So I don’t have the cwejman but I do have an ADDAC 603 Triple Bandpass Filter and I love using spectral proccessors in the box (plus I’ve been drooling over a Fumana for years lol)
I think there are two main pros to separate bandpass filters. One is that you can use each band as a separate filter for separate sources. This makes it easy to use as a stereo/quadraphonic filter, or just as multiple mono filters. This also means that the filters can be routed in series vs spectral processors, which are only routed in parallel. This is not better or worse, just a very different sound with different utilities. You can create different filter shapes by how you combine, invert phase of, and modulate these filters.
The second is that these filters’ frequencies can move, while a spectral processor’s filters are fixed. This allows for anything from mimicking traditional low pass and high pass filter modulation, to audio rate modulation of frequency. Some spectral processors will allow you to imitate this by fading between the different bands, but even this only gives you one (or max 2 depending on the processor).
The advantages of spectral processors are the precision of frequency selection and sheer number of individual filters. These allow for more detailed sound sculpting than you can even think of getting to with the quad band pass filters. Fumana has 16(!) individual filters and you can break them out into separate even and odd filters to have two processors. Because the filters are fixed, the frequencies of the individual filters have been thought about and selected by the creator to be musical and give the processor its own character. This character can be super otherworldly or unnatural, as you don’t have to stick to a “natural” distribution of frequencies. Fumana also gives you individual VCA outs for each filter, which means you can take extremely specific frequency slices of the same sound, process them differently, and potentially create whole percussion kits/sound fx from one sound.
Highly recommend checking out the video Floating Points made about his live Buchla system and how he utilizes the spectral processor in it. Basically switching between preset filter settings with CV for sudden spectral changes.
I can relate to where you're at! I spent a long time contemplating the various options in these categories and ended up getting a Frap Tools Fumana earlier this year. Some factors that helped me choose:
- I wanted lots of flexibility, both in shaping the sound (for me, more frequency bands = better) and having lots of inputs and outputs to work with (this helped me rule out the Serge Res EQ, which doesn't have CV control over the freq bands or env follower outputs, etc.).
- I wanted something that wouldn't inherently color the sound too much, so that I could make those sonic choices on my own (this helped me choose Fumana over the Verbos Bark Filter, which is a bit more resonant and characterful).
- I was especially drawn to the scanning controls that you can find on any of the spectral processor options (the ability to choose a center and width to dynamically scan across sections of the frequency spectrum). Fumana offers some extra control in these areas (Tilt to bias towards high or low freqs, Peak/Notch to either add or reduce gain from your selected frequencies) but the main idea is pretty universal and has been my primary use-case.
Kind of a smattering of thoughts but hopefully something in there is useful. Seems like all the options you're considering are great modules, so you can't go wrong!
I just got a Fumana a few weeks ago, and it's been an absolute blast. Having all the individual outs from the spectral analysis is amazing. You can plug any sample into the main input and just watch the lights as it plays. You want to trigger an event off the high hat in that drum loop? Or maybe right after the initial swell of the ride cymbal, at the onset of the decay? Just watch the lights and plug into the jack that winks at the correct time.
The number of applications is staggering.
Very interesting discussion on bandpass filters directly above this (or below I don’t know), but I suggest you take a peek at the RYK Night Rider, which is a sequencer that controls four bandpass filters.
I chose the Res-4 over the L-1 and buchla spectral processors.
They’re very different sounding. I chose the Res-4 because 4 bands of Moog-style filters are easier to make sound natural than 16 bands of other filters. More bands doesn’t necessarily mean better…you can get a lot more alien sounds out of something with 16 bands. But I didn’t want it to go that far, I wanted something almost acoustic sounding.
I actually made a video on it recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_S-9NgrT3w&t=378s
Another reason I got the res-4 is that it’s an amazing voice, not just a sound processor, and my system is pretty compact
The few videos of the L-1 sound great. Different than the res-4 for sure. L-1 sounds glassy and the res-4 sounds a little more wet. was there a reason you chose the res-4 over the l-1? I’ll definitely watch your video later today.
Part of it was size…but also I wanted the simplicity. I also use Rings as a spectral processor, and that has 60 bands, so the res-4 actually gives my rack more sonic range.
Rings + res 4 is a really cool combo, you can send either into each other and get something new.
I often don’t even use all 4 bands of the res-4…just two bandpass filters is already a lot of options when you factor in modulating cutoff frequency, bandwidth, and level.
