| carlsaff wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 20:29 |
| NoWo wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 14:24 |
The guys praising the Spitfish seem to forget that it is only mono, or does a stereo version exist?
|
It has a "Stereo/Mono" button. The default operation is mono, but one click and you're stereo.
|
Thanks Carl,
is it labelled? Seems like I
Logged
« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2007, 06:51:36 PM »
| Adam Dempsey wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 18:32 |
For me..
Option 1: avoid de-essers whenever possible. Instead, usually careful post-compression subtractive EQ.
Option 2: 1 band of Waves C4 in conjunction with the above.
|
You should give a listen to the Sonoris Multiband comp - http://www.sonoris.nl/en/smbc.phpto my ear MUCH better sounding results in every application than the C4!!! of course ymmv. Best regards, Steve Berson
Logged
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2007, 06:56:00 PM »
| Adam Dempsey wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 17:32 |
avoid de-essers whenever possible
|
I have regretted *not* using one more than once, but can't remember a project where I wish I hadn't used it. My two cents, YMMV, etc.
Logged
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2007, 07:04:02 PM »
| carlsaff wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 18:56 |
| Adam Dempsey wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 17:32 |
avoid de-essers whenever possible
|
I have regretted *not* using one more than once, but can't remember a project where I wish I hadn't used it. My two cents, YMMV, etc.
|
Nothing like getting a blast of sibilance into your ear while listening loud on bright headphones - or listening back to a test record with distortion on every "ess" - to understand why de-essers exist! Still - I'll agree with Adam that we need to be cautious in their application as you always can have some risks of veiling the track, losing some of the "air" on the track - or especially with losing some of the cymbals and high-hats - if de-essers are indiscriminately applied. Best regards, Steve Berson
Logged
« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2007, 07:16:55 PM »
Logged
« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2007, 07:18:02 PM »
My point being, an ounce of prevention n' all that, when possible, first and foremost.
Logged
« Reply #23 on: February 24, 2007, 07:27:17 PM »
| Adam Dempsey wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 18:32 |
For me..
Option 1: avoid de-essers whenever possible. Instead, usually careful post-compression subtractive EQ.
Option 2: 1 band of Waves C4 in conjunction with the above.
Never had a problem.
Perhaps more importantly, as it's so easy to talk gear, it's good to hear more of peoples' approach. Over-compression in recording & mixing can certainly increase sibilance. Do you get to discuss this ahead of mastering when the option of a remix exists? Or vocal stems - another option?
|
Interesting. Pretty much the opposite for me. I try to avoid the eq when I can focus more on the desser. I am also from the subtractive school. A dB off with the Sontec from 8.1 to 10K usually works for me. Dessing can be linked or dual mono for me. Usually before a compressor. I have the weiss but it's been off for so long I forget how to use it. Can some one show me a trick or two? I have the fortune of being able to audition all gigs before I take them on. If there are issues - it's usually sibilance of some sort. Bass...level (too much or not enuff). No problem. The usual. As long as everything turns out better... Clients seem open, aware of problems these days. As long as they know that all I care about is the music then the defenses go down and everyone gets down to work. I can do stems but don't get asked about much anymore. Which is super fine by me - Probably cause of the whole mix audition thing? I want to get into multiband more - but I have been saying that for years. A great tool in the right hands. Me and my relationshipp to a MBC is still in it's infancy. I have also transformer based stuff in various places in the chain. They tend to soak up more that a few problems (but sometimes add more...) My Neve 32087 is a great sibilance tamer when at the end of the chain. All in all. I hate to complain. My attitude is that when the client walks in it only me now. Mixing is done. recording is done. Nothing before really matters at this point but me. I don't dwell or point fingers either. It's about having fun and trying to get the result. Sometimes I get closer than other times. Either way I love what i do. I haven't been jumped it the parking lot yet! Nothing really makes me go "uh-oh" other than distortion/clipping. (btw, the Agorithmix "scratch free" can be good at "declipping")
Logged
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2007, 07:47:28 PM »
| tweakman wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 19:16 |
Anyone try out the SPL De-esser?
http://www.spl-usa.com/DeEsser/in_short.html
It works differently than most de-essers by using phase cancellation rather than limiting and the unit is not expensive.
Less than $1K US.
|
I've tried it out and wasn't all that impressed with the results - it just never seemed all that effective. ymmv. Best regards, Steve Berson
Logged
« Reply #25 on: February 24, 2007, 08:19:00 PM »
| TotalSonic wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 14:57 |
Can anyone who own one of these comment as to whether my impressions are correct or not?
|
Not. It always seems to do just what it's supposed to. The lack of controls is a testament to superb design.
Logged
« Reply #26 on: February 24, 2007, 09:49:10 PM »
When you guys talk about the Maselec, you're talking about the MDS-2, right?
Logged
« Reply #27 on: February 24, 2007, 10:05:26 PM »
| Gold wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 20:19 |
| TotalSonic wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 14:57 |
Can anyone who own one of these comment as to whether my impressions are correct or not?
|
Not. It always seems to do just what it's supposed to. The lack of controls is a testament to superb design.
|
I would like that to be one of my next purchases. Until then, I use the waves stuff,& spitfish usually just on the problemed areas only. Ed
Logged
« Reply #28 on: February 24, 2007, 10:08:25 PM »
| tweakman wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 18:16 |
Anyone try out the SPL De-esser?
http://www.spl-usa.com/DeEsser/in_short.html
It works differently than most de-essers by using phase cancellation rather than limiting and the unit is not expensive.
Less than $1K US.
|
I own one of these and i LOVE it. it always gets used on Film & Video mixes. one side set to Female the other to Male. I also use t for VO sessions and occasionally for music mixing. yes, it does swap the phase of the ESS area (can i say that on a public forum?) and blend it back in...in a way, it's an old skool trick. but...i would not use it in Mastering. if you listen very closely it changes the sound ever so slightly. specifically, some kind of lo-mid bump. not a deal breaker for mixing. you can 'fix' this with an EQ. but i wouldn't use it in a Mastering suite...unles it was all i had. or, well, you know, horses for courses and all that. but i'd probably be looking at a TC 6000 or WEISS for Mastering Grade de-essin'.
Logged
« Reply #29 on: February 24, 2007, 11:02:10 PM »
| bblackwood wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 21:49 |
When you guys talk about the Maselec, you're talking about the MDS-2, right?
|
Yeah. Me anyway. It's not a pretty sound though. Has that bland-ish grey-ish sound of the other stuff. I heard there is a newer one which sounds better than the version use. Leon Z. has a newer "black" one and loved it compared to the other generations he used. I have been considering an upgrade forever. But guys who's work I admire a lot use it to great effect. So it must be me.
Logged
|
