end of it using bands 5, 4 and 3 in that order. whilst using bands 5 and 4, you will mostly be bringing in the top end of it and with the lower bands full closed you keep all the bass out. then when time comes to bring the vox full in, bring up band 3 and start bringing in the sub for a deep swell. end of phrase. slam the bass right in. the kicks start booming, the vocals explode in their low end presence. then you gotta do the opposite on the other tune too. then you can make subtle cuts in certain bands to get the mix more tonally pleasing. especially if both tunes you are mixing have very harsh, sizzling kind of hihats. you can retain the clarity in the mix by increasing the mids and upper mids on one track but decrease the treble band to bring out the klang and reduce the hiss. and on the other drop the mids and upper mids slightly to reduce the klang and increase the sibilance. overall you will have both hihat lines playing but you can make them both more separate in the mix owing to the extra bands.

overall theres some artful things you can probably do with it. the crucial factor is time though. with my mixes i leave em in for at least 2 phrases. in most tunes around tranceish bpms thats about a minute. and i have barely enough time to work a smooth mix using 3 bands.

quote:

Originally posted by Derivative with a 7 band EQ you now have control over (broadly): 1)sub bass (0 to 65hz approx. all suuuuub baby) 2)bass (65 to 250hz. kicks and the top end of most deep basses) 3)lower mid (250 to 1500hz. bottom end of speech recognition around her. lower order harmonics here. most leads/vox and stuff have their bottom end around here) 4)mid (1500hz to 3000hz) 5)upper mid (3000hz to 6000hz. upper end of most leads/pads and the clarity and definition on vocals) 6)lower treble (6000hz to 8000hz) 7) treble (10,000hz +, all air on leads/vox, sibilance on hihats)

Nice perspective on the EQ range within a tune. A thing I'd be interested in trying in mixing terms is to have two tunes running in the transition along side each other and having certain EQ ranges from both tunes cut and some at 0db. Sort of like taking different areas of production from two tunes and combining them to make one tune.

Heres an example:

TUNE 1

1)sub bass
2)OFF
3)OFF
4)mid
5)upper mid
6)lower treble (6000hz to 8000hz)
7)OFF

TUNE 2

1)OFF
2)bass
3)lower mid
4)OFF
5)OFF
6)OFF
7)treble


...Obviously both tunes would have to be the in the same key as each other for this to be effective.

Quite ambitious but I'd definately be willing to give it a go if I had 7 band EQ on my mixer. Otherwise as you said, it would be too much to handle for a normal 1-2 minute transition.

Wait!

"Dual 7-band master EQ with On/Off switch"

That 7 EQ is just master EQ, meaning that each channel has NO EQ previous mixing, (zero EQ, just the master has) so those planned tricks are impossible!.
NO 7 EQ in that 402 mixer!

Those mixers were visible some years ago and I now see a few are still being produced.
Not for Djs really.

To my knowledge the only DJ mixer with 4 EQ is the Allen& heat Xne 92. And the only DJ mixer with real parametric sweepeing EQ is TASCAM's X-9.

To me the X-9 is -by far- the best, most versatile and creative choice in EQ for Djs.
Apart from having complete range parametric EQ, it is really digital, very similar tech to the announced Pioneer DJM-1000 that will have one of the most exhorbitant prices to be seen in this field.

Plus -and this is just great- X-9 allows you to choose the thickness of the EQ(from thin to thick) to be setted for each rotary control(H,M,B) from a menu.

Mind that the parametric EQ control is via a second rotary control located just at the base of the typical 3 ones, so it is really accesible and can be controlled in real time.

The kick drum is different in the incoming track? a little to fat? go to the bass parametric ring and find where you can lower it so they are more alike. Middles are too thin? correct it just where it needs.

There's even a display that shows the actual number in Hertz so you will learn precise EQ numbers that can be useful later to effecting and setting parameters from effects.

No DJ mixer can top all this in the EQ side of things.


////////////////////There's a manual in pdf and some explantions at Tascam's DJ forum:

http://www.vaporpark.com/invboard/i...?showtopic=5529

quote:

Originally posted by djcl.ear Mind that the parametric EQ control is via a second rotary control located just at the base of the typical 3 ones, so it is really accesible and can be controlled in real time.

sorry but i have to disagree quite strongly here. There was an X-9 at this night I used to play at once a month and I hated it. The frequency control was about as accessable as a nuns knickers, the knobs were far too close together. The EQ gain knobs were too small, and too tight. The whole system was just too damn fiddly to be of any practical use

There are lots of other little niggles I have with this mixer too, but I cant be arsed to go into them now. Alot of the features it has are really good ideas, just the implementation of them sucks.

I think 3-band or sometimes 4-band EQ is enough.

