Bass cut (HP filter) in Cubase SX3?

[kritikon]

If you were at the studio I am at you would be mocked without mercy.

You won't keep many customers, if that's the case. In fact, if that's how you deal with customers, I guarantee the studio will go out of business. You don't deserve customers. Don't learn such bad habits from the dickheads you obviously work with.


Why should a customer know anything whatsoever about HPFs? Why should he know how to implement it? Isn't that what he comes to your studio for, wanker?

[Muzik 4 Machines]

... As I said in the other thread, I'm not at home right now, and don't have my manual here. ...

there_is_a_manual,I_only_got_PDF's_with_mine...

[Villy]

SaltyDawg, you can just read about the "proximity effect" and use a pop filter to avoid making heavy use of the hpf after recording. The filter wont help much with the proximity effect but ull avoid other singing issues.

In sort, the closer you move towards the mic, you get more attenuation in the 'bass' frequencies...Thats why r0de suggests the use of hpf and nothing more.

[kmonkey]

My point was the Cubase is expensive..learn that shit if you buy it..it does so much. In fact, I strongly reccomend you get the instructional DVDs that are made for it..much easier if you hate reading manuals.

If you were at the studio I am at you would be mocked without mercy.

Then afterwords everyone would have a beer.

And my point is that I have been using Cubase for a couple years now. I know it inside and out when it comes to sequencing external MIDI gear. I even wrote my own patch files organized by both catagory and bank for both my Korg Triton Rack and Roland Fantom XR. And I have 5 instructional DVD's that show me how to use Cubase in this fashion.

However, as I said many times now... I never had any intention of recording with Cubase so I never looked into any of that. This changed over the last week or so and now I need to learn it.

I knew it was an easy, basic question when I asked. That's why I figured it would be no big deal for someone to just point me in the right direction really quick...

Huh....Man i dont want to discredit you in any way just as i dont support comments like that one from "stash98" . Call me crazy but i think that it's insane to claim that you HAVE and USE Cubase for YEARS along with HARDWARE and you dont know how a HPF works and how you can get similar process in cubase with any EQ

This is realy crazy.

And it is ok to claim that you dont have time to learn everything but with using cubase and hardware for YEARS for music making i realy doubt that you did not need HPF until now

Even if you used cubase just for sequencing because after all you must go in to some way of mixing process. And this is where you will need HPF sooner or later. Maybe you working slow so after all these years your need for HPF can be explained but then....

I cant see how one can work (and mix...well...where do you put those sounds if not in mixer???) for years with hardware without using any or small knowledge on EQing. This is basic. Even sounds from your HW (Korg, Roland or any brand) sometimes need some sort of filtering/EQing to sit in a mix. But then again i dont know anything about your production or working methods so this can be true.

Anyway it's crazy and unbelieveable (but not impossible) IMO

[Sascha Franck]

SaltyDawg, I have to somewhat disagree with bduffy here.
I wouldn't use the EQ on the input channel at all.
You would perhaps apply a low cut on a quality hardware EQ before running signals into your DAW (which is also a good way to gain more headroom), but as the signals are inside the DAW allready when they hit the input channel it doesn't matter whether you're recording them straight and apply the EQ later on.

The input channel FX functionality is great if you want to "print" some FX to a file that otherwise would use up a lot of CPU (such as a guitar amp sim, most of them aren't exactly CPU friendly), but EQs are really low CPU cost devices in these days (at least the internal SX one is), so better apply it to the track rather than the input. You may cut too much and won't be able to regain things.

As far as a high pass (or low cut) goes: Just switch on the leftmost EQ band in SX' channel EQ and drag the node down. Then drag it left/right to your likings for a start.

Also, as Villy said, use a pop-shield in any case!


Finally, as far as not knowing how to achieve a lowcut goes, well, uhm... really, no offense meant, but that's indeed recording and mixing 101. And you shoud've known about it before as well, regardless whether you've been tracking vocals or just been doing some plain synth mixing jobs.
Lowcuts are *the* essential things to apply on almost anything (I tend to apply lowcuts on everything but bass and kicks) when sorting out possible mud.
As said, no offense meant, but you should probably start getting familiar with them right now. Otherwise your vocal recording endeavours may not come out as pleasant as you'd wish.


Anways, while I do somewhat understand stash in a way that I know what he's talking about, in germany we say "der Ton macht die Musik" - something like "the tone is responsible for the music" (really doesn't translate well). And yours (stash98 that is) seriously doesn't qualify for a good tone at all.

[guitarzan]

in germany we say "der Ton macht die Musik" - something like "the tone is responsible for the music" (really doesn't translate well).

No Sascha, I think that translates very well! It's perfectly true - even if evrybody's idea of great tone is different, still, it has to be right to the performer or the performace will not be worth doing! I like that saying