if they developed some sort of guide/book/etc. on what each individual part does on effects...craig anderton is somewhat close, but what about those of us who wonder what part each resistor/cap/trans/diode/etc plays in each circuit? Sure, we can all study electronics and circuits until our heads spin, but I can't believe someone hasn't taken the time to explain it in a non-tech sort of way! :shock:
Has this been done anywhere? If so, where? I know I would buy a book if there was such a thing...am I alone?
Thanks!
I see that as a great idea. Pick popular circuits and dissect them part by part dexcribing what each part does...a good approach to a hands on learning book !!!
The copyrights, references etc. would pose the most time consuming/barricade issues for a modern book like that IMO, but I never looked into it really...maybe there are enough available 'open' [or available] schematics to compile very interesting book.
By reading at "technology of' articles at GEO, and everywhere esle around >here<, there's a fantastic resource of information about stompbox and other type circuits. Vast reserves...
By building and working experiments, trying others experiments, [all these circuits started out as/are still experiments], posting questions and reading...there's not much subject matter relating to analog circuits that haven't been at least touched on.
I think everything you need for excellent electronics writing is waiting to be compiled, or already exists. ...Not to say new stuff isn't being found.
This forum and links available from here is a library of electronics/sound related pages, but also has the interaction of being able to pose feedback in the form of questions...what a better place to find answers! I like that the free vibe allows the flow of info...
Do you have a particular question about specific components?
Quote from: petemooreI see that as a great idea. Pick popular circuits and dissect them part by part dexcribing what each part does...a good approach to a hands on learning book !!!
The copyrights, references etc. would pose the most time consuming/barricade issues for a modern book like that IMO, but I never looked into it really...maybe there are enough available 'open' [or available] schematics to compile very interesting book.
By reading at "technology of' articles at GEO, and everywhere esle around >here<, there's a fantastic resource of information about stompbox and other type circuits. Vast reserves...
By building and working experiments, trying others experiments, [all these circuits started out as/are still experiments], posting questions and reading...there's not much subject matter relating to analog circuits that haven't been at least touched on.
I think everything you need for excellent electronics writing is waiting to be compiled, or already exists. ...Not to say new stuff isn't being found.
This forum and links available from here is a library of electronics/sound related pages, but also has the interaction of being able to pose feedback in the form of questions...what a better place to find answers! I like that the free vibe allows the flow of info...
Do you have a particular question about specific components?
Well, yes! :lol: (I'm warning you though, this will be lengthy! :lol: )
Actually, where do I start....how about here:
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/v2/diagrams/tube_driver_sc.gif
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/v2/diagrams/ts-808_sc.gif
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/v2/diagrams/guvnor_sc.gif
For example, what does each part contribute to the sound, and why does it need to be there? Also, what would happen if it WASN'T there?
More, still: Why each schematic totally different, yet each does the same thing (basically clipping the signal)? How would you combine 3 pedals into one and make them switchable (in detail), and why hasn't anyone done this yet?
See what I mean? Alot of stuff! That's why it would be a good topic for a book. I know I for one, just simply want to sit down, make the stinking pedal, and not have to thumb through 50 websites or articles to find those answers! :lol:
Thanks!
oooh, i'll beat r.g. to the punch here. you should really sift through http://www.geofex.com . read the "technology of . . . " articles, and look over the various circuit snippets. there's some great stuff there.
also check out http://sound.westhost.com/articles.htm . rod elliot also has some great general explanations for how things work.
and it's all free!
I wish I could... really. But most of my decisions are based on gut feeling. Or luck. Sometimes I go "I wonder what happens if I remove that one there and replace it with this" and it sounds great. The I pretend to be a genius. Yup. If no-one's done it by the time a graduate as an EE I'll try to write a book like that. :D
Hehe...I'm an EE....(specialized in computerscience, but still EE ) and often i go :shock: :? ...so the EE degree isnt magic when it comes to stompboxes.....general EE knowledge doesnt make a good sound perse
They never told me Ge diode "sound" different to Si ones.....come to think of it...we never talked about ge at all.......
Quote from: claydavisoooh, i'll beat r.g. to the punch here. you should really sift through http://www.geofex.com . read the "technology of . . . " articles, and look over the various circuit snippets. there's some great stuff there.
also check out http://sound.westhost.com/articles.htm . rod elliot also has some great general explanations for how things work.
and it's all free!
