OT: impulse response plug for film post [Archive]

Dave Labrecque

04-22-2008, 05:18 PM

As I'm doing ADR assessments for this film project, I'm noticing a lot of problems with poor set acoustics. They built this period set (Civial War days) in a local warehouse with apparently little expertise in how it would sound. I'm getting some bad resonances and just plain annoying room reverbs. As a result, I'm deciding to replace some lines of dialogue based on these factors alone.

But I'll need to make the new lines work alongside the production audio that's not being replaced, and so there are two things I need to be able to do:

1 match the room 'verbs, and
2 match the mic characteristics

...as closely as is possible or feasible. I think it might be time to step up to one of the better impulse response plugs, perhaps one that's suited to this kind of work in particular.

I know there was a discussion a little while back about what plugs are available, but I'd like to leverage the experience gained since then into a good investment for me today. :)

Gents? Especially audio post afficianados (Sean, MM) -- what would be your take on the current crop, especially the plugs with which you have some experience.

Really appreciate it!

MMP

04-22-2008, 05:24 PM

Ian Alexander

04-22-2008, 05:31 PM

Another vote for Voxengo CurveEQ. Makes my Shure KSM-44 match an old Senn 421.

Bob L

04-22-2008, 07:58 PM

Warren

04-22-2008, 09:37 PM

another vote for using the same mic on the ADR....half the battle.

Regarding the undesirable room tone....I would suggest not trying to match it, but using a new ambiance on both the ADR and the production audio, and it will likely mask the bad juju. Less is more. And don't forget to put room tone under the ADR to make the tranistions smooth.

The "pros" would likely clean up production dialog tracks using real time noise reduction hardware such as the Cedar units:

http://www.independentaudio.com/CDCatalog/HTML/cedar.html

Demoed these at NAB....very impressive...and very expensive....starting at $7K, IIRC.

Dolby had a unit that was quite popular a few years back, but I can't remember the model number. But they get the job done, and you've been hearing them for years as you watch your favorite movies.

Mark

Is there a software equal to this device?

Sean McCoy

04-22-2008, 09:38 PM

Well, first I would cut the ADR with the same mic used on set.
Yes, and I've been cutting all ADR with both a boom and a lav, which has really helped in some cases. If you're sure the original was all boom, then you might want to put up a pair at different distances.

Altiverb VST would be my convolution choice, but Sir can work O.K.
Convolution seems to be the best option, unless you happen to have a TC System 6000 around. I've used Waves IR-L and SIR, but I think the choices of available impulses are far more critical than the program. I've downloaded every impulse Waves has and every free impulse I could find for use in SIR, and have found there just isn't a great variety of useable stuff out there for post. Altiverb is high on my shopping list because I understand it has a huge library of quality, post-friendly impulses available. I did buy Speakerphone last year, and it's very impressive and useful but with a limited number of rooms built in.

I have had some good luck with EQ matching using Voxengo Curve EQ.
I tried this on several occasions with Firium, never had very good luck and usually end up using Q10. Could be I just didn't get it. Is there something that makes Voxengo's matching process better than the other options?

Dave Labrecque

04-22-2008, 10:25 PM

Just a question... if the reason for replacing the dialog is based strictly on the room acoustics... why bother doing clean vocals and then going to all the trouble to try to match the original room acoustics... you know... the acoustics you did not like and replaced the dialog because of... seems like if you do a good job matching evrything, you will be right back where you started. :)

Bob L

Good question.

Fortunately (so far anyway), it's looking like some parts are worse than others within a given scene, depending on location of the speaker in the room, spectral content and volume of the speaker, and placement of the mics (which often move during a given spoken line). It's looking like about 80 or 90 percent of the dialogue finds itself within an acceptable intersection of these factors (even with the poor acoustics), and the balance need replacement. My aim is to match the sound of the replacing lines with that of the adjacent, acceptable production dialogue.

