The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Sibilances on separate track
Old 15th November 2009
  #1
Lives for gear
 

Sibilances on separate track

I tried some advice I got on here about placing sibilances on separate tracks, and I have to say....


I'll be doing it that way from now on. It actually has some additional benefits. I just don't like De-essers for a number of reasons. In all fairness, I have haven't tried dsm, or some of the protools options, but based upon the 4 plugs I have tried in logic, it sounds unnatural to me.

I am already doing what some would consider to be ridiculous volume automation on vocals anyway... partly because I sing with rapidfire dynamics that are a pain to deal with in the mix.

Compression only makes the sibilances worse, which is why I was willing to try the advice on here about cutting out all of them and placing them on a separate track.

Now, I'm not going to pretend it takes 2-3 minutes like I've heard on here... it took me more like 45 minutes for a single verse, but that's including the time it tooke me to dig into the volume automation for the sibilance track and get them all to sit just right, and I'm being overly careful if anything about my edit points.

That being said, one major benefit also came up: Because they are on their own track, I can send differently to verbs. I like a lot o high end in my vocal verbs, but sibilances are always the problem as their ringing out is distracting.

Now I can turn down the verb sends and even turn it UP a bit on the main track since I don't get those nasty rings.

Then, I can sum the two dry signals into a buss and compress them together. Since I have total control over sibilance level separately, I am free to compress the vocals listening to the overall sound to get the best compression levels rather than being forced to use the sibilance as my limit on what works compression-wise.

I've found that this compression step also helps re-blend the two tracks.

Now, was it somewhat time consuming? Yes, but frankly even if it were an hour per verse to get it right the first time and be done messing with it, it was more than worth it for amazingly clear and natural sounding vocals.

Just thought I'd share, and encourage anyone who hasn't tried this method to give it a shot.
Old 16th November 2009
  #2
Gear Head
 
supernovasounds's Avatar
 

that seems like a lot of unnecessary work. if the proper mic was selected from the begining you would save yourself a lot of trouble.
Old 16th November 2009
  #3
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by supernovasounds View Post
that seems like a lot of unnecessary work. if the proper mic was selected from the begining you would save yourself a lot of trouble.
or a pencil!

wasn't there something about Shania Twain's consonants being on a separate track?
Old 16th November 2009
  #4
Lives for gear
 
The Beatsmith's Avatar
 

you could use eiosis de-esser to do this, much quicker. not as accurately, but yeah. there's a tutorial on it on their site, if i remember.
Old 16th November 2009
  #5
Lives for gear
 
duckoff's Avatar
 

Quote:
you could use eiosis de-esser to do this, much quicker

ditto - unique deesser - in a class of it's own ( you can eq/gain the 'esses' and the 'non-esses' separately )

best £100 I ever spent
Old 16th November 2009
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Geert van den Berg's Avatar
 

IMHO if there's no option to fix the problem at the source iow swapping mic's or with a track recorded by someone else. Splitting the esses on a different track is the way to go! Takes some time but you do get all the benefits the OP noted.
Old 16th November 2009
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geert van den Berg View Post
IMHO if there's no option to fix the problem at the source iow swapping mic's or with a track recorded by someone else. Splitting the esses on a different track is the way to go! Takes some time but you do get all the benefits the OP noted.

im dreaming of a plug which could do it for years
Old 16th November 2009
  #8
Lives for gear
 

Yeah... it's just not the same as a de-esser. Maintains a much more natural sound... can still be overdone and make the singer sound lispy... I prefer sublte attenuation.
Old 17th November 2009
  #9
MB comp?

or how about putting a filter on the vox to bring out only the sibilances, then gate that to get only the peak offenders, use that to trigger whatever you want. phase flip it with the original to get the non-sibilanced vox, to use for verb or what-not. boom, now your peaky sibs wont interrupt your normal processing.
Old 17th November 2009
  #10
Here for the gear
 

helpful advice, thanks for sharing
Old 17th November 2009
  #11
Lives for gear
 
duckoff's Avatar
 

Quote:
im dreaming of a plug which could do it for years
Quote:
Yeah... it's just not the same as a de-esser. Maintains a much more natural sound... can still be overdone and make the singer sound lispy... I prefer sublte attenuation.
seriously demo the eiosis - it essentially does this automatically - totally unlike any other desser
Old 17th November 2009
  #12
Lives for gear
 
duckoff's Avatar
 

Quote:
MB comp?
pretty much what most dessers are anyhow - specialised MB comps

I used to use an MB comp till i got the eiosis
Old 18th November 2009
  #13
now that i think about it the easiest solution is to put a de-esser on but only on the reverb bus. so your reg vocal in the mix is un-de-essed, but the one that goes to the reverb is heavily de-essed to the point of sounding like a lisp, to avoid those annoying high-freq consonants benig reverberated. this should do the trick.
Old 18th November 2009
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockManDan View Post
now that i think about it the easiest solution is to put a de-esser on but only on the reverb bus. so your reg vocal in the mix is un-de-essed, but the one that goes to the reverb is heavily de-essed to the point of sounding like a lisp, to avoid those annoying high-freq consonants benig reverberated. this should do the trick.
Interesting idea. Might try it. I have a couple tracks where problem is much bigger than that... already recorded so damage is done... just doing best I can with it.
Old 18th November 2009
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Saudade's Avatar
 

I thought I read somewhere there's another method using "a separate track".

Like you mult to a new track, put a very high HPF so you only have like above 5k for example. Flip the phase of this multed track, automate mute and unmute whereever de-essing is needed/not needed?
Old 18th November 2009
  #16
Lives for gear
 
The Beatsmith's Avatar
 

i am certainly up for finding a solution, this is a lot of work (attached pic)

i use the eiosis de-esser for the EQ section, and i do the volume ride myself., but i *still* feel like it effects the overall tonality with it on.

i'm going to go the route of doubling the lead vox track, the eiosis on both tracks, one with the sibilants on, the other 'the rest', and deal with the separately. this is what i was talking about earlier, and is suggested on the eiosis website...
Attached Thumbnails
Sibilances on separate track-automation.jpg  
Old 18th November 2009
  #17
Lives for gear
 

Why exactly does flipping the phase on the sibilance track make a difference?
📝 Reply
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump