lowland wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 05:32 |
Maselec in the analogue. |
aivoryuk wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 06:10 |
just out of interest, does anyone use a desser other than for vocals, if so what?? |
Jerry Tubb wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 01:41 |
Wondering what all you guys are using for a Mastering De-Esser? Haven't seen much discussion about it lately. One of the following? 1. Weiss 2. TC 6000 3. dbx Quantum 4. plug-in (which one & why?) 5. EQ alone 6. selective ITB processing (one "ess" at a time, rather than overall processing) 7. other approach 8. combination of the above What kind of technique as well.. standard, M/S, etc? Just curious, thanks. JT |
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? |
TotalSonic wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 13:57 |
As far as the Maselec - the lack of control over the parameters besides threshold and whether it detects via M/S plus its price makes me less apt to jump in. It seems this box is more aimed at vinyl cutting where the de-essing and high freq limiting needs to be stronger than more subtle applications needs for CD mastering. Can anyone who own one of these comment as to whether my impressions are correct or not? |
carlsaff wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 20:29 | ||
It has a "Stereo/Mono" button. The default operation is mono, but one click and you're stereo. |
NoWo wrote on Sat, 24 February 2007 18:05 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thanks Carl, is it labelled? Seems like I Post by: TotalSonic on February 24, 2007, 06:51:36 PM
You should give a listen to the Sonoris Multiband comp - http://www.sonoris.nl/en/smbc.php to my ear MUCH better sounding results in every application than the C4!!! of course ymmv. Best regards, Steve Berson Post by: carlsaff on February 24, 2007, 06:56:00 PM
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. Post by: TotalSonic on February 24, 2007, 07:04:02 PM
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 Post by: tweakman on February 24, 2007, 07:16:55 PM 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. Post by: Adam Dempsey on February 24, 2007, 07:18:02 PM Post by: Phil Demetro on February 24, 2007, 07:27:17 PM
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") Post by: TotalSonic on February 24, 2007, 07:47:28 PM
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 Post by: Gold on February 24, 2007, 08:19:00 PM
Not. It always seems to do just what it's supposed to. The lack of controls is a testament to superb design. Post by: bblackwood on February 24, 2007, 09:49:10 PM Post by: Ed Littman on February 24, 2007, 10:05:26 PM
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 Post by: minister on February 24, 2007, 10:08:25 PM
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'. Post by: Phil Demetro on February 24, 2007, 11:02:10 PM
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. Post by: Bob Boyd on February 24, 2007, 11:07:59 PM
The one I tried was the MPL-2. Stereo Peak Limiter + DeEsser. Looks like the MDS-2 gives you left/right control + a "fast" setting. Post by: Phil Demetro on February 24, 2007, 11:10:00 PM
How are ya, Paul Don't you have one of those Neumann's Acceleration limiters with your lathe?? Chris Muth tells me his little "fix" for those will kick the shit out of the Maselec. Truly no disrespect to Maselec. Amazing design. I guess I'm just bugged 'cause we have a spare Neumann sitting and I'm not allowed to mod it. YET. Post by: mcsnare on February 24, 2007, 11:23:30 PM Dave Post by: Gold on February 25, 2007, 12:37:06 AM
That's the one I have but I think the MPL-2 is just a ganged stereo version. He must have changed the MDS-2 at some point because mine has a threshold lo/hi switch where the fast switch is. Like on the MLA the threshold is always set on low. The time constants are genius on that thing but I guess the fast switch couldn't hurt. I would be more inclined to have a slow switch though. He also changed the scale markings which is an improvement because on mine there are 5 hash marks between 12 & 18 and 5 hash marks between 18 & 20. So I'm always logging 18+2 0r 18+3. A PITA. Phil, I use the VG66 rack which has the HT66 HF limiters. I've jumped them out of the circuit. I liked them when I used them but they are sloppy and a little heavy handed. I don't miss them. I'll inquire about the secret mod. I've been inside a couple of SAL74's that he's worked on. There haven't been any circuit mods besides opamp swaps. I recently went through the full calibration procedure for the acceleration limiters. It was pretty obvious that Neumann screwed around with it until it worked.Meaning it was was good with program. Then worked backwards to figure out how to set them up. There are about 15 trimmers in that thing. And odd things like one trimmer for two parameters seperated by about ten steps. I wouldn't imagine screwing with that circuit is in any way staightforward. Post by: Phil Demetro on February 25, 2007, 12:49:39 AM
