|
Post by EmRR on Aug 10, 2019 5:28:51 GMT -6
They sold 900 racks for something like 20 years. Before the 500 thing exploded a decade ago you heard about them equally. Every remote truck I ever worked had 900 racks, I never saw a 500 rack anywhere until this last decade, trucks, studios, installs. Better on one level; stereo single width modules possible.
If someone is obviously going to need de-essing, why not do some of it on the way in? Just don’t F up.
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Aug 10, 2019 10:59:26 GMT -6
A 900 series chassis? What's that?? Hah! It barely gets a hit when googled. Is the 520 a reasonable facsimile? And while I'm thinking about it, why de-ess while recording when you could apply (and print if you like) the de-esser later? Is it perhaps because it's preferable to De-ess before the signal hits any other hardware ..like a compressor? I occasionally use the UAD Manley VoxBox with the De-ess while tracking. I never get too aggressive with it, but it can save you time and make the vocal track easier to process later.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 10, 2019 16:24:44 GMT -6
The de-esser in DP has a visual response view that’s easy to sort for center and width of control, and look ahead processing along with sensitivity, attack and release controls. I usually get something pretty good out of it very easily. DP also has a dynamic EQ, and it never seems to do a great job, even though the control set looks the same. Something is different under the hood. For instruments, I usually try both and pick one or the other. Still like and use dbx 902’s, these days while tracking mainly, if needed. This may be worthy of a different thread, but I've always wondered how DIY songwriters who have to engineer themselves manage to effectively use EQ related devices in their own vocal recording chain. At least with compressors you can watch the needle and reasonably gauge the grab that way. But I don't trust myself to EQ my own voice on the way in. I just don't see myself being able to hear and compensate for an over active de-esser whlie I'm singing. Does the 902 have the kind of meters that let you know what's going on? Work in a team with someone you trust.
Or alternately, do a take, then listen back. Make corrections based on playback, do another take. Repeat as neccessary.
I generaly use the first method - I have a music partner, we live in the same house/studio, play in the same band but have other projects, and have known each other a lot longer than we've been woking together formally. He started as my assistant, but I've turned over more and more of the actual engineering duties as he's learned my process.
It's kinda like an old fashioned hippie/punk rock commune stuation, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Aug 10, 2019 16:32:11 GMT -6
Or alternately, do a take, then listen back. Make corrections based on playback, do another take. Repeat as neccessary.
Somewhere I read (was it here?) that I could do a dry take and apply the hardware in hybrid fashion until I get it right, then transpose it to the recording chain. Your way is purer, but potentially a lot more work - and you can never be sure that you have it perfectly dialed in. The best way is no doubt to get an engineer friend in the room.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 10, 2019 16:36:48 GMT -6
Or alternately, do a take, then listen back. Make corrections based on playback, do another take. Repeat as neccessary.
Somewhere I read (was it here?) that I could do a dry take and apply the hardware in hybrid fashion until I get it right, then transpose it to the recording chain. Your way is purer, but potentially a lot more work - and you can never be sure that you have it perfectly dialed in. The best way is no doubt to get an engineer friend in the room. More work, more fun!
One thing I should add is that as far as electronic de-essing goes, I tend to do it more doing mix phase, to get the vocal to sit in the mix relative to other elements. Whe tracking I usually try to rely on physical techniques of working the mic, placement, and mic selection to try to get it as right as possible going in. I'm not afraid to repeat tracks as needed, usually take three keeper tracks of a vocal, and often use the second and third best takes as a triple, panned hard L & R, down a couple or so dB with the main in the center. Some days I'm just not "on", s if it seems like nothing's happening I'll wait a few hours or a day or two and come back to it.
Electronic de-essing is more a last resort to trim what I souldn't get right via other means.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 10, 2019 18:02:29 GMT -6
Boy, I'm glad my Oktava 319 is fine on esses... (AKG 200 example below) Chris
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Aug 10, 2019 19:56:26 GMT -6
To be clear the de-esser is used during tracking on those 1-2 a year people who’s S are 6-12dB hotter than everything else. Like there’s a whistle built into their mouth that no mic selection will ever fix.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Aug 10, 2019 20:02:44 GMT -6
To be clear the de-esser is used during tracking on those 1-2 a year people who’s S are 6-12dB hotter than everything else. Like there’s a whistle built into their mouth that no mic selection will ever fix. Well, the wave form for my esses aren't as big as the vowels that follow, but I just recorded some BGVs on a song with a female vocalist who sang the exact same thing on the same mic, and she was closer to it than me - and her esses were easily 6 to 12db softer than mine.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 10, 2019 22:01:42 GMT -6
To be clear the de-esser is used during tracking on those 1-2 a year people who’s S are 6-12dB hotter than everything else. Like there’s a whistle built into their mouth that no mic selection will ever fix. But mic technique can go a long way toward fixing.
