• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

High Pass Filter (HPF) and Low Pass Filter (LPF) Mega Thread

A first order filter cuts at 6db/octave. ( e.g the signal at 10Hz is reduced by 6db more than the signal at 20Hz ). A 2nd order filter cuts off more sharply at 12db/octave, and 4th order filters 24 Db/octave are not unheard of. Anything more than that and it's getting like a brick wall cutoff. Below, blue = 1st, red = 2nd.

View attachment 2952998

All of the filters I design into bass amps are typically 4th order, or 24dB/octave (same as 80dB/decade)
Why would anybody not want a 4th order filter for this purpose?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stumbo
My pedalboard splits out the highs with a crossover after my octaver, which can't function without the lows. Highs goes through the rest of the effect chain. Reunification goes by way of a blender with phase 180deg optional footswitch which is good enough for jazz when the chorus is on but the distortion isn't, keeping the low mids from cancelling (per Agedhorse's post) in the crossover. Then the whole lot is high passed. No rocket scientists required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stumbo
Ok, so I'm planning on getting the DSM Omnicabsim and running that thru my amps FX loop (Darkglass 900) and using that as my XLR, however I keep seeing mention of the benefits to running a HPF *before* effects and the benefits.

Is there a HPF on the market that can be used as a looper where you can blend back in the unaffected lows(since I plan on running it through both a HP/LP at the end with the DSM)??? Or is this just a crazy idea?? Pointless and unnecessary??

Apologies, this is a whole new thing to me...also I'm running through a fEARful cab so I get a pretty accurate representation of the FOH tone(if that helps??)

I'm hoping the HPF will make my OC2, filter, drive and chorus all react even better
Maybe this may help:

My pedalboard splits out the highs with a crossover after my octaver, which can't function without the lows. Highs goes through the rest of the effect chain. Reunification goes by way of a blender with phase 180deg optional footswitch which is good enough for jazz when the chorus is on but the distortion isn't, keeping the low mids from cancelling (per Agedhorse's post) in the crossover. Then the whole lot is high passed. No rocket scientists required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hintz
A practical understanding of filters:

Filters are defined by their slope, which determines the attenuation of signals outside the 'pass' band. Most audio filters on mixing desks (and DAWs) will have a slope of 12dB or 18dB per octave, and in synthesizer filters the slope may be as steep as 24dB per octave.

If an 18dB/octave high‑pass filter is set to 80Hz, any audio an octave below that (at 40Hz) will be attenuated by 18dB, and an octave lower still, at 20Hz, it will be attenuated by 36dB... and so on.

Ref: Q. What are filters and what do they do? |

High pass and low pass filters attenuate all frequencies below and above the knee. So if you have a problem at 60hz for example, you need to set the knee of the filter at a higher frequency so that 60Hz is attenuated. A notch filter can be more surgical in attenuating specific frequencies.
 
I respectfully disagree.
Where you're making your mistake here is that I specifically said the D800 PLUS - maybe you should go back and read what I posted again...

Also, using an fdeck with the D800 isn't "wasting" anything - it's merely bringing it's capability a little closer to that of the D800+...

I'll stick with what I posted earlier - the D800+ feature set makes it a no-brainer for a one amp choice... The Quilter is a nice amp, but is pretty primative when compared to the D800+ - not to mention Mesa's stellar reputation for reliability and customer service... I almost forgot - the Mesa's DI would be worth something, too...
It's a "no brainer" for you and others who feel the same. It isn't, for me and others who feel differently than you. Deal with it.
 
Both @fdeck and @Azure Skies use
12 dB per octave low frequency filter.
Iirc, Francis uses a 24dB/octave filter in his latest version, 12dB fixed and 12dB variable, as do I. This gives closer to the best of both worlds imo.
 
Could an explanation of 1st, 2nd> ect order HPF's be given so creaky old halfwits
(me) can understand please? : )
Link Removed
^ This has pictures for the text challenged like myself. :woot:
Probably more info than you wanted, but the drawings help show it getter, I think.

As others have said, it's a matter of how quickly things roll off.
They can achieve higher roll offs by "stacking" more filters one after the other.
So essentially, one filter section (Resistance/Capacitance aka RC) is first order, two sections are second order and on and on.
I'm pretty sure there is a diminishing point of return in that the slope will never be absolutely vertical.
There are probably other trade offs as well when stacking filters.

Each filter section will present some loss. A practical HPF would need some amplification to overcome the losses.
 
Comparo of three filters, all with the same 3 dB point of 35 Hz: N=3, 0.5 dB Chebyshev, N=4 Butterworth, and two cascaded N=2 Butterworth.

This illustrates why slope alone only shows part of the picture. Notice the attenuation at 20 Hz. The N=3 Cheby has more attenuation than the N=4 BW, though the Cheby has less ultimate slope. The cascaded BW has about 14 dB attenuation, though it has the same ultimate slope as the N=4 BW.

The cascaded case will happen in a bass amplifier that has simple AC-coupled stages. It does create a high-pass filter. However, even if the 3 dB points of the stages were the same, it will result in less attenuation at frequencies below the cutoff frequency than would result from a properly designed high-pass filter.

hpf_comparo.png
 

Latest posts