That doesn't surprise me at all. I personally preferred the DS1 as a compressor. The RenDesser didn't excite me but the original Waves Desser was simple and cool - although I felt a bit dirty when I used it . So ugly! Post by: Phil Demetro on February 25, 2007, 01:15:26 AM
This is kind of stuff is not for the faint of heart - as I've looked into our lathe electronics a few times. I once remember looking inside a weird but cool EMT compressor we used to own. The German stuff looked well built but seemed so strangely designed? Maybe that transient designer/elysia comp is the latest generation of that lineage? Post by: Ben F on February 25, 2007, 02:58:18 AM
Would have to disagree with you here Adam. Notching out with EQ can remove the 'sweet spot' on vocals, especially female. The 6-8Khz range and above is the silky highs that float the vocals in front of the music, if they have been well recorded. For vinyl release a de-esser is recommended, otherwise it can be hit hard buy the cutter and sound flattened. I usually save them the hassle. In my experience so far nothing comes close to the Weiss DS-1. It just somehow manages to only catch sibilance and nothing else. It actually fascinates many people that come into the studio, it seems to be intelligent! Kudos to Daniels algorithms. Other uses for the Weiss are taming high hats and getting rid of midrange bite without losing detail. And then there is the limiter that keeps low/mids intact. It's an incredible box. How's the Sontec going? Post by: TotalSonic on February 25, 2007, 03:10:55 AM
I've only used the Neumann BTT74 Acceleration lLmiter that was in the SAL84 rack at Europadisk but I soon learned best results were had by it being in line but setting the threshold high enough so it's limiter would just barely get nudged into action - and using appropriate de-essing and a well set LPF prior to feeding the cutting amps to share the chores of keeping the cutter head safe and the cuts distortion free - otherwise the Neumann AL could be pretty darn heavy handed and just suck out the life out of the hihats. It would be interesting to hear the result from what Chris Muth could do for this mod wise though. Best regards, Steve Berson Post by: cerberus on February 25, 2007, 05:35:26 AM jeff dinces Post by: Gold on February 25, 2007, 07:25:53 AM
The bland sound is why I love the stuff. I've heard the black compressor sounds better too. I have the light grey EQ/compressor and the darker grey MDS. I'll stay blissfully ignorant. I recently started using the pair of Klein + Hummel UE100's I've been working on for months. People have audibly gasped when I've turned the knobs. That doesn't happen with the Maselec. It just goes about it's business un obtrusively
There isn't much room (or need IMO) for modification in the lathe electronics without a redisign with new boards. At that point you might as well build from scratch. I could see how a magic calibration might make a difference with the limiters. Maybe changing the time constants. I do remember something about eliminating some coupling caps. An EMT156PDM perhaps? I had one that I gave up on. Extremely complicated and had impossible to find transitors. Designed by an American though! Post by: jfrigo on February 25, 2007, 11:13:08 AM Post by: Andy Krehm on February 25, 2007, 01:57:50 PM
I'm surprised you've abandoned this unit for de-essing! Why not give it another shot, since you own it. Fire up the preset, take off the "safe" function, change shelf to a notch, use the side chain to find the worst area and adjust the frequency, bandwidth, ratio and release to taste. If you have the same version as I do, you'll probably find the preset is very close to workable after taking off "safe" and using a notch filter. On the other hand, given our sometime diametrically opposed gear philosophy, you'll probably still won't like it! Post by: hnewman on February 25, 2007, 02:00:11 PM Currently using an EQ1-DYN for de-essing services, and wish I needed it less. Post by: Andy Krehm on February 25, 2007, 02:53:35 PM
Yeah, Phil. If you're not going to use it, give it up! Man, you must be independently wealthy to keep an expensive unit like that sitting around gathering dust! Don't wait for Daniel to clone it to TDM. Harris, as I think you have discovered, as great as it is, the EQ1-DYN only goes so far for de-essing duties so you really do need something else for the really bad stuff and the DS1 does the job really well. Post by: Phil Demetro on February 25, 2007, 02:54:30 PM
You wouldn't try to sabotage me would ya? Kidding... thanks. It's really about getting all those attack and release times to equal a "magic" setting - which I can never find. But I'm mainly talking about using it as a compressor here. I'm happy-ish in the desser dept. I might have exagerrated a bit about using it though - the ds1 gets used for lacquering quite a bit - as a desser. I often wish the interface was more simplistic or user friendly... one attack, release. I hate the preview/delay stuff.