Thanks clay--I'm checking out the geofex stuff right now, and the sound.westhost site is great! I've never seen that one before.
I guess my point in the whole thing is that If I (being a 20 something year old) would like to purchase all the info in one nice little easy to understand package, surely others would too?
Thanks again!
Some more useful links here:
http://users.chariot.net.au/~gmarts/ampovdrv.htm
http://www.geofex.com/effxfaq/distn101.htm
I have often thought about this. And it does get frustrating when the answers are too high tech or involve 5 hours of "trying different things."
Maybe not a book with "what everything does" so much as what is worth playing with. Like if a cap filters out something (D.C. or something -- I don't know, I'm a dope), and changing it does nothing to the sound, then don't change it. But what resistors will make a difference and how. Or what caps will make a difference and how. That sort of thing.
I would love to see something like: changing this resistor from 100 ohms to 1k ohms will give increasingly more gain, but outside of this range you get no discernable change.
Then I'd know not to sit there trying 1k, then 2k, then 3.3k, then... and wondering why it still sounds the same.
That's what I'd like to see.
-Joe Hart
heres what i did when i wanted to know this stuff. Put a simple circuit on the breadboard, hen when it is working, pull each individual component out one at a time while it is running. believe it or not this gave me quite a good understanding of how single transistor circuits work. Maybe im just weird......
On that note, Joe, changing your DC filter caps will affect the sound a lot :D a 10nF dc filter cap is going to filter out a lot of bass ;) While a 10uF cap might be too big :D
i strongly recomend you read an article entitles "Cook your own distortion" available right here:
http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/richardo/distortion/
it goes through the basics of R-C high-low pass filters, and opamps, and clipping diodes. It doesn't really discuss tonal differenced of different types of components, but i think thats more opinion than fact.
Might take you a couple of times reading through to fully understand, but its an excellent resource!
I learnt loads from that!
Although there are tons of info around here on most subjects relating to the DIY Stompboxes, I have to agree with many of the others. One place/book that speaks in simple terms with tweaks ect.. would be nice. I still use Arons DIY FAQ and Mods pages all the time for reference. Maybe its just time to merge those many resources togather?
Thank you Jimbob,
That's what the simple mods page was for.
YOU (not you Jimbob) need to take the time to find the fragments of the simple mods in your own pedals.
http://www.diystompboxes.com/cnews/mods.html
You will see these circuit fragments over and over in popular pedals.
One thing that hurts my improving on my DIY projects is when im get too lazy. I remember there was a thread about the GGG site--if i recall it was about how that site might make it too easy detering away from actual learning. But at the same time it really attracts new people to want to begin this hobby. Anyway, I think im going to get off my lazy ass and read more from the different pages/sites for info. And also learn different tweaks about my own pedals..
Quote from: aronThank you Jimbob,
That's what the simple mods page was for.
YOU (not you Jimbob) need to take the time to find the fragments of the simple mods in your own pedals.
http://www.diystompboxes.com/cnews/mods.html
You will see these circuit fragments over and over in popular pedals.
I see your point, though I'm trying to point out a demand, and a lack of supply.
Thanks!
I believe the info on the net for Stompboxes is unsurpassed, but I haven't really bought any books on the subject except 'beginner electronics'. Anything that can be printed on paper can be sent on the net also.
Actually a page or three on a circuit or few, dissecting and depicting each parts role in the circuit would be interesting and informative for 'initiation' to how different circuits work.
Much of the time, circuit fragments are tied together, even if modded, they can be easily identified.
The reads at GEO, and other sites, cover most, if not all of these fragments/circuits, which reccur in various forms in tone modifying circuits. I can't think of something interesting that isn't covered/if not, a post here would surely spark interest, and probably any question regarding 'it could be adressed.
Hi.
I've found that having a bit of maths and some rules of thumb are really handy when working out how things work. Stuff like "the product of the output pot (in k) and output cap (in uF) needs to be 5 or larger, otherwise you might be cutting bass". The detailed formulae (fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C)) leads to these simple rules.
Also, if you understand *in depth* how things like common emitter stages and op-amps work, it gets very easy to see schematics and imagine sounds and picture waveforms.
All in all, if you consider the learning FUN, then you'll go a long way and enjoy the trip!
PS I knew virtually nothing 12 months ago, asking lots of questions on the forum. These days I give lots back and my error rate is way down. (I think :roll: )
Quote from: brettHi.
