I don't understand what is a linear phase EQ and i also want to know if its the right one to use for mastering? Cause i seen someone use a linear eq during a mastering session.
i found this information also about Reaper/ Reaeq but i still don't understand
Is ReaEQ linear phase? ReaEQ is not a linear phase eq. Linear phase eq will always introduce some latency, so easy way to tell this is to check the possible latency at the bottom of the Track FX window. ReaEQ is not a linear phase eq.

 

it is completely useless to use an eq in linear phase mode. What advantages should it have?
Any top mastering engineer uses the best outboard eqs, and they all introduce phase rotations, it is in the nature of equalizers.

It makes sense to use them only in case of parallel processes or multi-microphone recordings.

 

maybe some but when use modern puter and a old lphase eq from 10 years or even much older its a big difference than using maat on a medoicre specs rig

 

All you need to know:

 

Last edited: Dec 23, 2020

https://audiohertz.com/2018/03/08/w...hase EQ is equalization,use a Linear Phase EQ.

 

nice site

 

Hey Samsome,

To your question, linear phase EQs, a.k.a LP EQs, are equalizer architectures that introduce a constant phase shift at all frequencies. They provide only frequency–dependent gain, no frequency–dependent phase shift or group delay. I have to say that Toli (above) has a rather narrow view of this topic, as most major engineers, with the exception of “only analog/never digital” practitioners, reach for LP EQs where needed.

Where is that? When you need pure gain versus frequency. Some examples are fixing problems (like decongesting a mix), building a transparent crossover or, most common, altering the gain for a range of frequencies without altering timbre. LP EQ generally do not alter timbre whereas other EQ architectures do. Most mastering engineers use LP EQ as well as trad EQs because wise (and well heeled) practitioners use the right tool for the job. Note that LP EQ can only be realized in the digital domain, there is no such thing as an analog LP EQ.

 

Best explanation I have read ever about it. Thank U

 

Hi omasciarotte
I did endless tests on infinite material with eqs, both digital and hardware at a professional mastering studio here in Italy.

To decongest a mix (without altering the timbre) any modern digital EQ is fine; I did a particular test, where I cut 10db with 8 digital eqs (eq stock by cubase, fab, dmg, weiss, uad, waves) of which a couple doing a / b with linear phase on and off ... after finding the Q similar among all, I have not heard ANY substantial difference (and my listening system makes me hear everything, I use Focal Solo6 BE + SUB in the room treated and corrected even with Sonarworks Reference). I did the test on 3 masters of different genres, and in 3 different points of the spectrum (250hz-1000hz-5000hz). Let alone if it makes a difference when the interventions in the master should be in the order of 0.5-1.5db. I happened to make heavier corrections on mixes that I didn't follow myself, I'm talking about 2-3db of cut on the master ... even there I have never heard differences that justify the use of eq LP.

While most engineers use EQ LP it's not a problem, in the end it all starts with your listening, your ears and experience. Everyone has their own workflow. I don't use LP EQ on masters because I don't need it.
I recently went to the mastering studio I mentioned earlier to finalize a mix made in our studio. To get a reference I also brought my master's, made entirely by ITB.
We were able to achieve something more by making it completely OTB, using the MASELEC MEA-2 as corrective eq. After various tests on the compressors (each gave a characteristic tone, including NEVE, SSL, MASELEC we chose the one that best suited the sound of the song) we chose this chain:
MASELEC MLA-2>
MASELEC MPL-2>
MASELEC MEA-2>
DANGEROUS BAX EQ>
BETTERMAKER MASTERING LIMITER>
LAVRY BLUE

We made the 2 cuts of 0.5db each in full chain, practically in the same points made in my master itb (the exact frequency changes slightly, being the Maselec in step).
Impressive result, more rms, more depth between instruments in the center (kick bass snare and vocals), more punch in the bass than my master. All this thanks to the full analog chain with the best hardware you could want for the job.

This example to say that, in mastering, there are many other things that make the difference ... and in order I would say:
- listening system
- ear / experience of the engineer
- equipment (and I put software and hardware on the same level)

 

If you use linear phase equing, don't use steep filters, bells etc. Especially it produces preringing and postringing, but postringing is half less than minimum phase does, so another half goes for preringing.
Better to use lower order, gentle, not steep filters, bells, shelves etc. Better to work with high and highest frequencies. Cutting is way less noticeable than boosting.
If you layer/mix drums, for example, it is just a different approach to mix kicks or snares or other elements, just as an option, so it can solve problems or make worse. So it is better to experiment with minimum, linear, free phases (free adjustment), like in Equilibrium to find that spot. Kaiser window function all the way.
For accurate low frequencies and notching use more IR length, but there is more preringing again, but filters are accurate. Less IR length is for highs.
It is transparent for stereo stuff, if you work with mid or side cutting/boosting, it doesn't place right channel into left channel and vice versa, as minimum phase does. So, it is way neutral for low cutting filter in side mode.
FIR and its linear phase mode is not effective for DC offset fixes. IIR does it pretty well.

So, it is an option for better phase/stereo mixing etc, but preringing is sh*t.

If you use steep filters, bells etc, minimum phase does longer postringing and more phase issues, linear phase only does longer pre/post ringings, no phase issues.

Shelf is either in minimum or linear phases is too "hi-fi-esh", I use it more than filter cutting.

Latency... Yes... It does delay, but your DAW should use excellent PDC algos etc. It compensates delay for linearphased tracks and other tracks to sound at same time, together. Longer IR length, more time for PDC, later you hear the result of processing. Something like that.

You decide

 

Last edited: Jan 14, 2021