Go Back   TalkBass Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Effects [BG]
Register Rules/FAQ/CUP Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Supporting Membership
Thank You

Latest Supporting Member
Donate to Upgrade Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #41  
Old 02-03-2013, 04:28 PM
Flux Jetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by walterw View Post
flux, your "images" were perfectly clear

i was thinking that the actual circuitry in each band by itself only truly had -15dB of cut, which would end up being squat when summed with all the other parallel bands that weren't cutting at that spot. if the actual cut is way deeper, and just ends up at -15dB after the summing, well that makes sense to me.
Yea, a slightly MEGA-NECESSARY part of the image that I neglected to include!

Like painting a rainbow and forgetting the blue.

HAAHAAA!!!

Thanks for the compliment, WalterW.
  #42  
Old 02-03-2013, 05:05 PM
Supportive Fender
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
GOLD Supporting Member
OK, my pea brain is getting me into trouble again;

in our mixing board example, with 5 channels all getting the same signal, how much summing are we getting?

adding a second channel to the first gives us 3dB, right? and doubling that, by adding two more, gets us another 3 for 6dB total, right? and that 5th channel just adds a little more on top of that, right?

those 4 extra channels don't add up to anywhere near a 15dB boost, do they? that means that even cutting one off completely doesn't cut by anywhere near 15dB either!

you can't just cut one band deeply enough to get -15dB!

the only way i can think of that you could actually reduce the signal of the 4 remaining bands by a bigger amount would be to flip the polarity on that 5th fader and start bringing it up, so as to add in a reversed-polarity signal that starts to cancel the others.

is that's what's happening? the "cut" setting is not just ceasing to add to the others, but is actually introducing a flipped signal back into the proceedings?

(forgive me if all this is "filters 101", i never took that class.)
__________________
Walter Wright
Guitar Repair Gnome
Alpha Music, VA Beach

Last edited by walterw : 02-03-2013 at 09:36 PM.
  #43  
Old 02-03-2013, 08:48 PM
Supportive Fender
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
GOLD Supporting Member
for that matter, when tone purists talk about too much EQ being bad because it adds "phase shift", is this what they're referring to?
__________________
Walter Wright
Guitar Repair Gnome
Alpha Music, VA Beach
  #44  
Old 02-03-2013, 09:28 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Portland, OR
I think the thing is that you can get very nuanced EQ in a very small area. Lets say you want a narrow boost at 250 and 600 but you don't want the overall level to go way up, you can boost 250 with a microscopic Q, boost 600 with a little broader Q and then bring down the level of both with a big broad Q centered at around 375. It's not a situation where you'd want to scoop a big broad section of sound like a backhoe, more like shaping it with a shovel and a rake. If you want to eliminate big chunks of sound with a series EQ, then get a series EQ.

This is all make believe that I think is true. Passinwind and Flux can tell you if this is an incomplete or false explanation.
__________________
http://soundcloud.com/cheapbasslovin/line-in-the-sand
Oregon Bassist #56
  #45  
Old 02-03-2013, 10:11 PM
Flux Jetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by walterw View Post
OK, my pea brain is getting me into trouble again;

in our mixing board example, with 5 channels all getting the same signal, how much summing are we getting?

adding a second channel to the first gives us 3dB, right? and doubling that, by adding two more, gets us another 3 for 6dB total, right? and that 5th channel just adds a little more on top of that, right?

those 4 extra channels don't add up to anywhere near a 15dB boost, do they? that means that even cutting one off completely doesn't cut by anywhere near 15dB either!

you can't just cut one band deeply enough to get -15dB!

the only way i can think of that you could actually reduce the signal of the 4 remaining bands by a bigger amount would be to flip the polarity on that 5th fader and start bringing it up, so as to add in a reversed-polarity signal that starts to cancel the others.

is that's what's happening? the "cut" setting is not just ceasing to add to the others, but is actually introducing a flipped signal back into the proceedings?

(forgive me if all this is "filters 101", i never took that class.)
Uh .. .some (depending on filter topology)
.... no.
.... depends on if they are series or parallel.
.... forgiveness not necessary, because you are not at fault. You simply need the right light shown on the issue. You'll "get it" soon enough .. I barely grajiated from rural public high school in low-desert Arizona with a D-minus average back in the "stoopid 70's" ... so you'll grasp this all very soon, once the light comes on it stays on, and many other things become understood as well. You'd laugh till you cried if you knew how long it took me to grab ahold of impedance issues!

So ..... let's see if any of this answers The Questions of The Grand Peanut Head.

