TNGator wrote:It's just this one particular project
Use the iZotope demo? I can't recall what the limitations are, but typically you can render results from these things in one way or another.
Or if it really is just the one project, why not invite someone else to do it for you and avoid spending all that time learning to get the best results from whatever tool you purchase?
Tim Gillett wrote:
Really to advise with more certainty we need to hear the "pops and crackles" that you are hearing. There are limits to what's possible without damaging the wanted audio. Any chance of a short sample audio?
I agree with Tim. Are these pops and clicks convertor sync issues?
Any spectral editor and some elbow grease will work better than a blanket noise removal plugin.
TNGator wrote:Hey gang. Im plagued on this song with pops and crackles on various tracks. Not extremely loud but they are there. I tried Audacity and it did nothing. I know iZotope software is really good and i have one or two items of theirs. But even the RX7 elements is like $130. Anyone know of a good software fro removing unwanted pops and such? Thanks y'all.
Really to advise with more certainty we need to hear the "pops and crackles" that you are hearing. There are limits to what's possible without damaging the wanted audio. Any chance of a short sample audio?
Tim
Hi Tim. I'll see if i can put even one track maybe on soundcloud and share the link.
Tim Gillett wrote:
Really to advise with more certainty we need to hear the "pops and crackles" that you are hearing. There are limits to what's possible without damaging the wanted audio. Any chance of a short sample audio?
I agree with Tim. Are these pops and clicks convertor sync issues?
Any spectral editor and some elbow grease will work better than a blanket noise removal plugin.
Hi Ken. What is a spectral editor please? perhaps if i can explain more clearly. Let me go through the tracks and find exactly which ones have the crackles. Some tracks were recorded by mic such as vocals and a fender strat. Some were done by DI such as the bass. Im very careful about gain staging and dont record hot at all. In fact the level is quite low. let me see what exactly what is popping and how it was recorded. In the meantime I'll continue searching for a good software tool for this.
TNGator wrote:It's just this one particular project
Use the iZotope demo? I can't recall what the limitations are, but typically you can render results from these things in one way or another.
Or if it really is just the one project, why not invite someone else to do it for you and avoid spending all that time learning to get the best results from whatever tool you purchase?
I dont know anyone Mixed. But thats ok.. I always get great help and feedback on the SOS forum so I'll manage somehow
TNGator wrote:Hey gang. Im plagued on this song with pops and crackles on various tracks. Not extremely loud but they are there. I tried Audacity and it did nothing. I know iZotope software is really good and i have one or two items of theirs. But even the RX7 elements is like $130. Anyone know of a good software fro removing unwanted pops and such? Thanks y'all.
Really to advise with more certainty we need to hear the "pops and crackles" that you are hearing. There are limits to what's possible without damaging the wanted audio. Any chance of a short sample audio?
Tim
Tim / Ken. I might have to run away and quit the SOS forum due to embarrassment and wasting everyone's time.. Your question re what kind of noise am i getting got me to export a track to the demo version of RX. There was no noise to be heard in RX but it was clear in my DAW. I then played a few of the tracks in Windows Media player. No sign of any clicks etc either. When i went into Cakewalks settings I saw that the number of buffers in playback was only 2 and it was grayed out. I went into windows control panel and there is a panel there for my M Audio. When i raised the latency fader and went back into the DAW it seemed to play without the pops and such. It might have been a buffer setting causing this. I'll keep testing but this is starting to look like an embarrassing goof on my part.
TNGator wrote: I'll keep testing but this is starting to look like an embarrassing goof on my part.
The important thing is that a) you found the problem and b) you shared the solution. That way we all get to learn something, including about cheaper alternatives to RX
Don't think there's any need for embarrassment. We've all been caught out by cunningly hidden settings! But it does sound very likely that the clicks were indeed due to the buffer being too small to sustain glitch-free playback. Glad it was an easy fix!
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
TNGator wrote:
Hi Ken. What is a spectral editor please? perhaps if i can explain more clearly. Let me go through the tracks and find exactly which ones have the crackles. Some tracks were recorded by mic such as vocals and a fender strat. Some were done by DI such as the bass. Im very careful about gain staging and dont record hot at all. In fact the level is quite low. let me see what exactly what is popping and how it was recorded. In the meantime I'll continue searching for a good software tool for this.
OK - seems as though you're talking about noise in the signal rather than any clicks from syncing your convertor.
