Old 10-14-2015, 12:05 PM   #41
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
I remember when I first noticed that and it appears they move the kick above bass guitar to make room frequency wise. Been awhile so don't quote me if I'm not remembering accurately.



I'm assuming the 5 string is required to get it below the detuned guitars as they begin reaching into bass guitar sonic territory which then causes the need for the Tupperware kick because the bass ends up in the kicks territory which infers something relevant to all of this...
Actually no, the 5 string bass was not a musical/arrangement choice (that kind of thinking was NOT evident at that stage of my experience). It was the Bass player feeling that 5 strings are better than 4 and how could a band NOT sound better with even more low end. LOL. They were ALL tuned down to low A!

We were all young, the band was amateur, I was amateur and the product was amateur. Live and learn.
Magicbuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2015, 12:42 PM   #42
Kooljohn74
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
Filters ALWAYS influence the phase (unless they're linear phase, but then they have their own set of cons)! Not just the frequency.
I've had a respected mastering engineer say this to me and explain it to me and I now tread very carefully.
Kooljohn74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2015, 02:31 PM   #43
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
But certainly agreed that handling of low end frequencies is a major issue in mixing, and not as simple as "high-pass everything".
Agreed. Not against using an HPF at all, just less encouraging to make it a blind practice; if junk is there remove it. However, If an instrument reaches down 'there' just a little, unless it is actually making the mix muddy, I see no reason to not leave it and let the instrument be what it naturally is. I don't think I'd ever be comfortable EQing without good reason mostly because I came from the training that they should be treated as something that corrects problems and I usually try to avoid the problem at the source if I have any control over it.

Much of the advice that I think we are discussing, doesn't come from that train of thought but rather the opposite... "Do this and your mix will be great". I can't seem to buy into any practice that takes that route but hey, I'm on vacation this week leaving me plenty of time to BS about audio.

EDIT: Why didn't you use Reaper's built in phase meter on the EQ?
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 10-14-2015 at 02:39 PM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2015, 02:39 PM   #44
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
Actually no, the 5 string bass was not a musical/arrangement choice (that kind of thinking was NOT evident at that stage of my experience). It was the Bass player feeling that 5 strings are better than 4 and how could a band NOT sound better with even more low end. LOL. They were ALL tuned down to low A!

We were all young, the band was amateur, I was amateur and the product was amateur. Live and learn.
LOL! I just assumed the genre in general would end up in that configuration even if they didn't realize why in order to keep from walking all over each other sonically.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2015, 03:10 PM   #45
Normie
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Topock, AZ
Posts: 357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Low passing is perhaps underused
I recently discovered how much of a difference High cutting can make. I have one track I'm generally satisfied with and that I often play around with to learn plugs etc, and I was blown away at how much hash/crap lived in the 17K and up range and how much more defined the mix got with it filtered.

You really don't know what you got till it's gone (Oooooooom Pa pa pa pa!
Normie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2015, 07:08 PM   #46
Time Waster
Human being with feelings
 
Time Waster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bowral, Australia
Posts: 868
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
Filters ALWAYS influence the phase (unless they're linear phase, but then they have their own set of cons)! Not just the frequency.
After reading up on the science, I get this:

You can create a filter by mixing a phase shifted copy of a signal with the original signal. The resulting signal will be also be phase shifted from the original. Therefore for a signal filtered by any means will result in a signal which is phase shifted from the original.

Which I guess is the same sort of principle as:

A fundamental frequency plus a harmonic series will result is a sawtooth waveform and therefore a sawtooth waveform produced by ant means will have a fundamental frequency and a series of harmonics.
__________________
ReaRack JSFX Modular Synth - Mostly harmless: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/28403/ReaR...dularSynth.zip
The Wasters of Time: https://soundcloud.com/thewastersoftime
Time Waster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 05:43 PM   #47
suleiman
Human being with feelings
 
suleiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic View Post
I'm a great man for the high passing..and low passing.
There have been occasions when i have completely passed out.

