Surely you jest. Is the DSP meter bar in totalmix decorative?

Doesn't even have to take up any additional resources. I mean, if it can have a high pass on every output, it shouldn't be that hard to give it an option for a low pass instead, right? Right?

I'd be more than happy with a configurable high or low cut per hardware out.

The Babyface Pro FS is an excellent device, but its design emphasises portability and operation via the USB bus. To achieve this, it does not include a DSP as this would increase power consumption beyond what the USB power supply can handle.

If you are looking for more advanced features, such as an integrated DSP for effects or advanced connectivity, upgrading to the UCX II would be a significant step forward. It offers a more robust feature set while maintaining exceptional audio quality.

For this reason, I often recommend considering a slightly larger model first. The Babyface Pro FS is characterised by being compact and versatile, but it's not designed to replicate the full feature set of its larger counterparts. By upgrading, you'll get a more future-proof setup and get even more useful functions, some of them from the flagship devices like Mic Preamp with 75 dB Gain, DURec, full implementation of DSP chip, RoomEQ and cross-feed.

You're coming off a bit hostile for no apparent reason.

No, as an owner of a BF pro fs for a few years now I did not know that it doesn't have a DSP. Nor do I think that I should have reasonably known. How should I? The manual mentions multiple times a DSP and there's a DSP FX meter in totalmix. I don't even think there's mention of FPGA anywhere in the manual. If there is, I haven't seen it and I've read it multiple times over the years.

Regardless, so this FPGA or whatever it is, is not programmable via firmware update?

As for the suggestion to use an entirely different product instead, that is not portable, please refrain from assuming. You know what they say.

Regardless, so this FPGA or whatever it is, is not programmable via firmware update?
Yes it is, it a programmable field gate array. But it has very limited size and no ram, so might not be possible. Advantage, the dsp and ram can not break, cause they are not there.
Will negative values on the hi shelving filter not do the job?

Well, they kinda do, but it's a bit janky.

Need it for crossovers and you know how it is. Can never get it quite right without high/low pass filters.
Or at least I can't. If anyone got an awesome recipe for doing crossovers with shelving filters I'm all ears.

Anyway, if it's programmable and it's possible to give the option of a high cut with a firmware upgrade, it would be a fantastic addition.

Maybe it does not fit in FPGA, otherwise it would have been, IMHO, implemented from very beginning....

What I'm doing currently is 2 shelves on each output. All set to the crossover frequency, Q 0.8, +20/-20 gain.
And phase inverting one of the two outputs.

It's much steeper than a regular crossover, it won't completely fade out the rejected side and needs lowering faders by 20db to counter the +20 eq boosts, but eh, kinda works.

If I understood correctly your suggestion is to use a single higher Q shelf per output and use the mid band to take out the notch?