SOUND ON SOUND

[Tomás Mulcahy]

I doubt it's possible from a limited bandwidth recording to "synthesise" the actual missing overtones of that voice.

It is possible, with Izotope Spectral Repair.

[blinddrew]

It looks like Elements doesn’t include De-Reverb. Too much room tone is one of the issues I am dealing with. If the other progs I mentioned earlier can’t deal with this to an acceptable level then it looks like RX Standard is the way to go.

De-reverb doesn't come with Elements but actually you can get rid of a fair bit of it just using a couple of passes of the standard voice de-noiser.

[James Perrett]

When I last tried to use it I found that De-reverb needed an impulse response for the reverb that you were trying to remove. I haven't tried using the RX8 version yet though.

[Mike Stranks]

When I last tried to use it I found that De-reverb needed an impulse response for the reverb that you were trying to remove. I haven't tried using the RX8 version yet though.

I use the 'learn' setting where it scans the whole piece and then adjusts parameters accordingly. I also judiciously tweak - if I'm allowed to say that! :lol:

[zenguitar]

I also judiciously twerk - if I'm allowed to say that! :lol:

FTFY :angel:

Andy :beamup:

[ManFromGlass]

What ? No YouTube link?
:mrgreen:

[Tim Gillett]

I doubt it's possible from a limited bandwidth recording to "synthesise" the actual missing overtones of that voice.

It is possible, with Izotope Spectral Repair.

Great, any chance of an audio example please?

[Hugh Robjohns]

I doubt it's possible from a limited bandwidth recording to "synthesise" the actual missing overtones of that voice.

It is possible, with Izotope Spectral Repair.

Great, any chance of an audio example please?

You can experiment for yourself with the 30-day free trial of RX8.

The Spectral Recovery Module works a bit like an aural exciter in synthesising upper harmonics (above 4kHz) from the audio content, but in a way which is specifically optimised for repairing speech, recognising the difference between vowels and sibilants.

It can also fill in spectral holes within the audio (below 4kHz) created by lossy compression using the same core technology.

The module has a Learn function to analyse the content and determine appropriate settings, but there are also five user controls for preferential optimisation. (Source cut-off frequency, amount, vowel/sibilant balance, smoothing, and spectral patching on-off).

I found it pleasingly effective and natural, and a useful new tool to have in the armoury.

[Aural Reject]

I doubt it's possible from a limited bandwidth recording to "synthesise" the actual missing overtones of that voice.

It is possible, with Izotope Spectral Repair.

Great, any chance of an audio example please?

You can experiment for yourself with the 30-day free trial of RX8.

The Spectral Recovery Module works a bit like an aural exciter in synthesising upper harmonics (above 4kHz) from the audio content, but in a way which is specifically optimised for repairing speech, recognising the difference between vowels and sibilants.

It can also fill in spectral holes within the audio (below 4kHz) created by lossy compression using the same core technology.

The module has a Learn function to analyse the content and determine appropriate settings, but there are also five user controls for preferential optimisation. (Source cut-off frequency, amount, vowel/sibilant balance, smoothing, and spectral patching on-off).

I found it pleasingly effective and natural, and a useful new tool to have in the armoury.

Slightly off topic, Hugh, but do you reckon the upgrade from RX7 Advanced to 8 is worth it? I've not looked at evaluating it yet.....too busy with all these sodding phone recordings...but read your review yesterday....

[Hugh Robjohns]

Slightly off topic, Hugh, but do you reckon the upgrade from RX7 Advanced to 8 is worth it?

It is if the new modules and functions are things you would use a lot... but it's less clear if they aren't!

I'm unlikely to make much use of the Guitar de-noise, but for those that do that kind of thing a lot it would massively speed up track clean-up times. The same applies to the other new modules, really like Spectral Repair (which I've found very handy, actually). And the W&F module is okay and handy for simple jobs, but a little limited for real-world tricky stuff...

For me, the two biggest and most useful updates are the horizontal scrolling, which just makes moving around a file much easier, and the batch processor which can now save processed files in multiple formats and locations with different names -- that's a big time-saver for me!

The other updates are incremental improvements, really -- all very nice to have, but not really essentials for most applications.

As a business expense I'd say it can be justified, and it's good to stay current... but for a hobbiest I think it really depends on whether the new stuff is directly relevant to your specific needs.

[Tim Gillett]

I doubt it's possible from a limited bandwidth recording to "synthesise" the actual missing overtones of that voice.

It is possible, with Izotope Spectral Repair.

Great, any chance of an audio example please?

You can experiment for yourself with the 30-day free trial of RX8.

The Spectral Recovery Module works a bit like an aural exciter in synthesising upper harmonics (above 4kHz) from the audio content, but in a way which is specifically optimised for repairing speech, recognising the difference between vowels and sibilants.

It can also fill in spectral holes within the audio (below 4kHz) created by lossy compression using the same core technology.

The module has a Learn function to analyse the content and determine appropriate settings, but there are also five user controls for preferential optimisation. (Source cut-off frequency, amount, vowel/sibilant balance, smoothing, and spectral patching on-off).

I found it pleasingly effective and natural, and a useful new tool to have in the armoury.

Perhaps so but what was the reference?

Actually my 30 day trial of RX8 expired months ago. I still use it for evaluation but the 30 second limit now makes such evaluations of its tools much more difficult.

[Aural Reject]

As a business expense I'd say it can be justified, and it's good to stay current... but for a hobbiest I think it really depends on whether the new stuff is directly relevant to your specific needs.

Thanks for that, Hugh :)

I use various bits of it on almost everything I do....but most of the new features (barring possibly Spectral Repair) would be relatively infrequent at this moment in time...I've been through 5-7 Advanced but normally end up buying just at the wrong time just before the next major update comes out! :beamup:

[James Perrett]

And the W&F module is okay and handy for simple jobs, but a little limited for real-world tricky stuff...

I'm probably a little more enthusiastic about this than Hugh but then I don't have access to Capstan or Respeed to compare it with. It works well on cyclical variations like an off centre record or a cassette recorded with a dirty capstan. However, it doesn't seem to handle incidents like someone brushing against a tape flange where the recorded audio could speed up by a few semitones for a second or two before returning to normal. I also found it seemed to work better when you tell it to reference the audio to a known pitch. W&F was the main reason I upgraded to Advanced this time round.

[blakedirksen]

A few posts back a few users suggested converting the stereo tracks that are identical left and and right to a mono track. What is the downside of leaving the track stereo? CPU efficiency?

Thanks everyone, this forum is really helping quarantine be more tolerable!

blake

[Sam Spoons]

Yes, and storage, the files will be half the size. I just think it's neater though and in an uncharacteristic attack of OCD I would reduce any 'dual mono' tracks to mono..