High Pass Filters DON'T f...ing ruin your mixes

[robussc]

@bxbrkrz - thank you for that.

The In the Mix guy is very reasonable. Don't hate the player hate the stupid game the YouTube algorithm makes you play.

[challism]

Is there any way to apply a high pass filter to this thread?

I do agree that clickbait titles are annoying, but such is the way of the world in which we live. If clickbait titles are bothering you that much, I'd say you have a pretty good life.

[huggermugger]

I highpass everything at 2KHz just to be on the safe side. And I sidechain everything too.

You better low-pass at 2KHz at the same time, just to be on the safe side

I tried that but then all the sound was gone and I thought hmmm this can't be right.

[moofi]

What you are talking about is effecting the sound, I´m talking about cleaning. Like removing low end you wouldn´t nor want to hear anyway, simply for removing low level energy, freeing volume and space for the rest of the mix.

That´s not necessarily true because when using HPF on individual channels, these are usually set to specifically suit a channel. If we are talking cleaning up a mix, HPF is quite essential and you wouldn´t really hear any low end shizzle that´s creating energy/level anyway.

Correct! One may record a finger snap, close to the microphone. It will contain a lot off bass content. I personally wouldn't want that, so it's the first thing I'd filter.
Other times a crash cymbal may have some odd booming to it. Do I want that in a mix? No. Not personally.
Can a solo acoustic guitar recording have every natural bassy taps left in without filtering? Absolutely!
Again, it's always up to the engineer, as long as they know what and why they do.

[crimsonwarlock]

You better low-pass at 2KHz at the same time, just to be on the safe side

I tried that but then all the sound was gone and I thought hmmm this can't be right.

But with no sound, you also don't have any sound issues

[bxbrkrz]

[crimsonwarlock]

[RobC]

"The problem? Many people see the clickbait. They don't watch the video, but still "learn" from the clickbait, and will think as if HPF-ing a mix would be bad.

Why didn't I add context? Cause when I did, people had sympathy for the devil. And I don't like advertising clickbait crap."

And behold! Even like this it happened. Why do I even bother?

I hope there will be some AI developed that can effectively no-pass-filter ; ) clickbait crap.

Why stand up FOR clickbait, though?

The youtuber is saying that water can kill you if you drink it from a high-pressure fire hose. That's all.
You and the youtuber agree. And I agree with both of you.
By the way, your thread is proof click baiting works. This is why you'll keep replying on the thread everybody already agrees with you, including the youtuber.

Find inner peace by watching the damn video

Clickbaiting works because it leverages various psychological principles and human behaviors. Here are some reasons why it's effective:

1. **Curiosity Gap**: Clickbait headlines often provide just enough information to make the reader curious, but not enough to satisfy that curiosity without clicking. This exploits the psychological phenomenon known as the "curiosity gap," where people are motivated to resolve gaps in their knowledge.

2. **Emotional Appeal**: Clickbait often uses emotional triggers to grab attention. By appealing to strong emotions such as excitement, anger, or fear, these headlines can increase the likelihood that someone will click on them to experience or understand the emotional context better.

3. **Over-Promise and Exaggeration**: Many clickbait titles exaggerate the content of the article or promise more than the article can deliver. This over-promise can create an expectation in the reader's mind that clicking will lead to some significant revelation or entertainment.

4. **Instant Gratification**: In the age of the internet, people seek quick and easy access to information and entertainment. Clickbait titles often suggest that the content will immediately satisfy this desire, whether it's by promising a quick laugh, shocking information, or an unbelievable story.

5. **Social Proof and FOMO (Fear of Missing Out)**: If a clickbait article is widely shared or appears to be popular, it may create a sense of social proof, suggesting that the content is worth engaging with. Additionally, people may click on these articles due to FOMO, fearing they might miss out on something significant or culturally relevant.

6. **Algorithmic Amplification**: Social media algorithms and search engines often prioritize content that engages users, measured by clicks, likes, and shares. Clickbait headlines are designed to maximize these interactions, leading to more visibility and a self-reinforcing cycle of clicks and shares.