Sometimes while performing..... Uppers or downers dont matter... A blackout's a blackout....
suleiman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 07:18 PM   #48
Neenja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 204
Default

The problem with all of that.
1. Phase is relative. One mic. No phase issue. (2 mics, you already had a phase issue, but you can low/high pass them together).
2. ALL eqing causes phase issues. Is there anyone that doesn't EQ their tracks? Please tell me how you do that.
Neenja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 07:40 PM   #49
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neenja View Post
Is there anyone that doesn't EQ their tracks? Please tell me how you do that.
The number of tracks that need EQ or how much EQ is needed can be greatly reduced by how the sounds are captured. That might be accomplished by micing position choices, mic used or even changing the instrument (such as choosing a different guitar) and so on; the list is fairly long. If a sampled instrument, we can achieve similar by changing voices, instruments etc. at the source until they fit the best with least or no EQing.

It's a really great idea to always be aware of the power we have frequency wise at the recording stage especially since fixing it there typically sounds better and more natural than trying to achieve the same with an EQ later. Obviously this tends to require some forethought and/or practice.

I don't think it is necessarily unhealthy to consider the need to EQ a track at the mix stage as a potential misstep during the recording stage - even if that isn't always true, having that mindset creates a good habit. There's always some EQing going to be going on but IMHO it shouldn't be the first choice because it is often fixing something when we get right down to it.

2 cents/ymmv
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 10-15-2015 at 07:53 PM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 07:50 PM   #50
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neenja View Post
The problem with all of that.
1. Phase is relative. One mic. No phase issue. (2 mics, you already had a phase issue, but you can low/high pass them together).
2. ALL eqing causes phase issues. Is there anyone that doesn't EQ their tracks? Please tell me how you do that.
1. No, minimum phase filters do not delay all frequencies equally.

2. It's a matter of degree. Pass filters create more delay distortion than bell or shelf filters.

As has already been posted, tests with static waves will not yield any discernible effect, but it is possible to hear this smearing effect on transients in a dynamic audio source.

Whether this is noticeable, desirable, or whatever is a different matter, and will depend on both the source and the taste of the person processing it.

PS. and I'm with karbo, the more you can get your frequency balance right at the source, the better.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 07:50 PM   #51
Neenja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
The number of tracks that need EQ or how much EQ is needed can be greatly reduced by how the sounds are captured. That might be accomplished by micing position choices, mic used or even changing the instrument (such as choosing a different guitar) and so on.

If a sampled instrument, we can changing voices, instruments and parameters at that source etc. until they fit 'this' mix the best with least or no EQing. It's a really great idea to always be aware of the power we have frequency wise at the recording stage especially since fixing it there typically sounds better and more natural than trying to achieve the same with an EQ later.

I don't think it is necessarily unhealthy to consider the need to EQ a track at the mix stage as a potential misstep during the recording stage - even if that isn't always true, having that mindset creates a good habit.

Instruments often differ because they are each responsible for different slices of the audio spectrum which helps fill it in. When we can control that, and choose the right instruments in the right places across the spectrum, capture them properly for the mix, it is more likely to mix itself because instruments aren't stepping on each other. There's always some EQing going to be going on but IMHO it shouldn't be the first choice because it is often fixing something when we get right down to it.

