When to high pass.... does it matter?

[riccol]

Does it matter in the final mix when you high pass a track?

I mean I can high pass with settings on the mic... and setting on the pre...
Or high pass/roll off the lows once the track it recorded.

If you can live with the lows while tracking it seems at least you would have the lows there if maybe you needed them.

Is there any real difference in the end?

[daverich]

yes there is a difference.

Clearing that mud out can really make the difference between a mix that sounds clear and focused and one that just doesn't play nice.

You'd be amazed how much is cut out of vocals and guitars on some mixes, just leaving that bottom end to the bass and kick.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[longcipher]

Originally Posted by daverich

yes there is a difference.

Clearing that mud out can really make the difference between a mix that sounds clear and focused and one that just doesn't play nice.

You'd be amazed how much is cut out of vocals and guitars on some mixes, just leaving that bottom end to the bass and kick.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

I'm curious - what's the highest frequency you've high passed to? I've taken it to 300 and felt guilty, but the track sounded good. Anyone else care to share some frequencies?

[nfpotter]

Originally Posted by riccol

Does it matter in the final mix when you high pass a track?

I mean I can high pass with settings on the mic... and setting on the pre...
Or high pass/roll off the lows once the track it recorded.

If you can live with the lows while tracking it seems at least you would have the lows there if maybe you needed them.

Is there any real difference in the end?

If there's ANY doubt that you might want to keep the lows, then track them. Doesn't matter if you end up taking them out in mix stage.

[_Devin]

IMHO, everything but the bass and kick should be high-passed at it's own frequency, usually atleast 100-200hz, and I usually high-pass some or all of my hihats anywhere from 1000-5000hz. IMHO, IMHO, the bass and kick should not be high-passed, but perhaps just a 2-6dB cut with a low-shelf EQ.

There's a free VST plugin called Rubberfilter that's great for this.

[daverich]

Originally Posted by nfpotter

If there's ANY doubt that you might want to keep the lows, then track them. Doesn't matter if you end up taking them out in mix stage.

Yeah I agree with this,- I wouldn't hi-pass on the input,- only with plugs.

Also,- sometimes with guitars I find a lo-shelf below about 200 and down about -6 db will keep the body there but shift some mud.

This really is all trial and error though as every audio will be different.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[Fabian]

Originally Posted by longcipher

I'm curious - what's the highest frequency you've high passed to? I've taken it to 300 and felt guilty, but the track sounded good. Anyone else care to share some frequencies?

I think it was Yep who said (in his excellent thread about why our recordings sound like donkey) that it may be a good approach to put in a high-pass and raise the cutoff until it sounds bad, then to just back off a little and leave it at that. I've tried this and it works for me. Haven't bothered to remember the freqs I end up at though, just let the ears do their work...

[Amberience]

I'm tempted to say high-pass on anything that isn't a kick drum or a bass instrument.

[Mr. Data]

As Dave wrote:

It's all a matter of trial and error, 'cos every musical piece and every band is different.



-Data

[Chris_P_Critter]

Originally Posted by Amberience

I'm tempted to say high-pass on anything that isn't a kick drum or a bass instrument.

If you said it, I would agree with you.

[Chris_P_Critter]

Originally Posted by riccol

Does it matter in the final mix when you high pass a track?

I mean I can high pass with settings on the mic... and setting on the pre...
Or high pass/roll off the lows once the track it recorded.

If you can live with the lows while tracking it seems at least you would have the lows there if maybe you needed them.

Is there any real difference in the end?

I explained this to a friend of mine the other day. The more you bass frequencies you add (or, the more you allow to remain via lack of HPF), the more crowded the sub / low to low mid frequencies get, and the more crowded these frequency spaces get the less clarity you'll have.

It's that simple.

It's like trying to hear one person, over 100 other people all yelling at the same time - get rid of the other people, and you won't have any problems hearing the person you're trying to hear.

Hopefully that analogy makes sense.

[kindafishy]

Originally Posted by _Devin

IMHO, everything but the bass and kick should be high-passed at it's own frequency, usually atleast 100-200hz, and I usually high-pass some or all of my hihats anywhere from 1000-5000hz. IMHO, IMHO, the bass and kick should not be high-passed, but perhaps just a 2-6dB cut with a low-shelf EQ.

There's a free VST plugin called Rubberfilter that's great for this.

This might be a bit of a hijackish question, but why use one LP/HP filter over another? ReaEQ has both and I have been using it. Seems good.

[_Devin]

Originally Posted by kindafishy

This might be a bit of a hijackish question, but why use one LP/HP filter over another? ReaEQ has both and I have been using it. Seems good.

ReaEQ only has a 12dB/Octave-pole high-pass and low-pass, Rubberfilter has a knob that allows you to adjust the filter anywhere from 6dB/Octave all the way up to 360dB/Octave. The steeper high-pass allows you to completely cut out the muddy freqs below ~150hz without affecting the lower end of the midrange. Lower order filters affect frequencies above the cutoff, if you set a ReaEQ HP to 150hz, it may start rolling off as high as 1000hz. The term "cutoff" actually means the point that you hit -3dB of roll-off(in theory, not always in practice).