In summary, clickbait works because it effectively exploits human psychology and the dynamics of online content consumption. However, the downside is that it can lead to a decline in trust and content quality, as users may feel misled or disappointed by the content behind the clickbait.

It doesn't look like people agree at this point.
I'm not interested in reading why something bad would ever be good for me. Clickbait tricks you into checking something that turns out doing nothing with the title.
Why I reply to everyone? Well, if they took the time to say something, I will value their effort and respond. If I can, I help.

[dvdrtldg]

You better low-pass at 2KHz at the same time, just to be on the safe side

I tried that but then all the sound was gone and I thought hmmm this can't be right.

I had that problem too but then I bought some expensive mastering plugins. So far they haven't fixed it, I probably need to buy some more

[RobC]

Ah, okay, I see the thread turned into a troll-fest.

No wonder some great people left this forum.

[dvdrtldg]

High-passing every track because you think you need to high-pass every track is stupid. Use your ears

Agree with the first part of that

But when it comes to "use your ears", isn't the issue that a track might have some low-end content that you *can't* hear when you solo the track? But then if you end up with 20 tracks with the same sort of redundant low-end content, it starts to sound muddy in the mix?

[crimsonwarlock]

High-passing every track because you think you need to high-pass every track is stupid. Use your ears

Agree with the first part of that

But when it comes to "use your ears", isn't the issue that a track might have some low-end content that you *can't* hear when you solo the track? But then if you end up with 20 tracks with the same sort of redundant low-end content, it starts to sound muddy in the mix?

Of course, removing low-end rumble on a channel is a good idea. I use spectrum analyzers like everyone else. However, I don't go looking around at EVERY track with an analyzer to see if there is any low-end rumble. I use my ears first, and only when I suspect a problem (that I can hear), I look at the track I suspect for that. And yes, that can be quite a few tracks, but never all of them.

Putting a HPF on every track in your mix will result in a bad-sounding mix in most cases. To be honest, I have much more trouble managing the high-end (or lack thereof) in my mixes.

[RobC]

Who moved the topic to The Kitchen? It is a discussion, with teaching and learning. If you wish, we could have altered the title, cleaned up the comments, etc. Otherwise, you abuse your position, without discussing how you act, or at least notifying me about it.

Secondly, people, if my words are bullshit to you, at least listen to Reason Studios:

[RobC]

Agree with the first part of that

But when it comes to "use your ears", isn't the issue that a track might have some low-end content that you *can't* hear when you solo the track? But then if you end up with 20 tracks with the same sort of redundant low-end content, it starts to sound muddy in the mix?

Of course, removing low-end rumble on a channel is a good idea. I use spectrum analyzers like everyone else. However, I don't go looking around at EVERY track with an analyzer to see if there is any low-end rumble. I use my ears first, and only when I suspect a problem (that I can hear), I look at the track I suspect for that. And yes, that can be quite a few tracks, but never all of them.

Putting a HPF on every track in your mix will result in a bad-sounding mix in most cases. To be honest, I have much more trouble managing the high-end (or lack thereof) in my mixes.

Throw in a kick and a bass (instrument) note in your sequencer, playing at the same time.

Flip the polarity of one. Hear something changing?
Undo.
Move one just a few ticks away. Hear the difference?
Undo.
Start applying a high pass filter to the bass note (since it probably will be silent below 40 Hz). You hear that something is changing, right? Yet you probably didn't even cut up to 40 Hz.

You know what's happening, right?

Let's say, your kick and bass in a song play together perfectly. The bass is nice and clean up to 40 Hz, but the kick has some ugly rumbling going on below 30 Hz, which sounds unpleasant and even hits below 20 Hz. You would rather apply an HPF on the kick only, risking ruining the sound, because of phase shift that can cause frequency cancellation? You may end up with with both sounding dead when they play/hit together at the same time.
In such case, it's far smarter to put both in a group channel, and then apply a single HPF.

If your mix is doing great, but there's some rumble left to remove, say only below 30 Hz, which you don't find pleasant sounding and want silent (cause you didn't have any content planned below 30 Hz), then what do you do?

[aeox]

Play by ear