View Single Post
Old 30th October 2019
  #8
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
 

Well, you can do that if you want the audio to sound as close to untouched as possible. I think some people will want that: their goal would be to make it seem like they are NOT removing sibilance, yet it still doesn't become a problem. For your second example I think they'd go 'no, that's exactly how it should be'. Remember, esses ARE S. It's a bright white-noisy sound but rather highpassed: there is no way to change it into another sound short of further filtering.

I can do that with DeBess, even for your case I think, but you might end up using more than one instance. I can see using it as the first thing in the chain and by all means carry on with that… but then after you've compressed and brightened and all the things you want to do in mixing, consider putting a second DeBess on after all that, once you've got the vocal track you want.

You might be needing more thorough de-essing because you're bringing up what would not be objectionable esses… and by the time your chain is done, they've turned INTO objectionable esses. If that's the case, then DeBess will then be able to handle them better: they'll be louder and brighter and it'll be the same process.

I see that with the new sharpness control it's able to isolate the ess really well. That makes me happy

If you get lisp you need to continue engaging DeBess the way you were, but set the depth and filter until it SOUNDS right. There's not really any point where it's supposed to work with depth and filter at 0, that's just full power processing. It's probably filter you want to be using: that will roll off only the highs of the ess, if set correctly, and I think that's what you want. If DeBess is engaging or over-engaging, you modulate its maximum effect with depth and filter