TriTone vs Yoko Bandsplitter

[Wobbleburger]

Is there a point to having TriTone and Yoko? Is Tritone able to output each band for separate effects? Say I want to put reverb on the highs. That's the reason I have Yoko band splitter. But if Tritone can do that too, I'll just use that alone. Or, is Tritone limited to what it can do on the device?

[Zac]

For me yoko has never worked well if i need to recombine one source after effecting one or more bands of it. Others swear by it from what i remember. So maybe try for yourself?

[selig]

Is there a point to having TriTone and Yoko? Is Tritone able to output each band for separate effects? Say I want to put reverb on the highs. That's the reason I have Yoko band splitter. But if Tritone can do that too, I'll just use that alone. Or, is Tritone limited to what it can do on the device?

If all you want to do is put reverb on just the highs, any HP filter will do. In Reason there’s Pulveriser and the Stereo Imager as my quick and simple go-to filter/splitters. The advantage of the Stereo Imager is it will re-combine perfectly with the low band if you need to do that for any reason, like putting one reverb on the highs and another on the lows.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Wobbleburger]

Thanks guys - Reverb was just the example. Say maybe I want the mids delaying at 3/4 and the highs at 2/4 plus distortion or something like that. Just curious if there's a big difference between the two. AKA I have no slots left in the sub and I want to add something

[selig]

Thanks guys - Reverb was just the example. Say maybe I want the mids delaying at 3/4 and the highs at 2/4 plus distortion or something like that. Just curious if there's a big difference between the two. AKA I have no slots left in the sub and I want to add something

Not being a user of either of the two, what I CAN offer is that the stereo imager gets a lot of use by me for band splitting, since it’s a native device and so easy to use. Plus as I said previously, it’s filters are 100% complementary, meaning that if you split them then recombine the result is perfectly flat.

Not saying the others do or don’t do this, just saying there’s a device you already have that does everything you need, with the one “issue” that you need to use two Imagers if you need three bands, or three if you need four bands. Once their in a Combinator, it’s not anything you’d ever notice IMO.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Wobbleburger]

Thanks guys - Reverb was just the example. Say maybe I want the mids delaying at 3/4 and the highs at 2/4 plus distortion or something like that. Just curious if there's a big difference between the two. AKA I have no slots left in the sub and I want to add something

Not being a user of either of the two, what I CAN offer is that the stereo imager gets a lot of use by me for band splitting, since it’s a native device and so easy to use. Plus as I said previously, it’s filters are 100% complementary, meaning that if you split them then recombine the result is perfectly flat.

Not saying the others do or don’t do this, just saying there’s a device you already have that does everything you need, with the one “issue” that you need to use two Imagers if you need three bands, or three if you need four bands. Once their in a Combinator, it’s not anything you’d ever notice IMO.

All great information! Taking a risk and removing Yoko from the subscription. I'll wrap my head around your advice when I get home

[selig]

Here's a quick example of a four way X-over built with three Stereo Imagers. You can remove any you don't need, the main point to note is that the last device uses both low and high outputs, and the first device's high output feeds the next device's input. So the first X-over splits the low/high at around 200 Hz, then sends everything 200 Hz and above to the next X-over two octaves above (at 800 Hz), which does the same thing on to the last X-over which splits at two octaves above that at around 3.2 kHz.

For this Combinator, I've restricted the range of the low and high frequency to not get closer than one octave to the mid frequency to avoid band overlap - any well designed splitter would not allow two crossovers to get any closer than that to each other to avoid conflicts between the crossovers. Since we can't totally restrict ranges in Reason, if you lower the mid X-over and raise the low, you can get into trouble so be aware of this. Worst case would be the low and mid frequency being the same, which would not be the end of the world but would defeat the purpose of band splitting.

Simple4way_Xover_gr.cmb.zip

(1.26 KiB) Downloaded 50 times

[Loque]

You can try this one. It does not go beyond 10khz, but works quite well.
https://shop.propellerheads.se/rack-ext ... -splitter/

[selig]

You can try this one. It does not go beyond 10khz, but works quite well.
https://shop.propellerheads.se/rack-ext ... -splitter/

Wow, forgot about that one - looks pretty handy, especially for free!

BTW, I can’t see any reason to go above 10 kHz for the top crossover frequency. Same for not needing to go below 40 Hz on the bottom. That is to say, that’s only one octave above (or below) the crossover point. And there’s not likely a whole lot of energy in that top octave anyway, especially compared to just about every other octave in the audible spectrum!



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[strangers]

Take a look at Sunder. Very handy utility for scenarios like you're describing.

[selig]

Take a look at Sunder. Very handy utility for scenarios like you're describing.

I’ve not used Sunder, but have done the same thing via a totally different approach (built in Reaktor) for many years. It’s not the same thing as a frequency splitter - more like turning a crossover 90° on it’s side and splitting into bands according to level and not frequency, and then you define your “crossover” by decibels instead of by frequency.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[EdGrip]

AirRaid Audio Splitter is the one I use for this business.

[Wobbleburger]

Just to follow up, the TriTone works well for splitting freqs. It just doesn't have a 'return' input, so I had to route the fx to a new channel. Yoko works the same way but has an FX return, which is really nice. Overall, the TriTone wins for me.

[Wobbleburger]

You can try this one. It does not go beyond 10khz, but works quite well.
https://shop.propellerheads.se/rack-ext ... -splitter/

Absolute boss! Thanks so much for this. Free and pretty much exactly what I need. I'll still keep the Tritone because the inhouse effects are killer

[Wobbleburger]

Here's a quick example of a four way X-over built with three Stereo Imagers. You can remove any you don't need, the main point to note is that the last device uses both low and high outputs, and the first device's high output feeds the next device's input. So the first X-over splits the low/high at around 200 Hz, then sends everything 200 Hz and above to the next X-over two octaves above (at 800 Hz), which does the same thing on to the last X-over which splits at two octaves above that at around 3.2 kHz.

For this Combinator, I've restricted the range of the low and high frequency to not get closer than one octave to the mid frequency to avoid band overlap - any well designed splitter would not allow two crossovers to get any closer than that to each other to avoid conflicts between the crossovers. Since we can't totally restrict ranges in Reason, if you lower the mid X-over and raise the low, you can get into trouble so be aware of this. Worst case would be the low and mid frequency being the same, which would not be the end of the world but would defeat the purpose of band splitting.
Simple4way_Xover_gr.cmb.zip

Fantastic! Thanks so much for this... BTW the Coloring EQ is killer. I use it all the time now.