Post by: Phil Demetro on February 25, 2007, 03:04:04 PM
oh, yeah.... I'm loaded, man. Loaded. Sometimes, if I'm bored I'll make paper airplanes or do origami with $100 bills. They make great bookmarks, too. How much do you want for Silverbirch? Post by: Andy Krehm on February 25, 2007, 04:19:09 PM
Just give me some time to enjoy my new room and upgraded gear list then I'll get back to you on that (you mastering mogul, you)! Post by: Adam Dempsey on February 25, 2007, 05:08:59 PM
Hiya Ben. No, totally with you on that. Maybe I just overstated my processing which is certainly not surgical or notching a mix, but in cases when it (sibilance) may not be only lead vocals per se, so even -1dB @ 5-8.5k, or higher for some percussion sounds can shave the edge out a touch, at least ahead of needing to reach for de-esser or multiband (also not my thing unless nothing else is working). And not to assume that other MEs also don't work foremost on getting the EQ right first. As touched on elsewhere I much prefer prevention, via pre-session mix assessment, and I gotta say never (yet) have I found myself having to delve in with a de-esser to really make a go of a project, or been directly asked to de-ess a mix. Some manual EDL work maybe (eg on acoustic gtr squeaks). So I s'pose in that light I'm technically totally off topic! As I'd rather hear & talk of the when's & why's than 'which gear for this/that?'. (edit: fwiw the SADiE 4 system had the options of both a GR and phase inverse process on it's de-esser. Never floated my boat).
Post by: Jerry Tubb on February 26, 2007, 01:55:22 AM I would also like to hear what Mark Wilder, David Glasser, Bob O, Michael Fossenkemper, & Dave Collins have to offer on the subject. Here are some of my "practical" thoughts. Digital Hardware: The Weiss DS1 seems to be most highly regarded, esp in terms of transparency, it comes with a little sticker shock. The TC 6000 seems like a great value, esp since it'll do DS-ing and so many other things. Once again sticker shock. The dbx Quantum seems like a viable option, does the job pretty well, and can readily be found on eBay for a few hundred simoleans. Plug-Ins: I admit to using the Waves Ren De-Esser (TDM) in Pro Tools HD quite often. It's easy to use and actually sounds pretty good. With careful adjustment of frequency notch, range, & threshold, it gets the job done well. However, as with all plug-ins (imo), I can hear a slight color change in the audio. The Waves C4 and LMB, I've never been able to find settings that I like. Possibly pilot error, or lack of enthusiasm for fiddling around with a dozen tiny plug-in parameters, and not finding a likable setting. I thought the Waves old C1 worked pretty well, but the overall coloration of the audio is too much for my taste. I wish Waves would quit releasing a zillion new plug-ins every year, and instead focus on improving the audio quality of the ones they've offered for years (but that's another subject). Now that BrainWorx has gone TDM, might have to test drive that one. Analog Hardware: The Maselec MDS-2 looks reeaaally interesting, thanks for the tip on that one. The specs look good, however the fact that all HF above 2kHz are limited, rather than a frequency selectable notch, raises questions for me. I suppose setting the Thresholds just right is the key. The M/S option seems attractive as well. Based on the strong recommendations in the thread, I may be trying that one soon. EQ alone: If the vocal is bright, but only borderline sibilant, an 1dB EQ notch at 7-8k can be the ticket. But since there's no dynamic sensing is involved, it's often either too much or too little effect. Selective ITB processing with EQ or DS plug-in: Works well if there are only a few offending esses, as it leave the bulk of the song unaffected. I've used this method for many years. But it can be tedious and time consuming if there are lots of problem esses, cymbals, tambourines, and acoustic guitar squeaks, etc. Combination of the above: I find I'll use a little DS Plug-in along with a slight EQ notch, and go back over the song to ITB further repair any of the worst offenders. My Summary: De-Essing in mastering can be a challenge. Most of the traditional DS-ers seem to work best on the vocal tracks rather than overall program material (except for the proprietary ones designed for cutting lathes). The best digital options are ~very~ expensive. The plug-ins can color the overall program. The analog one ones seem to have too few adjustable parameters, or color the sound, & selective ITB processing is tedious and time consuming. So it's a bit of a conundrum. But apparently the options & solutions are getting better. Regarding