I'll certainly be aiming for recreating the space (when it's not too prominent) without the over-the-top resonances. :)

Some of the stuff I've been able to save as-is by notching the bad freqs. Some are just too far out there.

All that said, room acoustics aren't the only reason for the ADR. Sometimes there are acoustically mis-matched takes that have been edited together by the video guy (e.g., first half of a line from take 1, second half from take 2) . So, I need to replace it with a single new take that's consistent throughout. Sometimes it's lame diction. Sometimes there's backround noise that's getting in the way, or stops abruptly over a two-take edit point. Or some statesman's ruffly shirt makes too much noise or muffles the buried lavalier.

Dave Labrecque

04-22-2008, 10:30 PM

Well, first I would cut the ADR with the same mic used on set.

Altiverb VST would be my convolution choice, but Sir can work O.K.

I have had some good luck with EQ matching using Voxengo Curve EQ.

Good luck!

Regards,

MM

Yeah, maybe I'll try that "old trick" of using the same mics. :)

Documentation's pretty hit-and-miss on this project, but maybe the sound guys (if someone can remember who worked on which scenes, and I can find them) will remember what got used.

Even a lav and a shot gun of any make/model would proably work better than any studio condenser I put up, eh?

Dave Labrecque

04-22-2008, 10:32 PM

Dave Labrecque

04-22-2008, 10:39 PM

Yes, and I've been cutting all ADR with both a boom and a lav, which has really helped in some cases. If you're sure the original was all boom, then you might want to put up a pair at different distances.

Actually, it sounds like there's both boom and lav going on.

Convolution seems to be the best option, unless you happen to have a TC System 6000 around. I've used Waves IR-L and SIR, but I think the choices of available impulses are far more critical than the program. I've downloaded every impulse Waves has and every free impulse I could find for use in SIR, and have found there just isn't a great variety of useable stuff out there for post. Altiverb is high on my shopping list because I understand it has a huge library of quality, post-friendly impulses available. I did buy Speakerphone last year, and it's very impressive and useful but with a limited number of rooms built in.

I tried this on several occasions with Firium, never had very good luck and usually end up using Q10. Could be I just didn't get it. Is there something that makes Voxengo's matching process better than the other options?I think I'll have a look-see at Altiverb and Speakerphone. That last one is the one I couldn't remember that was being talked about around here a while back. Thanks.

Carl G.

04-23-2008, 01:18 AM

MMP

04-23-2008, 04:01 AM

I tried this on several occasions with Firium, never had very good luck and usually end up using Q10. Could be I just didn't get it. Is there something that makes Voxengo's matching process better than the other options?

I have never tried Firium.

I still find the need to tweak the Voxengo plugin, but find I get there a little quicker using it's analysis capabilities than I think I would otherwise. I also find 15-20 bands usually better than higher numbers, though that seems counter-intuitive. I believe there is a demo available.
http://www.voxengo.com/product/curveeq/

Regards,

MM

AcousticGlue

04-23-2008, 05:24 AM

I would say the automation of AuxSend is going to be a wonderkind for you on this. Automate reverb, compression and EQ.

Sean McCoy

04-23-2008, 08:47 AM

Even a lav and a shot gun of any make/model would proably work better than any studio condenser I put up, eh?
My only lav is an AT 831, which has worked pretty well matching production but is a little too sensitive to cable-induced noise. A Sanken COS-11X is on my wish list, but the AT definitely has that scrunchy "lav sound".

For boom work, I've been getting by using a Neumann KM140 and have gotten good feedback from other studios where I've sent stuff that was cut here. I do have my eyes on the ubiquitous Sennheiser 416 for shotgun duties—but it's pricey, and the amount of ADR I cut hasn't quite justified pulling the trigger yet. I've been wondering whether one of the much less expensive shotguns from Rode or AT might be a good alternative, but haven't been able to get any words of wisdom as to whether it would be an improvement over the Neumann for ADR or not. I'm trying to avoid any more "parallel upgrades," if you know what I mean.