- From the Rane PE-15 Datasheet:

"Each of the five filters in the PE 15 cover a center Frequency range of four octaves, a Bandwidth of .03 to 1.5 octaves, and a boost/cut range of +15 dB to -20 dB. Bands one and five switch to allow peaking or shelving characteristics. Special attention to the design of the state-variable filters make all of these adjustments possible. All parameters are completely independent. To the user, this means any control may be operated in any order without affecting the others. This flexibility makes the PE 15 ideal for all audio contouring applications. A range that begins with the sharpest of notch filters and continues through broad-band program contouring."

- From the PE-17 Datasheet ....

"There are parallel Parametric designs (PE 15) and there are serial Parametric designs (certain others), then there is the PE 17, which is (of course) a parallel and serial design. (We DON’T like life simple!)

Referring to the block diagram above, you can see that Bands 1, 2 and 3 are arranged in a parallel fashion in series with paralleled Bands 4 and 5. This unique topology offers an optimum combination of the minimum phase shift and delay times of parallel designs with the extreme cut or boost settings available from series designs. So keep in mind that for extreme boost/cut settings use two Bands in series (e.g., Bands 3 and 4), that way, their dB boost/cut values directly add. For example -15 dB on both results in a total of -30 dB. For parallel bands, their boost/cut dB values do not directly add. We know this is confusing, but so is the rest of life!....."

"..... Additionally, you may vary each filter’s bandwidth from as narrow as 1/30 of an octave to as wide as two octaves, and adjust the Level over a boost/cut range of +12 dB to -15 dB. The extra-deep cut range, when used with a narrow bandwidth setting, is effective against troublesome feedback frequencies. Specially designed circuits make all these adjustments completely independent. To you, this means the ability to change all controls in any order without affecting the others. This flexibility makes the PE 17 ideal for all audio contouring applications. Anything from the sharpest notch to widest contouring....."

- From the PE-17 manual .....

"...For extra-deep notching applications, use Bands 3 and 4 and set them exactly the same. Notches as deep as 30 dB are possible, since Bands 3 and 4 are in series while most other bands are in parallel (see the Block Diagram in the Specifications Section)...."

"..... If a -15 dB cut won’t cure the problem, the resonance is extreme and must be dealt with in other ways. For example, move the speakers or the mics; hang some drapes; move some walls; burn down the building; or simply unplug the system and go home—something must give!..."

- From Rane's tech publication titled *Exposing EQ Mythology*

"MYTH #6: An ideal equalizer would add no phase shift when boosting or cutting. Phase shift is not a bad word. It is the glue at the heart of what we do, holding everything together. That it has become a maligned term is most unfortunate. This belief stands in the way of people really understanding the requirements for room equalization. The frequency response of most performing rooms looks like a heart attack victim’s EKG results. Associated with each change in amplitude is a corresponding change in phase response. Describing them as unbelievably jagged is being conservative. Every time the amplitude changes so does the phase shift. In fact, it can be argued that phase shift is the stuff that causes amplitude changes. Amplitude, phase and time are all inextricably mixed by the physics of sound. One does not exist without the others.

An equalizer is a tool. A tool that allows you to correct for a room’s anomalies. It must be capable of reproducing the exact opposite response of the one being connected. This requires precise correction at many neighboring points with the associated phase shift to correct for the room’s opposing phase shift. It takes phase shift to fix phase shift. Simple as that.

One way people get into trouble when equalizing rooms is using the wrong equalizer type. If an equalizer is not capable of adding the correct phase shift amount, it makes equalizing much more difficult than it has to be. The popularity of the many constant-Q designs has come about because of this phenomenon.

Equalizers that produce broad smooth curves for modest boost/cut amounts make poor room equalizers, and good tone modifiers. They lack the ability to make independent amplitude and phase corrections close together with minimal interference to neighboring bands, restricting their usage primarily to giving a shape to an overall response rather than correcting it. Serious correcting requires sharp constant-Q performance, among many other things.

Only by adding many precise narrow phase shift and amplitude corrections do you truly start equalizing a system’s blurred phase response. You do not do it with gentle smooth curves that lack the muscle to tame the peakedness of most rooms. broad smooth curves do not allow you to correct for the existing phase shift. It's just that simple, you must pre-shape the signal in both amplitude and phase. And that requires narrow filters...."

- Walter, he be getting warmer, mon! The lights, they begin to glow in him haid!

Last edited by Flux Jetson : 02-03-2013 at 11:32 PM.
  #46  
Old 02-03-2013, 11:32 PM
Flux Jetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona
Supporting Member
Walter, in support of your question, here's what the folks that make the ANTARES FILTER vst program have to say.

"Filter" is a four-filter program that allows you to arrange the four filters in several algorithms (arrangements) that they call "Filter Routings".

*** Routing configuration #1 is all four in parallel.

*** Routing configuration #6 is all four filters in series.

So, that said as a reference, here's what they say that support your ideas (I emboldened some text to highlight certain ideas). These quotes were taken from page #24 ......

