is there a "best" way to De-ess vocals ???

[mva801]

One of the very first editing tricks I've came up with and I use it ever since... I open the vocal take in an editor and go through the take and boost/cut most phases to roughly the same level (it was before I even know compressors exist) briefly listening to check if it sounds natural. De-essing is a side product of this approach too. It is actually faster than to setup compressors/de-essers and stuff to sound right.

You're telling me that automating the volume on an entire vocal take is faster than putting a compressor and a d-esser on? You're mad sir!

Obviously there's no perfect answer. I don't run into that problem too often, but when I do I use a mix of Renaissance D-esser, the stock pro tools one, and manual volume automation. A lot of people go a little too heavy with the d-essing. Just have to find that right balance

 

[Studdy]

A common mistake i see is that people set the de esser first then do a bunch of compression. I to de ess first and sometimes after. Just remember a compressor will bring the noises level back up a bit.

 

[Nuno Filipe]

between automating shit on and on and using a compressor/de esser there is a solution that I thought before but never used it. It´s automate the de esser, turning on just when the sibilance comes. Might try this.

 

[mva801]

between automating shit on and on and using a compressor/de esser there is a solution that I thought before but never used it. It´s automate the de esser, turning on just when the sibilance comes. Might try this.

If you set the De esser correctly, the whole point of the damn thing is it only compresses when the sibilance hits. You shouldn't really have to automate the de esser itself

 

[Max Morton]

By the way, the amount and character of sibilants depends on the region and country, even when the vocalist sings in English. Slavonic and Turkish "s" sounds (from what I've worked with) are the most sharp in 10-12k region. In particular, I used to have that problem as a singer(and my sibilants are still somewhat sharp), but I'm working on them.

I love using two instances of old Voxengo Voxformer 1.9 deesser before compression and in the end of the chain. I just shave off a tiny bit, but I do it twice. Works more natural for me. In some cases I like two-band compression on vocals, and it also contributes to the evenness of the upper midrange and sibilance. I noticed that using VTM in master tape mode sometimes evens out the sibilants just a tiny bit more. It may be a placebo though.

Just recalled a situation, when I used to mix the guy's growl vocals recorded through Rode NTK (usually very sibilant). I was just mixing/mastering, so I haven't heard him in the room. He had the strangest sibilants ever! I had to boost them, even after all sorts of compression, saturation and parallel distortion. He just sounded like I over-deessed him, though I didn't.

It always depends on the singer and mic. Some "duller" sounding mics may actually sound smoother after boosting their high end, then "brighter" mics.

 

[Nuno Filipe]

If you set the De esser correctly, the whole point of the damn thing is it only compresses when the sibilance hits. You shouldn't really have to automate the de esser itself

well, as I said before, I probably dont know very well how to work correctly with a de esser, because my point in the post above was to avoid using de esser in the whole track because everytime I use it, sucks all clarity of the track. But if I am the only one complaning about the de esser bringing unwanted shit, it´s probably my fault!lol

 

[sander]

To be completely honest i've been recently automating volume and eq. I can't seem get the desired result with de-essers, but maybe it's just that the last couple of vocalists i've worked with have been extremely "s"-y singers.

 

[Kohugaly]

well, as I said before, I probably dont know very well how to work correctly with a de esser, because my point in the post above was to avoid using de esser in the whole track because everytime I use it, sucks all clarity of the track. But if I am the only one complaning about the de esser bringing unwanted shit, it´s probably my fault!lol

De-esser usually works as a frequency-specific compressor (a multiband compressor with only one band engaged). Most vowels have very little frequency content in the area where sibilants are most prominent. De-esser relies on this fact. You should set the threshold high enough to pass nonsibilants unchanged and compress only the sibilants. If your De-esser is affecting clarity of the track, your threshold is probably too low (damping also nonsibilant sounds) or your release settings are too long and the compressor damps also sounds after the sibilants.

 

[Nuno Filipe]

De-esser usually works as a frequency-specific compressor (a multiband compressor with only one band engaged). Most vowels have very little frequency content in the area where sibilants are most prominent. De-esser relies on this fact. You should set the threshold high enough to pass nonsibilants unchanged and compress only the sibilants. If your De-esser is affecting clarity of the track, your threshold is probably too low (damping also nonsibilant sounds) or your release settings are too long and the compressor damps also sounds after the sibilants.

You are probably right. Anyway I think I never used a de esser in a really serious situation, only when lacks time and patience and its the fast thing to do. So I didnt bother to learn well how to use it. Still think that automation it´s the best option but I have to look at those settings, I could change my mind about that.

 

[KillFrenzy]

I never felt any loss of clarity with FabFilter Pro-DS adjusting the threshold correctly. It also has an Audition button for you to hear exactly what the plugin is doing with the signal.