Tim Miskimon

04-23-2008, 01:32 PM

Altiverb VST is what I would suggest.
SIR is okay but the IRs that comes with Altiverb is far superior to the ones at Noise Vault.
Altiverb works very good in SAW.

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 03:32 PM

Voxengo Curve EQ has worked wonders here too.

Can you give me a quick overview of the process of using it to make one mic sound like another mic? The stuff on the Voxengo site doesn't seem to mention such an application.

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 03:35 PM

I would say the automation of AuxSend is going to be a wonderkind for you on this. Automate reverb, compression and EQ.

Yep. Pretty handy stuff, alright. :)

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 03:42 PM

My only lav is an AT 831, which has worked pretty well matching production but is a little too sensitive to cable-induced noise. A Sanken COS-11X is on my wish list, but the AT definitely has that scrunchy "lav sound".

For boom work, I've been getting by using a Neumann KM140 and have gotten good feedback from other studios where I've sent stuff that was cut here. I do have my eyes on the ubiquitous Sennheiser 416 for shotgun duties—but it's pricey, and the amount of ADR I cut hasn't quite justified pulling the trigger yet. I've been wondering whether one of the much less expensive shotguns from Rode or AT might be a good alternative, but haven't been able to get any words of wisdom as to whether it would be an improvement over the Neumann for ADR or not. I'm trying to avoid any more "parallel upgrades," if you know what I mean.

I've been thinking of a 416, too. It has it's place for certain VO work as well as location sound, so my trigger finger's a little itchy. :)

For the last ADR I did I put up a C414 set to hypercardioid, thinking that might be part of the sound of a typical shotgun, but didn't hear anything dramatic.

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 03:45 PM

Altiverb VST is what I would suggest.
SIR is okay but the IRs that comes with Altiverb is far superior to the ones at Noise Vault.
Altiverb works very good in SAW.

Tim, I've been reading some old threads and know that you're a pretty big fan of Altiverb. Can you tell me anything specific about how it may be suited to video/film post work? Are there lots of post-type spaces available as impulses? Are they pretty tweakable?

I recently got Dreamverb for my UAD-1, and that looks pretty tweakable as far as reflections and resonance curves, etc.

Ian Alexander

04-23-2008, 04:17 PM

Can you give me a quick overview of the process of using it to make one mic sound like another mic? The stuff on the Voxengo site doesn't seem to mention such an application.
Here's the way it works here, Dave. I'm going from memory and looking at the interface. Hope I don't muck it up.

1. Place a sample of the original on track 1. Say 15-20 seconds.
2. On track 2, starting at the end of track 1, record the same text as the original, using the new mic (with the same talent. It's not good enough to make me sound like you.)
3. Match levels and compression between old and new as closely as possible. Verb is something I haven't dealt with using CurveEQ. You'll have to experiment to see whether you want verb pre CurveEQ or post.
4. Add CurveEQ to both tracks. I usu go Post to include fader.
5. Move MT cursor back to zero.
6. On CurveEQ for track 1, click C for Capture.
7. Play to end of original sample.
8. Click S for Stop and also stop playback.
9. Click F for file.
10. Choose Save Captured Spectrum.
11. On CurveEQ for track 2, click F.
12. Choose Load Captured Spectrum.
13. Click F.
14. Choose Match Saved Spectrum xx bands. (More on this in a minute.)
15. Play the same text in new track.
16. Click S for Stop and also stop playback.
17. Compare tracks.

As to the number of bands, I think MM said he's found 15-20? works well. I have found varying numbers on various material. You'll have to play.

HTH.

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 06:52 PM

Here's the way it works here, Dave. I'm going from memory and looking at the interface. Hope I don't muck it up.

