[SilverEars]

So, I've been trying the darnest to reduce sibilant effect of vocal tracks that can be excessive. I know when it comes to recording precess there is concept of de-esser or de-essing, but this is during mastering phase(so that I don't run into this issue. LOL.). Do you guys just reduce the sibilance range in general of a wide band or specific narrower band of frequencies do you guys dip? Or how do you guys go about EQ'ing headphone in this respect?

Can de-esser concept be applied to EQ'ing track's sound output?

To me the range most annoyance and sounds the most treble energy with tinny tonality is within 6-8k(although nearby the annoyance level decays a bit to the left and right of that band).

 

[WoodyLuvr]

So, I've been trying the darnest to reduce sibilant effect of vocal tracks that can be excessive. I know when it comes to recording precess there is concept of de-esser or de-essing, but this is during mastering phase(so that I don't run into this issue. LOL.). Do you guys just reduce the sibilance range in general of a wide band or specific narrower band of frequencies do you guys dip? Or how do you guys go about EQ'ing headphone in this respect?

Can de-esser concept be applied to EQ'ing track's sound output?

To me the range most annoyance and sounds the most treble energy with tinny tonality is within 6-8k(although nearby the annoyance level decays a bit to the left and right of that band).

I have personally found solving harsh sibilance issues to be more about headphone selection rather than something easily fixable via EQing and/or DSP plugins. However, I am very sensitive to treble happy headphones and typically avoid them as they fatigue me quickly.

 

[SilverEars]

I have personally found solving harsh sibilance issues to be more headphone type/signature selection than something easily fixable via EQing and/or DSP plugins.

That's the idea I'm stearing toward after playing with EQ a bit. Mind you I haven't tried so many. I've tried EQAPO as far as computer software, but that didn't provide me satisfying results. I just wonder if a built-in EQ on an interface device more effective. I've tried some graphic EQ on DAPs and they weren't that great either except one device that actually had a built-in parametric EQ.

I think when you are mixing, you can EQ separately the vocals, and mix that in with the other tracks in the mix. If you EQ a track after the mastering, you are effecting everything in the mix.

 

[castleofargh]

So, I've been trying the darnest to reduce sibilant effect of vocal tracks that can be excessive. I know when it comes to recording precess there is concept of de-esser or de-essing, but this is during mastering phase(so that I don't run into this issue. LOL.). Do you guys just reduce the sibilance range in general of a wide band or specific narrower band of frequencies do you guys dip? Or how do you guys go about EQ'ing headphone in this respect?

Can de-esser concept be applied to EQ'ing track's sound output?

To me the range most annoyance and sounds the most treble energy with tinny tonality is within 6-8k(although nearby the annoyance level decays a bit to the left and right of that band).

setting up a threshold for some local compression can work great on one song, but do nothing or completely ruin the next song with different levels dynamic and instruments. so that's the main problem here, I don't imagine having a de-esser on all the time with fixed settings for all music. on a few songs with a really dramatic/annoying recording, I went and made a version I like that I now use instead of the original. but I wouldn't see myself doing that on many tracks. takes too much time for me as I suck at this.

obviously if the headphone is the cause of too much S, then a fixed EQ properly set should solve the problem. as long as it's not a stupid frequency response with like a tiny and massive spike, or some crazy ringing with nasty distortions, attenuating a headphone with typical EQ shouldn't pose any problem.

 

[SilverEars]

So, is your de-esser just a preset EQ you have set up? What EQ are you using, or what are you using for de-ess?

A really weird thing that happened to just now. I walked away from listening to music and came back and the music sounded much louder. Such an odd behavior.

 

[castleofargh]

a basic de-esser is a local band compressor. so the way it acts and when it's triggered depends on the signal level. that's why I said I don't imagine having such a thing all the time in a playback chain. but maybe with some fairly high trigger level and a fine replay gain it could feel like an improvement? is anybody using a de-esser all the time for playback?

for headphone, well my hd650 isn't really a sibilant headphone in the first place so I leave it alone on the ssss matters. I mainly rely on my EQ for that when some IEM is really annoying, but as I'm also very sensitive to boosts in the 4-5khz area, and almost never enjoy cymbals in a song, I often end up taking everything after 3khz down, like a monster that I am(with variations depending on the IEM's own response obviously). warm signatures aren't very sibilant ^_^.

