Why is 250hz such a problem frequency?

[davy4575]

probably, although you can usually hear it over cans as well

 

[TUEP]

My SVT has the graphic EQ, I set my mid-selector @ 800 HZ range and the frequency on flat. On the graphic EQ I have the 250 HZ set to flat. Seems like a neutral way to run it.

 

[Jazz Ad]

If you put a typical rock song to spectrum analysis, there is always a huge bump around this frequency. Everybody's there.

 

[jking138]

Don't quote me on this but I think I read somewhere that the human ear is naturally more sensitive to certain frequencies and is focused around 800hz on average. The sensitivity then moves in multiples, so up to 1khz, 1.2khz, etc, 1.6khz being notorious for listening fatigue. And down 600hz, 400hz, etc. It could be that too much 200hz is naturally displeasing to the ear. But it is a busy frequency for all instruments.

 

[Steve Dallman]

Vocals, acoustic guitar, and other instruments have a dominant hump around 250Hz. The chestiness of a male vocal, and the proximity effect of most stage mics, and even the drums, all have that hump. This builds up in the mix, and the cluster of 250Hz humps makes it a problem frequency. I did sound at a church (as well as playing bass) and we had a lot of musicians and singers. I started working on cleaning up the sound in the PA. First, I low cut everything but the bass and kick. Next I trimmed the lows out of each singer's mic. I shot for very natural sounding vocals, without any of the proximity bass boost everyone had been used to. Then I took out un-natural humps in each instrument, creating a sonic space for each instrument. At the time, I hated 250 in my bass tone, so I cut as much there as I could. I liked my bass tone below and above the other instruments, and they fit nicely in between.

It worked incredibly well. Three guitars (one acoustic, two electrics), flute, keyboards, drums, bass and 5-8 singers. (the flute player had her own pedalboard, with panning delay, octave below, and intelligent harmonizer) All was under control and no 250Hz hump anywhere.

 

[WashburnAB95]

I think part of it is that around 250 is where you get thickness and power in your tone. Unfortunately EVERYBODY wants that power or thickness for themselves. They don't realize that they are clashing with everybody else that wants that frequency band.

That being said... I think there is something that happens acoustically in this range. For some reason this frequency interacts with the rooms we play in. Maybe it has to do with multiples of 4' like someone said. I would like to study this phenomenon better.

 

[fokof]

Transpose your songs semitone up or down = problem solved !!!!!

Two things to consider : Arrangements and acoustics

Arrangements - like others said , if everybody is in the same range , better work on individual instrument's tones

Acoustics - Absolutly not true that a frequency will always be problematics (see Arrangements), all space will have different nodes. Where I work is 128-132Hz.

IME

 

[KeithAlanK]

Partly rooms accenting the area around 250hz, partly most instruments having plenty of info there, and partly the Fletcher-Munsen curves re: sensitivity of our hearing.
I found early in my FOH career that a judicious EQ cut here helped a lot, especially at lower volumes.
Outdoors, you gotta put it back.

 

[lowfreq33]

I find that most sound guys automatically cut 250 at least a little on every instrument. So if I do a narrow boost there it ensures that I'm audible regardless of what they do to my signal, since nobody else is in that lane.

 

[will33]

I usually find a 250hz cut to be a sort of magic knob to clear up vocals and make lyrics such that people can understand the words.

This dealing in small venue/barband PA's, likely for all the reasons mentioned here, as well as the typical 15" PA speaker getting somewhere in the neighborhood of its baffle step and really getting some output. Pole-mounted, especially if not up against a wall, they lose a good bit of output in the lows.

 

[mellowinman]

Two things:

1. Every sound needs to occupy its own space
2. Too much volume ruins every mix

I don't look at the numbers on an eq much. I listen with my ears, and shape the sound to that. If you are pushing a frequency on bass, don't push it on guitar. Separate your sounds! Don't make a wall of noise.

 

[walterw]

I don't look at the numbers on an eq much. I listen with my ears, and shape the sound to that.

i'll have to toss out a +1 here.

there are some "universal problem frequencies" to worry about, mostly the low, below 100Hz stuff that's really about what the PA can solidly produce; otherwise i'm nervous about assuming any one frequency to be in any way "special" or "always a problem".

hell, i'm more often than not pleased to discover in my little bars and clubs how if the channel strip EQs and overall speaker balance are where they should be, that the main EQ can be mostly or even entirely bypassed.

 

[lelandcrooks]

200-250 as has been discussed is always an issue. 2k-2.5k is also a standard at least for me to work on. It's where harshness lives.

 

[Blankandson]

When struggling with an easy set-up at church 20 years ago the minister of music happened to walk in (he had a Doctorate in some kind of music). He just walked over, found the 250 Hz slider on the equalizer, and pushed it all the way down. No more problems!!! He said it was a combination of the construction dimensions mentioned above but also that the room was concrete block which doesn't do 250 Hz very well. Anyway the ringing and feedback left immediately.

 

[wayshot]

As a hobby sound engineer I regularly have to cut 200 Hz to "remove the blanket" from most Mackie speakers, in addition to cutting 3,15k and 4k and boosting the highs a bit from 10k to 16k. I recently did one show with Bose L1 speakers and a boxy-sounding stage. Had lots of feedback problems in the low-mid area. Reduced 200 and 250 Hz by around 5 dB on the master EQ, voila! Clearer sound and most of the feedback issues were gone.