1. Place a sample of the original on track 1. Say 15-20 seconds.
2. On track 2, starting at the end of track 1, record the same text as the original, using the new mic (with the same talent. It's not good enough to make me sound like you.)
3. Match levels and compression between old and new as closely as possible. Verb is something I haven't dealt with using CurveEQ. You'll have to experiment to see whether you want verb pre CurveEQ or post.
4. Add CurveEQ to both tracks. I usu go Post to include fader.
5. Move MT cursor back to zero.
6. On CurveEQ for track 1, click C for Capture.
7. Play to end of original sample.
8. Click S for Stop and also stop playback.
9. Click F for file.
10. Choose Save Captured Spectrum.
11. On CurveEQ for track 2, click F.
12. Choose Load Captured Spectrum.
13. Click F.
14. Choose Match Saved Spectrum xx bands. (More on this in a minute.)
15. Play the same text in new track.
16. Click S for Stop and also stop playback.
17. Compare tracks.

As to the number of bands, I think MM said he's found 15-20? works well. I have found varying numbers on various material. You'll have to play.

HTH.

Thanks, Ian. OK, so it's pretty much like NR plugs where you sample the "before" piece, then apply it to the "after" piece. It's that simple. And how would you chracterize your degree of impressedness with such uses? Does it work pretty darn well?

Dave Labrecque

04-23-2008, 07:03 PM

I've never used this, but have had it recommeneded to me several times to match voices.

http://www.har-bal.com/

Didn't notice if there was a demo available.

mark

This came up here a couple years back.

The price is right. :) Steve Berson, what's the good word on Hairball?

Gary Ray

04-23-2008, 08:29 PM

Has anyone used the relatively new SIR ver. 2? A hi def version with additional tweaks is by the same person who brought us SIR_1.011. Price is $189 USD.

Comments?

TotalSonic

04-23-2008, 09:23 PM

This came up here a couple years back.

The price is right. :) Steve Berson, what's the good word on Hairball?

I don't really have that much experience using eq matching tools beyond being generally disappointed with them (starting with FreeFilter which I never really liked).
Personally I think if you're going for eq matching then Voxengo Curve EQ will likely give you better sounding results as their author really knows his DSP. I have heard of some that have been happy using HarBal for this chore though.

Izotope Ozone might also be another option for this - http://www.izotope.com/support/help/ozone/pages/modules_matching_eq.htm

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Perry

04-24-2008, 01:25 AM

Good question.

Fortunately (so far anyway), it's looking like some parts are worse than others within a given scene, depending on location of the speaker in the room, spectral content and volume of the speaker, and placement of the mics (which often move during a given spoken line). It's looking like about 80 or 90 percent of the dialog finds itself within an acceptable intersection of these factors (even with the poor acoustics), and the balance need replacement. My aim is to match the sound of the replacing lines with that of the adjacent, acceptable production dialogue.

I'll certainly be aiming for recreating the space (when it's not too prominent) without the over-the-top resonances. :)

Some of the stuff I've been able to save as-is by notching the bad freqs. Some are just too far out there.

All that said, room acoustics aren't the only reason for the ADR. Sometimes there are acoustically mis-matched takes that have been edited together by the video guy (e.g., first half of a line from take 1, second half from take 2) . So, I need to replace it with a single new take that's consistent throughout. Sometimes it's lame diction. Sometimes there's backround noise that's getting in the way, or stops abruptly over a two-take edit point. Or some statesman's ruffly shirt makes too much noise or muffles the buried lavalier.

Dave, it might be worth trying a 'transient' plugin. I cleaned up some dialog for a guy here recently this way. It wasn't in too bad of shape but had too much 'ambiance' and room reflections in it tht wasn't wanted. He had been trying gating and stuff but with no success and asked me if I could help. When I heard it my first thought was a transient plugin... and that worked pretty well. He was quite happy.

It's possible that at least in some cases you might be able to take the 'bad' stuff and clean it up enough to match the 'good' stuff it's just a matter of reducing the amount of 'ambient room sound'.

You might think of a transient plug-in as being used primarily to increase transients for things like drum trks or whatever (and you can do that) but they also work in 'reverse' and can sometimes effectively reduce unwanted ambient sound in cases where a gate or noise filter won't work. Pretty amazing really.

