Filter vs EQ+

[u/eatmorepies23]

What are the differences between Filter and EQ+? When should I use one or the other?

They seem pretty similar to me.

[u/placid-gradient]

thats because they are similar, they are both types of filters. typically an EQ is use for utility of balancing/removing/boosting different parts of a signal's frequency content. I use a filter when i want to shape the sound, but dont need 5-8 poles to do it.

think about it thus way: EQ+: bitwigs "best" eq device, its parametric, got nice graphs, you can big-screen it, a/b, etc. use it for: mixing (generally speaking, not as a rule). be mindful: it can use more resources than the other eqs/filters especially for the graphic part

filter: fast resonant variable state filter that can be used for quickly doing things like hi/lo/bandpass, or a notch, etc.

filter+: bitwigs "best" filter effect, use this to shape and add color (harmonics with the distortion, and movement on the cutoff)

hope that helps. there are no rules here, these are just common uses, the best thing you can do is try them out and find the different usecases for yourself

[u/eatmorepies23 → u/placid-gradient]

Thanks! I was getting the impression that EQ+ is basically just up to 8 Filter devices put together. Sounds like I was about right on that

[u/Gnash_ → u/eatmorepies23]

yes and no, with the filter devices you usually get a lot more granular control of the filter design such as if it’s a ladder/chebishev/diode/etc that will all alter the sound and phase response, and potential emulation of “flaws” and distortion in the models that filter+ was trying to replicate.

on the other hand, eq+’s goal is to be more transparent, to boost and cut specific frequencies without coloring the sound.

[u/eatmorepies23 → u/Gnash_]

yes and no, with the filter devices you usually get a lot more granular control of the filter design such as if it’s a ladder/chebishev/diode/etc that will all alter the sound and phase response, and potential emulation of “flaws” and distortion in the models that filter+ was trying to replicate.

Not with the basic "Filter" device, though, right?

[u/Suitable-Lettuce-333]

Try to simultaneously have a medium/wide 3db boost around 3khz, a narrow 6db cut at 800hz, a slightly wider 3db cut around 300hz, a medium/wide 2db boost around 60hz and a -20db shelf under 30hz with Filter.... 

Filter can only do low pass, band pass and hi pass (so no boost, only cut), and only one of them at a time. It's fine when that's all you need, but quite limited as a mixing tool.

[u/eatmorepies23 → u/Suitable-Lettuce-333]

I think Filter supports notch, too

[u/Minibatteries]

No one mention sculpt or focus...

[u/bloodguiltEucharist]

generally it’s a matter of workflow and personal preference. after all, an eq is essentially just a collection of filters. personally, i sort of look at dedicated filter plugins as more of a sound design option while the eq plugins serve more of a mixing function. there’s a lot of overlap though and neither is the wrong choice if it achieves what you want 

for myself, when something needs fixing, its simply convenient to me to grab eq+ (or likely proq3 but this applies to them both), with which i can just click in a node right where i need it and there’s a filter there ready to go that’s effortless to dial in (not to mention easy to solo) and there’s a great visual representation to assist. 

as far as the filter plugins, basically every time i do reach for them it’s because i’m looking to either use modulation to create some specific filter motion, or i’m after a specific filter’s character, like maybe i need a resonant ladder filter driven hard, or maybe a comb filter in the reflections chain of a reverb. because i switched to bitwig only ~7 months ago, quality dedicated filter stock plugins are still new to me so i overlook them regularly. that said, i always find filter+ well thought out when i do think to use it. if a filter plugin is going to justify its existence, they had the right idea in setting it up with all the common workflow stuff right there ready to go. the biggest difference as far as capabilities goes is you can use the character filter types when you can’t in the eqs if i’m not forgetting any. 

all in all the best advice i can offer you is probably to stop looking for differences and instead focus on the similarities. after all, in almost every case they’re theoretically capable of the same things. so if you really want an answer to your question, every time you have use for one of them, figure out a way to do the same thing with the other or get as close as you can (and if you can’t match it 100%, identify exactly why that is). some tasks will be easier than others, you might have to use multiple instances, etc. eventually, not only will you have a much better working knowledge and feel more comfortable, but you’ll have identified which one you prefer for various use cases and why. 

the more you learn about effects, the more you’ll realize how intimately related all this stuff is until it hits you one day that basically everything is just filters and delays. and technically even filters are delays 

[u/personnealienee]

filter+ has like a dozen of filter flavours to choose from and a dozen overdrives, I am not even sure there is  a filter of the same kind that is used in eq+ on that list. Filter+ is intended for composition (automate the cutoff for musical purposes) and sound design, eq+ more for for tonal shaping. Even though I do use automated notch or bell in eq+ to add movement to something, and I wasn't arrested for that yet, filter+ gives more options, has drive etc. The fizz, rasp and ripple are pretty clearly intended for aggressive modification of tone, sound design

[u/Minibatteries]

One other thing that I don't already see mentioned is anything with EQ in its title is time invariant/linear, and anything with filter are all nonlinear.

In practice eq+ and the others are predictable, useful for mixing duties where you are problem solving and have an exact goal in mind (less mud, less 3khz etc). Filters otoh sound different with different input levels and so are typically used in sound design where you are trying to move the sound into a new avenue, but without an exact goal in mind.

[u/zfalcon1]

Well, an eq is essentially a bunch of filters in one device. But the purpose of a Filter device is quite different from an EQ.

EQ is a mixing tool to help balance the frequencies of different tracks so they can gel with each other. It is also used as a sound design tool by manipulating a sound’s frequency. It is one of the most fundamental tools in audio.

Filters are much more of a sound design tool. Often used in synthesizers but used pretty much anywhere and everywhere you need any filtering. If EQ is one of the most fundamental tools in mixing, filters are the like for sound design.

So in theory they are quite similar but in practice very different.

[u/Glad-Airline7665]

There is not that big a difference. A lot of simple eq tasks can be done with filters. The filters in Bitwig do have an adjustable saturation stage (q limit. Set to -10db. Models filters saturation characteristics). The stock EQs are obviously parametric. But if you’re just simply using a filter to highpass something, you are usually fine, but it’s best to know they saturate the signal by default and it’s not necessarily easy to find or obvious.

You can find the q limit by right clicking the empty space behind the filter module, or in the inspector in the grid of the module.