I've found that having a bit of maths and some rules of thumb are really handy when working out how things work. Stuff like "the product of the output pot (in k) and output cap (in uF) needs to be 5 or larger, otherwise you might be cutting bass". The detailed formulae (fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C)) leads to these simple rules.
Also, if you understand *in depth* how things like common emitter stages and op-amps work, it gets very easy to see schematics and imagine sounds and picture waveforms.
All in all, if you consider the learning FUN, then you'll go a long way and enjoy the trip!
PS I knew virtually nothing 12 months ago, asking lots of questions on the forum. These days I give lots back and my error rate is way down. (I think :roll: )
:? :?:
Am I the only one who thinks that everyone is trying to keep it very 'techy'?
I know I could become an EE, or study for months and learn elec theory. I'm asking people why someone hasn't created a way to make this appealing to the AVERAGE person? The person who has 2.5 kids, a wife, a house, and the desire to NOT be on the computer 5 hours a night reading stuff, yet wants to be able to build a pedal, and understand what's basically going on with it without studying, and more studying.
Sort of like playing guitar--some of the best guitarists in the world don't know very much about theory, and rely on the ears!
Craig Anderton says it well--some of the best pedals get made by people who don't know very much at all about electronics, but have a GREAT EAR.
Sorry for the ramble, its just frustrating to see people keep posting about reading here, and there, and studying, and studying, instead of someone saying "hey--I see a potential market!"
ps--this wasn't meant for you alone, Brett, I just hit the 'quote' button out of ease! :lol:
Since we're on the subject...
Brett, could you break this down and dissect it for me?:
(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C))
'(' does this symbol mean anything to the actual equation?
(f how does the 'f' equate?
(fc capacitance?
(fc = Well I THInk I know what '=' =[equals]
(fc = 1/ this '/' gets me all quandried every time I see it
(fc = 1/( what does the beginning parenthesis sign mean I should do with what's inside parenthesis?
(fc = 1/(2 how does this '2' equate?
(fc = 1/(2. '.' [???
(fc = 1/(2.pi 'pi' [????
(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C. why are the period marks after 'R' and 'C'
Anything else that You see when you see the above equation...[and any fraction thereof] ???
When I see R/C I think it often means Resistance/Capacitence....in some relation to Rolloff...which I think is also changed by the current flowing through the R/c network... :?
I can't tell if I'm really making any sense...seems like some theories sort of bear out [and very remotely make sense] in real world build mods though.
This is a tall order...sorry to pick on you as the one...R.G. and others have done this for me...maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake. :)
If I could find a page that describes resolutely what these symbols mean, I'd surely print it out, and use it as a reference tool for reading these equations...whew...it comes in cycles of seeming insurmountably hard, to decptively easy.... :D
(http://www.morganpedals.com/dummies2.gif)
Finally Finished :wink:
QuoteAm I the only one who thinks that everyone is trying to keep it very 'techy'? I know I could become an EE, or study for months and learn elec theory. I'm asking people why someone hasn't created a way to make this appealing to the AVERAGE person?
Sorry - I couldn't suppress a chuckle. The stuff at GEO, my Guitar Effects FAQ, a lot of the material here is the end result of years of trying to get things from being "rocket scientist only" moved down toward the average guy. As I read your note, your request is how come we aren't already all the way there.
The short answer is - it's really, really hard to get explanations of some electronic stuff to be simple enough without losing the meaning. For reference, go to GEO and read http://geofex.com/Article_Folders/How_It_Works/hiw.htm which is something I started directly in answer to requests like yours a couple of years ago. It's by no means complete. I keep working on it from time to time.
There's another reference you might like. I posted it here a ways back. Kenn Amdahl's "There Are No Electrons" is a good no-technology tech learning book for a lot of this.
The fundamental problem is that the electronic things you necessarily have to use and understand to use them simply don't have any reference in daily life, and someone whose only experience is daily life will not be able to get the understanding without a lot of analogy being involved.
We're trying, as a group. You wouldn't *believe* how much better it is than twenty years ago when I first started trying to write this stuff down. In fact, it's better enough that you can ask the question. 8-)
QuoteSince we're on the subject...
Brett, could you break this down and dissect it for me?:
I'm not Brett, but I think I can handle it.
Your question translates to "what do those symbols mean", and rightly so, since they're a foreign language - they're "math language".