2 cents/ymmv
This is one of those things that looks bad when a track isolated, but in the real world makes little if any difference.
Neenja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 07:56 PM   #52
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neenja View Post
This is one of those things that looks bad when a track isolated, but in the real world makes little if any difference.
Actually, it is the exact opposite. If you find yourself doing lots of EQing to make instruments fit, you probably did a poor job capturing, it's that simple. If it weren't real-world noticeable, you wouldn't be EQing after the fact to fix it. The proverbial you that is. The exception is when you aren't in control of the capture. Like I said, it'll never be perfect but the mindset eventually improves the outcome.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 10-15-2015 at 08:30 PM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 11:11 PM   #53
clepsydrae
Human being with feelings
 
clepsydrae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,453
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
As has already been posted, tests with static waves will not yield any discernible effect, but it is possible to hear this smearing effect on transients in a dynamic audio source.
Judders -- do you have any links to examples? My understanding was that such "smearing" was very hard to produce even in "laboratory" conditions, and virtually a non-issue in practice, but I'd be fascinated to be proven wrong on that. Seems like the kind of thing that would be easy to make examples of... and my personal rule is that if there exist no examples on the whole of the internet then it's likely urban legend... :-) I'll play around with it myself a bit, but I've never heard it in previous experiments. Thanks!
clepsydrae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2015, 11:36 PM   #54
G-Sun
Human being with feelings
 
G-Sun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Norway
Posts: 7,254
Default

Ok, can anybody produce a case-project,
that makes highpassing-issues as audibel as possible?
So we can determine for ourself.

Because, if this is just a theoretical or visual case,
then, I'll just continue my old habits
__________________
Reaper x64, win 8.1
My music on Bandcamp
G-Sun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 02:18 AM   #55
Multibomber
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 388
Default

Well... I do record a full drumset in my bedroom with 11 mics: 2 kicks, each with an Audix D6 inside it and a homemade subkick outside of it, 5 toms, each with an internal mic, 1 snare with an internal mic, and one overhead pointed straight down... and I dont know anything about phase other than I understand what comb filtering is because I read an article about it yesterday. What kind of phase problems should I be looking for?

In addition, I use the same guitar tones, plugins, EQ etc for my guitars HOWEVER the guitars are hard-panned L and R (so they're completely separated and they're harmonizing with each other 95% of the time. Do I get a free pass from phase issues with this approach?

Last edited by Multibomber; 10-16-2015 at 02:27 AM.
Multibomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 04:00 AM   #56
Time Waster
Human being with feelings
 
Time Waster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bowral, Australia
Posts: 868
Default

Theorically, if you have a phasing issue due to using multiple mics, you could correct it to some extent using EQ, so it works both ways.
__________________
ReaRack JSFX Modular Synth - Mostly harmless: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/28403/ReaR...dularSynth.zip
The Wasters of Time: https://soundcloud.com/thewastersoftime
Time Waster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 05:51 AM   #57
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clepsydrae View Post
Judders -- do you have any links to examples? My understanding was that such "smearing" was very hard to produce even in "laboratory" conditions, and virtually a non-issue in practice, but I'd be fascinated to be proven wrong on that. Seems like the kind of thing that would be easy to make examples of... and my personal rule is that if there exist no examples on the whole of the internet then it's likely urban legend... :-) I'll play around with it myself a bit, but I've never heard it in previous experiments. Thanks!
Here's a quick n' dirty example I just cooked up myself.

It's a bass drum from Superior Drummer. It's a sum of multi-mic, but for our purposes, that is irrelevant. The bass drum hits were first rendered to audio to avoid any variance in the source from round-robins etc.

In stereo, I noticed differences in the correlation using a demo of Voxengo's PHA-979, but I don't have any software to plot that information.

I've included renders of the bass drum in mono and stereo, unprocessed, through one instance of ReaEQ with 1 oct bandwidth high pass at 50Hz, then through 3 instances of ReaEQ at those same settings. This was to simulate a "must high pass everything" attitude going from channel to bus to master.

What you should notice is, even though the ripple around the corner frequency is raising the gain of the signal as it goes through more filters, the initial peak is reducing in amplitude.

Now, I'm no engineer, so maybe this is down to some different phenomenon. All I know is, this leads to my drums losing punch.

Here are audio examples and screenshots: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kb4uegv1b...qzlZ62M6a?dl=0

Audio is 48k 24bit .wav.