There are a few demos available to try this. I used the demo of the Stillwell Transient Monster in this case and after trying a few others I actually think this one is better than some of the other more expensive and/or higher profile ones. In fact I think I'm going to purchase this one myself.

http://www.stillwellaudio.com/?page_id=18

Best of luck,

Perry

MMP

04-24-2008, 03:26 AM

That's interesting Perry...I recently used the UAD-1 version of the SPL Transient Designer in just this way, and it did make an improvement.

Regards,

MM

Ian Alexander

04-24-2008, 07:24 AM

Thanks, Ian. OK, so it's pretty much like NR plugs where you sample the "before" piece, then apply it to the "after" piece. It's that simple. And how would you chracterize your degree of impressedness with such uses? Does it work pretty darn well?
Well, how about a story? In fact, it's a story about matching audio recorded in an "interesting" environment.

I bought Voxengo CurveEQ to use on inserts for one studio. It's about 75 minutes away and I have this studio thingy here. So, I wanted to avoid 2.5 hour round trips for two sentences.

They have a fairly large booth with a table about 4 feet square in it. On the table sits a four-way isolation device. From above, it looks like an X, going from corner to corner. It's about 16 inches tall, about three inches thick, made of fiberglass insulation and window screen on a wooden frame. It allows them to aim four mics out toward talent seated at each side of the table. They use Sennheiser MD421s purchased as WWII surplus.;)

Maybe the isolation X gives them good separation between voices, but it also adds an amazing midrange boxy honk to the mic response. I use a Shure KSM-44 in a very dry booth about 6 x 6.5 feet. I get a fairly even response.

CurveEQ is not only able to match the Shure condenser to the Sennheiser dynamic, it comes very close to the midrange bizarreness that the isolation device creates. They send me a piece to match and I cross my fingers. The curve shown in the plugin is crazy looking. They regularly cut these inserts into long form programs and ship out the result on CDs or whatever. These are usually dry voice programs with no music, effects, or even pictures to draw attention away from a dicey edit.

It works.

Okay, everybody. Story time's over. Time to get back to work.:)

Disclaimer: I like the MD421. In open air, it is one of my favorite dynamics. I almost bought one as my first VO mic, but opted for the EV RE20.

Tim Miskimon

04-24-2008, 07:47 AM

Tim, I've been reading some old threads and know that you're a pretty big fan of Altiverb. Can you tell me anything specific about how it may be suited to video/film post work? Are there lots of post-type spaces available as impulses? Are they pretty tweakable?

I recently got Dreamverb for my UAD-1, and that looks pretty tweakable as far as reflections and resonance curves, etc.

Altiverb has tons of spaces - inside cars, fire trucks, in various houses - spaces captured in many different rooms of the same house.
I would suggest spending some time poking around wwwaudioease.com.
Check out all the spaces.
Altiverb is the most tweekable Convolution plug in available.
It's interface in very friendly, uncluttered and has lots of features.
The added bonus is that it works great in Saw Studio.

Sean McCoy

04-24-2008, 09:58 AM

The added bonus is that it works great in Saw Studio.
Does this translate into "it doesn't use an inordinate amount of CPU and remembers its presets?"

Long reverb impulses will use more CPU than short ones, but it feels to me like the Waves IR-L sucks up more than its fair share of power.

Dave Labrecque

04-24-2008, 10:55 AM

Dave, it might be worth trying a 'transient' plugin. I cleaned up some dialog for a guy here recently this way. It wasn't in too bad of shape but had too much 'ambiance' and room reflections in it tht wasn't wanted. He had been trying gating and stuff but with no success and asked me if I could help. When I heard it my first thought was a transient plugin... and that worked pretty well. He was quite happy.

It's possible that at least in some cases you might be able to take the 'bad' stuff and clean it up enough to match the 'good' stuff it's just a matter of reducing the amount of 'ambient room sound'.