Quote(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C))
parentheses are used for grouping. Anything inside a pair of matched parentheses are evaluated first, then that single number is used as a replacement for the whole thing inside the parentheses. In this example,
(2.pi.R.C) means "compute the result of "2.R.C" and replace the parentheses and contents with that number. This is handy because things like 4*2+5 come out differently depending on what order you do the operations in. Standard math says to do multiplication and division first, so that would come out as 8+5 or 13. If you wrote 4*(2+5), the result would be 4*7 = 28.
Quote(f how does the 'f' equate?
(fc capacitance?
It's intended to be "f subscript c", which is math-speak for f (whatever that is) related to "c". In this case f is used for frequency, and c is intended to be "critical". "f-sub-c" is the frequency where something important happens in this simple filter.
Quote(fc = 1/ this '/' gets me all quandried every time I see it
It's the division symbol. "1/(something)" means "one divided by (something)". In this case the something is that 2.pi.R.C in the grouping parentheses.
Quote(fc = 1/(2 how does this '2' equate?
(fc = 1/(2. '.' [???
(fc = 1/(2.pi 'pi' [????
(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C. why are the period marks after 'R' and 'C'
In this particular variant, the "." has been used to indicate multiplication. The more common symbol is the star, represented as an asterisk "*" usually. The single dot in the middle of the terms, higher than the lower period is often used in handwritten math, so that's probably how Brett got that.
I'm going to stop doing a blow by blow (tired of typing) and do the entire translation.
(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C)) means:
"Compute a single number standing for f-sub-c, which is used to stand for the critical frequency of a single Resistor-Capacitor filter, by computing the number one divided by the grouped quantity of two times pi times the resistance times the capacitance. "Pi" is the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference, about 3.14159."
It's math-language, and like any foreign language, it needs some translation.
Don't forget AMZ.
Jack has made a lot of that kind of info, free and for a few $$$ available since quite some time now.
http://www.muzique.com/
http://www.muzique.com/ebook.htm
Gilles
Quote(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C))
'(' does this symbol mean anything to the actual equation?
(f how does the 'f' equate?
(fc capacitance?
(fc = Well I THInk I know what '=' =[equals]
(fc = 1/ this '/' gets me all quandried every time I see it
(fc = 1/( what does the beginning parenthesis sign mean I should do with what's inside parenthesis?
(fc = 1/(2 how does this '2' equate?
(fc = 1/(2. '.' [???
(fc = 1/(2.pi 'pi' [????
(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C. why are the period marks after 'R' and 'C'
Anything else that You see when you see the above equation...[and any fraction thereof] ???
When I see R/C I think it often means Resistance/Capacitence....in some relation to Rolloff...which I think is also changed by the current flowing through the R/c network...
I can't tell if I'm really making any sense...seems like some theories sort of bear out [and very remotely make sense] in real world build mods though.
Pete, lets start here, 1/(2+2) is how we type the mathematical expression 1 divided by the quantity of 2+2
this equals 1/4 or 0.25
The parenthesis are used for grouping, without parenthesis you have:
1/2+2 this is equal to 1 divided by 2 plus 2 which is equal to 2.5
check out this page (http://www.sosmath.com/algebra/fraction/frac3/frac39/frac39.html) for some examples.
The f stands for frequency
fc stands for the cutoff frequency, this is the point where frequencies begin to be attenuated.
pi is 3.14159
2.pi is 2 times pi this is equal to 6.28318
fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C.) the periods are multiplication signs! The dot or period is used in algebra because the x is used as a symbolic variable.
so fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C.) is 1 divided by the quantity of 2 times pi times the resistor value in ohms times the capacitor value in Farads.
(http://www.tonmeister.ca/main/textbook/electronics/graphics/06_01.gif)
this is a high pass filter. It will let all frequencies above fc pass without attenuation. (Output is taken across the capacitor)
EDIT This is NOT a high pass filter when the output is taken across the capacitor, rather it is a LOWPASS filter. Thanks to Puretube for catching my mistake.lets find fc!
fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C)
fc = 1/ (2 times pi times 1000 ohms times 0.000001 Farads)
fc = 1/ (6.28318 times 0.001)
fc = 1/ 0.00628318
fc = 159.155 Hertz
Its all algebra!
Most of this is also in the FAQ.
I started late on this hobby and when I started GEO, AMZ and Justin's pages were my start along with AMPAGE. There were many others to follow, but I think I must have made nearly every one of Jack's early circuits.
