I wonder how we could devide audio/noise to different levels (BASS, TREBLE, HIGH)?
Ok I'll bite.
Hahaha I didn't mean to leave as a "bait" for anyone to bite, it's just that sometimes I am spending too much time explaining something that the original poster already knows, so this attitude saves him/her from reading stuff they already knew as well as my own time
Why four instances of each filter? Is this supposed to make the filter "curve" steeper or something?
That's exactly the reason.
It will be a piranha-fest. I was imagining that it's a 12-band analyser that he wants to be plotted/visualised? Wrong? Maybe?
@whale-av In the beginning, I had understood that the OP only wanted to separate the sound in bass, treble and highs, thus the image I posed above. Later I understood that he wanted to separate it in 12 parts (but the same principle would still apply).
@gsagostinho Haha yeah I was trying to be funny. So just to make sure I'm thinking about this correctly, you are raising the filter slope to the fourth power right? That is, you're filtering the same signal four times over. Are you shooting for a specific cutoff frequency, like 12db/octave? What's the default? The help file seems pretty vague on this one.
@rjp9 Hmm, I don't know it for sure (though your guess of raising it to the fourth power seems correct). I was not trying to get any specific slope value to be honest, I simply knew that the original filters have very mild slopes, and so putting a bunch of them together seemed reasonable (also, I have been studying a lot of patches by Andy Farnell (obiwannabe) and he uses these techniques quite often, and they work wonderfully well).
That's why I normally use [biquad~] so as to set the frequency/gain and the width of the notch. I don't know if it is available outside of "extended" though. Actually I don't know where half the stuff on my laptop came from any more.
@whale-av what is the difference between [bp~] and [biquad~} in this regard (2 pole 2 zero) and bandpass filter?
@gsagostinho how we could then use FFT here, is it applicable for 3 band EQ
I mentioned readsf and dac because I want to read file from hard disk and visualize it, and print because I wanted to see the out put before send it to visualizer so I get the grasp of what type of output I have so I could convert it to what I want
@bountybouncer Hello again,,
bp~ passes the frequency (1st argument) with minimal attenuation, and cuts surrounding frequencies at a rate set by the second (Q) argument. It is effectively an "inverted notch filter"
[biquad~] is more like a "variable Q tone control", as you can increase the gain at a frequency as well.
Here is a useful implementation.........4band.pd
If you want the 12 bands (and more) you can easily expand [4band.pd] and for the visualisation ((maybe)) a 30-band spectrum analyser?............ is already implemented in Pd extended...................
@whale-av Thank you so much, what do you think of center frequencies range, I mean what set of numbers would best works with bp~,
I mean how do I divide frequency range for high, mid and bass
@bountybouncer Hello again..
If you look at an old analogue mixing desk with 4 band parametric eq, often the bands will be... (because of the analogue filter design problems)...more or less..
Lo Mid 100-1000
Hi Mid 500-5000
The even older analogue desks had fixed bands that were renowned (Midas etc.) or not (Soundcraft etc.) for their "warmth" (muddy and compressed, but "human") or "transparency" (accurate, but clinical) and which all had different fixed frequencies.
Digital desks can pretty much do anything with any band
Bass we all know
Lo Mid that we like... warmth.... is really 150-320 ish.....which includes the notes that can be sung.... up to about 1000Hz.... then that can be whistled... up to about 1800hz.... then nasty rasping aggressive treble.... up to about 7000Hz and then the finer airy sounds that float around on top.
Take your pick really, depending upon what you like personally and what you want to achieve!