Wow djdk
sure you are entitled to have your opinion and your sizes and sensitivity, the same as when Carl Cox explained at how his big fingers couldnt deal with the typical DJ mixers.

And about X-9, well surely it doesnt fit all opinions but it has the same basic layout at the EQ section and size as the DJM-600...

And I always hear those kinds of complaints with respect but as a whole alien area to me, since I dj mostly kinds of psytrance or psychill-out, hence I'm not into scratching or turnablism. Same with the crossfader; mayor issue of some with the mixers, I dont dear to touch a xfader since I mix with the channel faders to get the % of change from each I want, and not the fixed one.

Thus djing for me is not an exercise of olimpic gymnastics-like. IMHO this mixer's accesibility is ok, excellent I should say.
Mind the most physically extreme mixing I've done was with the most alambicated/trashed set ups at far out spots at the middle of mountains, forests, raining,etc where people is concentrated in the AMAZING music rather in the DJ acting performance, as opposed to djing at places where a lot of the audience is watching your coreography over the turntables or mixer controls to dance accordingly.

But in front of a X-9 is like djing with a piece of the starship remote control, where the DJ is able to delicatelly adjust, control and wildly affect the sound by it.

Problem accesing the inner ring knob???? never heard such a thing.

And about EQing I am SO much into it that I carry my own hi-fi equalizing module to add EQ control.And X-9 is simply the most verstile best EQ there's in this DJing mixer's planet ...Ok, I could receive the Allen & Heat Xone 92, as a good contender, but not my personal choice if I had to choose between the two.


Other issues...well,initially there were a problem with the implementation of EQ latency that was solved completely a few months after the release of an update.
This mixer is the direct brother of very nice and powerfull digital studio mixers, from a company that adopted the digital tech very early on in its studio mixers, even to define standars and digital connectors. They just decided to bring that knowledge to us Djs, and if we are talking Trance here... I guess it's hard to beat.


If anything some complained about the automatic BPM counter that is connected with the effects, a problem for which you have the manual TAP button and voila, solved. Others didnt liked its blue color.

The main issues I see is when people want to use a regular (DJM) mixer and having no previous knowledge of it,get at the dj booth and in front of a X-9, then mixing has to go without using 10% of its possibilities.

When this particular mixer came out it was so different than the rest, it has a steep learning curve and being digital at a time when CD(digital) DJs were not even considered DJs it was overlooked by many if they even noticed it.

At the time the ones who really didn't like it, were the rival firms(and their fan clubs, hired associates and prestige related people)that had no idea of the technologies involved in doing such a machine.

Now even Pioneer is coming out with the same basic digital technology at its top model with the DJM-1000(and charging 6+ times$). Numark did the behringer-copy thing and is shipping small, cheap AND HIGHLY SPECIFIED digital mixers... so soon whole lines and brands of old noisy mixers are going to be noticed if by anything by its poor performance as compared with these new breed.


Anyway surely some will still come up and say "I dont like the touch of it"...and then I would again look to those a little puzzled and understanding there are many kinds of djing and sizes and tastes.
And while reflecting back on the shit, noisy and limited mixers there had been at the past, I will make an effort to understand comments as those and go myself happily crusing the incredible sound waves with mixers if not like X-9, probably built based on those techs.

Enjoy your game.

I think we'll probably just have to disagree on this one dude! I just dont want you to think Im dissin it becos its not a pioneer or whatever! I think the features of the X-9 are fucking cool, its just they havent been implemented very well. I think if you you look at the DNX-1500, thats how the X-9 shouldve been. In fact, if Tascam had got the X-9 right, it would blow all the other similar mixers (Denon, Ecler, Pioneer probably even A&H) out of the water.

In fact it really pisses me off, I wanted to like the mixer, it could have been soooooo good. But it isnt as good as it shouldve been. Ive been DJing now for 6 years and during that time ive played on a variety of different mixers, from ones with nothing but 2 channel faders and an x fader to top of the range allen and heaths, but the X-9 is the only one that didnt "feel" right, cant explain it. tbh, when I found out we were using the X-9, at first I was really excited about getting to use all the features, but it just didnt live up to my expectations.

Ill probably write a better reply tomorrow when im not drunk haha

quote:

Originally posted by djcl.ear where people is concentrated in the AMAZING music rather in the DJ acting performance,

id like to point out that these are THE best gigs ever. I got into djing to share the music i love with people, so those gigs where people dont care who the DJ is are the best ones. You are lucky to get to play alot of these!

Yes, djdk mostly they are...
And bringing that vibe to our plazas and parks is what many of us intend to, yes?


I just saw your explanation on the other thread and I am very sure that model you put your hands on is the one without the upgrade.
Your comments are almost a replica of the ones made at the time...
Happily those issues are solved.

EQualizing is just very much my thing when I Dj, I just moove it all the time

.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.