Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
- Status
I find my Fdeck 2M indispensable when amplifying my double bass, especially when using a stage provided amp.
But I seldom use it with my P or J.
But I seldom use it with my P or J.
Just jumping in to say thank you to OP for your question, and thanks to the folks sharing their info in response. I've learned a few new things here. YAAAYYYYY TB!
There is no rule that you need or must use a HPF, theres a lot of folk on here that don't use them
I get that. I was just looking to achieve the effect as stealthily as possible. I want to dip the lows, but not lose substance. On top of that, I want to protect my cab and it's smaller-than-average drivers.
I'm not thinking of it as a rule for all bassists. Just to suit my needs.
What nobody's said yet is that a HPF is a shelving-type filter, typically with a steep roll-off slope; the semi-parametric EQs and the graphic EQ filters on your amp are peaking/dipping type, so won't do the same function at all. The 'bass' knob on your amp IS likely to be a shelving type filter, but probably has a relatively gentle slope, as is illustrated in @Passinwind's first graph. Plus it has a relatively high -3dB point of 85 Hz, according the manual. Still, using a strong cut on that knob might give you some of the benefits of an actual HPF...it would at least be worth experimenting with IMO. I wouldn't be afraid to really turn it way down; if you start to lose too much low end, you can maybe boost it back up with one of the parametric EQ filters, or with the graphic EQ. But don't try to do that at 50 Hz; a center frequency of 80 or 100 Hz is probably where you would want to try that. And keep in mind that it would still be a bit of a kludge and not a substitute for a real HPF.
Last edited:
That's because it is NOT shelving. The attenuation increases as frequency decreases. With shelving EQ, attenuation is constant as frequency decreases.
I guess my understanding is wrong. What DO you call the shape of the slope in a HPF?
The red 30Hz graphic EQ slider on my old Trace Elliot head is really good at taming boominess (word?) and is recommended as cut only. I know it's not an HPF but aren't most HPF being used to tighten up low end?
High pass would actually be the shape though, filter is what it actually isHigh-pass filter.
Sorry, I had to
And most bass players ever haven't used a separate HPF, other than what their amp/cab provides.
Fiddling with low eq will probably get you most of the way and if you feel that isn't magical, a HPF probably won't be either.
I remember back in the day when the Bill Fitzmaurice cabs were the latest magical fad on TB. You don't tend to see them around here much any more, I guess the magic just fell out of em.
Or possibly things occasionally become over hyped in talkbass land
Or possibly things occasionally become over hyped in talkbass land
Sensationalism at its best (worst)
Most times, the goal for introducing a HPF in your signal chain is to sharply roll off (or "attenuate") any low frequencies your cab and speakers either can't reproduce, or can't reproduce efficiently. By eliminating those frequencies, your tone becomes tighter and cleaner sounding. And somewhat paradoxically, by removing those very low frequencies that are junking things up, you can often sound bassier with them missing.
Funnily enough, the knob labelled LOW or BASS does a fairly good job of achieving this as well. A parametric EQ even more so. It won't attenuate as much but how much practical difference is there really between a -15DB signal and a -45 one?
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,080
- 5
- 221,187
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
Except that a HPF absolutely is a shelving type filter. The attenuation RATE OF ROLLOFF remains constant, and when you integrate this the result is that the attenuation continues to increase the farther below the knee you get.
Oh no, there is very much a difference in a typical bass or low eq and a HPF. Virtually all bass eq slopes are 6dB/octave whereas a typical HPF is between 18 and 24dB/octave.
Also, the knee in a bass eq is usually somewhere between 80Hz and 125Hz and the knee in a HPF is typically between 30 and 40Hz (minimum).
Another difference is the Q of the filter, a HPF typically uses a higher Q than a tone control.
All of this gives MUCH more surgical control over what's removed and what remains.
Actually, everyone here, including you, likely uses them. They're built into almost every amp made. But they're usually a bit too low to be of help.
My SWR heads even have one. Problem is, the cutoff is at 15Hz. Not at all helpful.
My GK MB series is at 30Hz. Better, but still not terribly helpful.
Think the 800RB is at 100Hz, which is high enough that people tend to think of the amp as "not very bassy".
If I ever get put in the position of having to bring my rig to a jam night again, and I'd better not be, I'm bringing it with an HPF set to the highest frequency I can find.
How many bass amps have you designed that don't already have a high pass filter like that internally?
Does adding a second external one really provide a significantly better outcome than using the tone controls?
Yes, technically it is different but really for practical purposes how much different?
- Status
