Thanks for the feedback. The issue that gives me mouth noise also gives me the gift of strong sibilance, so it's good to know that it's not problematic.
Interesting! Thanks for sharing. It goes to show we are all capable of making mistakes. I've definitely overcooked thing in the past. So, I agree a lees is more approach is preferable.
We're all human and make mistakes and have room for improvement. It seems there are quite a few podcast editors with big egos and that stands in the way of them becoming better at what they do. It's why I open and honest about my journey as a podcast editor. There is always room for growth and improvement and you never know where you will learn something new. Sometimes, we become complacent and operate on autopilot, which is where I feel growth comes to a stop. It's one of the reasons why I teach and work with editors. It's why I create content. I learn more by helping others than I would otherwise. And part of helping others goes back to being open and honest about my experiences, good and bad. We can't improve when we work in a silo or keep our head buried in the sand.
Another interesting video! I watch most of your videos, but this is the first time I've seen Lil Freq in your signal chain. Have you released a review video assessing the strengths / weaknesses of Lil Freq? If not, please consider doing so as time permits. Thanks!
Thanks for the kind words. Lil Freq has been in my chain for awhile now. I haven't done a review because it's more of a specialized plugin that I'm essentially using because of its de-esser. Since it's primarily an EQ, I also use it to take the edge off the mids in my voice so I don't have to run another plugin for that purpose. It's a bit overkill for most podcasters and the EQ section isn't really meant for corrective EQ, which most podcast editors need. It's not a plugin I use on client work.
@@jesse.mccune I think many of us would benefit from a seeing a side-by-side comparison between Lil Freq's desser vs Sonible's smart:deess. Sonible, of course, claims their algorithim "goes far deeper and creates a more natural, better balanced sound by harnessing the power of a fully trained neural network."
It's funny, in this video I think the Sibilance removal sounds a little bit over-processed. It might be a result of accentuating the high end of the EQ while de-essing at the same time? This probably speaks to your point about over-processing and simplifying the process chain. Or, maybe I just never noticed this is what its like until today... I think I'd need the raw to be certain, as I don't know what UA-cam is doing to it... lol
Thank you for the feedback, Matthew. It's interesting how we hear things differently. Maybe it's my ears this morning, but I'm not hearing anything I'd classify as overprocessed. I hear a few edit points, which I'm ok with because it's just room tone, and I monitor at low volumes when I edit, so I'm going to miss these now and then. Most people won't hear them, and if they do, they probably won't find them so distracting that they'll stop watching. I have strong sibilance, so I have to apply aggressive amounts of de-essing, which could contribute to your hearing. There isn't any EQ boosting going on, though. When it comes to dialog, I almost exclusively use subtractive EQ...and always with my audio. There have been a couple times when I've used additive because cutting wasn't quite enough.
Several times during the 4m mark of your video, I can hear the gate (?) closing after you complete a phrase - it's a gentle close - sounds like a bit of fan noise being cut off. I'm using Beyer DT-990 phones. Your audio is head and shoulders better than what I get with my budget setup. I wanted to suggest a topic for future video if you are open to it? Do you ever have to consult the content creator or a subject matter expert in your editing process? Where the technical (?) content of the audio you've been furnished might pose a problem for determining what can be edited out? Guess I'm saying audio quality has to be balanced with content accuracy (?) in some cases - what to do when material content isn't in your wheelhouse of expertise?
Hi Jack. I'm not sure what you're hearing in the four minute section because there isn't a gate. I thought that maybe it was just from edits, but I only have one cut in the 4 minute section. I'm always open to video suggestions. I do consult with clients and content creators, but I haven't run into the situation I think you're describing. There are two phases of editing, technical and editorial. The technical stuff is the mixing, removing fillers, false starts, and repetitions, and adjusting pauses. I leave the editorial phase to the content creator or subject matter expert because it's their content and they know best what they want in there and what they don't. Having said that, I haven't edited an episode where I've been unable to determine what could be edited out. If you don't mind, could you send me a little more detail about this question that will help me better understand. tansyasteracademy.com/contact/
After listening several times this morning I'm convinced what I heard is you breathing. I only noticed because I listened more closely than I normally would. Why it didn't occur to me it was breathing is because I typically remove all breath sounds from my narrations - dating back 30 years even when I recorded my first record album. At near 70, breathing is an issue for me, so I process recordings with a gate typically set for -40dB (+/-2dB) which removes 95%. The downside is, it can clip word ends and I still have to comb through with a WAV editor for artifacts. My process murders words ending in S and F, etc (sibilant ends)? So listening critically to your video, I heard it and was perplexed. Continuing to think about it, I'm impressed by the consistency and control you demonstrate in speaking and breathing.
@ilblues Yeah, gates are good for cutting off starts and ends of words, especially when they're being used to gate out things like breaths or cross talk. I guess I've always taken my breathing for granted, but I guess the 6-days-a-week cardio routine, hiking and biking pay off in that regard. The consistency in speaking comes more from being on the spectrum and not having a lot of prosody in my voice. I don't really need much compression because my speech is fairly consistent.
I noticed the phase issues with RX11 dialog isolate and voice denoise as well. Stopped using RX11 except for declick. Having better luck with Accentize Deroom.
I've heard it off and on over the years, but it's never been consistent. I'm on RX10 now, but heard it at least as far back as RX8. It was probably present further back, but my ears weren't developed enough to recognize it.
I'd guess your threshold nodes were bouncing up and down from adaptive mode being on? I'm not a fan of Voice Denoise simply because the threshold and amount of attenuation you want is tied to where you set the 'Threshold Nodes'. The 'Global Threshold' literally just offsets the 'Threshold Nodes', and the 'Global Reduction' just limits the amount of total reduction is being applied. I don't think a lot of people even realize this. I much more prefer the style of DNS/WNS where you have 'Attenuation Bands' that simply attenuates the band by the amount you want, and the 'Global Threshold' which behaves as expected and sets the threshold. If anyone's looking for a multiband-gate style denoiser like DNS, I'd check out Bertom Denoiser. It's free and even supports AAX for Protools users. I don't use it because I own Cedar but I've heard good things about it. (Don't expect it to compete with AI denoising). That said, I agree I don't think you really need denoising on this audio. The sibilance also sounds fine to me. There's a slight harshness to my ears around 13kHz but it's subtle. I think your audio sounds pretty good.
Thanks for the comment and feedback on my audio, Chris. I wasn't aware of that about Voice De-noise. I did have Adaptive mode engaged. Like I mentioned in the video, I was running it because someone claimed the noise on my recordings was distracting, but I never heard any noise unless I really cranked my headphones, and then, it becomes difficult to know if the noise is coming from the recording or the headphone amp. It's not worth my time to take each recording into RX to manually clean up with Spectral De-noise, so I just slapped Voice De-noise on. I know I've run into this issue with Spectral De-noise to on occasion. It's odd because there doesn't seem to be rhyme or reason to it. I could never find a correlation. It would happen on audio that needed very little de-noising as well as things that needed a heavier hand. Since I've moved away from RX for day-to-day noise reduction, it's not much of an issue for me...at least now that I have decided to stop using Voice De-noise on myself. Now, I'm going to have problems if Mouth De-click starts producing artifacts.
The sound is fine! A little sibilant but not a problem. I'm probably only noticing it now because you mentioned it. :)
Thanks for the feedback. The issue that gives me mouth noise also gives me the gift of strong sibilance, so it's good to know that it's not problematic.
Interesting! Thanks for sharing. It goes to show we are all capable of making mistakes. I've definitely overcooked thing in the past. So, I agree a lees is more approach is preferable.
We're all human and make mistakes and have room for improvement. It seems there are quite a few podcast editors with big egos and that stands in the way of them becoming better at what they do. It's why I open and honest about my journey as a podcast editor. There is always room for growth and improvement and you never know where you will learn something new. Sometimes, we become complacent and operate on autopilot, which is where I feel growth comes to a stop. It's one of the reasons why I teach and work with editors. It's why I create content. I learn more by helping others than I would otherwise. And part of helping others goes back to being open and honest about my experiences, good and bad. We can't improve when we work in a silo or keep our head buried in the sand.
Another interesting video! I watch most of your videos, but this is the first time I've seen Lil Freq in your signal chain. Have you released a review video assessing the strengths / weaknesses of Lil Freq? If not, please consider doing so as time permits. Thanks!
Thanks for the kind words. Lil Freq has been in my chain for awhile now. I haven't done a review because it's more of a specialized plugin that I'm essentially using because of its de-esser. Since it's primarily an EQ, I also use it to take the edge off the mids in my voice so I don't have to run another plugin for that purpose.
It's a bit overkill for most podcasters and the EQ section isn't really meant for corrective EQ, which most podcast editors need. It's not a plugin I use on client work.
@@jesse.mccune I think many of us would benefit from a seeing a side-by-side comparison between Lil Freq's desser vs Sonible's smart:deess. Sonible, of course, claims their algorithim "goes far deeper and creates a more natural, better balanced sound by harnessing the power of a fully trained neural network."
@OregonCoast426 Thanks for the suggestion. I'll get it added to my list of ideas.
It's funny, in this video I think the Sibilance removal sounds a little bit over-processed. It might be a result of accentuating the high end of the EQ while de-essing at the same time?
This probably speaks to your point about over-processing and simplifying the process chain. Or, maybe I just never noticed this is what its like until today...
I think I'd need the raw to be certain, as I don't know what UA-cam is doing to it... lol
Thank you for the feedback, Matthew. It's interesting how we hear things differently. Maybe it's my ears this morning, but I'm not hearing anything I'd classify as overprocessed. I hear a few edit points, which I'm ok with because it's just room tone, and I monitor at low volumes when I edit, so I'm going to miss these now and then. Most people won't hear them, and if they do, they probably won't find them so distracting that they'll stop watching.
I have strong sibilance, so I have to apply aggressive amounts of de-essing, which could contribute to your hearing. There isn't any EQ boosting going on, though. When it comes to dialog, I almost exclusively use subtractive EQ...and always with my audio. There have been a couple times when I've used additive because cutting wasn't quite enough.
Several times during the 4m mark of your video, I can hear the gate (?) closing after you complete a phrase - it's a gentle close - sounds like a bit of fan noise being cut off. I'm using Beyer DT-990 phones. Your audio is head and shoulders better than what I get with my budget setup. I wanted to suggest a topic for future video if you are open to it? Do you ever have to consult the content creator or a subject matter expert in your editing process? Where the technical (?) content of the audio you've been furnished might pose a problem for determining what can be edited out? Guess I'm saying audio quality has to be balanced with content accuracy (?) in some cases - what to do when material content isn't in your wheelhouse of expertise?
Hi Jack. I'm not sure what you're hearing in the four minute section because there isn't a gate. I thought that maybe it was just from edits, but I only have one cut in the 4 minute section.
I'm always open to video suggestions. I do consult with clients and content creators, but I haven't run into the situation I think you're describing. There are two phases of editing, technical and editorial. The technical stuff is the mixing, removing fillers, false starts, and repetitions, and adjusting pauses. I leave the editorial phase to the content creator or subject matter expert because it's their content and they know best what they want in there and what they don't. Having said that, I haven't edited an episode where I've been unable to determine what could be edited out.
If you don't mind, could you send me a little more detail about this question that will help me better understand. tansyasteracademy.com/contact/
@@jesse.mccune I sent an email, Jesse.
After listening several times this morning I'm convinced what I heard is you breathing. I only noticed because I listened more closely than I normally would. Why it didn't occur to me it was breathing is because I typically remove all breath sounds from my narrations - dating back 30 years even when I recorded my first record album. At near 70, breathing is an issue for me, so I process recordings with a gate typically set for -40dB (+/-2dB) which removes 95%. The downside is, it can clip word ends and I still have to comb through with a WAV editor for artifacts. My process murders words ending in S and F, etc (sibilant ends)? So listening critically to your video, I heard it and was perplexed. Continuing to think about it, I'm impressed by the consistency and control you demonstrate in speaking and breathing.
@ilblues Yeah, gates are good for cutting off starts and ends of words, especially when they're being used to gate out things like breaths or cross talk. I guess I've always taken my breathing for granted, but I guess the 6-days-a-week cardio routine, hiking and biking pay off in that regard. The consistency in speaking comes more from being on the spectrum and not having a lot of prosody in my voice. I don't really need much compression because my speech is fairly consistent.
I noticed the phase issues with RX11 dialog isolate and voice denoise as well. Stopped using RX11 except for declick. Having better luck with Accentize Deroom.
I've heard it off and on over the years, but it's never been consistent. I'm on RX10 now, but heard it at least as far back as RX8. It was probably present further back, but my ears weren't developed enough to recognize it.
I find it extremely frustrating because it’s so random.
@richardsisk1770 That's been my experience as well. Most of the time it sounds fine, but every once in awhile, those artifacts are there.
I'd guess your threshold nodes were bouncing up and down from adaptive mode being on?
I'm not a fan of Voice Denoise simply because the threshold and amount of attenuation you want is tied to where you set the 'Threshold Nodes'. The 'Global Threshold' literally just offsets the 'Threshold Nodes', and the 'Global Reduction' just limits the amount of total reduction is being applied. I don't think a lot of people even realize this.
I much more prefer the style of DNS/WNS where you have 'Attenuation Bands' that simply attenuates the band by the amount you want, and the 'Global Threshold' which behaves as expected and sets the threshold.
If anyone's looking for a multiband-gate style denoiser like DNS, I'd check out Bertom Denoiser. It's free and even supports AAX for Protools users. I don't use it because I own Cedar but I've heard good things about it. (Don't expect it to compete with AI denoising).
That said, I agree I don't think you really need denoising on this audio. The sibilance also sounds fine to me. There's a slight harshness to my ears around 13kHz but it's subtle.
I think your audio sounds pretty good.
Thanks for the comment and feedback on my audio, Chris. I wasn't aware of that about Voice De-noise. I did have Adaptive mode engaged. Like I mentioned in the video, I was running it because someone claimed the noise on my recordings was distracting, but I never heard any noise unless I really cranked my headphones, and then, it becomes difficult to know if the noise is coming from the recording or the headphone amp. It's not worth my time to take each recording into RX to manually clean up with Spectral De-noise, so I just slapped Voice De-noise on.
I know I've run into this issue with Spectral De-noise to on occasion. It's odd because there doesn't seem to be rhyme or reason to it. I could never find a correlation. It would happen on audio that needed very little de-noising as well as things that needed a heavier hand. Since I've moved away from RX for day-to-day noise reduction, it's not much of an issue for me...at least now that I have decided to stop using Voice De-noise on myself. Now, I'm going to have problems if Mouth De-click starts producing artifacts.
less is more !