 

[SilverEars]

Interesting you say the 4-5k area. If you look at overlap of Andromeda and Profile-8, you can see the differences in the way that region differs and also the lower mids. The overlap of those two graphs has been quite intriguing to me. I hear the differences in characterizations. Preferably, there is an amount of warmth and treble level that jives well for me for greater amount of recording types.

 

[Strangelove424]

I only have experience using a de-esser on dialogue in editing. Never applied it to overall sound track or mix, and I do not believe it was ever designed with this purpose in mind. It is a tool for reducing the sibilance region in human voices, which mics often exaggerate, and is used on isolated tracks. It was not designed for instruments or ambiance in music, or to correct for frequency imbalance in playback equipment.

One of the biggest drawbacks of de-essing is the automation of it. In one way, it saves a ton of time, but it can also make minor sacrifices in treble detail that if you were to manually EQ, you might be able to retain. It would be a compromise to use in a playback situation where you'd be forced to apply in to the entire song. Plus a range of material types would makes one de-esser setting impossible. When correcting for frequency imbalance in playback equipment, linear EQ adjustments will behave more consistently than a signal-dependent compressor algorithm like a de-esser. A graphic EQ would probably serve best in this situation.

That said, it's always fun to experiment. There's a few free de-essers here if you're looking for options: http://www.best-free-vst.com/plugins/effects/de-esser-01.php

 

[castleofargh]

I've finally gone and installed all the audio stuff on my new computer just so that I don't have to turn the other one ON anytime I want to try something, and I just spent 15mn trying to find out how to get VSThost to use 24bit.
I finally installed pedalboard2 just to have an alternative until I figure it out. I hate it when I'm even dumber than my former self.

 

[Zapp_Fan]

So, I've been trying the darnest to reduce sibilant effect of vocal tracks that can be excessive. I know when it comes to recording precess there is concept of de-esser or de-essing, but this is during mastering phase(so that I don't run into this issue. LOL.). Do you guys just reduce the sibilance range in general of a wide band or specific narrower band of frequencies do you guys dip? Or how do you guys go about EQ'ing headphone in this respect?

Can de-esser concept be applied to EQ'ing track's sound output?

To me the range most annoyance and sounds the most treble energy with tinny tonality is within 6-8k(although nearby the annoyance level decays a bit to the left and right of that band).

IIRC A De-esser is usually implemented with a specialized multi-band (or just band-limited) limiter / compressor. It's a little iffy if you want to run it on an entire mix (which is why it's usually done at the mastering stage) but you can get de-esser VSTs that might work. You could also get a multiband compressor plugin and set it up yourself. Doing it with EQ may be OK as long as the band that's bothering you is narrow enough.

edit: just realized everyone already said all that, oh well

 

[Erik Garci]

I don't want to leave out options for people, so will include the BACCH, but I will make a note of the cost and relative lack of user experience and subjective impressions due to price point in the description.

Another user posted a report about BACCH4Mac recently.

BACCH4Mac Pro Edition: a report

 

[colonelkernel8]

For those of you using a Mac, I can recommend without hesitation Audio Hijack from Rogue Amoeba for hosting AU plugins (not free, but worth every penny). It has several built in plugins and has access to all the default Apple AU plugins (including 10 and 31 band EQs). It lets you construct a logical DSP chain and for my money is as nice to use as possible; extremely polished. It can grab audio from one source (e.g. iTunes or Tidal or what have you) and then route it anywhere (e.g. to your DAC). You can drag in live monitoring blocks like a simple VU meter or a Peak/RMS meter to see if you're clipping at all with your EQ selections.

 

[bigshot]

I’m going to check that out colonel! Thanks!

 

[colonelkernel8]

I’m going to check that out colonel! Thanks!

Of course my friend. Let me know if you want an "best practices" or help setting it up.

 

[Glmoneydawg]

A

I have older friends, and in my opinion the software route would be too difficult for them without a person there to help. I will not be going into detail about them or their capabilities, as I don't feel that's a matter for forum discussion. The great thing about discussing all these options for DSP is being aware that they even exist. Whether one chooses to use one or the other is a personal choice.

I may be one of your older friends lol....this is stuff that should be sorted out long before i have to worry about trying to sort it out with my computer.