I printed out both Jack's and R.G's articles and I still have them here. Great reading and I spent lots of time dreaming about the possiblities!
I still have some of my original sketches done on the airplane - dreaming of the next Shaka circuit.
Freakie ! ! !
I bookmarked the math page....thanks for the link. [ I hate math...lol]
I'll try to get through that.
Oh yea..freaky how you can actually calculate R/C and find the beginning cutoff frequency !!!
Great help...but will most definitely take some getting used to...no it'll take some studying... :D
Edit: "Pencil and paper come in real handy for understanding math equations...those are some good ones on that page"
I have all but the last one Figured I think. I'm starting to get it a little bit!!!
Quote from: R.G.QuoteAm I the only one who thinks that everyone is trying to keep it very 'techy'? I know I could become an EE, or study for months and learn elec theory. I'm asking people why someone hasn't created a way to make this appealing to the AVERAGE person?
Sorry - I couldn't suppress a chuckle. The stuff at GEO, my Guitar Effects FAQ, a lot of the material here is the end result of years of trying to get things from being "rocket scientist only" moved down toward the average guy. As I read your note, your request is how come we aren't already all the way there.
The short answer is - it's really, really hard to get explanations of some electronic stuff to be simple enough without losing the meaning. For reference, go to GEO and read http://geofex.com/Article_Folders/How_It_Works/hiw.htm which is something I started directly in answer to requests like yours a couple of years ago. It's by no means complete. I keep working on it from time to time.
There's another reference you might like. I posted it here a ways back. Kenn Amdahl's "There Are No Electrons" is a good no-technology tech learning book for a lot of this.
The fundamental problem is that the electronic things you necessarily have to use and understand to use them simply don't have any reference in daily life, and someone whose only experience is daily life will not be able to get the understanding without a lot of analogy being involved.
We're trying, as a group. You wouldn't *believe* how much better it is than twenty years ago when I first started trying to write this stuff down. In fact, it's better enough that you can ask the question. 8-)
:D
I guess it is kind of comical when you consider all things!
I would've definately been confused 20 years ago! :lol:
Seriously, RG, your site is one of the best sites for us newbies, but some of us still don't understand even THOSE translations! :D
For example, it gets really confusing and frustrating to put together something simple like a Lpb1 and it doesn't work!! Don't laugh-its happened! :) I'm still trying to figure out how come that doesn't work--I've switched around transistors, and everything I could think of, still to no avail (I'm doing it on a breadboard), so I don't even want to attempt a bsiab for example!!
Thanks for the reply, though RG! :)
It would also be nice if more fellers did those 3D schematic graphic builds type thangy. Some guy here was doing those a while back. Those made building an effect a no brainer. I think he did one on a Fuzz Face and one or two others. Those were sweet! :D
(This is an edit!)
Just found that site and the feller.
http://smallbox.zeonhost.com/
Now this guy knows how to take care of the newbies frustration! :D
Thanks Juan!
hey the LPB1 is in there to!
Well, that's kind of my point.
Of course we could go wild drawing 3D version of where to place things, but what I am hoping will happen is that you learn how to interpret a schematic and learn how to complete the process yourself.
Frankly, if all you want to do is put together circuit without any knowledge what-so-ever of what's going on, then grab a ready-made PCB and go for it!
You get a great sounding effect; it works and you will be happy.
What I'm hoping is that people will learn to mod and to understand schematics - at least enough to "connect" things themselves without needed a 3d model.
So no one caught the humor of the book cover above? I hope that no one was offended.
I am just starting out, and I like the fact that I have to do a Lot of work to figure this stuff out.
I could just go out and buy a bunch of crappy pedals to get the sounds that I want, but it won't be near as satisfying as when I can create a pedal that makes the sounds I'm after. It may cost twice as much, and I may quit several times before I get there, but I will get there dang it. :x
Anyway, everyone look at the book cover above, and read the fine print. It's very funny. Really.
It's not a real book by the way.
:lol:
Too Funny ! ! !
I was looking for a link to buy it too !!!
The boring stuff first :roll:
In one of my past jobs, I had to design, build, and try circuits to fit the needs of the company customers.
But I was only building the first one. Well, two in fact: The prototype, which was on a breadboard, and a second one a the real pcb.
Then, I would make drawings for the assembly line. Heathkit style: only a few part or wires on each drawing. They would never use a drawing with all the parts on the pcb at the same time.