I've always had a sibilance problem, but since getting dentures it's much worse. Not only do I have a spitting cobra in my mouth, he has somehow acquired a dog whistle - an audible one. Slight modification of the upper denture helped the whistle a lot, but applying good mic technique is the ticket for all but the most egregious sibilance - and it helps a LOT with that. It does require a vocalist who is capable of minimal thought while singing.
After a little practice it becomes reflexive.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 10, 2019 22:13:50 GMT -6
To be clear the de-esser is used during tracking on those 1-2 a year people who’s S are 6-12dB hotter than everything else. Like there’s a whistle built into their mouth that no mic selection will ever fix. Well, the wave form for my esses aren't as big as the vowels that follow, but I just recorded some BGVs on a song with a female vocalist who sang the exact same thing on the same mic, and she was closer to it than me - and her esses were easily 6 to 12db softer than mine. Ears, not eyes.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Aug 11, 2019 2:00:24 GMT -6
To be clear the de-esser is used during tracking on those 1-2 a year people who’s S are 6-12dB hotter than everything else. Like there’s a whistle built into their mouth that no mic selection will ever fix. Try a loose upper dental plate that sounds like a deflating tire on every ‘s’.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Aug 11, 2019 3:58:37 GMT -6
Well, the wave form for my esses aren't as big as the vowels that follow, but I just recorded some BGVs on a song with a female vocalist who sang the exact same thing on the same mic, and she was closer to it than me - and her esses were easily 6 to 12db softer than mine. Ears, not eyes. OK, 18 db softer by ear! Just kidding ..I think. All I know is that in addtion to 3 or 4 db of de-essing and a little automation, I'm using anywhere between 3 and 12 db of clip gain on a majority of my esses. Yes, the wave form is only a reasonable indicator of loudness, but on occasion it does catch things that, upon closer inspection, my ears confirm. At worst, it's a great time-saving guide. Funny thing is, I'm using less and less automation on the rest of the tracks these days because I'm using a little more compression on the way in, and I like the sound of it - but find myself paying more and more attention to esses. I'm seriously considering trying out a ribbon like the AEA 44.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Aug 11, 2019 6:52:23 GMT -6
I 100% agree with johneppstein here. Mic technique goes a long way. Some good microphone technique and some basic singing technique, per my earlier post.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Aug 11, 2019 7:31:55 GMT -6
Yeah, we talked about mic technique. I'm talking about the people who don't have any, and aren't gonna get any that day, or that week, or that month. Paying clients who've already been through 10 possible vocal mics to find the one that works best.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Aug 11, 2019 8:11:30 GMT -6
There's almost no way out of this dilemma emRR, M57. There are basically only three things you can do. First, if it's you singing, vocal technique helps a lot. I've gone from 6 or 7 heavy "esses" to maybe 1 or 2 a track. Second, I hate to say it, but get a U67 style mic. Both Stam SA67's I'm testing now handle "esses" in a very natural way and simply don't emphasize them, yet all the frequencies are still there without processing. With that kind of mic, just a pinch of a de-esser might tame those really excessive singers to a tolerable point. Last, find a de-esser that works. I haven't tried the Fab Filter yet, but it seems to be the plug-in of choice.
The Sooth plug-in was brilliant, it automatically EQ's offending frequencies in real time at different levels instead of a single level setting de-esser plug. The idea was brilliant, but it just didn't work that well when set high because it affected tone. That idea better implemented would be a blessing for "Ess" problems.
