Comparison

Butterworth vs Chebyshev Filter

Design a 4th-order low-pass filter at 1 kHz for an audio application and a Butterworth gives you a butter-smooth passband with no ripple but only −80 dB/decade roll-off at the same order. A 4th-order Chebyshev Type I with 1 dB ripple rolls off steeper past cutoff, rejecting an unwanted 2 kHz tone by an extra 10–15 dB compared to Butterworth. That steeper skirt comes at the cost of ripple inside the passband — a trade-off that matters enormously in audio versus communications filtering.

EEE, ECE, EI

Side-by-side comparison

ParameterButterworthChebyshev Filter
Passband responseMaximally flat; no ripple (0 dB ripple by definition)Equiripple; ripple of 0.5 dB, 1 dB, or 3 dB selectable
Roll-off steepnessModerate; −20n dB/decade for nth orderSteeper than Butterworth for same order and ripple
Phase responseBetter (more linear phase)Worse; more nonlinear phase, more group delay variation
Transient / step responseNo overshoot in step responseExhibits ringing and overshoot due to poles near jω axis
Pole locationsPoles equally spaced on left-half s-plane semicirclePoles on an ellipse in the left-half s-plane
Order needed for same stopband attenuationHigher order requiredLower order for same −40 dB stopband attenuation
Complexity for same performanceMore stages neededFewer stages; saves components
Frequency normalisation−3 dB point exactly at ωc−3 dB point beyond ωc for Type I; ripple edge is at ωc
Typical applicationAudio amplifiers, anti-aliasing, any phase-sensitive pathCommunications channel filters, IF filters, data modems
Design tablesButterworth polynomial tables, standardChebyshev polynomial tables; ripple parameter ε

Key differences

A Butterworth filter has all its poles on a semicircle in the s-plane, producing maximally flat magnitude response — no ripple anywhere in the passband. The same-order Chebyshev pushes its poles toward the jω axis, trading equiripple passband behaviour for a sharper transition band. A 5th-order Chebyshev with 1 dB ripple achieves the same stopband attenuation at 2ωc as a 7th-order Butterworth, saving two filter stages. However, Chebyshev filters ring on step inputs due to high-Q poles, making them unsuitable for time-domain pulse applications. For GATE, know that Chebyshev provides steeper roll-off at the cost of passband ripple and poorer phase linearity.

When to use Butterworth

Use a Butterworth filter when passband flatness and phase linearity are critical — for example, an anti-aliasing filter before a 24-bit audio ADC where any passband ripple directly degrades the dynamic range of the recording.

When to use Chebyshev Filter

Use a Chebyshev filter when the sharpest possible transition band is needed with a minimum number of poles — for example, a 5th-order Chebyshev IF filter centred at 10.7 MHz in an FM receiver to reject adjacent channel interference.

Recommendation

For audio and precision measurement, always choose Butterworth — its flat passband preserves signal integrity. For communications filters where adjacent-channel rejection matters more than passband flatness, choose Chebyshev. Never use Chebyshev where pulse fidelity matters; the ringing will corrupt the waveform.

Exam tip: GATE and university exams ask you to compare the pole locations on the s-plane for both filters and to state which provides maximally flat response — Butterworth — versus equiripple — Chebyshev; write this with the s-plane diagram for full marks.

Interview tip: Interviewers at DSP and communications companies ask you to explain why a Chebyshev filter requires a lower order than Butterworth for the same stopband specification, and to name the trade-off — passband ripple and poorer phase linearity.

More Analog Electronics comparisons