spectral balance

[miroslav]

But you will find very few people who don't high pass both instruments pretty much as a general rule.

I don't.

I know people will HP (cut the lows ) on stuff at the mic...at the pre...at the comp...at the mixer...
...I'm just saying I don't do that as an SOP, rather waiting for the mixing and then seeing how things are going.

And I don't disagree about adjusting EQs between tracks to make them work a little better, but I don't cut away to any great degree on one track in order to make room for another. There is more equal give-n-take across ALL the tracks.

So like I said to Glen...it's often a "word thing" on the forums that leads to extended debate.
We're probably closer on how we both work, than further apart.

 

[Freudian Slip]

But about 90% of the ones that are marked as "High-Pass" filters on much of the gear tend to be Low-Cut...so they should just be called Low-Cut.

I think we're talking semantics here. Is it an A sharp or a B flat? Does it matter? Discussing the semantics just confuses people. If it has a constant downward slope then call it what you want but, when you say high pass people know what you are talking about. That's what matters.

F.S.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I have to admit that I don't recall seeing a lo-cut filter on a mixer actually being being labeled "high pass". Maybe there are some out there, but I don't recall that. I tend to remember them being usually very similar to the typical labeling on my Mackie, which gives the full blown label of "Low cut 75Hz 18dB/Oct." They may not all include the slope figure, but usually it's identified as "Low cut" or 'lo-cut" followed by the pivot frequency, at least as well as my acid flashbacked memory will allow me to remember, anyway.

You're right, though, that if there are ones out there that are actually labeled "high pass", that's not only a pretty meaningless label, but it's technically kind of inaccurate. Then again, they often label the polarity inversion switches as "phase inverters", so such bogus labeling on mixers is not without precedent.

The problem is, to be accurate, a "high-pass" or "low-pass" filter is meant to designate specifically a filter that leaves the frequencies above (or below) the pivot frequency (more or less) alone, but allows you to do any number of things to the rest of the frequencies, usually either in the form of positive or negative shelving or slope cuts. This is why they're called "____-pass", because it's to hard to call a "low pass" filter a "high boost/cut/high shelf/low shelf" filter . By such a definition, the low cut on a mixer channel, even though it does pass the high frequencies, should not be called a high pass filter, because that designates a different animal altogether.

But even with that out of the way, there's still a problem as I described earlier with referring to "___ passing" as a verb, because it describes nothing about what you're actually doing with the stuff you're not just passing.

G.

 

[miroslav]

Well...then I got one of the "weird" consoles that has the 80Hz Cut Filter labeled as a HPF.
It's a TASCAM M-3500 console.

But yeah...most people DO know what you are talking about even if you say HP instead of LC.
The Tape Op last page is often done with a lot of tongue-in-cheek, though there ARE a lot of common sense points in this month's issue about how gear manufacturers could help end users by making some simple changes in how they label knobs or how they design basic functionality.
Most of the comments are pretty spot-on...(for anyone that has the Tape Op issue).

As another example (and off the track of this thread)...I have a Sebatron 4-channel mic pre, made in Australia. Nice preamp, but with some strange faceplate labeling decisions.

It has switches for:

Phase In
||
Phase Out


Phantom Off
||
Phantom On


Power On
||
Power Off

Maybe it's me....but I told them they were inconsistent in their On/Off direction, and that it would make more sense to flip the Phantom around, and that even the Phase "In/Out" is really relative to the incoming signal...but that I got what they meant to say.
Of course...they said they didn't think it was odd at all.

Ehhh....Australians!!!

 

[Freudian Slip]

I have to admit that I don't recall seeing a lo-cut filter on a mixer actually being being labeled "high pass". Maybe there are some out there, but I don't recall that. I tend to remember them being usually very similar to the typical labeling on my Mackie, which gives the full blown label of "Low cut 75Hz 18dB/Oct." They may not all include the slope figure, but usually it's identified as "Low cut" or 'lo-cut" followed by the pivot frequency, at least as well as my acid flashbacked memory will allow me to remember, anyway.

You're right, though, that if there are ones out there that are actually labeled "high pass", that's not only a pretty meaningless label, but it's technically kind of inaccurate. Then again, they often label the polarity inversion switches as "phase inverters", so such bogus labeling on mixers is not without precedent.

The problem is, to be accurate, a "high-pass" or "low-pass" filter is meant to designate specifically a filter that leaves the frequencies above (or below) the pivot frequency (more or less) alone, but allows you to do any number of things to the rest of the frequencies, usually either in the form of positive or negative shelving or slope cuts. This is why they're called "____-pass", because it's to hard to call a "low pass" filter a "high boost/cut/high shelf/low shelf" filter . By such a definition, the low cut on a mixer channel, even though it does pass the high frequencies, should not be called a high pass filter, because that designates a different animal altogether.

