LFF
Co-Organizer for Can Jam '09
Member of the Trade: Paradox
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
- Posts
- 7,055
- Likes
- 265
Just wanted to comment on the whole frequency range fiasco.
This chart is based off of the famous Carnegie Chart. The original was hand-drawn in 1941 by E.J. Quinby of Carnegie Hall and has been used by audio engineers and audio professionals since the 40's.
Within the mastering industry, this is what is used for EQ points:
Sub Bass: 20 Hz and below
Low Bass: 40 Hz
Mid Bass: 80 Hz
Lower Cloud: 150 Hz
Upper Cloud: 250 Hz
Lower Mid: 1,000 Hz
Mid: 3,400 Hz
Upper Mid: 6,000 Hz
Lower Treble: 8,000 Hz
Top: 10,000 Hz
Air: 14,000 Hz
This is what I have been using for over 11 years now and I know of other famous engineers who use the same definitions who have been using it for 30 years or more. I am sure many of you have their work in your collection.
Now, if Robert Harley wants to come out and change those definitions for the sake of selling books and magazines, then that is fine. It doesn't make him right. It's up to you who you want to believe and/or trust. Then again...do you really want to believe a man who argues against objective tests/listening/results?
This chart is based off of the famous Carnegie Chart. The original was hand-drawn in 1941 by E.J. Quinby of Carnegie Hall and has been used by audio engineers and audio professionals since the 40's.
Within the mastering industry, this is what is used for EQ points:
Sub Bass: 20 Hz and below
Low Bass: 40 Hz
Mid Bass: 80 Hz
Lower Cloud: 150 Hz
Upper Cloud: 250 Hz
Lower Mid: 1,000 Hz
Mid: 3,400 Hz
Upper Mid: 6,000 Hz
Lower Treble: 8,000 Hz
Top: 10,000 Hz
Air: 14,000 Hz
This is what I have been using for over 11 years now and I know of other famous engineers who use the same definitions who have been using it for 30 years or more. I am sure many of you have their work in your collection.
Now, if Robert Harley wants to come out and change those definitions for the sake of selling books and magazines, then that is fine. It doesn't make him right. It's up to you who you want to believe and/or trust. Then again...do you really want to believe a man who argues against objective tests/listening/results?