You might think of a transient plug-in as being used primarily to increase transients for things like drum trks or whatever (and you can do that) but they also work in 'reverse' and can sometimes effectively reduce unwanted ambient sound in cases where a gate or noise filter won't work. Pretty amazing really.

There are a few demos available to try this. I used the demo of the Stillwell Transient Monster in this case and after trying a few others I actually think this one is better than some of the other more expensive and/or higher profile ones. In fact I think I'm going to purchase this one myself.

http://www.stillwellaudio.com/?page_id=18

Best of luck,

Perry

Interesting. Thanks, Perry. I'll check it out. Can you run the theory of operation by me real quick? How would this work, theoretically, from a physics standpoint? I always thought about "transient designer" plugs as super high-precision compressors, really (dynamic envelope shapers). Not sure how that would apply. But I'm sure you are. :)

Dave Labrecque

04-24-2008, 11:00 AM

Well, how about a story? In fact, it's a story about matching audio recorded in an "interesting" environment.

I bought Voxengo CurveEQ to use on inserts for one studio. It's about 75 minutes away and I have this studio thingy here. So, I wanted to avoid 2.5 hour round trips for two sentences.

They have a fairly large booth with a table about 4 feet square in it. On the table sits a four-way isolation device. From above, it looks like an X, going from corner to corner. It's about 16 inches tall, about three inches thick, made of fiberglass insulation and window screen on a wooden frame. It allows them to aim four mics out toward talent seated at each side of the table. They use Sennheiser MD421s purchased as WWII surplus.;)

Maybe the isolation X gives them good separation between voices, but it also adds an amazing midrange boxy honk to the mic response. I use a Shure KSM-44 in a very dry booth about 6 x 6.5 feet. I get a fairly even response.

CurveEQ is not only able to match the Shure condenser to the Sennheiser dynamic, it comes very close to the midrange bizarreness that the isolation device creates. They send me a piece to match and I cross my fingers. The curve shown in the plugin is crazy looking. They regularly cut these inserts into long form programs and ship out the result on CDs or whatever. These are usually dry voice programs with no music, effects, or even pictures to draw attention away from a dicey edit.

It works.

Okay, everybody. Story time's over. Time to get back to work.:)

Disclaimer: I like the MD421. In open air, it is one of my favorite dynamics. I almost bought one as my first VO mic, but opted for the EV RE20.

Then you would describe your implementation of the Curve EQ as "semi-miraculous"? :)

Wow, it's just hard to believe that it's as good as people seem to be saying.

Perry

04-24-2008, 12:20 PM

That's interesting Perry...I recently used the UAD-1 version of the SPL Transient Designer in just this way, and it did make an improvement.

Regards,

MM

In the fwiw dept. I tried the SPL as well but thought the Stillwell one was generally a bit better.. at least for what I demoed them for. That's not to say that the SPL sucked mind you. ;) :) The SPL is prettier too.. though that's in the eyes of the beholder I guess. :)

Perry

Perry

04-24-2008, 12:41 PM

Interesting. Thanks, Perry. I'll check it out. Can you run the theory of operation by me real quick? How would this work, theoretically, from a physics standpoint? I always thought about "transient designer" plugs as super high-precision compressors, really (dynamic envelope shapers). Not sure how that would apply. But I'm sure you are. :)

Well.... besides being able to turn up the attack by manipulating the transients.. you can turn down the sustain. In this case the 'sustain' is the ambient sound.

I had played around with some of these a bit and when this guy wanted me to see if I could do something with his files I knew already that more traditional methods probably weren't going to work.. no gating or anything like that. Those approaches would be too obvious.

I thought that a transient plug-in might work.. and it did. It didn't get completely rid of the ambient sound but it did very noticeably reduce it and it was a big improvement. It made 'THE' difference and made it usable. As I said, the guy was very happy with the results. Me too.

As to how this is 'actually' done... you'd have to read up on the technical aspects of transient manipulation (me too!)... but it does do what is claimed.