I look forward to hearing some more geeky types explain this
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 05:53 AM   #58
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Sun View Post
Ok, can anybody produce a case-project,
that makes highpassing-issues as audibel as possible?
So we can determine for ourself.

Because, if this is just a theoretical or visual case,
then, I'll just continue my old habits
If you're happy with your old habits, why change them?
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 06:21 AM   #59
Neenja
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
Here's a quick n' dirty example I just cooked up myself.

It's a bass drum from Superior Drummer. It's a sum of multi-mic, but for our purposes, that is irrelevant. The bass drum hits were first rendered to audio to avoid any variance in the source from round-robins etc.

In stereo, I noticed differences in the correlation using a demo of Voxengo's PHA-979, but I don't have any software to plot that information.

I've included renders of the bass drum in mono and stereo, unprocessed, through one instance of ReaEQ with 1 oct bandwidth high pass at 50Hz, then through 3 instances of ReaEQ at those same settings. This was to simulate a "must high pass everything" attitude going from channel to bus to master.

What you should notice is, even though the ripple around the corner frequency is raising the gain of the signal as it goes through more filters, the initial peak is reducing in amplitude.

Now, I'm no engineer, so maybe this is down to some different phenomenon. All I know is, this leads to my drums losing punch.

Here are audio examples and screenshots: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kb4uegv1b...qzlZ62M6a?dl=0

Audio is 48k 24bit .wav.

I look forward to hearing some more geeky types explain this
You high passed a kick drum at 50hz and it loses "punch"? You don't say...
Neenja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 06:25 AM   #60
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neenja View Post
You high passed a kick drum at 50hz and it loses "punch"? You don't say...
You've completely missed the point.

When comparing 1 instance of the high pass filter with 3 instances in series, we are ADDING low end, yet the initial peak is still lower in amplitude.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 07:14 AM   #61
Reno.thestraws
Human being with feelings
 
Reno.thestraws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 9,753
Default

You can Hi pass everything! There's no good or bad way. If you want a super precise mix with a huge arrangement and lots of notes with an RMS level of -5db at the mastering stage, you have to Hi pass... BUT THE BIG MISTAKE imho is not to HI pass everything but is to EQing IN SOLO!!!

Sure HPF introduce phase shift but you can use it at your advantage. Just EQ IN CONTEXT and NEVER IN SOLO!

Hi passing a kick often introduce a phase shift in the low midrange and most of the time it's pleasant. Instead of cutting -9 db at 400Hz to remove the boxiness, a well set HPF is a lot more safe for your mix

TRICKS IN REAPER :

It's sometimes hard to EQ or mixing without using the solo button for a newbie or non pro mixer.

Go in preferences -> audio -> solo in front dimming : set -3 db instead of -18

now toggle on the options "solo in front" and you can use solo to help your ears mixing "in context" by reducing all the non soloed track by 3 db instead of muting it :P
Reno.thestraws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 07:22 AM   #62
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

I wish I knew what this phase problem sounds like to listen out for it.

When I high-pass something it just sounds like there's less low end (or sometimes just sounds the same depending what the track is)
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 07:26 AM   #63
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
I wish I knew what this phase problem sounds like to listen out for it.

When I high-pass something it just sounds like there's less low end (or sometimes just sounds the same depending what the track is)
A smearing, or softening of transients. Like from "TOK!" to "THWOK!", or "BAP!" to "BWAP!"

It's not necessarily a bad thing, and can be desirable. It will also be unnoticeable more than not.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 07:34 AM   #64
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

I should point out that I high-pass all the time. I am not on some moral crusade.

But I always listen to what filters are doing, don't set anything by default, and judge on a case-by-case basis.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 07:54 AM   #65
timboz
Human being with feelings
 
timboz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: South of Buffalo
Posts: 229
Default

Dumb question.... but. Will a using a Linear-phase EQ eliminate the problem of phase shift in the EQ?