[riccol]

thanks for the input! I know the effects of taking out certain frequencies and it varies from track to track and project to project. What I was asking was "When" to adjust. During tracking on input, or afterwards. Thanks for the good answeres

[darjama]

geez, am I the only one that high passes kick and bass? usually somewhere around 40Hz. My logic is that it helps focus the sound by not reproducing what most speakers don't articulate anyway.

[Amberience]

Originally Posted by darjama

geez, am I the only one that high passes kick and bass? usually somewhere around 40Hz. My logic is that it helps focus the sound by not reproducing what most speakers don't articulate anyway.

I usually take care of that with an EQ on the final output.

[UncleAge]

Originally Posted by darjama

geez, am I the only one that high passes kick and bass? usually somewhere around 40Hz. My logic is that it helps focus the sound by not reproducing what most speakers don't articulate anyway.

No you're not the only one, I do it as well in a fair number of my mixes. But I never eq on input. I try to get all I can by using the best mic for the situation and then positioning it until I get about the sound I'm looking for. With that said I'd say that I'll shelf it quite a bit as well, especially if it is a sparse piece (1-3 instruments) where a HP might take away from the feel of the piece.

Either way it's never "one size fits all", IMO.

[_Devin]

Originally Posted by darjama

geez, am I the only one that high passes kick and bass? usually somewhere around 40Hz. My logic is that it helps focus the sound by not reproducing what most speakers don't articulate anyway.

It tends to suck the power right out the kick and bass(like I said earlier, "cutoff" is the -3dB point, the rolloff starts much higher than 40hz), if it really needs a cut, I'll do a 2-6dB Lowshelf cut at anywhere from 20-100hz. Are you using a sub to monitor?

[dub3000]

Originally Posted by darjama

geez, am I the only one that high passes kick and bass? usually somewhere around 40Hz. My logic is that it helps focus the sound by not reproducing what most speakers don't articulate anyway.

yeah, there isn't really anything useful happening down under 40hz, and it sucks up loads of mix headroom.

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by dub3000

yeah, there isn't really anything useful happening down under 40hz, and it sucks up loads of mix headroom

Depends on the tune, low B on a five string bass is about 30Hz.

I do agree however that most sytems don't get down this low with much efficiency.

[dub3000]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Depends on the tune, low B on a five string bass is about 30Hz.

I do agree however that most sytems don't get down this low with much efficiency.

most *bass amps* can't play back the low note on a 5-string. and most consumer-grade subs are tuned heavily to one tone (e.g. 50hz) so they're not going to be any help either.

the only way to get that to show up on any reasonable system is to add upper harmonics (e.g. distortion/enhancement)

[Geoff Waddington]

Originally Posted by dub3000

most *bass amps* can't play back the low note on a 5-string. and most consumer-grade subs are tuned heavily to one tone (e.g. 50hz) so they're not going to be any help either.

the only way to get that to show up on any reasonable system is to add upper harmonics (e.g. distortion/enhancement)

Sadly, you are 100% correct. I've spent my entire life trying to get decent response in the lowest octave, and am totally familiar with the harmonic distortion / enhancement trick to fool the ear (I was a pro bass player for years).

Still there is no substitute for the feeling generated by that lowest octave.

[dub3000]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Still there is no substitute for the feeling generated by that lowest octave.

totally, but yeah. even club systems start to give out around 50Hz.

...i'd love a nice pair of duntech sovereigns. 30Hz-20KHz +/- 2dB!

[geo242]

Originally Posted by dub3000

yeah, there isn't really anything useful happening down under 40hz, and it sucks up loads of mix headroom.

If I am doing the mastering on my tracks, I will usually start by rolling off everything from about 30hz and below due to the amount of headroom it can take up. If I am not doing the mastering, then that's the mastering guys problem.

I have noticed with 5 string bass, even though it can produce down to 30hz-ish, that isn't where the real bass energy is. You typically see a lot more energy coming from the 60-80hz range on the low notes.

[Jim Roseberry]

Originally Posted by Amberience

I'm tempted to say high-pass on anything that isn't a kick drum or a bass instrument.

I'd suggest running a high-pass on the bass too.
Granted, it's set pretty low... but it carves out just a little more space for the kick (down in the deep sub-bass nether region).

If you aren't already using them, getting to grips with high-pass filters will do wonders for your mix.

There's no set frequency. Each track is different...
Use your ears. By listening in context, you'll know when you've rolled out too much of the body of an instrument/vocal.


