Blind filter comparison test

[manisnotabird]

I have made a zip file of 30 different filter sweeps of a plain vanilla sawtooth from Little LFO. Each of the filters was swept by a Synchronous from all the way closed to all the way open to back to all the way closed twice. This is repeated at 0%, 50%, and finally at 90% resonance. Each of these has been normalized, with a small fade in and fade out to avoid clicks. Do you think any of them are analog? Any exotic filter types? I'll post what the different filters are (but not which one is which) in a few days. And then, finally, which ones are which.

http://www34.zippyshare.com/v/F2cPPKxq/file.html

[Theo.M]

In all blind tests the actual products used are listed. It's then up to the individual to pin the sample to the product. I'd like a comparison between the new digital filter, reason's own filters, d filter etc and would be keen to get in on this, but at the same time I am not into the total game of having no idea where to start - point being if it's just using stock reason stuff I have no interest "playing", so you could maybe give a bit more info up front to make it fair.

[manisnotabird]

I'll do that in a few days. First, perhaps, just see which ones sound good. And then come back and see if you can figure which ones are which.

[manisnotabird]

Although, obviously, I should point out that there aren't 30 different stock Reason filters.

[satyr32]

I wait eagerly for the results. My guess is that 22 is one of the Vikings Filter? Could be totally wrong though, but 22 is the one I liked most.
Number 8 is pretty disturbing as well as others.
It is difficult to compare some of them with each other because some filters seem to open to a much higher frequency than others.

[manisnotabird]

I did worry about the fact that the different filters open and close to different frequencies, but that is also part of what makes each one distinctive. (And, also, to try and compensate for that would have been more work than I wanted to do).

[selig]

I did worry about the fact that the different filters open and close to different frequencies, but that is also part of what makes each one distinctive. (And, also, to try and compensate for that would have been more work than I wanted to do).

You may find that because of these things that many folks here will find this experiment more work than they want to do as well.
Comparing apples to oranges seems like a futile exercise, no?
That's my take, fwiw.

[manisnotabird]

Well, for the one person that's interested here's what the different filters are (not in order, yet).

ECF-42 LP12
ECF-42 LP24
Etch Red "Fatty" LP
Etch Red "Japan" LP12
Etch Red "Japan" LP24
Etch Red "SVF" LP12
Etch Red "SVF" LP24
Blamsoft F-16 LP12 (with "high" quality)
Blamsoft F-16 LP24 (with "high" quality)
Ivoks LP
Redom "Ju-2" filter type
Kong LP
Malstrom LP12
Minibrute (no "brute factor")
Pulverzier LP12 + notch
Pulverizer LP24
Rob Papen Punch LP12
Rob Papen Punch LP24
Redom "Redom" filter type
Revival LP12
Revival LP24
Synchronous LP
Thor Ladder Filter LP12
Thor Ladder Filter LP24 mode i
Thor Ladder Filter LP24 mode ii
Thor SVF LP12
Viking Linear LP12
Viking Linear LP24
Viking Non-Linear LP12
Viking Non-Linear LP24

[manisnotabird]

Matched to the number in the download

1. thor ladder 24 mode I
2. etch japan 12
3. viking linear 12
4. viking linear 24
5. etch japan 24
6. redom
7. etch svf 24
8. minibrute
9. vinking nonlinear 12
10. ivoks
11. revival 12
12. pulverizer 24
13. ecf-40 12
14. thor ladder 24 mode ii
15. thor svf
16. etch fatty
17. synchronous
18. viking nonlinear 24
19. f-16 24
20. thor ladder 12
21. ecf-40 24
22. punch bd 12
23. etch svf 12
24. malstrom
25. ju-2
26. revival 24
27. pulverizer 12+notch
28. punch bd 12
29. kong
30. f-16 12

[eusti]

Thanks for doing this! Must be something with my ears... The first one in each set sounds very similar to me each time... So much so, that I actually pulled them up and looked at the wave forms...

D.