Many editors have a spectrum view that will allow you to surgically remove the clicks much like photoshop. Izotope has this but so does Wavelab and SADiE. There's also Sony's Spectral Layers etc. Not sure which is the cheapest or which one would provide you with value for money if it's a one-off repair.
ken long wrote:Many editors have a spectrum view that will allow you to surgically remove the clicks much like photoshop.
Yes, there are many spectral editing tools now but they're not all created equal. I believe only CEDAR and iZotope can intelligently fill the gaps left behind by your spectral edits by interpolation, in the same way that Photoshop can when, for example, removing a telegraph pole from a pic. The others just allow you to remove/manipulate the existing data and perhaps apply crossfades with the adjacent bits
ken long wrote:Many editors have a spectrum view that will allow you to surgically remove the clicks much like photoshop.
I believe only CEDAR and iZotope can intelligently fill the gaps left behind by your spectral edits by interpolation, in the same way that Photoshop can when, for example, removing a telegraph pole from a pic.
Well not really. Wavelab is very good at this too (I use it everyday for such tasks). And as I mentioned, Sony Spectral layers takes it a step further with the ability to reveal layers behind layers. There's quite a few options on the market now.
ken long wrote:Well not really. Wavelab is very good at this too (I use it everyday for such tasks). And as I mentioned, Sony Spectral layers takes it a step further with the ability to reveal layers behind layers. There's quite a few options on the market now.
Yes, really.
For all their other strengths — which I agree are many — neither Wavelab's spectral editing nor Spectralayers generates new background sound based on analysis of the surrounding material to fill the blanks when removing unwanted noises. Nor do the various others, except RX and CEDAR's software. If they did, without CEDAR's permission, I imagine CEDAR would litigate to enforce their patent; they've done so successfully before...
ken long wrote:Well not really. Wavelab is very good at this too (I use it everyday for such tasks). And as I mentioned, Sony Spectral layers takes it a step further with the ability to reveal layers behind layers. There's quite a few options on the market now.
Yes, really.
For all their other strengths — which I agree are many — neither Wavelab's spectral editing nor Spectralayers generates new background sound based on analysis of the surrounding material to fill the blanks when removing unwanted noises. Nor do the various others, except RX and CEDAR's software. If they did, without CEDAR's permission, I imagine CEDAR would litigate to enforce their patent; they've done so successfully before...
I guess I missed the bit where you wrote "intelligently". Wavelab is probably a little behind in this respect as it's still a bit of a manual task. But you can still analyse the surrounding areas. It's just not as automatic.
Last edited by ken long on Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All in all...there seem to be a few software packages out there that can do this sort of cleaning. Although it seems i got out of jail on this occasion, it would do no harm to have this sort of toll in the toolkit going forward. Although expensive, it seems a lot of folks here have mentioned the iZotope software (and Cedar too). As an existing iZotope user i'll touch base with them and keep an eye out for deals for existing customers.
Mixedup wrote:neither Wavelab's spectral editing nor Spectralayers generates new background sound based on analysis of the surrounding material to fill the blanks when removing unwanted noises. Nor do the various others, except RX and CEDAR's software. If they did, without CEDAR's permission, I imagine CEDAR would litigate to enforce their patent; they've done so successfully before...
Unless I'm using RX's spectral repair in the wrong way I don't see it as being particularly intelligent. If I'm removing clicks then I find Audition's 'Fix single click' to work far better than attempting the same thing in RX. If there is a transient close to the click then RX has a habit of removing the transient - even though it is outside the selected area - which sounds very odd. Unfortunately my version of Audition only repairs clicks in this way so it can't be used as a general spectral repair tool.
Hugh Robjohns wrote:Don't think there's any need for embarrassment. We've all been caught out by cunningly hidden settings! But it does sound very likely that the clicks were indeed due to the buffer being too small to sustain glitch-free playback. Glad it was an easy fix!
Thanks Hugh. Nice to get friendly support even you screw up
TNGator wrote: I'll keep testing but this is starting to look like an embarrassing goof on my part.
The important thing is that a) you found the problem and b) you shared the solution. That way we all get to learn something, including about cheaper alternatives to RX
Plus we get Mike’s priceless tale.
Glad you got it sorted.
Thanks for the support Bill. Nice to to be able make goofy mistakes and come clean and not get laughed. Some forums out get some really nasty smart remarks. Thanks again all for the tips and help