Jim Roseberry
www.studiocat.com
jim@studiocat.com

[nerdfactormax]

Originally Posted by _Devin

ReaEQ only has a 12dB/Octave-pole high-pass and low-pass, Rubberfilter has a knob that allows you to adjust the filter anywhere from 6dB/Octave all the way up to 360dB/Octave. The steeper high-pass allows you to completely cut out the muddy freqs below ~150hz without affecting the lower end of the midrange. Lower order filters affect frequencies above the cutoff, if you set a ReaEQ HP to 150hz, it may start rolling off as high as 1000hz. The term "cutoff" actually means the point that you hit -3dB of roll-off(in theory, not always in practice).

I was under the impression that steep slope filters produce un-natural artifacts. Anyone savvy on this subject?

[daverich]

Originally Posted by nerdfactormax

I was under the impression that steep slope filters produce un-natural artifacts. Anyone savvy on this subject?

in linear phase eqs they do,- otherwise a steep cutoff filter will cause an effect like ringing, but that's actually the human ear causing that, not the eq. (IIRC)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

[stupeT]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Still there is no substitute for the feeling generated by that lowest octave.

See Tory Amos' "welcome to sunny florida" DVD. She plays low on her grand and the five string bass is even lower. On proper monitors this gets extremely physical and touching. Just great. And no mud - though live.

I'd killed that engineer who hi-passed that at 40 Hz!!!

[Deltones]

Originally Posted by Fabian

I think it was Yep who said (in his excellent thread about why our recordings sound like donkey)

Would you have a link for this article?

[kindafishy]

Originally Posted by Deltones

Would you have a link for this article?

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=29283

In various places throughout this thread, you will find links to pdfs that contain an edited version of the whole thing.

[stupeT]

Originally Posted by Deltones

Would you have a link for this article?

Here is the thread:

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...&highlight=ass

Its huge. Maybe look for smurf in that thread, he posted a PDF version of that.

[kindafishy]

Originally Posted by stupeT

Here is the thread:

http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...&highlight=ass

Its huge. Maybe look for smurf in that thread, he posted a PDF version of that.

heh heh heh... you highlighted... 'ass'... heh heh heh

[stupeT]

Originally Posted by kindafishy

heh heh heh... you highlighted... 'ass'... heh heh heh

Ooops. Home came?!?

[Evan]

One approach I've used is to group tracks in categories (groups) and apply the HPF there. I would have some groups (right before the Master output) that would aid in frequency distribution. Assuming just a couple groups, one would be highpassed rather drastically... the other moderately.

So I'd send secondary and ambient sounds to the first group, and the more important instruments (excluding bass/kick drum/other low sounds) to the second. And I wouldn't worry about highpassing individual tracks in the mix.

I believe grouping is a better approach because you use fewer EQs, less filtering, less artifacts (and less CPU), and better frequancy image organization? That was my thinking, I await to be corrected.

[jamesp]

Originally Posted by nerdfactormax

I was under the impression that steep slope filters produce un-natural artifacts. Anyone savvy on this subject?

If you try to skimp on the processing power required then they are more likely to produce ripples in the phase and frequency response going up an octave or two into the part of the sound that you want.

12dB per octave is fine for most high pass filtering in my opinion.

Cheers

James.

[darjama]

Originally Posted by _Devin

It tends to suck the power right out the kick and bass(like I said earlier, "cutoff" is the -3dB point, the rolloff starts much higher than 40hz), if it really needs a cut, I'll do a 2-6dB Lowshelf cut at anywhere from 20-100hz. Are you using a sub to monitor?

I don't use a subwoofer for mixing, though I test out mixes on my home system which does have one. And I don't use it all the time, only on bass and kick tracks where the amount of low frequency energy overwhelms the overtones you need to hear the stuff on speakers that aren't full range.

[_Devin]

Originally Posted by daverich

in linear phase eqs they do,- otherwise a steep cutoff filter will cause an effect like ringing, but that's actually the human ear causing that, not the eq. (IIRC)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Low-pass filters do, but not high-pass. Linear phase LP filters effectively draw a high-pitched sine wave on steadily repeating waveforms, even though it's not reflected in the frequency response as being a peak. Contrary to popular opinion, the human ear does not perform FFT on an input signal, it goes more by periodicity of the waveform, hence you can still tell what note is being played, even if the fundamental frequency is missing.

[willowhaus]

Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington

Still there is no substitute for the feeling generated by that lowest octave.

Well, there is Ex-Lax...

[Chris_P_Critter]

Interesting info from Andy Sneap, Rock and Metal producer extraordinaire.

http://noise101.wikidot.com/eq-guide

[sstillwell]

Originally Posted by Fabian

I think it was Yep who said (in his excellent thread about why our recordings sound like donkey) that it may be a good approach to put in a high-pass and raise the cutoff until it sounds bad, then to just back off a little and leave it at that. I've tried this and it works for me. Haven't bothered to remember the freqs I end up at though, just let the ears do their work...

I read somewhere that Alan Parsons (Alan Parsons Project, Steely Dan, etc.) used a very similar technique with both high and low pass filters on nearly every track...move the filters up/down until they become obvious, then back them off just a touch. Cleans up a lot of mud, for sure.

Scott