Something like DDMF LP10.
timboz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:02 AM   #66
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timboz View Post
Dumb question.... but. Will a using a Linear-phase EQ eliminate the problem of phase shift in the EQ?

Something like DDMF LP10.
Yes, but then you have the possibility of audible pre-ringing (again though, it will only be audible in extreme cases). It's always a compromise.

I should stress though, if you're not hearing it, don't worry about it.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:28 AM   #67
Magicbuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Sun View Post
Ok, can anybody produce a case-project,
that makes highpassing-issues as audibel as possible?
So we can determine for ourself.

Because, if this is just a theoretical or visual case,
then, I'll just continue my old habits
Minimum phase EQ issues on multi mike instruments can audible which is why I usually use linear phase EQ on drums. Actually I use acon equalize which has a mixed phase mode. it has all the benefits of linear phase but minimizes pre-ring.

One place where minimum phase EQ can cause REAL world problems is during mastering. If you hipass a track that is near digital zero it can actually boost the signal into clipping due to phase distortion.
Magicbuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:40 AM   #68
drtedtan
Human being with feelings
 
drtedtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I've included renders of the bass drum in mono and stereo, unprocessed, through one instance of ReaEQ with 1 oct bandwidth high pass at 50Hz, then through 3 instances of ReaEQ at those same settings. This was to simulate a "must high pass everything" attitude going from channel to bus to master.
Running the source through three instances helps make the sound obvious, but how often is that done in practice? Surely people are high passing at the individual track level, either during tracking or during mixing, and not multiple times. If the first instance doesn't give you what you want, just use a different corner frequency or a steeper filter slope.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
don't set anything by default, and judge on a case-by-case basis.
Definitely.
drtedtan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:44 AM   #69
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I should stress though, if you're not hearing it, don't worry about it.
I think this is good advice in general but I do think it's natural for people to worry about things that they can't hear but other people with better equipment/room/"ears" might.

Think this is especially true with low end, and certainly something I've worried about in the past.

It's so hard to get a room that's flat in the low end; I'd imagine even top studios aren't completely flat down there and that most home setups are way off the mark.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:44 AM   #70
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drtedtan View Post
Running the source through three instances helps make the sound obvious, but how often is that done in practice? Surely people are high passing at the individual track level, either during tracking or during mixing, and not multiple times. If the first instance doesn't give you what you want, just use a different corner frequency or a steeper filter slope.
It's not unusual for people to high-pass the source, then on the mix master output, and then on their master of the stereo file.

In any case, I can hear and see an effect after one instance. But, as I said, I don't have the software to plot phase distortion, so it could be some other factor I'm unaware of.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:46 AM   #71
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
I think this is good advice in general but I do think it's natural for people to worry about things that they can't hear but other people with better equipment/room/"ears" might.

Think this is especially true with low end, and certainly something I've worried about in the past.

It's so hard to get a room that's flat in the low end; I'd imagine even top studios aren't completely flat down there and that most home setups are way off the mark.
That might be true for sub frequencies, but I don't think most people would have too many problems with discerning smeared transients.
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:49 AM   #72
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
That might be true for sub frequencies, but I don't think most people would have too many problems with discerning smeared transients.
I'm still none the wiser of what it even is lol
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 08:51 AM   #73
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
It's not unusual for people to high-pass the source, then on the mix master output, and then on their master of the stereo file.

In any case, I can hear and see an effect after one instance. But, as I said, I don't have the software to plot phase distortion, so it could be some other factor I'm unaware of.
Do people really high pass the master?

I thought the purpose of the "high pass everything" was so the bass guitar can occupy the entire low end?
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 09:15 AM   #74
Judders
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,957
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Do people really high pass the master?

I thought the purpose of the "high pass everything" was so the bass guitar can occupy the entire low end?
No, the popular internet folk wisdom that I've read is that everything below somewhere between 30 and 50Hz is pointless garbage, so you cut the lot. If they see (not hear) anything below that at any stage, they stick another high-pass on it.

