ReaEQ Question: Hi/Lo Pass

Hi, all. When I put a hi/lo pass with ReaEQ on one of my tracks, I generally reduce the 'Q' because it seems like the default (two octaves) cuts further than it should -- a hipass @ 100Hz looks like it cuts well above 100Hz. Is this standard for a hi/lo pass? Is there a reason I should keep it at two octaves? Just curious as to standard practice, the reason for the default setting, etc. Let me know. Thanks. J P.S. FWIW, I generally pull the octave setting down as far as I can before the EQ curve starts bubbling up to compensate.

not sure why that happens but I imagine where the filter works in relation to the setting is purely up to the person making the plug. I would say that gentler curves will sound more natural however, so use your ears. Kind regards Dave Rich

If you want really sharp or odd ball filters, use ReaFIR and draw your own curve.

That is indeed the default... there is no "right" curve. ReaEQ is a minimum phase EQ designed for "musicality" and you will get resonance depending on how you set the Q. If you want surgical EQ, ReaFIR is what you want. So, what is right is what sounds right. Also known as... quit looking at the dern graphic display and listen.

Here's a comparison. 100hz sine wave being generated from a test tone plugin through 7 channels. All EQ's except ReaFir are set at 100hz with a 1.4 Q. None - ReaEQ - Waves Ren - Cubase built in Hi-pass 1 & 2 - Waves Linear. ReaFir centered at 99hz with the slope going directly to the bottom left corner of the plugin window. ReaEQ seems more surgical than the others, it never touched 100hz, it's output is the same as the channel with no plugin. Point? Use your ears... ;) ... not strictly the eq display. Look what happens when I change the frequency below on the tone generator to 50hz. These EQ's, set to hi-pass with the same freq/Q settings and still at 100hz would have a vastly different effect on your low end below the pass frequency. So much for "pass me your hi/lo/shelf eq settings". :) Waves hi/lo pass Q settings/slopes aren't even close to the others and Reaper seems more surgical than Cubase with hi-pass leaving more bass.

One more test. I ran ReaEq against the Cubase "Parametric 1" EQ default with the following settings. -6db and 1.4Q Changed the generated tone frequencies and EQ centers at the following bands, reversed the ReaEq channel and summed them in the master with the following remnants. 50 -71.3 100 -85.4 200 -81.5 400 Infinity 800 Infinity 1000 Infinity 3000 Infinity 5000 Infinity 7000 Infinity 10000 Infinity 12000 Infinity 15000 Infinity 17000 Infinity For all practical purposes identical (in result and display) at least in this test at that common 1.4 Q setting. I did the same with "Parametric 2" in Cubase and they diverged more, especially in the higher end getting up in the -20 range of non-cancelled leftovers. Boosting +3 at those same freqs was a little different with leftovers in the range of -78 etc, differences which you'd still never hear. ReaEq and Waves Ren were also really close falling into the -50 / -60 or more ranges in a lot of bands. Waves Linear diverged from all of them much more leaving remnants up to the -20 range obviously doing something very easily audibly different. Aside from the different curves/slopes at identical visual freq/Q settings for the shelves and hi/lo passes, ReaEq and the built-in Cubase Parametric 1 EQ seem near identical for general peak/dip eq'ing. I suspect those very tiny differences in the low end have more to do with the accuracy of the display/freq/scale settings than what the EQ is doing.

Non-minimum phase? I don't know.

-> jalan A steeper roll-off curve means more phase shifting, which could led to a less natural/pleasant sound in the end. (I'm assuming here that you're using a hi-pass filter to get rid of pops, thumps, noise, exc, without affecting the actual sound) You have to find the right compromise track by track. The default settings are similar to the fixed filters you'll usually find in analog desks, and are a good starting point. It's a common behaviour of a hi-pass filter to start digging a bit higher than the nominal set frequency. I usually try to use sweeter slopes as I need to climb up in frequency where our ears and brain are more sensitive...

Thank you, phonofranz. That was the info I was looking for.

Might I also suggest Liteon's excellent JS plug in pack??? It has lots of different types of filters with different sounds. I LOVE the Butterworth filter. That being said, I mostly use ReaEQ for utility hipass lopass.