But even with that out of the way, there's still a problem as I described earlier with referring to "___ passing" as a verb, because it describes nothing about what you're actually doing with the stuff you're not just passing.

G.

Well a shelve is a different animal all together and should not be compared to HIGH PASS Personally I don't like using the term "low cut" because taken literally it could refer to a low shelf used in a cutting way. But since a low shelf can either boost or reduce the low end I think that "low shelf" is a great name for it. It represents the configuration fairly well. Now the term "high pass" can pretty much only mean one thing to me. It allows the highs to pass from a designated point on up. where as cutting some lows could mean pulling 3 db at 80 hz and leaving 60hz alone or dropping dropping everything below 80hz by 3db, like could be the case using a shelf.


I disagree on the term _______ pass not describing what are doing with the stuff your not just letting pass. You are not letting it pass One has to only use thier keen powers of deduction to figure out that it has been stopped. (I know I'm a smart ass )

Anyway, I don't know why orange isn't called blue or green. All that matters is that we all know what someone means when they say orange. If someone says high pass. I know what they mean. They don't mean a low shelf, becasue if they did they would say low shelf. If they say low cut or low roll off I will assume that they also mean a "hi pass".

Now as far as Makies labeling of things well........."rude solo light"... Need I say more?

F.S.

 

[LeeRosario]

I wasn't sure if this should be in the newbie forum, but since I haven't been able to find any in depth posts on this subject.

First if we could get a solid definition of spectral balance. I understand you want a nice curve, and no rigid peaks. You want to add distinction and clarity to individual components b finding a space in the spectrum for each instrument to dominate.

Do I have this right?

Are there rules of thumb when it comes to where specific components typically sit in the spectrum? I know every mix is different. I just want to know about the process, and where you start etc.

I think we need to rewind a few steps here. While recording and mixing is somewhat of a science, remember that being an artform; no two tracks are ever alike. Especially with respect to spectral balance. I'd prefer someone learn to use their ears and put tape over every meter in the studio before looking at the numbers and frequencies.

There's a tendency for the human brain to trick itself into thinking something is less than acceptable by the way it looks. That's a flawed way to look at things in my opinion. There are plenty of "jagged edge" and crazy looking waveforms for some of the best mixes ever made.

I'd say the best way hands down is to learn what it is that makes a mix work. Memorize that. Let it be your everyday routine. Pick stuff out of the mix. Try to find behind the scenes stories on those mixes and see how they got to be that way from the engineer themselves.

Reference mixes are key in the mixing industry. Even some of the best engineers in the world need a starting point to reset their minds and ears.

You could go in there one day, have a great mix, then come back the next day and realize it's off. That's just the way the human brain and human ear work.

 

[miroslav]

Now the term "high pass" can pretty much only mean one thing to me. It allows the highs to pass from a designated point on up.

But that was the point of the Tape Op comments.
If the designated point is set at 80Hz...then it's NOT just a high pass filter as it's also allowing lots of lows, mids AND highs to pass.
Like on my console...when the "HPF" button is engaged, it's cutting at 80Hz with a 12dB/octave slope.
That's a low cut filter to me (and the guys at Tape Op)...not a high pass filter, which implies it only passes the highs.

(I know I'm a smart ass )

The thought never entered my mind.

 

[miroslav]

I think we need to rewind ....

What about the guys using DAWs?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Well a shelve is a different animal all together and should not be compared to HIGH PASS Personally I don't like using the term "low cut" because taken literally it could refer to a low shelf used in a cutting way. But since a low shelf can either boost or reduce the low end I think that "low shelf" is a great name for it. It represents the configuration fairly well. Now the term "high pass" can pretty much only mean one thing to me. It allows the highs to pass from a designated point on up. where as cutting some lows could mean pulling 3 db at 80 hz and leaving 60hz alone or dropping dropping everything below 80hz by 3db, like could be the case using a shelf.


I disagree on the term _______ pass not describing what are doing with the stuff your not just letting pass. You are not letting it pass One has to only use thier keen powers of deduction to figure out that it has been stopped. (I know I'm a smart ass )

Anyway, I don't know why orange isn't called blue or green. All that matters is that we all know what someone means when they say orange. If someone says high pass. I know what they mean. They don't mean a low shelf, becasue if they did they would say low shelf. If they say low cut or low roll off I will assume that they also mean a "hi pass".

