Hi/Low Pass filter VST?

ORIGINAL: mike_mccue

ORIGINAL: AT

Sonitus, low and high shelves. If you need them sharper, you can stack the low-mid and hi-mid frequencies.

Hey, THANKS!

I never tried this... and so I loaded up a project and placed Voxengo Gliss EQ before and instance of Stillwell Audio's scHope. I used ScHope to zoom in to 20-100Hz with the hi res FFT size.

I stacked up 5 nodes as hi pass filters in Voxengo Gliss EQ and found that I could seemingly eliminate any activity down below 40Hz... which scHope showed was still quite active with only a single hi-pass instance... without creating a obvious resonant peak.

This is what I'm speaking/thinking about... I don't know enough about filters but it seems like there should be some easy way to ERADICATE any data below a certain frequency with a one click plugin while feeling confident you were not building a resonant peak near the cutoff.

I made a preset of my 5 stack and unless I learn of some bad side effect intend to use it for a basic hi-pass on futurte work.

I'm still curious, is the preset I just made analagous to a fifth order filter???

best regards,
mike

ORIGINAL: mike_mccue

Good Questions!

All I know is that I stared at the highest res fastest response in scHope and watched carefully for changes as I switched each node in or out.

I saw the activitity below 40Hz finally disapear... if harmonics of that disapear... harmaonics that were likely from room modes, local resonances, or extraneous noise, rather than feature source material then I guess I don't mind them being discarded even without my notice... if it's happening.

I was using Voxengo Gliss EQ because it has a nice real time frequency analyzer.

I used schOpe because it's the highest res frequency viewer I have.

My Voxengo Gliss settings were:

all five nodes have the same settings:

frequency: 80
bandwidth: 2.54 HZ (this seems to the steepest that doesn't cause an adjacent resonant peak)
gain: 0 (this control doesn't seem pertinent with the Hi-Pass filter option)
dynamics: 0 (I tried various settings... and left it at *0* in an effort to disengage the feature)


edit to add:

I just made a preset for Sonitus FX EQ as suggested...

I used a hi pass filter at 80Hz with a Q of 1.4 on each node. I went lower than 80Hz but the was discernible energy dancing around at 20-30Hz.


best regards,
mike

ORIGINAL: mike_mccue

Thanks nprime I'll look at that.

Tom,

I want to eliminate ONLY the sub frequencies and ONLY on tacks that don't have any fundamental use of the frequencies I want to kill. I also want to use it with care on master tracks when working on acoustic (including drums) mixes.

You may be right that it will lead to a digital sound but my thought about that is that it doesn't therefore compare to analog work because, in my experience, the deep low energy I'm speaking of disappears along the signal chain in an analog world... I think I'm only starting to realize how much low end gets into the *machine* and makes it thru the production process in a ITB workflow.

Even though I may grab some subs via proximity effect or resonance... and that's part of the real acoustic event... I'm eager to minimize their effect for the most part.

Take a look at these illustrations which I just made after taking AT's suggestion to try stacking nodes:

...

So far I like what I'm hearing and what I'm seeing :-)

But I'd like to learn more about what's happening and if there is some reason to think the stack causes a domino effect on the harmonics I have yet to recognize.

best regards,
mike

ORIGINAL: info@tomflair.com

...

links or more infos would be deeply appreciated!

thanks