(quoting)

"ANOTHER NOTE: The one place where series routing is not only useful, but pretty much required is when you’re dealing with multiple notch filters. As an example, choose routing #6 and set all four filters to notch at different frequencies. Link #2, #3 and #4 to #1 and sweep #1’s frequency to hear the effect. Now switch to routing #1 and try the same thing. There will be very little effect because each of the parallel filters is “filling in” the other 3 filters’ notches.

YET ANOTHER NOTE: When using parallel routings, and particularly routing #1, keep in mind that the final output is the sum of all of the active filters’ outputs. If you have three or four filters emphasizing the same frequency ranges or with high Qs, you can generate levels that can cause clipping and distortion. To prevent this, adjust the individual filters’ Gain controls to eliminate the clipping."

(end quotes)

So it seems the way some filter/EQs react depends on their topology and design. I'm not completely sure I agree with what they've said here about how parallel filters "sum" their outputs with additive results .... but hey ... it's their friggin program so I suppose they know how it works, right? I suppose it's because you can adjust each filter's actual output volume, so if you have each one tuned to 500hz with the same Q and boosting that 500hz by 12db, and you kick each filter's independent output gain levels in the nuts by raising each filter by 10db as well, you're going to see greatly elevated levels at 500hz! But most parallel filters don't have "volume" controls that actually increase the filter's total gain as an independent unit (as if each band were a separate stompbox with it's own frequency boost/cut AND an overall output gain control). The Rane is NOT like that, it's parallel filters don't offer independent gain levels of each band in addition to the boost/cut for the chosen freq - each band does not have it's own output amplifier (that I am aware of, if it does it sure doesn't have any type of user control to set it's gain level .. at least MINE doesn't anyway). I suppose that's how Antares can say that if you do what they warn of here you will see elevated spikes. I'm not sure I would apply that ethos to most EQs though.

BTW, I have this program ... it is one killer VST!

Here's the link to the Antares Filter Manual ...

http://www.antarestech.com/downloads...ter_Manual.pdf

Here's some image grabs I snagged from the manual, you can see the six configurations in that little picture-portion there. Very cool to be able to change the routing algorithm that easily. This is one of the ultimate fully flexible digital/computer-based filters I know of. It also has automation features for automatically sweeping and modulating the filters at will. It even includes it's own event sequencer, as well as four independent LFOs with numerous waveforms each. Pretty hip.


Last edited by Flux Jetson : 02-04-2013 at 12:00 AM.
  #47  
Old 02-03-2013, 11:56 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Portland, OR
To be clear, the Rane can't do something like in that graphic because it doesn't have individual output levels on each channel, is that right?

I'm seeing one notch with the overall levels @ Odb, and then two shelving boosts and a peak boost with the output level on those three channels turned way down, is that right?
__________________
http://soundcloud.com/cheapbasslovin/line-in-the-sand
Oregon Bassist #56
  #48  
Old 02-04-2013, 12:04 AM
Flux Jetson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Colorado River Basin, Arizona
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapbasslovin View Post
To be clear, the Rane can't do something like in that graphic because it doesn't have individual output levels on each channel, is that right?

I'm seeing one notch with the overall levels @ Odb, and then two shelving boosts and a peak boost with the output level on those three channels turned way down, is that right?
Totally correct ... I was editing my post to reflect that while you posted your question.

The Rane does not have independent gain amps in addition to the frequency cut/boost level controls. The Antares Filter seems to operate like separate stompboxes that have not only a fully parametric EQ band, but ALSO a separate gain level amplifier for each band as well.

You can turn the ENTIRE Rane unit up or down, but not individual EQ bands (other than their freq boost/cut controls). The Antares allows you to independently boost/cut a selected frequency, adjust the bandwidth (aka "Q"), AND raise/lower the filtered output of each band, AND ALSO turn up/down the entire unit. Talk about control!

Last edited by Flux Jetson : 02-04-2013 at 12:09 AM.
  #49  
Old 02-04-2013, 01:04 AM
Supportive Fender
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
GOLD Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flux Jetson View Post
Walter, in support of your question, here's what the folks that make the ANTARES FILTER vst program have to say.

There will be very little effect because each of the parallel filters is “filling in” the other 3 filters’ notches
.
thank you for that, it re-states my question perfectly!

the rane obviously has something else going on under the hood, or it would be useless as a notch filter unless you always used multiple bands to cut anything.
__________________
Walter Wright
Guitar Repair Gnome
Alpha Music, VA Beach
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Visit TalkBass on Facebook   Download our iOS app   Download our Android app

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:58 PM.




© 2012 Talk Music Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Play guitar too? Visit TalkGuitar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.