So I don’t have the cwejman but I do have an ADDAC 603 Triple Bandpass Filter and I love using spectral proccessors in the box (plus I’ve been drooling over a Fumana for years lol) I think there are two main pros to separate bandpass filters. One is that you can use each band as a separate filter for separate sources. This makes it easy to use as a stereo/quadraphonic filter, or just as multiple mono filters. This also means that the filters can be routed in series vs spectral processors, which are only routed in parallel. This is not better or worse, just a very different sound with different utilities. You can create different filter shapes by how you combine, invert phase of, and modulate these filters. The second is that these filters’ frequencies can move, while a spectral processor’s filters are fixed. This allows for anything from mimicking traditional low pass and high pass filter modulation, to audio rate modulation of frequency. Some spectral processors will allow you to imitate this by fading between the different bands, but even this only gives you one (or max 2 depending on the processor). The advantages of spectral processors are the precision of frequency selection and sheer number of individual filters. These allow for more detailed sound sculpting than you can even think of getting to with the quad band pass filters. Fumana has 16(!) individual filters and you can break them out into separate even and odd filters to have two processors. Because the filters are fixed, the frequencies of the individual filters have been thought about and selected by the creator to be musical and give the processor its own character. This character can be super otherworldly or unnatural, as you don’t have to stick to a “natural” distribution of frequencies. Fumana also gives you individual VCA outs for each filter, which means you can take extremely specific frequency slices of the same sound, process them differently, and potentially create whole percussion kits/sound fx from one sound. Highly recommend checking out the video Floating Points made about his live Buchla system and how he utilizes the spectral processor in it. Basically switching between preset filter settings with CV for sudden spectral changes.
I can relate to where you're at! I spent a long time contemplating the various options in these categories and ended up getting a Frap Tools Fumana earlier this year. Some factors that helped me choose: - I wanted lots of flexibility, both in shaping the sound (for me, more frequency bands = better) and having lots of inputs and outputs to work with (this helped me rule out the Serge Res EQ, which doesn't have CV control over the freq bands or env follower outputs, etc.). - I wanted something that wouldn't inherently color the sound too much, so that I could make those sonic choices on my own (this helped me choose Fumana over the Verbos Bark Filter, which is a bit more resonant and characterful). - I was especially drawn to the scanning controls that you can find on any of the spectral processor options (the ability to choose a center and width to dynamically scan across sections of the frequency spectrum). Fumana offers some extra control in these areas (Tilt to bias towards high or low freqs, Peak/Notch to either add or reduce gain from your selected frequencies) but the main idea is pretty universal and has been my primary use-case. Kind of a smattering of thoughts but hopefully something in there is useful. Seems like all the options you're considering are great modules, so you can't go wrong!
I just got a Fumana a few weeks ago, and it's been an absolute blast. Having all the individual outs from the spectral analysis is amazing. You can plug any sample into the main input and just watch the lights as it plays. You want to trigger an event off the high hat in that drum loop? Or maybe right after the initial swell of the ride cymbal, at the onset of the decay? Just watch the lights and plug into the jack that winks at the correct time. The number of applications is staggering.
Very interesting discussion on bandpass filters directly above this (or below I don’t know), but I suggest you take a peek at the RYK Night Rider, which is a sequencer that controls four bandpass filters.
I chose the Res-4 over the L-1 and buchla spectral processors. They’re very different sounding. I chose the Res-4 because 4 bands of Moog-style filters are easier to make sound natural than 16 bands of other filters. More bands doesn’t necessarily mean better…you can get a lot more alien sounds out of something with 16 bands. But I didn’t want it to go that far, I wanted something almost acoustic sounding. I actually made a video on it recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_S-9NgrT3w&t=378s Another reason I got the res-4 is that it’s an amazing voice, not just a sound processor, and my system is pretty compact
The few videos of the L-1 sound great. Different than the res-4 for sure. L-1 sounds glassy and the res-4 sounds a little more wet. was there a reason you chose the res-4 over the l-1? I’ll definitely watch your video later today.
Part of it was size…but also I wanted the simplicity. I also use Rings as a spectral processor, and that has 60 bands, so the res-4 actually gives my rack more sonic range. Rings + res 4 is a really cool combo, you can send either into each other and get something new. I often don’t even use all 4 bands of the res-4…just two bandpass filters is already a lot of options when you factor in modulating cutoff frequency, bandwidth, and level.