Now as far as Makies labeling of things well........."rude solo light"... Need I say more?

F.S.

The more we explore this subject, the more I'm getting the impression that it depends on who/where/how one was originally taught the meanings of these terms, because - with respectful honesty, F.S. - there's more in your last post that I have to disagree with, and I think it's because we grew up with differing definitions.

For me, I never grew up assuming that high pass meant a low slope cut. Yes, I have come to learn that many folks do interchangeably use the terms low-cut and high-pass (and v.v.), and yes, I have been guilty of that myself because of the force of peer habit, but I have alwasy considered that to be an assumption and not a technically accurate description.

For me, high pass meant just what I described, a NOUN for a filter that did *something* to the low end, but a slope cut was only one out at least four possibilities of what it could do, including up-sloping and shelving in both directions. Those are all forms of "___ pass" filters, and attempting to use the term "___ pass" as a verb never specifies just which of those possibilities one is actually executing.

Now apparently you and others assume that "___ pass" means a slope cut in the other direction, and and that shelving or slope boosting are different than "___ pass".

That never made sense to me, because they are all indeed and in fact types of band pass filters. To me, it's kind of like saying that "screwdriver" automatically assumes meaning a flat blade screwdriver, and that Phillips head or Torx head screwdrivers are not really screwdrivers.

You're right that it is in a sense semantics only. But the problem is that not having the semantics straight winds up leading to confusion in real life, as the last few posts show .

G.

 

[LeeRosario]

What about the guys using DAWs?

Ctrl-shift left arrow, left arrow, left arrow or jog wheel activate/counter clockwise

 

[Freudian Slip]

There's a tendency for the human brain to trick itself into thinking something is less than acceptable by the way it looks. That's a flawed way to look at things in my opinion. There are plenty of "jagged edge" and crazy looking waveforms for some of the best mixes ever made.

And while we are on brain tricks. You can always depend on the fact that generally a listeners brain will add in any lacking low end.

I totally agree with having reference material.

This is not pertaining to you Lee but, I am going to mention it here. People keep saying that they understand you need to find a place for each instrument to dominate in the spectrum. no! People have said you need to eliminate overlap, no!. Both of these statements lend them selves to going about mixing in the completely wrong way. If you have a problem, then deal with it. Knowing what makes up a particular instruments frequency range or what select frequency areas carry allot of the weight for that instrument allows you to better tackle problems. Knowing that a particular frequency is less important for (or will effect the sound less on) one instrument than another gives you the ability to exploit that difference should you need to bring something forward in the mix when you encounter an issue. If you are mixing a three piece band without distorted guitar you will likely never have an issue. There is oodles of room.
on a metal song with 3 distorted guitars, heavy drums, bass, and three or more vocal tracks you may have to employ some tricks to get everything you want to be heard, heard. But you wait and see. Nothing says you can't leave elements of a song buried either. Look at the pad on many songs. The average person might never notice it unless it went away suddenly.

I think people often are looking for a formula where there is none.

F.S.

 

[miroslav]

For me, high pass meant just what I described, a NOUN...

Yeah..I get what you are saying, a "pass"....like a pass in-between things, which makes it a noun, but even as a noun, it does imply an action - "to pass through" - which is what the noun is derived from.
So...it's not too unusual for most people to think of it as a verb rather than a noun.

My comments (and I believe those of the Tape Op crew) where aimed more at the single button (on/off) type of "HP" filters that only do one thing, which if very often to "cut" extream lows...so "high pass" is a kinda' backasswards way of saying that!

But a variable bandpass, that has more than on function, should certainly not ever be called just a cut filter.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Yeah..I get what you are saying, a "pass"....like a pass in-between things, which makes it a noun, but even as a noun, it does imply an action - "to pass through" - which is what the noun is derived from.
So...it's not too unusual for most people to think of it as a verb rather than a noun.

How people think of it is the source of the problem. A high pass filter means it is NOT filtering the higher frequencies; i.e. it is leaving them alone. there is no action involved there. The action - the verb - is in the word "filter", not in the word "pass". Where/when there is no filtering, there is no filter. The identification of the type of "passing" is nothing but an adjective describing the boundaries of the filter's actions. It dies not describe the filter's actions themselves.

My comments (and I believe those of the Tape Op crew) where aimed more at the single button (on/off) type of "HP" filters that only do one thing, which if very often to "cut" extream lows...so "high pass" is a kinda' backasswards way of saying that!

Agreed. In fact it's so wrong, that it's what caused the initial misunderstanding between us .

G.