|
|
Post by peteje on Apr 9, 2015 16:46:34 GMT -6
I wanted to share / promote the greatest de-esser I have used to date, the XQP 531A. I got to help beta some of the prototypes of this one and really love its versatility, transparency and effectiveness. Dane's use of hpf (vs. bell) for the side chain results in an extremely natural response without the need to hone in exactly in each little sibilant range. This means you don't end up over crushing to catch the right spot effectively. It is a very nice action that really smooths down the sibilance with out nuking your signal altogether. I use it as a re-recording mixer in TV and Film post production where we can get some pretty harsh and pronounced sibilant artifacts. This shapes and softens so nicely. I have used many analogue and plug in variants - this is the one in my chain now. www.xqpaudio.com/531a.html |
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 9, 2015 17:34:40 GMT -6
I have tried about a million de-essers and never liked any of them. I am not doing live work, so I can cut my harsh s-sounds and drag them down without killing any of the surrounding vocal tone. I wish there was something like that in 500 series!
R
|
|
|
|
Post by peteje on Apr 9, 2015 18:25:28 GMT -6
This is what I like about this XQP one. Closest thing to just lowering them without being divit-like and lispy. I like the "soft" selection (it has two different opto choices) as it can give a slightly smearing lowering of the sibilant - when dealing with really harsh, affected radio mics, like we can get in produciiton, it has a nice effect. The "clean" selection is great for pretty darn good transparency on very well recorded stuff or even for tracking. I also use clip gain at times when absolutely necessary, but time restraints here don't allow a complete surgical pass of that on any given show.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchtower on Apr 9, 2015 19:11:51 GMT -6
I have tried about a million de-essers and never liked any of them. I am not doing live work, so I can cut my harsh s-sounds and drag them down without killing any of the surrounding vocal tone. I wish there was something like that in 500 series! R Just curious, have you tried FabFilter's Pro-DS? |
|
|
|
Post by carymiller on Apr 9, 2015 19:38:29 GMT -6
I wanted to share / promote the greatest de-esser I have used to date, the XQP 531A. I got to help beta some of the prototypes of this one and really love its versatility, transparency and effectiveness. Dane's use of hpf (vs. bell) for the side chain results in an extremely natural response without the need to hone in exactly in each little sibilant range. This means you don't end up over crushing to catch the right spot effectively. It is a very nice action that really smooths down the sibilance with out nuking your signal altogether. I use it as a re-recording mixer in TV and Film post production where we can get some pretty harsh and pronounced sibilant artifacts. This shapes and softens so nicely. I have used many analogue and plug in variants - this is the one in my chain now. www.xqpaudio.com/531a.htmlHave you tried the Pendulum and Empirical Labs 500 series units? How does this stack up by comparison? |
|
|
|
Post by peteje on Apr 9, 2015 21:39:03 GMT -6
Pendulum, yes; Empirical, no; fab filter pro ds and massey were my favorites in the plug in world; (I've used many through the years - 902s, BSS, Junger). I find the XQP to be my favorite. I believe it is due to the hpf vs bell side chain approach. Pendulum sounds very good, but like many de-essers, if you are not tuned to just the right freq (which is changing person to person) you commonly get the not enough or too much effect. Fab filter is good, but even with the freq following algorithms (auto freq sort of function), I can hear it working a bit too much.
The XQP really can be transparent and just reduces the sibilant into the track in a nice balance much more easily than the others. Toggling the bypass shows it doesn't affect the overall sound quality of what passes through. You absolutely can get some crazy sucking out / envelope changing effects with it if you crank up the thresh. But set for natural de essing (I am using X or Y freq and ~ 9 - 10 o'clock thresh mostly) there is a nice range of lowering effect you can get with no artifact. Sometimes toggling it in and out is quite an eye opener - dialogue is sounding natural and balanced then clicking to bypass shows how really sibilant it is. Now this is on TV production sound mostly, which has the worst of radio transmit/receive artifacts and often lav mics with compromised placement and/or bad batteries (sometimes all you get is muffle + sibilant, lol). The simple 4 freq positions for the hpf sidechain make it easy to leave the thresh alone and just click to a different range if needed as a particular scene or recording needs that (90% of the time I don't touch it once dialed in).
|
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 9, 2015 22:59:28 GMT -6
Yeah, I have tried them. I hear them all working and hate it. Most of the music I do has the lead vocal highly exposed. So, any tone loss drives my ears crazy.
R
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Apr 10, 2015 18:19:04 GMT -6
You know, IMHE, in the de-essing function, plugins have the edge over hardware. I've never been more pleased with what I can get out of a plug than with the de-esser plugz I use.
|
|
|
|
Post by carymiller on Apr 10, 2015 19:15:28 GMT -6
You know, IMHE, in the de-essing function, plugins have the edge over hardware. I've never been more pleased with what I can get out of a plug than with the de-esser plugz I use. Honestly I agree. The best one I've tried is the BX DynEQ by Brainworks. I just like the layout of this one more than my Waves De-esser, and I feel it's extremely transparent/unobtrusive...honestly It's better than the hardware units I've had experience with. This includes Vintage DBX 902's and the like. However I do know a lot of people love the Empirical Labs unit. I just haven't gotten to really use one for long enough to really formulate an opinion. Also it can De-ess in MS mode and has other functions as a two band Dynamic EQ with a spectral analyzer...so you can really SEE what you need to target in the sibilant range. |
|