technique: I'm assuming most of you guys DS on the source, rather than the destination end of the chain. For me it seems there's less objectionable coloration that way. I try not to use DS-ing unless really necessary. Knowing when to use it, is a matter of good monitoring, knowing your translation, and experience... MTCW. Any more perspectives and opinions? Thanks - JT p.s. I was really pleased to see Sound Editors & Sound Mixers given "on camera" awards & recognition on the Oscars this year, don't remember the last time that happened. Post by: Ben F on February 26, 2007, 06:23:46 AM I'd generally be de-essing last in the chain as sibilance is a by product of compression. Usually EQ>Compression>deessing>limiting. But from what you have stated a de-esser would probably work quite well on the original audio file before processing, and the waves ren de-esser is very nice although I've only used it in mixing. Ideally I guess if you had the vocals as stems you could do that without effecting the music too much. I suppose another option would be to automate the Ren De-esser threshold in Pro Tools. Post by: mcsnare on February 26, 2007, 07:06:14 AM Dave Post by: Bob Boyd on February 26, 2007, 10:35:02 AM
I typically DeEss toward the end. Post comp (if I'm compressing) and pre-limiter. DeEssing the 'more controlled' version of the song allows me to focus the DeEsser more carefully. I've done it that way for so long I'll have to compare that to earlier in the chain next time. You've got me curious... As far as approach, I see DeEssing and EQ as two different things most of the time. I've had the DS1 for years so maybe I don't see the process as a big negative. As a very general comment, I don't like the idea of sacrificing the mix EQ because of a short dynamic issue thats easily tamed.
ditto that! Post by: Gold on February 26, 2007, 10:50:26 AM
The Maselec isn't super transparent. It has a smearing effect. I find it to be much more helpful than it is hurtful. Like I said in another post, I leave it in almost always. It can really help tighten up the top end and also is good for expensive sounding sheen. Post by: Jerry Tubb on February 26, 2007, 12:16:37 PM
Ah yes, the Quantum, that's a pretty hearty endorsement Dave. I think Brad uses one too. Also for the suggestion, to put it at the end of the chain, which in my case would be just after the Lavry ADC, but before the L2. My way of thinking, reducing the esses before compression might help them to be less aggravated by the compressor. I suppose there's advantages to both. I'll borrow a Quantum from one of my buddies here in Austin to try. Thanks for the perspective guys. JT Post by: Phil Demetro on February 26, 2007, 06:39:44 PM
I have one in fine shape dark grey...make me an offer if you're looking for a cheaper alternative to the latest one.
I only speak for myself.... I use the MDS-2 towards the end of the path. Sometimes last b4 an AD or before a compressor that is b4 the AD. Just used it on a track for the local MTV VJ. Took the ugly hash off in and around her vocal which allowed me to boost some sweeter hash EQ back into the same freq. range. I'm a genius, I tell ya!! Post by: Phil Demetro on February 26, 2007, 06:58:57 PM (Sorry if this info was given earlier?) Post by: jdg on February 26, 2007, 08:09:43 PM but mirror for mac VST: http://www.u-he.com/FishFilletsOSX.tgz mirror for mac AU: http://www.u-he.com/fishfilletsAU.zip Post by: AndreasN on February 27, 2007, 05:07:11 AM http://www.digitalfishphones.com/main.php?item=2&subItem =5 Plus another vote for the Quantum. Post by: carlsaff on February 27, 2007, 10:17:14 AM
Same here. Basically, I let the pre-limiter chain determine what, if any, de-essing is needed. Sometimes, the EQ in place has already taken care of the essy-ness (if the highs in general are the issue). Also, if there are artifacts from the de-essing (there shouldn't be, but let's be realistic), I don't want the compression to expose or highlight them. Post by: Andy Krehm on February 27, 2007, 12:26:08 PM My rational is that anything corrective should have happened in the mix but since it didn't, I want to make my adjustments right after the mix and then do the rest of the mastering work following. I use the tape early in the chain is b/c ideally the track would have been mixed to tape, plus I can control the amount of tape compression before hitting the rest of the analog chain. Obviously, a few engineers are getting good results by putting the de-esser near the end of the chain so maybe I'll try that next time. Post by: aivoryuk on February 27, 2007, 12:35:20 PM
