simonsez
Well-known member
all gone, druu got the last one.
Thank you
Thank you
That's because you've chosen the dual-cap variation of Baxendall's implementation. the single cap implementation requires only two poles and offers better curves IMO.simonsez said:for stereo ganged control, we need 4 pole rotary switch for bass freq selector, and 2 pole for treble.
This is just a description of the shelving response of the Bax circuit, in opposition to a bell curve. In order to achieve a certain amount of boost at a frequency situated between the mid range point and one of the extreme, one has to apply a larger boost; with a bell curve, one just applies the right amount at the right frequency.simonsez said:Still learn about this baxandall behavior, it said here that :
"The main Disadvantage of the basic circuit is that it has its greatest effect at the extremes of the audio range, as shown in Fig . 1.For example , if a 6dB boost is required at 4kHz, one must simultaneously tolerate a Much greater boost of perhaps 18dB at 16kHz.
That's the behavior of the dual-cap LF implementation; it tends to act as a variable-frequency low-pass or high-pass filter, when the single cap implementation acts as a fixed-frequency, variable-slope type.Furthermore, the turnover frequency of the bass control depends on its setting, but this does not apply to the treble control!”
Correct.simonsez said:Is fHB and fLB in the pic below is what called turnaround freq ?
Yes. That's because shelving filters (or EQ's) are characterized by a sloping response.so when we boost at say 3db at 3khz, we actually boost much more in the higher freq? (or lower with bass). Is this true for all shelving eq?
That's weird! Traditionally, Bax EQ's are specified by their cut-off frequency at max boost/cut, which makes sense technically; specifying the "tilt" frequency usefully complements the information.druu said:From the Dangerous manual:
The frequencies noted on the faceplate reside in the middle of this slope, thus corresponding with the most audible band. The highest frequency shoulder is approximately twice the listed frequency (where the cut/boost is exactly 5dB). So for example, when modifying 1.6kHz, a 5dBu boost occurs at 3.2kHz.
Yes some authors choose to specify the frequency corresponding to half the max boost or cut. It makes sense in metrologic terms since it is in the highest slope portion of the curve, but in terms of adequation with the physiological perception it is inadequate.dirty1_1garry said:Interesting moment - dengero*us bax eq HF marked as 1.6kHz, 1.8kHz, 2.1kHz , 2.5kHz, 3.4kHz, 4.8kHz, 7.1kHz , 18kHz. But if you will see on it's HF curves , HF points match +/-3dB boost/cut instead of +/-5dB boost/cut on LF
Enter your email address to join: