I'm a big fan of Hush and Auphonic. One thing that stood out to me is how well Auphonic attenuated the Reverb on the Esses in example 2. If you listen close you can hear the Ess ring out on Hush whereas Auphonic removes it. It also dealt with the ticking sound of example 5 quite well. Hush errs a little more on the side of natural. VoiceEx of course is very impressive for realtime although it seems like it could use a dedicated DeReverb knob? And dxRevive is invaluable for certain problems for me. Thanks for the comparison, it's cool hearing them side by side!
Thanks for the detailed response, Chris. I think it was you who mentioned in a response for a recent video that you liked Auphonic and it reminded me that I needed to include them in this shootout. My biggest issue with Hush is the inability to audition or preview how it will sound at the given setting. I don't want to render out an hour long track 2 or 3 times trying to find the best setting. I'm hoping others find this shootout useful because many of us don't have the time or patience to put something like this together. It's easy to quickly A-B test plugins, but not so much when it comes to the non-realtime options. My other goal is to help those who rely on the lower quality tools hear just how much better some of the other options sound, but I doubt it will have much impact on the Descript and Riverside editors.
Thanks Jesse - you've got me rethinking my process. Converting a print blog to podcast it takes me about 60-90 minutes per 2 page / 10 minute article. Uploading a raw 2m file to Auphonic and processing another copy my usual way, Auphonic was better in respect of preserving the soft/trailing ends of words - like those that end in m, n, ing, etc. I typically use a noise gate as the 2nd step after editing the recording to script; set for -38 to -42dB to remove 95% of the breath noise, that clips some word ends. I haven't found the solution yet. But Auphonic didn't do that in my hearing. Other differences were subtle - Auphonic was a wee bit sharper at 3k, 5k, and 10k+ and lower at 4k over Accentize Dialogue Enhance processing. I haven't needed to use DeRoom any longer now that I'm recording in the clothes closet. I'm enough impressed with Auphonic to switch. Much as I'd like to boast of my audio editing abilities, at 70, simplicity and saving time for Judge Judy reruns is more important to me. ;^) Again, thanks for the eye opening. Jack in Sequim
I'm happy the video helped you, Jack. This is a big reason I do videos like this. I think simplicity and saving time should be important at any age. While Judge Judy isn't my thing, I can think of any number of things that I can do with the time I save here and there. Given your project of converting blog posts to podcast episodes, the more you can automate that process the better.
Auphonic really surprised me. It's too bad it's not available as a plugin, but I know it's probably not a simple task. I know from talking with Ian, the developer of Hush Audio that there are some challenges turning it into a real-time process. Just look at the poor performance of RX11's Dialog Isolate.
@@jesse.mccune isn't it a matter of buffering? a lot of iZotope plugins are using a large buffer. From what I heard Pro Tools is having problems with it. But on Reaper, which I use, extremely large buffers like iZotope sometimes uses are not a problem at all.
Very interesting examples! Glad to see such variety of audio issues in real-life examples. Would you be interested in putting our technology to a test as well? We don't offer a plugin but you can try out either a web app or API for free:)
I just checked out your site. Given that the free plan only offers mp3 and there's no trial, I'm afraid I won't be able to test it out. I would need wav files in order to do a proper test and I'm not paying to perform a test.
@@jesse.mccune I was not surprised at poorly working RX 11 Dialogue Isolate 😂 Small changes for big money upgrades - not a good way to promote their product)
These were all run using the Natural algorithm. I’m not a fan of the EQ that is applied in the other algorithms. I’m not sure how I forgot to mention that, so thank you for asking.
I'm a big fan of Hush and Auphonic.
One thing that stood out to me is how well Auphonic attenuated the Reverb on the Esses in example 2. If you listen close you can hear the Ess ring out on Hush whereas Auphonic removes it. It also dealt with the ticking sound of example 5 quite well. Hush errs a little more on the side of natural.
VoiceEx of course is very impressive for realtime although it seems like it could use a dedicated DeReverb knob? And dxRevive is invaluable for certain problems for me.
Thanks for the comparison, it's cool hearing them side by side!
Thanks for the detailed response, Chris. I think it was you who mentioned in a response for a recent video that you liked Auphonic and it reminded me that I needed to include them in this shootout. My biggest issue with Hush is the inability to audition or preview how it will sound at the given setting. I don't want to render out an hour long track 2 or 3 times trying to find the best setting.
I'm hoping others find this shootout useful because many of us don't have the time or patience to put something like this together. It's easy to quickly A-B test plugins, but not so much when it comes to the non-realtime options. My other goal is to help those who rely on the lower quality tools hear just how much better some of the other options sound, but I doubt it will have much impact on the Descript and Riverside editors.
Truly amazing!!!! Thank you
No problem. I'm glad you found it helpful.
Thanks for this. I found Auphonic best for all sources. Way better than the rest.
I was surprised at how well it did on all the clips.
@@jesse.mccune Me too. Even better than Hush Audio App.
Thanks Jesse - you've got me rethinking my process. Converting a print blog to podcast it takes me about 60-90 minutes per 2 page / 10 minute article. Uploading a raw 2m file to Auphonic and processing another copy my usual way, Auphonic was better in respect of preserving the soft/trailing ends of words - like those that end in m, n, ing, etc. I typically use a noise gate as the 2nd step after editing the recording to script; set for -38 to -42dB to remove 95% of the breath noise, that clips some word ends. I haven't found the solution yet. But Auphonic didn't do that in my hearing. Other differences were subtle - Auphonic was a wee bit sharper at 3k, 5k, and 10k+ and lower at 4k over Accentize Dialogue Enhance processing. I haven't needed to use DeRoom any longer now that I'm recording in the clothes closet. I'm enough impressed with Auphonic to switch. Much as I'd like to boast of my audio editing abilities, at 70, simplicity and saving time for Judge Judy reruns is more important to me. ;^) Again, thanks for the eye opening. Jack in Sequim
I'm happy the video helped you, Jack. This is a big reason I do videos like this. I think simplicity and saving time should be important at any age. While Judge Judy isn't my thing, I can think of any number of things that I can do with the time I save here and there. Given your project of converting blog posts to podcast episodes, the more you can automate that process the better.
Studio Sound and Auphonic seems to have the best and similar processing. 🤔 I wish it was a DAW plug-in though.
Auphonic really surprised me. It's too bad it's not available as a plugin, but I know it's probably not a simple task. I know from talking with Ian, the developer of Hush Audio that there are some challenges turning it into a real-time process. Just look at the poor performance of RX11's Dialog Isolate.
@@jesse.mccune isn't it a matter of buffering? a lot of iZotope plugins are using a large buffer. From what I heard Pro Tools is having problems with it. But on Reaper, which I use, extremely large buffers like iZotope sometimes uses are not a problem at all.
Very interesting examples! Glad to see such variety of audio issues in real-life examples. Would you be interested in putting our technology to a test as well? We don't offer a plugin but you can try out either a web app or API for free:)
I can't promise I'll make a video, but I will check it out.
I just checked out your site. Given that the free plan only offers mp3 and there's no trial, I'm afraid I won't be able to test it out. I would need wav files in order to do a proper test and I'm not paying to perform a test.
Thank you for this comparison!
No problem. Did you have a favorite or one that surprised you at how well or how poorly it did?
The one that surprised me was Auphonic. I didn’t expect it to perform that well in the audio repair game.
I guess that’s the one that surprised you too 😂
@@jesse.mccune I was not surprised at poorly working RX 11 Dialogue Isolate 😂 Small changes for big money upgrades - not a good way to promote their product)
@@TopTierAudio Yes, Auphonic is really good
Здравствуй дорогой))) какой алгоритм включен в Accentize dxRevive Pro?
These were all run using the Natural algorithm. I’m not a fan of the EQ that is applied in the other algorithms. I’m not sure how I forgot to mention that, so thank you for asking.