thats my train of thought on it as well, i see dessing as a corrective procedure so its the first thing in my chain if its needed. but i'll certainley try it out at the end of the chain Post by: turtletone on February 27, 2007, 04:19:47 PM Post by: Bob Boyd on February 27, 2007, 04:27:15 PM Post by: NoWo on February 27, 2007, 04:52:46 PM I did a longer test with the Spitfish Deesser and have a strong feeling that it does more than just dessing. It seems to thicken up the signal and gives the signal a harsher sound than it had before, not pleasing. I used it in a mastering chain before the final limiter. Any ideas? Norbert Post by: prolearts on February 28, 2007, 09:21:42 AM
I tried using the spitfish on a track last week as well. Just putting it in with all (2) controls at their lowest (I'd assume closest to "off") settings, it really put a serious blanket on the whole sound of the track. Who is able to run a whole track for mastering through this? Ditto for "bypassed." That doesn't happen to y'all? Puzzled... J. Ward Post by: Andy Krehm on February 28, 2007, 09:31:21 AM
I am in agreement about the versatility of the Weiss DS1 and also only use it as a de-esser of last resort, since its my best de-esser. I use it often as a stereo compresser or parallel compresser. First, I'll try my Weiss EQ1 DYN which is decent for light de-essing and especially good for transparently smoothing out harsh frequencies. Secondly, I'll add a touch of the TubeTech SMC 2B's top band with a de-essing setting. If they don't do it, the DS1 will. If I had an unlimited budget, I would definitely buy another Weiss DS1! This is not, I repeat, not a paid endorsement! Post by: mikepecchio on February 28, 2007, 10:08:57 AM
no offense, but compared to alot of us you DO seem to have an unlimited budget. Ive got some nice gear, but damn, son! Ive been on the prowl for a de-esser myself. but the weiss is out of the question ($$). I recently modified an Orban de-esser (the mono version) for a tracking engineer friend of mine, and the results are *very* good. much better than expected. It is currently being used on every vocal track for a BIG major lable R&B artist's new album. I don't know how well it would work across a mix, I might have to track down 2 of these for myself and see. the other day I tried out a BSS DPR-402 just for the de-esser. the de-essing actually sounds pretty good, but the overall tone is a little too dark/thick for my taste. perhaps it would be better in an M/S loop, only in the middle. or maybe it just needs to be souped up. I also came across an alison research rack with a couple of "DSP" modules. they are de-essers with seemingly alot of control. I didnt listen yet, but will probably get a chance to hok them up before the end of the week. is anyone familiar with these things? and what about the api 525, that has a d-s mode that sounds cool on vocals, has anyone tried putting it across a mix? mike Post by: TotalSonic on February 28, 2007, 11:04:34 AM
Spitfish is very sensitive to threshold set - so even with the detector set to a high threshold and the depth lower you need to make sure first that the "Soft" button is off (which lowers the threshold of the detector) and second that you are not feeding too much signal into it in order to get most transparent results - plus also critical is to set its center freq correctly so that it is actually reducing the sibilance and not other areas. I suggest using the listen function so you can hear what you are actually reducing and make sure that it is actually just the sibilace and not other instruments such as hihat. Regardless - I've done qute a bit of testng of the various Waves De-essers vs. Spitfish - and 90% of the time to my ear Spitfish would get beter sounding results. On my DAW (SAWStudio) every plugin has an additional true bypass from the DAW's built-in plugin wrapper which I generally use in preference to the ones on the plugins- so hadn't noticed whether it still "blankets" sound when it is bypassed. As far as running entire tracks through it - in general I don't - instead I isolate the sibilant areas by splitting these regions to a separate track that has Spitfish loaded into it and only process these areas. It takes a little extra time but the results if transparency is desired is definitely worth it. Sometimes tracks come in extremely brittle and overly bright though in which case Spitfish's veiling can actually be a desired effect. As stated I'm still looking for another solution for de-essing besides the current digital plugin methods (of which Spitfish is one of three that I use) that I already have. Best regards, Steve Berson Post by: chrisj on February 28, 2007, 11:12:44 AM http://www.airwindows.com/m/DeEss.mp3 I would be interested in opinions on