In this particular case the Stillwell plug-in beat out the UA/SPL IMO. I had that demo on hand as well at the time.

I haven't needed this since then but I think I'll purchase the Stillwell plug-in anyway... great product at a great price... and very usable. I'm sure I'd use it again... maybe even for drums as is promoted. :) It's an interesting tool to have on hand. I think it's $50.00 if I recall correctly.

Thinking about it now... I gotta add.... All of the Stillwell plug-ins seemed to be nice actually. Impressive stuff. Cool 'vibe' there as well. I want to test more of them out a bit for myself if I can just ever get to it. The 'problem' with plug-ins at this point (for me at least) is that I have so many already. But... the Stillwell 'Transient Monster' is fairly unique... and he has some other 'interesting' stuff there as well to check out.

Gee.. I'm talking myself into it. Just getting into mixing an album now and I think I'll try some of the Stillwell plug-ins in there. :)

Anyway... back to the original issue here... I'd say definitely give this a try.. it just might be the tool that you need and it might save a lot of work otherwise.

All the best with it,

Perry

Dave Labrecque

04-24-2008, 01:43 PM

Well.... besides being able to turn up the attack by manipulating the transients.. you can turn down the sustain. In this case the 'sustain' is the ambient sound.

I had played around with some of these a bit and when this guy wanted me to see if I could do something with his files I knew already that more traditional methods probably weren't going to work.. no gating or anything like that. Those approaches would be too obvious.

I thought that a transient plug-in might work.. and it did. It didn't get completely rid of the ambient sound but it did very noticeably reduce it and it was a big improvement. It made 'THE' difference and made it usable. As I said, the guy was very happy with the results. Me too.

As to how this is 'actually' done... you'd have to read up on the technical aspects of transient manipulation (me too!)... but it does do what is claimed.

In this particular case the Stillwell plug-in beat out the UA/SPL IMO. I had that demo on hand as well at the time.

I haven't needed this since then but I think I'll purchase the Stillwell plug-in anyway... great product at a great price... and very usable. I'm sure I'd use it again... maybe even for drums as is promoted. :) It's an interesting tool to have on hand. I think it's $50.00 if I recall correctly.

Thinking about it now... I gotta add.... All of the Stillwell plug-ins seemed to be nice actually. Impressive stuff. Cool 'vibe' there as well. I want to test more of them out a bit for myself if I can just ever get to it. The 'problem' with plug-ins at this point (for me at least) is that I have so many already. But... the Stillwell 'Transient Monster' is fairly unique... and he has some other 'interesting' stuff there as well to check out.

Gee.. I'm talking myself into it. Just getting into mixing an album now and I think I'll try some of the Stillwell plug-ins in there. :)

Anyway... back to the original issue here... I'd say definitely give this a try.. it just might be the tool that you need and it might save a lot of work otherwise.

All the best with it,

Perry

LOL. Nice to listen in as you talk yourself into it. :p Thanks for the info, Perry. I'll definitely check out the demo.

Ian Alexander

04-24-2008, 03:05 PM

Then you would describe your implementation of the Curve EQ as "semi-miraculous"? :)

Wow, it's just hard to believe that it's as good as people seem to be saying.
I think the theory is pretty pedestrian. Capture two cumulative frequency spectrums. Compare them to each other. Then EQ the second to match the first. Miraculous, no, but the implementation does a very good job in a short time.

This is only EQ, though, and will not address the ambience issues you describe.

Dave Labrecque

04-24-2008, 03:15 PM

I think the theory is pretty pedestrian. Capture two cumulative frequency spectrums. Compare them to each other. Then EQ the second to match the first. Miraculous, no, but the implementation does a very good job in a short time.

This is only EQ, though, and will not address the ambience issues you describe.

Yeah, I guess that make sense. So long as your comparing the same voice reading the same line. What I don't get is how this can apparently work so well getting song A to sound like song B. When the base audio is decidedly different, I'm not sure I know how the magic can work quite so well.

