|
|
Post by Guitar on Dec 22, 2016 16:44:42 GMT -6
Just installed mine yesterday.
Had a weird problem. Gain reduction was happening at maximum levels when given silence on the audio input. Caused chattery sounding gating artifacts on breathing and mouth noises.
After running it for a day or so it seems to have "burned in." The problem is no longer apparent. Makes me wonder if it got a proper burn in at the factory.
After the issue has gone, I really love this thing. It controls esses beautifully, and just seems to make things sound better just by passing through it, even with no gain reduction, it's just a sweet sounding circuit. My vocal test is sounding super smooth and sitting perfectly even with heavy compression and a very bright microphone. I prefer the DBX sound over the FabFilter DS plugin.
I hear a few other folks on RGO got a 520 I'd be interested if it's working out for everyone else as well as it has for me.
|
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 22, 2016 19:50:34 GMT -6
Post by EmRR on Dec 22, 2016 19:50:34 GMT -6
I have four 902's and they are super useful. Can really help spikey guitars, fret noise on basses or slap upright, mashing cymbals down in smashed room mics when you put them in high freq mode. Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 22, 2016 19:53:44 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 22, 2016 19:53:44 GMT -6
So is it a set to a certain Q? Guess I should have read about it before I bought lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Dec 23, 2016 7:49:54 GMT -6
So is it a set to a certain Q? Guess I should have read about it before I bought lol Same here, I ordered it kind of impulsively. The learning curve is pretty short though. In the normal mode, it's a broadband attenuator. The manual says use this for vocals. In the "HF ONLY" mode it attenuates only the highs, the manual says this is better for instruments. The range knob has a small area marked NORM and pretty much all of the usable vocal sounds are in this very small range, just needs to be tweaked very lightly, then it's sort of set and forget. The detector does a great job of automatically handling different signal levels, like loud and soft passages of a vocal. The yellow knob controls which frequency the detector is looking at. I didn't find it to make much difference where I turned it on my vocal test. But I've only done two voice tests so I'm sure there are other ways you get to use it depending on your program material, microphone type, etc. The manual suggests to leave it parked at 12 o'clock for most vocal de-essing. |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 23, 2016 8:14:56 GMT -6
via mobile
ericn likes this
Post by jcoutu1 on Dec 23, 2016 8:14:56 GMT -6
Anyone compared this to the BSS DPR-402? I tried deessing with my DPR last night and it seemed pretty cool. Curious how they compare. EmRR perhaps? |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 23, 2016 10:20:07 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by EmRR on Dec 23, 2016 10:20:07 GMT -6
I have not.
|
|
|
|
Post by mdmitch2 on Dec 23, 2016 23:40:10 GMT -6
I picked up two of these from front end --- thanks for the tip Guitar !! |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 24, 2016 2:37:59 GMT -6
Post by ChaseUTB on Dec 24, 2016 2:37:59 GMT -6
I wanted to post the link to the comparisons I mentioned regarding sibilance and what I have to work with at times. The roughs are labeled as such but due to the high peaking ( -.3 was registering -5 to -6 GR at times on the roughs… I know ) and no matter how I tried to match the files by normalizing to rms or peak value ti would not work due to the drastic overages in the roughs. These are full scale so please adjust your monitors before playback especially on the roughs. I use two limiters on the rough files one with ISP to hopefully not fry any DAC because i really had thought i blew a driver on one of my monitors while working on the " Master "… link below… they are wavs… 24 bit 44.1 so prob have to DL, when jcoutu1 does these drives, it will tell me to DL on my iPhone however once I click that the song or file plays, Computer may be different, IDK… wish I had a few of those DBX 520 for this work! drive.google.com/open?id=0B315LtJ5Y4gEbVZqZFFLSURoM3c |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 24, 2016 8:14:31 GMT -6
Post by rowmat on Dec 24, 2016 8:14:31 GMT -6
Has anyone compared the old Valley DSP 815 (Dynamic Sibilance Processor) to either the original DBX 902 or DBX 520? They seem to be somewhat similar in operation. Valley DSP 815  |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 24, 2016 9:25:08 GMT -6
via mobile
ericn likes this
Post by EmRR on Dec 24, 2016 9:25:08 GMT -6
The circuit approach of the dbx is unique, being a frequency specific level comparator rather than a simple HPF/limiter combo. I may be mangling that description off the top of my head, ssltech at GroupDIY dug into the specifics of it at one time in a diy 902 thread. The control set may look the same, but most are not. The half-rack dbx also lacks a critical part of the circuit and is regarded as the lesser device
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 24, 2016 14:19:57 GMT -6
So - I got it and just played around with it on a male vocal. Vocal didn't need much DSing...Anyway, I'd love to like this thing, but I was able to get MUCH better results with Pro-DS. I cranked the threshold and swept the frequency range and strangely, the esses were showing up more in the 1 khz range with the hardware...more in the 6-9khz range with Pro-DS. Regardless, I think this will be going back.
