Help with boxy/muddy sounding voice

I may have to take a poke at this. Almost everyone seems to be using over all plugin solutions VS editing. In the film relm editing is #1. Or was, I may be a tad behind what is du Jour. You don't spend a lot of time trying to tune a plugin you just cut out the problem, or swap it with something else or paste something over it. Noise reduction is a pretty all over operation but if you have an issue with a word or word combo you don't try to tweak a "whole clip" effect you center in on the issue and edit.

This BTW is not really criticism since I have not taken a whack at it so dispite the above maybe editing won't help. but in general you want to avoid systemic "fixes" for local problems.

I did listen to the clip back awhile and it did not sound particularly far off many things I have gotten in the past so maybe this week if I get some time I will go "old school" on it and post a file.
 
aram said:
Actually, one more question. Looking at the spectral view of the latest version I noticed energy cuts before and after the sibilant areas, but the reduction of the main "body" in the s sound was limited. Was this done by design, because you like it like that (it does shorten the sibilant sounds a bit, making them less obvious) or was that the result of some specific tool you used this time around?

I quite liked the result of using the spectral de-esser with a big tilt to brown noise and very high spectral shaping (used it on the CU2 version).
Click to expand...
That may have been from the voice declick module. I addressed that bad s with dialogue isolate as I wasn't getting what I wanted from the de esser. I'm glad you were able to make it work well for you. I'm listening to these treatments on my small computer speakers, not in my treated room so I'm sure I could do better there. RX 6 up here not 7 as in my real room. I also used de rustle in a few spots. Thats a powerful tool. I agree the s sounds different, but again taste. To me the s part of the word was too long and the new version is shorter. I'm glad you bought RX7 Advanced! Its money well spent in my opinion.
 
Noiz2 said:
I may have to take a poke at this. Almost everyone seems to be using over all plugin solutions VS editing. In the film relm editing is #1. Or was, I may be a tad behind what is du Jour. You don't spend a lot of time trying to tune a plugin you just cut out the problem, or swap it with something else or paste something over it. Noise reduction is a pretty all over operation but if you have an issue with a word or word combo you don't try to tweak a "whole clip" effect you center in on the issue and edit.

This BTW is not really criticism since I have not taken a whack at it so dispite the above maybe editing won't help. but in general you want to avoid systemic "fixes" for local problems.

I did listen to the clip back awhile and it did not sound particularly far off many things I have gotten in the past so maybe this week if I get some time I will go "old school" on it and post a file.
Click to expand...

Scott, It would be interesting to see what editing alone can do for this clip. The 1000 hz whine that runs through the track is one thing that was easily taken care of with spectral repair in about two seconds. I would think that would be the tougher challenge for editing. The background noise beyond that is another factor that would be harder to address. Looking forward to hearing your go!
 
Absolutely agreed that the biggest problem of the contactlessssssss is the length of that S!
I am also interested in hearing Scott's take. The whole idea of the old school approach is a mystery to me. I remember reading about cutting syllables together to make words and every time I have tried it, it's been such a disaster, but that's what I am guessing you are talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top