Here's another description of phase distortion, just in case that helps

"phase distortion : An effect caused when phase-shift in an audio device is not a linear function of frequency. In other words, different frequencies experience different time delays. This changes the waveform of the signal and is especially injurious to transients. Most transducers produce significant phase distortion. As low frequencies travel slightly faster than high frequencies and as air absorbs high frequencies more readily than low ones, the more delay there is between low frequencies and the higher harmonics of a sound, the sound becomes progressively more smeared and is perceived as more distant."

- http://www.dilettantesdictionary.org...txt=distortion
Judders is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 09:42 AM   #75
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
I should point out that I high-pass all the time. I am not on some moral crusade.

But I always listen to what filters are doing, don't set anything by default, and judge on a case-by-case basis.
^This. I use HPF all the time when needed as well. I just don't throw HPF across the board as some routine step which is really the only thing I've recommended against. I still can't find good reason to make changes to waveforms that don't have anything wrong with them. I also haven't found mixes suddenly getting better from doing so because I get the same (IMHO better) result by only EQing what needs to be EQ'd.

It should follow the same logic as everything else, if you cannot hear the difference, there is usually no real reason to do it.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 09:51 AM   #76
bladerunner
Human being with feelings
 
bladerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 4,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
I'm still none the wiser of what it even is lol
It's literally just the softening of a transient. It's probably most noticeable on a well recorded snare or tom hit. Take a snare recording and run it through a few eq plugins boosting at various frequencies - you might notice that the snare seems to lose a bit of its transient - this is the phase shift 'smearing' the transient.
bladerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 09:55 AM   #77
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Running the source through three instances helps make the sound obvious, but how often is that done in practice?
My typical 'not broken, don't fix it' approach has a safety feature built in.

Instead of trying to guestimate usage percentages and/or measure what seemingly insignificant differences will be heard across thousands of different scenarios, across an near infinite number of seemingly insignificant tweaks, just don't change the things that don't appear to need changing.

^That's much easier and consistent than trying to test/guess every conceivable scenario in order to claim it as insignificant. It's sort of like wearing a hard had at a construction site, I might work there 20 years and never have something fall and hit my head, but I wear the hat so that I never have to worry about it. "I went to the construction site today without a hard hat, nothing fell on my head so it must not matter" We do similar all the time in audio forums.

The same is true when caring for waveforms, you don't have to constantly decide what is significant, just treat it nicely and get on with mixing.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.

Last edited by karbomusic; 10-16-2015 at 10:08 AM.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 10:02 AM   #78
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,901
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stews View Post
Do people really high pass the master?

I thought the purpose of the "high pass everything" was so the bass guitar can occupy the entire low end?
I've occasionally rolled off just above DC which is below 20Hz but not often.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 10:06 AM   #79
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judders View Post
Here's another description of phase distortion, just in case that helps

"phase distortion : An effect caused when phase-shift in an audio device is not a linear function of frequency. In other words, different frequencies experience different time delays. This changes the waveform of the signal and is especially injurious to transients. Most transducers produce significant phase distortion. As low frequencies travel slightly faster than high frequencies and as air absorbs high frequencies more readily than low ones, the more delay there is between low frequencies and the higher harmonics of a sound, the sound becomes progressively more smeared and is perceived as more distant."

- http://www.dilettantesdictionary.org...txt=distortion
Appreciate that mate but, like most physics, that just makes me feel thick lol.
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 10:07 AM   #80
Stews
Human being with feelings
 
Stews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 1,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner View Post
It's literally just the softening of a transient. It's probably most noticeable on a well recorded snare or tom hit. Take a snare recording and run it through a few eq plugins boosting at various frequencies - you might notice that the snare seems to lose a bit of its transient - this is the phase shift 'smearing' the transient.
Cheers, I'll have a play about
Stews is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.