RSparks wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I sometimes think that we amateur seismologist over-emphasize the need 
> for low pass filtering, with the unexpected result that we destroy the 
> fidelity of the earthquake signal.  To illustrate what we might be 
> losing, I posted my recording of this mornings Baja quake using both 
> raw data and HIGH PASS filtered data in the WinQuake volume format.  
> The high pass was done using WinQuake filters set at 1 Hz, two pole.
>
> Here is a link to the posting: 
> http://www.seismicnet.com/cgi-dos/makegif.exe?/quakes/0912/091230.185135.ebgzx.psn 
>    The trace on the bottom is the raw data.
> As you can see, the quake was about 1677 km from this station but 
> there was still lots of high frequency (> 1 Hz) in the data.   If 
> filtered low pass below 1 Hz, this information would be compromised, 
> and as you can see, there is a lot of information to be lost.
are your sure the bottom is the raw data?? it looks a lot like my 
filtered data
__________________________________________________________

Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSN-L)