|
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 24, 2016 16:12:49 GMT -6
Post by wiz on Dec 24, 2016 16:12:49 GMT -6
So - I got it and just played around with it on a male vocal. Vocal didn't need much DSing...Anyway, I'd love to like this thing, but I was able to get MUCH better results with Pro-DS. I cranked the threshold and swept the frequency range and strangely, the esses were showing up more in the 1 khz range with the hardware...more in the 6-9khz range with Pro-DS. Regardless, I think this will be going back. Bummer... oh well cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 25, 2016 20:48:33 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ChaseUTB on Dec 25, 2016 20:48:33 GMT -6
So - I got it and just played around with it on a male vocal. Vocal didn't need much DSing...Anyway, I'd love to like this thing, but I was able to get MUCH better results with Pro-DS. I cranked the threshold and swept the frequency range and strangely, the esses were showing up more in the 1 khz range with the hardware...more in the 6-9khz range with Pro-DS. Regardless, I think this will be going back. I google drives a reference rough I had to mix see if the dbx 520 can handle that lol. If interested I can provide raw vox... it's in my post a few above, had to do a ton of sibilance work... I also found having to use 4 SW deEssers tunes at different frequencies on each to really smooth the sibilance completely and i still feel it is bitey and a little too sharp... oh well... |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 25, 2016 21:03:11 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 25, 2016 21:03:11 GMT -6
So - I got it and just played around with it on a male vocal. Vocal didn't need much DSing...Anyway, I'd love to like this thing, but I was able to get MUCH better results with Pro-DS. I cranked the threshold and swept the frequency range and strangely, the esses were showing up more in the 1 khz range with the hardware...more in the 6-9khz range with Pro-DS. Regardless, I think this will be going back. I google drives a reference rough I had to mix see if the dbx 520 can handle that lol. If interested I can provide raw vox... it's in my post a few above, had to do a ton of sibilance work... I also found having to use 4 SW deEssers tunes at different frequencies on each to really smooth the sibilance completely and i still feel it is bitey and a little too sharp... oh well... Not sure I understand |
|
|
|
DBX 520
Dec 25, 2016 21:10:25 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by ChaseUTB on Dec 25, 2016 21:10:25 GMT -6
I google drives a reference rough I had to mix see if the dbx 520 can handle that lol. If interested I can provide raw vox... it's in my post a few above, had to do a ton of sibilance work... I also found having to use 4 SW deEssers tunes at different frequencies on each to really smooth the sibilance completely and i still feel it is bitey and a little too sharp... oh well... Not sure I understand On page 3 of this thread, I shared a post with a link to wav files via google drive that had tons of sibilance I had to deal with in a mix. The vox recorded thru a $200 or less LDC and clipped ic mbox preamps recorded in a bedroom. I was saying see what your dbx 520 could do The to rough mix vox. I also offered to provide you the raw vox. It was a way to see how well your FF and dbx could do in a different genre than you are used to working in and give you another form of judgment... I added that I used 4 software de essers, each at a different set frequency to smooth the sibilance in the mix I posted on the google drive link. Sorry for the confusion. |
|
