Linear-Phase vs. Non-Linear Phase EQ: Which is Better?

By Craig Anderton

(The following is excerpted from the Hal Leonard book “How to Use and Apply Equalization,” from
the “Musician’s Guide to Home Recording” book series.)

There are two broad categories of equalization: non-linear and linear-phase. Each has advantages and
disadvantages. Some equalizers offer both modes so you can use whichever is best for a particular
application. A lot of mythology surrounds this issue, and the following is a bit technical. The key
takeaway is that linear-phase equalization is more precise, but it tends to have less character then
traditional EQ. Linear-phase equalization isn’t as common, but it can offer significant advantages in
some situations so it’s worth investigating what it can do.

One potentially significant difference is CPU load. Linear-phase equalizers tend to draw more power
than non-linear EQs. However, the CPU requirements vary—for example, the FabFilter Pro Q 2
equalizer has a variation on linear-phase operation that draws less CPU power than traditional linear-
phase types. Linear-phase operation may also be offered at different degrees of precision (low, medium,
high), with more precision drawing greater CPU power (Fig. 1). Some EQ processors offer a draft
mode, which uses less CPU power, and can change to maximum precision when mixing.

Figure 1 Clicking on the Cakewalk L-Phase Equalizer’s Expert button brings up a dialog box where
among other functions, you can choose non-linear mode and three different degrees of precision for
linear-phase mode. Many other EQs work similarly.

Linear-Phase Latency (Delay)

Traditional EQs that are based on analog equalizers introduce phase shifts when you boost or cut a
band. A phase shift alters the waveform subtly and while you can’t hear this alteration by itself, you
may hear it when combining bands that have some degree of phase shift. It’s hard to describe the
resulting effect, but it can lead to a somewhat less distinct sound. Some people call this smearing,
which may be subtle or obvious, depending on the settings. However, note that these phase shifts are
also what give particular EQs their character and are therefore sometimes desirable.
Tech Talk Sidebar: About Latency

Latency is the name given to delay caused by processing within the computer, which is most noticeable
when monitoring an instrument played in real time through the computer—like a guitar going through
an amp sim or a keyboard triggering a synthesizer plug-in. Longer latencies mean that it can take
several milliseconds—and under some conditions, much longer—between the time when you pluck a
string or hit a key on a keyboard and when you actually hear the note.

Various plug-ins can add to the overall latency. Linear-phase processors, some dynamics processors,
and convolution reverbs are particularly prone to adding latency.

Linear-phase EQ delays the signal, which is necessary to make sure that the equalizer can ensure all
bands are in-phase to avoid introducing phase shifts. This allows for extremely accurate and predictable
equalization. Some people even refer to linear-phase EQ as surgical EQ because of its precision.

If you compare non-linear and phase-linear modes with a massive treble boost, you’ll almost certainly
hear that the linear-phase processed audio sounds more transparent and airy. Conversely, the phase
shifts that are an inherent part of non-linear equalization can give a particular character you may find
desirable for some individual tracks or even entire mixes.

But also note that linear-phase equalizers aren’t perfect. Because they need to delay the signal, your
host recording software needs to delay all your other tracks to match the amount of delay. Otherwise,
the tracks being processed with linear-phase equalization would sound late compared to the rest of the
tracks.

Linear-Phase Pre-Ringing

In addition to increased latency because linear-phase EQs need to delay the signal, they can exhibit a
phenomenon called pre-ringing that’s inherent in phase-linear operation. This can be heard as a low-
level, swooshing artifact before transients. Normally pre-ringing isn’t an issue, because it becomes
audible only at relatively low frequencies with high gain and Q (width) settings. However with hip-
hop, electronic dance music (EDM), and other bass-heavy musical genres, you may want to add high
gain/high Q settings at low frequencies on specific tracks or even on a master; a linear-phase EQ may
not be the best choice in this case.

Conversely, non-linear EQs can exhibit a phenomenon called post-ringing with transients. This tends
not to be noticeable because it’s masked by the audio that follows a transient, but it exists. Neither pre-
ringing nor post-ringing are deal-breakers at all, because they tend to matter only at relatively extreme
settings. But, it’s good to understand the phenomenon so you can choose the appropriate EQ response.
Please refer to Fig. 2, which shows kick drum pre-ringing with high-gain, narrow-width settings.
However, note that it’s zoomed way in vertically so you can actually see the low-level pre-ringing (this
is why the kick appears clipped, even though it isn’t).
Figure 2 Pre-ringing is noticeable at extreme settings: a non-linear EQ (top) shows no pre-ringing, a
moderate-gain linear-phase EQ (middle) shows low-level pre-ringing, and a high-gain linear-phase
EQ (bottom) shows obvious pre-ringing.

The green kick drum waveform in Fig 1.16 (top) has a gain of 10 dB and Q of 10, but uses traditional,
nonlinear equalization. There’s no pre-ringing prior to the attack—the waveform is a flat line right up
until the attack.

The yellow kick drum waveform (middle) uses linear-phase EQ with a gain of 5 dB and a Q of 5, at
100 Hz. You can see a tiny bit of pre-ringing as a slight ripple in the wave just before the attack.

The blue kick drum waveform (bottom) shows the same kick through a linear-phase equalizer, also
with a boost at 100 Hz. But this time the gain is doubled to 10 dB and the width is narrowed to 10. At
this relatively extreme low frequency setting, the wavy line before the attack is obvious; listening to
this, you’d hear a swooshing sound preceding the attack.

In most applications, pre-ringing will not be an issue, and may not even be audible. But if it becomes
problematic, you can always use a non-linear equalizer instead of a linear-phase one.

Minimizing Latency

One issue that confuses some people is a recording system that suddenly exhibits increased latency.
Although a misadjusted audio interface parameter can cause latency, note that many plug-ins introduce
latency—not just linear-phase equalizers. In particular, some dynamics processors introduce latency on
purpose with a look-ahead buffer. This delays the incoming audio long enough so that the processor can
analyze a signal prior to processing it.

Although you may have an option to choose a setting that reduces latency, linear-phase equalizers will
always exhibit some degree of latency. Non-linear operation has no equivalent limitation, so if you
want to use EQ while tracking and need minimum latency, you can use the non-linear setting and then
switch over to linear-phase operation when mixing, where you won’t really notice the increased
latency. Most DAWs also let you freeze tracks (i.e., render an audio version of the track with
processing so the signal doesn’t have to pass through the processor in real time) to minimize CPU
consumption.

Does It Really Matter?

Comparing linear-phase and non-linear modes, I’d say their personalities are audibly (albeit subtly)
different. Non-linear mode adds a bit of an upper midrange edge, whereas linear-phase operation is
more neutral in how it affects the sound. Also, for a given amount of gain, linear-phase mode will
sound like it has less of an effect because its sound is more transparent.

But to put matters in perspective, the music itself is infinitely more important than the EQ mode.
Linearphase operation has its uses—but if only traditional EQ existed, the earth would continue to
rotate on its axis.