whether it's important to MEs to de-ess lower frequency stuff. I see it as more about the sibilance being interactive with DACs, or cutter heads. I'd want to work with some vinyl mastering people before seriously advocating mine as a to-vinyl de-esser. Of course, it can't really hurt anything if it's not doing much, but I can't be certain it is really being effective as a lathe protector, not having used it in that context. http://store.kagi.com/cgi-bin/store.cgi?storeID=6FEGJ_LIVE&a mp;a mp;lang=en&page=Effects Post by: Bob Olhsson on February 28, 2007, 05:30:19 PM Typically I'll just spot the worst ones. Lately the Samp-quoia spectral editor has been my tool of choice. When that doesn't make sense, my second choice is often the waves linear phase multiband with everything but the desired band bypassed. It does less harm to the overall signal than the other things I've tried. Sometimes just the right eq. on the high-end is the ticket. Sure wish there was a formula... Post by: Ben F on February 28, 2007, 07:24:36 PM There's pleasant sibilance and really, really harsh sibilance depending on the recording/mix engineers experience. Sometimes a very sibilant analogue recording can sound quite ok...I actually like it. But heavily compressed vocals done incorrectly are a real challenge, the midrange bite has to be reduced without softening the vocals too much. This is where the Weiss is also useful, setting a notch filter on the bite (say 1.5-2.5K) and reducing it quite transparently. I suppose you could also use a waves multi-band but I find their character too noticeable across an entire track, sometimes making a digital recording sound even more digitally processed. Post by: carlsaff on February 28, 2007, 07:29:15 PM
Hey Jason! What is interesting about your comments is that you say the "blanketing" happens even when the plug is bypassed? That speaks to a stranger problem than just bad DSP. I just ran a track through Spitfish with it bypassed, then inverted the phase of the resulting track and summed it with the original. Result: complete phase cancellation. Just for fun, I ran the same track through Spitfish at it's lowest settings (I agree, this seems to mean "off"), then inverted the phase of the resulting track and summed it with the original. Again, complete phase cancellation. If you're hearing something happening to the sound with the plugin bypassed or at it's lowest settings, then something else is up, I have a feeling. Not sure what. Carl Post by: TotalSonic on February 28, 2007, 09:37:24 PM
On second thoughts I'd have to agree with Carl's assessment that something might be amiss in the host DAW app or something else in the signal chain - or in the monitoring chain also perhaps - if your results were what you said they were. What is the host app & monitor chain? Best regards, Steve Berson Post by: Adam Dempsey on March 01, 2007, 12:23:34 AM
First port of call, in conjunction with some tube and/or transformer tone balancing. Only then reaching for slight de-essing if need be. Post by: jtr on March 02, 2007, 10:25:30 AM
Thanks to a suggestion by Alan Silverman, I've started using my Algorithmix Renovator for de essing. Once I figured out how to work fast and smart, it does very well. I dial down the display so only the "s's" show up, then use a gain adjust on each peak. I was skeptical at first, but once I practiced a bit it became very easy to do. I'm only using this in a mastering setting- mixes are done, artist is down to the bucks left for mastering and replication. Post by: Greg Reierson on March 02, 2007, 12:02:56 PM
Cool idea. What's the trick? GR Post by: jtr on March 02, 2007, 02:38:11 PM
Well, open the tune with renovator. Find a couple S's, now turn down the range control (right side of screen) till only the S sounds are showing, or close to it. Next draw a box around one, put your resynthesis type as : Gain, then either mouse down the gain value or type a minus amount in. This is the part you need to play with to get comfortable. With a bit of practice you can just drag the box from one to the next. It does take practice, but is well worthwhile. Particularly when you rescue a mix the artist is loosing sleep over Post by: zenmastering on March 02, 2007, 04:29:02 PM Select a region with the sibilance and draw a box around the 'sss' Click on the padlock icon, just below the display on the right side. The 'Range' control now sets the amplitude threshold of the gain reduction. This is shown by using a green colour that isn't in the regular Renovator colour spectrum. Essentially, you are affecting only the loudest components of the selected area. Choose 'gain' as the process type and about 2-5 dB of reduction. Like Jim says, this takes some practise, but by now, it's just as fast as setting up a de-esser to do the same thing. Today I was using Renovator to fix glitches in a trumpet/organ master, by cutting and pasting good organ 'spectra' into the glitch spots, with the trumpet totally unaffected...Renovator is #$%#$ amazing. However, there is a dangerous side to being too successful with Renovator or Retouch: Obsessive, perfectionistic clients (or, ahem...users) will make you wish it had never been invented. Best, Graemme