Tim Miskimon

04-24-2008, 06:52 PM

Does this translate into "it doesn't use an inordinate amount of CPU and remembers its presets?"

Yes to both.
I'm Quite pleased with it's over performance.
I'm thinking seriously about buying one of those Muse VST players so I can take the unit on the road for live PA.
The AMS IRs are fantastic as well as the plates.

Dave Labrecque

04-24-2008, 06:57 PM

The AMS IRs are fantastic as well as the plates.

They should make IRs of the plates so you don't have to lug 'em around. Must be a real PITA at live gigs. Space hogs.

Sean McCoy

04-24-2008, 07:01 PM

Yes to both.
I'm Quite pleased with it's over performance.
I'm thinking seriously about buying one of those Muse VST players so I can take the unit on the road for live PA.
The AMS IRs are fantastic as well as the plates.
Thanks, Tim. I looked through their list of post-oriented impulses today and it is a huge and impressive set. Seems like Altiverb is a must-have for any serious in-the-box post folks. Dang! There goes another five hundred bucks.........

The "deluxe" version of the program includes surround impulses. I have no idea how those might be implemented in SAWStudio. Anybody?

Ian Alexander

04-24-2008, 09:05 PM

Yeah, I guess that make sense. So long as your comparing the same voice reading the same line. What I don't get is how this can apparently work so well getting song A to sound like song B. When the base audio is decidedly different, I'm not sure I know how the magic can work quite so well.
Good question. I've never used it on music. In fact, other than choruses and orchestras, I've recorded and mixed exactly one song.

I would guess, based on what I've read about using CurveEQ for music, that if you want your tune to sound like someone else's, you'd at least use similar instruments. CurveEQ would then give your tune the same overall frequency spectrum "shape". If you have carved out chunks of spectrum for each of the instruments in the mix, that spectral matching would result in a similar overall tonal balance at least. Some radio stations have tried to achieve a "station sound" applying the same sort of theory through multiband compression.

It would seem truer to the art to create a mix based on what each song and each band brings to the table. But there have been plenty of folks who've made money over the years with a "Me, too!" approach to music production, films, tv, books, stealing ideas from the guy in the next cubicle, etc.

Dave Labrecque

04-25-2008, 10:25 AM

Good question. I've never used it on music. In fact, other than choruses and orchestras, I've recorded and mixed exactly one song.

I would guess, based on what I've read about using CurveEQ for music, that if you want your tune to sound like someone else's, you'd at least use similar instruments. CurveEQ would then give your tune the same overall frequency spectrum "shape". If you have carved out chunks of spectrum for each of the instruments in the mix, that spectral matching would result in a similar overall tonal balance at least. Some radio stations have tried to achieve a "station sound" applying the same sort of theory through multiband compression.

It would seem truer to the art to create a mix based on what each song and each band brings to the table. But there have been plenty of folks who've made money over the years with a "Me, too!" approach to music production, films, tv, books, stealing ideas from the guy in the next cubicle, etc.

Some of these "spectral matching" plugs talk about using the process to get a lot of different songs, perhaps from different eras for example, to sound consistent within the context of a compilation project. That's a lot of potential variation in instrumentation, arrangement, etc. Now that sounds like a technical challenge for a plug-in.

Perhaps in such an example it's just light EQ balance, rather than straight-up emulation that they're going for.

Perry

04-25-2008, 04:11 PM

LOL. Nice to listen in as you talk yourself into it. :p Thanks for the info, Perry. I'll definitely check out the demo.

As a follow up.. I did purchase the Stillwell 'Transient Monster' plug-in. Also... the 'demos' are fully functional so if you want to try it it will work without any restrictions. I'm already using it on some things in the mixes I'm doing. Works really well and is quite useful.... made some rather 'weak' ride cymbal sounds jump up and stand proud! :cool:

It's almost magical really.... don't forget to try it! :)

Cheers,
Perry