Just an FYI you are using the RX9 de-noises wrong. Learn mode works best when you ONLY input the noise. Otherwise you want to use adaptive mode. RX9 destroys all the other options when used properly. Also you want to adjust the reduction and threshold accordingly. I work a lot on podcasts and post production doing dialog editing (mostly removing noise). C vox imo is incredible too. I use it on my Apollo console when I’m live streaming (easily removes CPU fans without effecting my voice). I do think the c vox had less artifacts than the clarity, but what i thought was impressive of the clarity is the sale price and the ease of use. But honestly as mentioned before the waves update plan is lame as well as only giving you one license.
I have the standard version of Clarity VX, and I like it. I recorded a seminar. A few people in the audience were speaking without a mic. The lecturer's mic picked it up, I cut it out cranked it way up. There was a STUPID amount of hiss, and this plugin helped. I still combined it with the RX Voice denoiser. It still sounds like crap, but it is actually listenable. Well done, Waves. And I did not need iLok for this one.
You're right, this is what manual says, but I still found out that when your speech is dense or your noise is not constant, it's good to just leave the "learn" function for quite some time. This is against the manual, true. I did both learn only on noise and on longer chunks and I got similar results: in both learn approaches RX 9 lost entirely. I can re-edit the vid and use the noise only learn if you wish. I just realized that people might say that the test isn't fair, which wasn't my goal, of course...
@@FoliaSound RX9 is nowhere near the other 2, so regardless the results would have been the same. I recently purchased Waves Clarity Vx. I was surprised just like you. It’s the best so far.
I use noise reduction a lot as a podcast editor and I've learned that things like RX Voice De Noise are great to handle some ligh hiss, and in that case Clarity Vx introduces some noticeable artifacts. But when it comes to heavier noise, it has no competition.
I got it and I'm really impressed by it, I do have to say, I don't see myself using the pro version anytime soon, the normal $30 version is good enough for me. Your comparison is really good and straight to the point. Good job!
I've seen a few of these comparisons and what surprises me most is that very few ever mention RX's Spectral Denoise which is far better than their Voice Denoise and Dialogue Isolate (and Clarity VX, imo), mainly because you can better control harmonics, high frequency partials , and artifacts without the final voice sounding like it was recorded in an anechoic chamber. Been using RX for over 10 years and I always find myself falling back to Spectral Denoise because the end result doesn't sound compressed (use at least quality settings C or D)
although the waves blows RX out of the park, it's just fantastic, especially realtime, you are using RX completely wrong. The learn function in RX is to learn the noise profile. You are letting voice into the learning so it actually is going to reduce the voice. That's why the voice is reduced in volume aswel. Beside this, Dialogue isolate is actually really close to waves. And although Waves is realtime, it's very cpu hungry and has a lot of latency to compensate. So anyway in a big project you would probably use it offline. That said, I added Waves to my arsenal. It's a pity you didn't actually compared it to Cedar, because Cedar is realtime, 0 latency and very cpu light, and with fantastic results.
As for VX Pro, I gave it a shot when doing the sound post for a doc film shot entirely on a mobile, for the Krakow festival here in Poland. VX Pro did quite an amazing job and the film can be now screened in full 5.1 with all the dialogues audible, though my beast OC CPU was able to handle exactly 14 instances of it, then all the playback was just killed, so each dialogue track went freeze in my Nuendo to save the CPU (prefer it to Direct Offline Processing sometimes). Cheers!
@@FoliaSound oh sorry, I see you actually talk about the Cedar algorithm in C-Suite in this video. I was a bit too fast by skipping to the results. My fault! Great comparison video by the way. Don't want to sound too critical. This video helped me for sure
I use both clarity and c-vox. I clearly prefer c-vox, UA's policy is just so inconvenient that have to use clarity. For a fair competition, you should have taken RX's dialog isolate.
What to you think about my test? Just to clarify the test results, I uploaded additional test, using RX9 "learn" only on noise, as RecordingStudio9 suggested, youll find it here: ua-cam.com/video/_otLQj4fSrc/v-deo.html
@@FoliaSound awesome! Yeah, it’s nice to see the expression and emotion from dance. Reminds people they are alive (even just subconsciously). Also it just looks cool!
Myślę, że powinieneś porównywać dialogue isolate, bo często robi lepsze rzeczy niż voice de noise. A voice denoise często lepiej działa w adaptive mode. Polecam też sprawdzić brusfri, możesz się zadziwić :)
Hej, adaptive mode odpadł w tym teście na maksa, więc oszczędziłem w ogóle RX-a w tym sensie wizerunkowo bardzo. Dialogue isolate to trochę inne narzędzie, inaczej działające, ja chciałem zrobić zestawienie porównywalnych denoiserów działających w real-time, myślę, że w tym sensie test jest uczciwy :)
I could have added even more, but I just added what I already have and use. I also tend to make my vids really long, so limiting tools lets me be more brief :) It wasn't meant to be a complete shootout, hope you enjoyed it anyway!
@@FoliaSound Yeah it’s a great comparison. There’s really no perfect tools for noise reduction. A little dose of different tools goes a long way. Admittedly, clarity vx is impressive. It’s a shame it’s a bit cpu intensive, it’s not suited to use as an insert on big sessions.
actually there many good denoiser today but the use and case scenario of your ( noisy recording ) will determine which one is better I found that clarity is good in ( very noisy/ non-constant noises ) C-Vox is good on real-time denoising or you should add lead noise before your vocal as it is adaptive it will capture the noise in real-time then apply it so the performance of c-suite will differ according if you give it good lead noise or not .... ( in real time recording I'll just have a few seconds of silence untill I hear the denoise buffered lots of the noises I hear on my headphone then I start recording with this plugin on-recording mode ) RX 9 - shine in the capture/ learn mode (you've to capture the noise alone for it to function correctly) as you'll give it a sample of your noise ( and perform better than others if you have constant low level noise ) so I feel the case scenario is favored to Clarity best use in this video I've test them all and I think everyone shine in specific uses.
RX9 can learn on pure noise, but it's efficient only when your speech is not too dense, has silence/pauses and the noise is absolutely constant. C-Vox and Clarity are working the same - no learn, just adapting to what there is. My experience is that two examples I gave cover 90% of the real life situations. I'm into film post as a pro for 15 years now. RX de-noiser war never my fav tool. Clarity works even better than C-Vox. Nothing was really favored to Clarity here and I knew nothing about it when started shooting this vid :)
Hey, Anas, I did an additional vid and compared them, using RX9 learn on noise only. You'll hear that it's still the last place... ua-cam.com/video/_otLQj4fSrc/v-deo.html
Here is not only about “specific cases” but also about workflow and practicality. In this test he literally ran each plug-in in a quick and straightforward way as most of us would but without stressing too much about “extra effort” to get some good results fast. If you think about it, for the speed of good results (in literally MOST scenarios) the Waves plug-in provides, it should in fact be more expensive than UAD/Cedar, but it’s in fact cheaper. It’s not always about geeking and extra tweaking which btw will always tax your available time and on a tight schedule it’s just more logical to go with a fast set and forget tool like what Waves recently put out. I’m generally not a Waves fan but hats off where it’s due.
@@costinvaly1 actually I respect your opinion but at the same time I still find it wired to ignore the manual of the plugin If you don't then you're just using the plugin incorrectly and hoping to get good result let me give a simple example... if you've 2 microphones 1 condenser and the other dynamic - gain hungry mic - and you compared them exactly with same gain! then you said oh the dynamic mic, volume is very very low it will be illogical comparison,, same thing apply on how far you'll be from the mic. same concept applied in plugins especially when they functioning in a different ways, and built for different uses or priorities. and actually I used all plugins mentioned and I don't find it as - extra work - you can directly guess according to the recording you've that rx will be not the best here or even waves plugin I found steady/ low level noise it is not as good as the other plugins so I'll not even consider it in these cases compared to the others. but any inconsistent/ high level noise waves is the best. the problem why you want to use the correct plugin in the correct scenario is simply you want " the highest noise reduction / with lowest artefacts" you want to preserve the quality of the recording as possible that why we're testing and comparing.
@@AnasAlsayedStudio I don't want to be rude or disrespectful but your analogies are irrelevant and wrong. Based on the interface of the Waves's denoiser plugin, it's straight forward and meant to be used in a "fast results" way, it's interface it's literally self explanatory and it suggests exactly that, it doesn't take a pro to tell that the plugin is meant to deliver fast results with not that much effort into it. Even if you use each plugin from this comparison in their advanced Form (by providing the captured ambience separately) that still doesn't guarantee the yeald of magical results. Better than in this test? Yes, but still won't justify them 3x++++ the cost of the Waves counterpart.
deverberation is also making big steps these last few years. Not sure how 'AI' it is, but iZotope RX 7 came with Dialogue De-reverb. It's with minimal control and detects the voice. Way better then the old de-reverb, which is a total mess. Accentize DeRoom also does a great job.
waves vs c suite na wokalach w home studio? waves radzi sobie zadziwiajaco dobrze, chyba jedyny argument za tym zeby kupic c suite to to, ze dziala realtime, innych roznic brak
C-suite ma też kilka zalet! Działa na platformie DSP UAD, nie liczy się na procesorze. Jest bardzo dobrym algorytmem i nie kosztuje tyle, co główne wersje Cedara. Kiedy go kupowałem, nie było jeszcze Clarity :D
Hej. Po obejrzeniu Twojego filmiku dorwałem nową wtykę od waves. Ściągnąłem standardową wersję demo do testu. I szczerze to nie zrobiła na mnie wrażenia. Używam Fl Studio jak Daw i on też ma swój denoise. Porównałem ślady z denoisem od Waves i Fl Studio. I ku mojemu zaskoczeniu na moje ucho Fl Studio wypada lepiej. Mój ślad do testu nie był tak ekstremalnie zanieczyszczony jak Twój w nagraniu. Co odrazu rzuciło się na uszy to to że Denoise od Waves zmienia charaktarystyke nagrania. Algorytm Fl Studio nie zrobił tego w takim stopniu. Być może w wersji pro można to lepiej ustawić ale za te 250$ wolalbym dołożyć kasę i kupić lepszy mikrofon 😉
No, nie będę Cię przekonywał do swoich racji, powiem Ci tyle, że jako człowieka, który od 15 lat udźwiękawia filmy dokumentalne, trudno mnie zaskoczyć w kwestii denoisingu, Wavesom się to udało...
@@FoliaSound sorry ze nie obejrzalem do końca 😅 Ale i tak będę musiał jeszcze raz go potestować na innych śladach. Pierwsze wrażenie było na nie. Ta lżejsza wersja i tak nie ma za duzo mozliwosci manipulacji. Drugi algorytm dzialal jeszcze gorzej na slad. Ale ogolnie to co dzisiaj przeczytalem to ta wtyczka lepiej reaguje na ekstremalne zanieczyszczenia. Na moich sladach az takich duzych brudow nie bylo😅
9:58 Hey you should only teach it the noise, so a silent part. It doesn't have any "intelligence" as to what is voice and what is not. I simply spectrally removes the profile you give it! Basically it could have sounded better, but still no comparison of course.
Why? All the tools I'm using are real-time algorhithms, all of them are meant for voice and vocals. Why should I use offline Dialogue Isolate, which does something a bit different in a different way?
@@FoliaSound hopefully what's happening on social media with the amount of comparisons, will trigger them to create a real time one hehe and hopefully it is less CPU hungry like others
I wonder if he knows that his act is totally ridiculous ... why do so many of those guys feel that they need to make complete idiots out of themsleves before they say anything which btw quite often is equally dumb ... like " NEVER listen to tracks in solo !!! "
Just an FYI you are using the RX9 de-noises wrong. Learn mode works best when you ONLY input the noise. Otherwise you want to use adaptive mode. RX9 destroys all the other options when used properly. Also you want to adjust the reduction and threshold accordingly. I work a lot on podcasts and post production doing dialog editing (mostly removing noise). C vox imo is incredible too. I use it on my Apollo console when I’m live streaming (easily removes CPU fans without effecting my voice). I do think the c vox had less artifacts than the clarity, but what i thought was impressive of the clarity is the sale price and the ease of use. But honestly as mentioned before the waves update plan is lame as well as only giving you one license.
Tell em 🙏🙏
I have the standard version of Clarity VX, and I like it. I recorded a seminar. A few people in the audience were speaking without a mic. The lecturer's mic picked it up, I cut it out cranked it way up. There was a STUPID amount of hiss, and this plugin helped. I still combined it with the RX Voice denoiser. It still sounds like crap, but it is actually listenable. Well done, Waves. And I did not need iLok for this one.
yes i was waiting for you to deliver the truth going back to your seat 😁😁🎸🎸🎸🎸
For RX, I thought LEARN was to listen to noise only part to remove from the main voice. I could be wrong.
You're right, this is what manual says, but I still found out that when your speech is dense or your noise is not constant, it's good to just leave the "learn" function for quite some time. This is against the manual, true. I did both learn only on noise and on longer chunks and I got similar results: in both learn approaches RX 9 lost entirely. I can re-edit the vid and use the noise only learn if you wish. I just realized that people might say that the test isn't fair, which wasn't my goal, of course...
Hey, man, here comes the RX9 learn used on noise only, compared to other denoisers as before: ua-cam.com/video/_otLQj4fSrc/v-deo.html
@@FoliaSound RX9 is nowhere near the other 2, so regardless the results would have been the same.
I recently purchased Waves Clarity Vx. I was surprised just like you. It’s the best so far.
Thanks for the video, but RX Voice DeNoiser is a different thing, it's just a multiband gate. You should use Spectral De-Noise or Dialogue Isolate.
I use noise reduction a lot as a podcast editor and I've learned that things like RX Voice De Noise are great to handle some ligh hiss, and in that case Clarity Vx introduces some noticeable artifacts. But when it comes to heavier noise, it has no competition.
The regular Vx at $29 is the plugin deal of the decade. Blows RX-10's de-noiser out of the water.
It actually beats Cedar denoisers in some situations and this is really, really impressive.
I got it and I'm really impressed by it, I do have to say, I don't see myself using the pro version anytime soon, the normal $30 version is good enough for me.
Your comparison is really good and straight to the point. Good job!
Thanks, man!
Really good video, that Waves plugin is really impressive, although im not the biggest fan of their update plan still..
Same here :)
I agree. The Waves Update Plan Stinks.💩💩💩
@@AuteriaWWinzerJr what does the update plan do?
I like to use rx spectral denoise at full quality followed by clarity vx pro. Works wonders for background noise
I've seen a few of these comparisons and what surprises me most is that very few ever mention RX's Spectral Denoise which is far better than their Voice Denoise and Dialogue Isolate (and Clarity VX, imo), mainly because you can better control harmonics, high frequency partials , and artifacts without the final voice sounding like it was recorded in an anechoic chamber. Been using RX for over 10 years and I always find myself falling back to Spectral Denoise because the end result doesn't sound compressed (use at least quality settings C or D)
Yup, people should learn RX better.
although the waves blows RX out of the park, it's just fantastic, especially realtime, you are using RX completely wrong. The learn function in RX is to learn the noise profile. You are letting voice into the learning so it actually is going to reduce the voice. That's why the voice is reduced in volume aswel. Beside this, Dialogue isolate is actually really close to waves. And although Waves is realtime, it's very cpu hungry and has a lot of latency to compensate. So anyway in a big project you would probably use it offline.
That said, I added Waves to my arsenal.
It's a pity you didn't actually compared it to Cedar, because Cedar is realtime, 0 latency and very cpu light, and with fantastic results.
Hey, Thijs, there's an additional vid where I learned noise profile on the RX, you'll find it in the vid description!
And actually C-Suite IS a Cedar algorithm, just not a multi-band one!
As for VX Pro, I gave it a shot when doing the sound post for a doc film shot entirely on a mobile, for the Krakow festival here in Poland. VX Pro did quite an amazing job and the film can be now screened in full 5.1 with all the dialogues audible, though my beast OC CPU was able to handle exactly 14 instances of it, then all the playback was just killed, so each dialogue track went freeze in my Nuendo to save the CPU (prefer it to Direct Offline Processing sometimes). Cheers!
@@FoliaSound oh really, I didn't know that. That's interesting!
@@FoliaSound oh sorry, I see you actually talk about the Cedar algorithm in C-Suite in this video. I was a bit too fast by skipping to the results. My fault!
Great comparison video by the way. Don't want to sound too critical. This video helped me for sure
I use both clarity and c-vox. I clearly prefer c-vox, UA's policy is just so inconvenient that have to use clarity.
For a fair competition, you should have taken RX's dialog isolate.
What to you think about my test? Just to clarify the test results, I uploaded additional test, using RX9 "learn" only on noise, as RecordingStudio9 suggested, youll find it here: ua-cam.com/video/_otLQj4fSrc/v-deo.html
Great vid man, love it
Thanks!
I suggest bringing back the intro of you dancing. That’s one of the best intros I’ve seen in a while..
Whoah, thanks, man! The next episode shouts out to you with this intro!
@@FoliaSound awesome! Yeah, it’s nice to see the expression and emotion from dance. Reminds people they are alive (even just subconsciously). Also it just looks cool!
You not the first one to say sorry to Waves in the last year they are on fire. Apart of this AI stuff I love Magma plugs.
STUDIO LOOKS GREAT BROTHA. SALUTE !!!
Thanks, man!
Witam…..fajnie ze wrociles….pozdrawiam
Siemanooo! :D
Thanks for this vidéo!
Is there a real
différence between the CLariry Vx and thé Pro version?
Because the price.,,,
All the best
Myślę, że powinieneś porównywać dialogue isolate, bo często robi lepsze rzeczy niż voice de noise. A voice denoise często lepiej działa w adaptive mode. Polecam też sprawdzić brusfri, możesz się zadziwić :)
Hej, adaptive mode odpadł w tym teście na maksa, więc oszczędziłem w ogóle RX-a w tym sensie wizerunkowo bardzo. Dialogue isolate to trochę inne narzędzie, inaczej działające, ja chciałem zrobić zestawienie porównywalnych denoiserów działających w real-time, myślę, że w tym sensie test jest uczciwy :)
C suites $359, Clarity VX Pro $249. That's a clear decider for me.
You should add Accentize Voicegate 2 and Acon Extract Dialogue to your comparison.
I could have added even more, but I just added what I already have and use. I also tend to make my vids really long, so limiting tools lets me be more brief :) It wasn't meant to be a complete shootout, hope you enjoyed it anyway!
@@FoliaSound Yeah it’s a great comparison. There’s really no perfect tools for noise reduction. A little dose of different tools goes a long way. Admittedly, clarity vx is impressive. It’s a shame it’s a bit cpu intensive, it’s not suited to use as an insert on big sessions.
I use waves clarity it is the best for price and very good plugin
Did you try Acon Digital Extract:Dialogue?
waves is really good BUT, how can we reduce that robotic metalic voice?
Well, whatever you call "robotic" or "metallic" - you can smooth it out wit an eq or tools like soothe2.
Waves was the best they have a hi pass filter from what I hear
Dude... Really? you didn't use RX correctly. You did no noise profile first. Very unfair video.
I did an additional vid with creating the noise profile correctly, you'll find it on my chan!
actually there many good denoiser today but the use and case scenario of your ( noisy recording ) will determine which one is better
I found that clarity is good in ( very noisy/ non-constant noises )
C-Vox is good on real-time denoising or you should add lead noise before your vocal as it is adaptive it will capture the noise in real-time then apply it so the performance of c-suite will differ according if you give it good lead noise or not .... ( in real time recording I'll just have a few seconds of silence untill I hear the denoise buffered lots of the noises I hear on my headphone then I start recording with this plugin on-recording mode )
RX 9 - shine in the capture/ learn mode (you've to capture the noise alone for it to function correctly) as you'll give it a sample of your noise ( and perform better than others if you have constant low level noise )
so I feel the case scenario is favored to Clarity best use in this video
I've test them all and I think everyone shine in specific uses.
RX9 can learn on pure noise, but it's efficient only when your speech is not too dense, has silence/pauses and the noise is absolutely constant. C-Vox and Clarity are working the same - no learn, just adapting to what there is. My experience is that two examples I gave cover 90% of the real life situations. I'm into film post as a pro for 15 years now. RX de-noiser war never my fav tool. Clarity works even better than C-Vox. Nothing was really favored to Clarity here and I knew nothing about it when started shooting this vid :)
Hey, Anas, I did an additional vid and compared them, using RX9 learn on noise only. You'll hear that it's still the last place... ua-cam.com/video/_otLQj4fSrc/v-deo.html
Here is not only about “specific cases” but also about workflow and practicality. In this test he literally ran each plug-in in a quick and straightforward way as most of us would but without stressing too much about “extra effort” to get some good results fast. If you think about it, for the speed of good results (in literally MOST scenarios) the Waves plug-in provides, it should in fact be more expensive than UAD/Cedar, but it’s in fact cheaper. It’s not always about geeking and extra tweaking which btw will always tax your available time and on a tight schedule it’s just more logical to go with a fast set and forget tool like what Waves recently put out. I’m generally not a Waves fan but hats off where it’s due.
@@costinvaly1 actually I respect your opinion but at the same time I still find it wired to ignore the manual of the plugin
If you don't then you're just using the plugin incorrectly and hoping to get good result
let me give a simple example... if you've 2 microphones 1 condenser and the other dynamic - gain hungry mic -
and you compared them exactly with same gain! then you said oh the dynamic mic, volume is very very low it will be illogical comparison,, same thing apply on how far you'll be from the mic.
same concept applied in plugins especially when they functioning in a different ways, and built for different uses or priorities.
and actually I used all plugins mentioned and I don't find it as - extra work - you can directly guess according to the recording you've that rx will be not the best here or even waves plugin I found steady/ low level noise it is not as good as the other plugins so I'll not even consider it in these cases compared to the others.
but any inconsistent/ high level noise waves is the best.
the problem why you want to use the correct plugin in the correct scenario is simply you want " the highest noise reduction / with lowest artefacts" you want to preserve the quality of the recording as possible that why we're testing and comparing.
@@AnasAlsayedStudio I don't want to be rude or disrespectful but your analogies are irrelevant and wrong. Based on the interface of the Waves's denoiser plugin, it's straight forward and meant to be used in a "fast results" way, it's interface it's literally self explanatory and it suggests exactly that, it doesn't take a pro to tell that the plugin is meant to deliver fast results with not that much effort into it. Even if you use each plugin from this comparison in their advanced Form (by providing the captured ambience separately) that still doesn't guarantee the yeald of magical results. Better than in this test? Yes, but still won't justify them 3x++++ the cost of the Waves counterpart.
ust bought the vx version but mine looks a bit different and its not working the same. It actually destroys the vocals makes them sound laggy
AI is always going to be game changing. Next stop: AI in dereverberation ;)
deverberation is also making big steps these last few years. Not sure how 'AI' it is, but iZotope RX 7 came with Dialogue De-reverb. It's with minimal control and detects the voice. Way better then the old de-reverb, which is a total mess.
Accentize DeRoom also does a great job.
Waves just dropped Clarity dereverb 😄
I use Supertone Clear, it clears noise and removes reverb from voice
waves vs c suite na wokalach w home studio? waves radzi sobie zadziwiajaco dobrze, chyba jedyny argument za tym zeby kupic c suite to to, ze dziala realtime, innych roznic brak
C-suite ma też kilka zalet! Działa na platformie DSP UAD, nie liczy się na procesorze. Jest bardzo dobrym algorytmem i nie kosztuje tyle, co główne wersje Cedara. Kiedy go kupowałem, nie było jeszcze Clarity :D
Hej. Po obejrzeniu Twojego filmiku dorwałem nową wtykę od waves. Ściągnąłem standardową wersję demo do testu. I szczerze to nie zrobiła na mnie wrażenia. Używam Fl Studio jak Daw i on też ma swój denoise. Porównałem ślady z denoisem od Waves i Fl Studio. I ku mojemu zaskoczeniu na moje ucho Fl Studio wypada lepiej. Mój ślad do testu nie był tak ekstremalnie zanieczyszczony jak Twój w nagraniu. Co odrazu rzuciło się na uszy to to że Denoise od Waves zmienia charaktarystyke nagrania. Algorytm Fl Studio nie zrobił tego w takim stopniu. Być może w wersji pro można to lepiej ustawić ale za te 250$ wolalbym dołożyć kasę i kupić lepszy mikrofon 😉
No, nie będę Cię przekonywał do swoich racji, powiem Ci tyle, że jako człowieka, który od 15 lat udźwiękawia filmy dokumentalne, trudno mnie zaskoczyć w kwestii denoisingu, Wavesom się to udało...
@@Elektroliryka a mówisz o wersji standard czy pro? Bo tej pro jeszcze nie testowalem a rozbieżność w cenie jest też x 10
@@fabbro.chillout , w wideo testuję obie!
@@FoliaSound sorry ze nie obejrzalem do końca 😅 Ale i tak będę musiał jeszcze raz go potestować na innych śladach. Pierwsze wrażenie było na nie. Ta lżejsza wersja i tak nie ma za duzo mozliwosci manipulacji. Drugi algorytm dzialal jeszcze gorzej na slad. Ale ogolnie to co dzisiaj przeczytalem to ta wtyczka lepiej reaguje na ekstremalne zanieczyszczenia. Na moich sladach az takich duzych brudow nie bylo😅
9:58 Hey you should only teach it the noise, so a silent part. It doesn't have any "intelligence" as to what is voice and what is not. I simply spectrally removes the profile you give it! Basically it could have sounded better, but still no comparison of course.
Yep, I did it later on - you'll find an extra vid with that on my chan :)
@@FoliaSound yeah I see sorry I must be the so manyeth comment haha. Just discovered you, good stuff :)!
@@jeremias3363 thanks, hope to see you soon :)
can you take a look at fidef jentwo?
Whoah, it looks amazing, sure I can! Thanks, await the vid :)
You should have compared RX9 dialogue Isolate, not voice de noise, de noise compare it to waves X noise, right?
Why? All the tools I'm using are real-time algorhithms, all of them are meant for voice and vocals. Why should I use offline Dialogue Isolate, which does something a bit different in a different way?
@@Elektroliryka if you want real time then yeah it makes sense, but voice de noise has no chance against them.
@@BayanChacra , that's exactly the point. RX9 voice denoise, thought it's meant to compete in this gropu of products, can't compete at all.
@@FoliaSound hopefully what's happening on social media with the amount of comparisons, will trigger them to create a real time one hehe
and hopefully it is less CPU hungry like others
It take lots of CPU load
Yes, it does!
So print it.
Only scan noise with "Learn" to maintain the Voice
I wonder if he knows that his act is totally ridiculous ... why do so many of those guys feel that they need to make complete idiots out of themsleves before they say anything which btw quite often is equally dumb ... like " NEVER listen to tracks in solo !!! "
Yooo! You're calling "him" me? You can talk to me personally!