Post by: Phil Demetro on March 03, 2007, 12:05:41 AM
I have this plugin. Haven't really explored it's potential yet... it's amazing to me how visual the audio world is becoming. I agree that when the client clues into what I am doing they want to really dig in and fix everything. Especially with the scratch/noise free plug ins from Algorithmix. They want to do heads and tails of every track at that point. even if there isn't a problem. When things become visual the client can very quickly become over involved. Often, if I'm using a using a plug in - the client usually owns it and is an expert with it! Time has proven to me that it is important not to lose control of the the proceedings. Focus and decisiveness is needed. Luckily, sibilance is never so nasty here that an eq/desser combo can't tame it. MDS-2 is still my go to... Post by: Oldfart on March 03, 2007, 11:23:34 AM I'm guessing it has to do with their choice of monitors Strangely enuff most are using 824 & or the older Using a properly tuned band in the UADs Precision MBL as been working out rather well for me. I don't have, nor could I afford the "Renovator", but I'll have to try using that technique in WL6's with it's spectrum editor and see if I can manage to make that work. It does sound promising. Oldfart Post by: jtr on March 03, 2007, 10:54:42 PM
Hey Graemme! Always good to hear from a REAL northwesterner! Thanks for the pointer regarding the padlock icon- I've had the plug for about 3 years now and am still exploring possibilities. As for your second point- bring em on! As long as they have the cash... Post by: escape on March 04, 2007, 11:55:49 AM Post by: prolearts on March 04, 2007, 08:20:50 PM I'm working with it in soundBlade and it isn't the most stable environment to mess with plug-ins in. There's some pretty clunky interactions between it and a few plug-ins I've encountered. I need to spend a bit more time with y'alls advice probably. I'll report back. JW Post by: prolearts on March 04, 2007, 09:06:53 PM Now I'll actually try to use it. Post by: cerberus on March 05, 2007, 01:10:03 PM
but i worked for years on ns-10s which i hate, and i don't think that this case is likely.good recordings sound relatively good on auratones too. monitors may lie, but they are not very smart about it. so i would say perhaps that some engineers don't really aspire to make great sounding records, but perhaps they know how to make money... and better to spend it with you then on monitors they wouldn't be able to appreciate. jeff dinces Post by: carlsaff on March 05, 2007, 04:42:23 PM
Was going to suggest this as a possible solution... but decided to give you the benefit of a doubt. It comes up in mono on all systems, I believe. Post by: prolearts on March 05, 2007, 10:41:08 PM
Ha, that'll show you! Yeah, it's working pretty well now. It is really impressively selective and pretty gentle. Too bad no repeatable exact numbers, but for the price!?!?... On a related subject (de-essers!) has anyone messed around the with spl de-esser? http://mercenary.com/spldeesser.html The process sounds interesting. Post by: escape on March 06, 2007, 12:52:38 AM
makes the vocals less "essy" but more lispy, is about the only way i can describe it. Post by: carlsaff on March 06, 2007, 01:31:20 PM
Wait a minute... are you saying Soundblade won't save the plugin's settings with the project? If so, that would be a workflow killer for me! Post by: jdg on March 06, 2007, 01:37:52 PM if its in the EDL desk or master section.. it dont save with the project but u have to save them as desk settings. but the "desk overlay" saves with the project. sometimes u just gotta go wtf with sB .... back to topic..... Post by: prolearts on March 06, 2007, 11:09:46 PM Eric, in regards to the SPL, is less "essy" and more "lispy" a good thing, like that kind of crispy post-deessing that sounds all intimate and "pro" or some sort of slightly phasey kind of "what happened" sound (in your opinion)? best, JW Post by: bblackwood on March 07, 2007, 12:03:36 AM
Yah, I just got the mass email announcing V2 was released, but until SB can compete with Sequoia, I'm stuck with windoze... Post by: escape on March 07, 2007, 12:55:49 AM