I totally get your frustration emRR. I did a podcast style voice-over recording for a friend who is excessively "essy". She has a wonderful voice for things like audio books, but I think there's just nothing she can do about her super-essy voice, and it may mean she just can't do that kind of work in the end.It may be the same with your super-essy vocalist.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Aug 11, 2019 8:55:09 GMT -6
...I hate to say it, but get a U67 style mic. Both Stam SA67's I'm testing now handle "esses" in a very natural way and simply don't emphasize them, yet all the frequencies are still there without processing. With that kind of mic, just a pinch of a de-esser might tame those really excessive singers to a tolerable point. Last, find a de-esser that works. I haven't tried the Fab Filter yet, but it seems to be the plug-in of choice. The Sooth plug-in was brilliant, it automatically EQ's offending frequencies in real time at different levels instead of a single level setting de-esser plug. The idea was brilliant, but it just didn't work that well when set high because it affected tone. That idea better implemented would be a blessing for "Ess" problems. So other than the Stam, what other 67 style mics could I consider in a similar price range? I just can't bring myself to pay for something and have no idea when I'll get it. You know my voice and the styles of music I write in. How might a ribbon like the AEA 44 stack up? I've pretty much tried everything but the Fab Filter - come to think of it I don't believe I've ever tried soothe for de-essing - though I've used it plenty for other problems.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Aug 11, 2019 9:42:43 GMT -6
You can also try just pulling the singer back from the microphone, like 12-18 inches. You’ll loose some of the proximity effect, but also lessen the SS sounds.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Aug 11, 2019 10:03:33 GMT -6
You can also try just pulling the singer back from the microphone, like 12-18 inches. You’ll loose some of the proximity effect, but also lessen the SS sounds. I've already mentioned that I do a lot of things folks recommend but I'll repost it here.. And it's not just how I aim - I've aimed the mic at my head, my neck, you name it. It's pretty much every mic I've ever used. Of course, I may be overly sensitive to it. People haven't been pointing it out as a problem in my mixes recently, but that's probably because I'm so focused on it while mixing. I think I do a decent job taming these guys, but there are the occasional places where I feel like I have to jump through hoops getting them to sound natural, including things like copying an ess from somewhere else and dropping it in place of the offending ess ..like you would a sample.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 11, 2019 10:22:58 GMT -6
Besides a 44, the Sontronics Sigma 2 ribbon is very "anti-sibilant". Trevor himself (owner), could tell it was right for me, over any of his LDC's-immediately. Also "very Vintage" sounding, so not for the all those Rappers here at RGO, you know-like John E. Word! Chris
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 11, 2019 10:29:52 GMT -6
Also the new Tonelux J37 microphones, based on the Sony C37a, "control sibilance" well. And an additional shout out, for Mark Fouxman's microphones, both ribbon and LDC.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 11, 2019 13:32:43 GMT -6
Yeah, we talked about mic technique. I'm talking about the people who don't have any, and aren't gonna get any that day, or that week, or that month. Paying clients who've already been through 10 possible vocal mics to find the one that works best. If they've been through 10 different vocal mics and still have a problem they need to take a "look" at their mic technique because they're looking for a "magic bullet" that doesn't exist. (Or you need to stop using "budget" mics. Swapping sideways is counterproductive to progress.)
How hard is it to learn to turn your head away a bit when you make an "S" sound and to not eat the mic when you hiss?
I know it probably sounds condescending to some people, but if they aren't willing to put at least a minimal amount of effort into their technique they probably don't belong in a studio. Would you want to work with a guitarist who couldn't be arsed to learn to play a basic pentatonic scale? Or a drummer who refused to play the dynamics of a song?
It's really not rocket science.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 11, 2019 13:37:16 GMT -6
...I hate to say it, but get a U67 style mic. Both Stam SA67's I'm testing now handle "esses" in a very natural way and simply don't emphasize them, yet all the frequencies are still there without processing. With that kind of mic, just a pinch of a de-esser might tame those really excessive singers to a tolerable point. Last, find a de-esser that works. I haven't tried the Fab Filter yet, but it seems to be the plug-in of choice. The Sooth plug-in was brilliant, it automatically EQ's offending frequencies in real time at different levels instead of a single level setting de-esser plug. The idea was brilliant, but it just didn't work that well when set high because it affected tone. That idea better implemented would be a blessing for "Ess" problems. So other than the Stam, what other 67 style mics could I consider in a similar price range? I just can't bring myself to pay for something and have no idea when I'll get it. You know my voice and the styles of music I write in. How might a ribbon like the AEA 44 stack up? I've pretty much tried everything but the Fab Filter - come to think of it I don't believe I've ever tried soothe for de-essing - though I've used it plenty for other problems. It's not "67 style" (more like a 47), but my Pearlman TM-1 works pretty well for me. I liked my first one enough to buy a second, and even pay a bit more than the first. I have not tried a good 67 style yet, but it's on my bucket list.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 11, 2019 13:43:50 GMT -6
John, have you tried your Heiserman H47 FET much yet? It's one of the best LDC's on me also. As good as a 67 that way IMHO. TLM 67 is nice too. Chris
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 11, 2019 13:47:32 GMT -6
Of course, I may be overly sensitive to it. People haven't been pointing it out as a problem in my mixes recently, but that's probably because I'm so focused on it while mixing. I think I do a decent job taming these guys, but there are the occasional places where I feel like I have to jump through hoops getting them to sound natural, including things like copying an ess from somewhere else and dropping it in place of the offending ess ..like you would a sample. I've always been over sensitive to sibilance, about as long as I can remember. When I was a little kid my mom would drag me along when she went out to lunch with her "old ladies' sewing circle and gabfest" and the sibilance in some of her friends' voices used to just kill me - I hated it.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 11, 2019 13:51:42 GMT -6
John, have you tried your Heiserman H47 FET much yet? It's one of the best LDC's on me also. As good as a 67 that way IMHO. TLM 67 is nice too. Chris I have not. For the last several months we've been concentrating on getting a stable band together that's both gig ready and recording worthy and have not done enough work on new original material for a new record. Hopefully in the next month or two we'll be ready to lay some tracks.
|
|