But... even if all or most of the boards were working once finished, none of these people would know why it was working. And they were not interested to know either.
But if one of them was showing some interest in the thing, (and that we felt that he could learn it), he was showed how to test and debug the assembled circuit boards. That's how some of them learned enough to understand how and why it was working.
:arrow: So what I mean to say is that even if you don't know what you're doing at first, the important thing is to build something, anything. After a few working circuits, you"ll have to find why one is not working. That's where you'll really learn something.
I would say that 10% of the learning process is in the building, 90% in the debugging. (Maybe not the exact numbers, but you know what I mean...)
The more you build, the more you learn. And that's why I think it's good to have easier to read diagrams for those who have less experience, and all the harder (up to impossible :twisted: ) to read ones for those who have more experience.
But we all started with the same thing: learning how to solder 2 wires together. The rest came one step at the time. The important thing is to be able to find the information you need, no matter what is your level of experience.
:idea: There are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.
- Thomas A. Edison
Gilles
Quote from: tele_guitarist
Sort of like playing guitar--some of the best guitarists in the world don't know very much about theory, and rely on the ears!
Give this some thought:
how did they learn to play?
How long did it take?
Could they teach their method of learning?
If they could teach this "no theory" method, could they do it
in a book -without sitting next to you?
I felt the same way you did, at the start --just like I did when I wanted to learn to play guitar overnight. I taught myself by ear, and it took quite a while --and I worked at it HARD :)
No, I thought it was hilarious! I DID read the fine print, which was equally as humorous! Did you make that image? If so, your really good at that stuff--it looked real!
:D
Quote from: morganpedalsSo no one caught the humor of the book cover above? I hope that no one was offended.
I am just starting out, and I like the fact that I have to do a Lot of work to figure this stuff out.
I could just go out and buy a bunch of crappy pedals to get the sounds that I want, but it won't be near as satisfying as when I can create a pedal that makes the sounds I'm after. It may cost twice as much, and I may quit several times before I get there, but I will get there dang it. :x
Anyway, everyone look at the book cover above, and read the fine print. It's very funny. Really.
It's not a real book by the way.
QuoteNo, I thought it was hilarious! I DID read the fine print, which was equally as humorous! Did you make that image? If so, your really good at that stuff--it looked real!
Let's just say that me and Photoshop, or PhotoDraw, get along pretty good. Glad it made someone laugh. :wink:
Quote from: Jason StoutQuote(fc = 1/(2.pi.R.C))
(http://www.tonmeister.ca/main/textbook/electronics/graphics/06_01.gif)
this is a high pass filter. It will let all frequencies above fc pass without attenuation. (Output is taken across the capacitor)
Its all algebra!
Sorry Sir! in my book, this is a Low Pass !!
:roll:
Ahem...Um :oops: well your book is right! Thanks for catching that, and sorry for the confusion guys! The capacitors reactance goes up as the frequency through it is decreased...Yes it is low pass!
...or take off the signal across the resistor: then you`ll have a HiPass 8)
[quote="puretube
Sorry Sir! in my book, this is a Low Pass !!
:roll:[/quote]
... at really high frequencies the bonding lead inductance of a physical capacitor (ie. rather its absolute value magnitude) overtakes its capacitive reactance (magnitude) and the total impedance of the capacitor becomes purely inductive and thus increasing with magnitude in a linear function to frequency ...
... this is why you'll see in modern high-speed circuit boards the supply rails being shunted by both 10uF and 0.1uF caps, the smaller cap's capacitance shorts out the inductance of the bigger cap at those frequencies where its bonding lead inductance has become dominant ...
so if you take the circuit to represent an idealized representation then indeed it's low pass, but if you take it to represent a real circuit things are not so simply defined ...
hair splitting...
this topic is about a simple RC filter
for audio-purposes with an example
of a depicted LoPass with an fc of ~160Hz,
which by accident is named "HiPass".
(btw.: the article, that the schem is taken from,
says so, too, if one takes time to read it...)
This is a nice example to prove that the possibility
of editing posts is helpful on this board - and should be used! :wink:
no doubt, that parallelled small caps across the power rails are very
helpful and neccessary in many cases:
again they help for lopass-purposes: let the lowest "frequency", namely
DC pass through the resistive leads or PCB-traces to the power-supply nodes,
and shunting those parasitary high frequencies to ground,
that aren`t being shunted to ground by the (inductive) bigger caps...