not "pro" at all imo. i think the best deessing is done rather transparently, this spl thing changes the character of the sound too much, imo. by lispy to my ears there's a little plop sound at the end of the esses and so instead of "caressss" you get "caressp" on your vox. it's just unnatural and definitely not transparent. i know it's sexy to have that auto threshhold button on there, and i think alot of people stuck on plugs like "auto" settings. imo there are much better tools. i will give spl credit for trying deessing in a novel way(phase reverse the ess and feed it back). just not my pick for the job. as i stated earlier i'll reach for the Renovator if it's really got issues or i'll just settle on TC's Compressor Deesser plug, which really doesn't get enough cred, imo. Post by: Bob Boyd on March 07, 2007, 01:11:58 AM
I think v2 only applies to PMCD at this point. sB is 1.x Post by: twelfthandvine on March 07, 2007, 01:27:05 AM
FWIW, I tried one of these and ended up keeping it. Like all tools, it's not for every job. But, set at low values and used conservatively, it can ... depending on your subjective view of course ... be usefully employed. I will add that that it took a little while to really get to know the apparently simple thing well and learn how to get subtle results. And, as I said, it's not my choice of tool on all occasions. Kind regards, Paul Blakey 12th & Vine Post Post by: bblackwood on March 07, 2007, 07:43:03 AM
Oh yah, I think you're right. Sorry... Post by: soundroid on March 08, 2007, 12:08:44 AM
used the BSS unit about 10 years ago on a few jobs. it does the job ok, but it works on a fairly broad bandwidth and is no where as accurate as, the weiss. imo, not really suited to hi end mastering. it's input filters also roll of several dBs of sub. I've used the db audio stuff. definitely worth checking out. Post by: bluecouchstudios on May 30, 2008, 03:34:07 PM Here's a run-down of a few cool features:
Beyond that, it has the amount of reduction setting and of course input and gain reduction meters. There are also placeholders for a few other features that I know he's working on that will work later. And I know he's still tweaking the algorithm to make it even more transparent, but I think everyone would be pretty impressed with it the way it is. No release date yet. As a side note, I had downloaded the Massey Tools (also RTAS only) awhile back but missed the M/S encoder and decoder plugs that are now available. Check it out along with his other tools and plugins. Here's a link to the Massey Tools. http://www.smassey.com/plugin.html I'll post any updates if I remember. Post by: TotalSonic on May 30, 2008, 05:35:37 PM Best regards, Steve Berson Post by: Richard Morris on May 31, 2008, 07:03:32 PM Just to add another couple votes for the usual suspects (the Weiss DS-1 and the Maselec MDS-2) I can say that when I assisted for Greg Calbi at Sterling and did my own sessions out of Leon Zervos new room there I got to love them both (the de-essers, that is - but both those guys are great too!). When I went out on my own last year and started working out of Scott Hull's place I discovered the MPL-2, which was one of the first pieces I bought for myself and am always happy with using for all kinds of situations. An awesome combination is a little bit of the MPL-2 and a touch of the DS-1 for the faster transients and more transparency. p.s. - Been reading for a while, just got around to registering. Much respect for this forum and the participants! Post by: bblackwood on May 31, 2008, 09:04:18 PM Post by: bluecouchstudios on July 22, 2008, 09:19:50 AM http://www.masseyplugins.com/?page=deesser Post by: lowland on July 22, 2008, 10:34:10 AM
The S-less description made me smile Post by: Matt_G on July 23, 2008, 11:52:18 AM
The demo is can't be used for stereo mastering as it's mono only & doesn't do dual mono or stereo. I tried it out on a mono vocal stem I had today & I've got to say initially I liked it but then realized that the de-essing sounded delayed like there was a small latency whenever the esses were triggering GR. This made it less transparent & it didn't matter what mode it was in or between different response or speed times didn't help. I'm loving the DS-1 Mk3 for mix de-essing in dual mono or M/S modes, my only problem with the Weiss is the latency makes it a bit difficult to use on vocal stems unless you nudge the music to manually compensate for the delay. ADC in Pro Tools won't compensate for much over 4500 samples depending on your buffer setting/sample rate. I've heard good things about the Eiosis E Post by: bluecouchstudios on July 23, 2008, 01:39:57 PM
|