First, does anyone know know if Waves X-Hum plugin it works with any version of Tracktion?
I am using Tracktion 6
I have a live recording with intermittent single-coil guitar pickup hum.
I have never had success with anti-hum pluging. Hum is a nasty thing.
Does Waves do decent job of not reducing hum and limiting comb filtering?
THANKS!
Waves X-Hum Experience Anyone?
-
- KVRist
- 96 posts since 22 Jan, 2009 from California
Sworkshop
"The tide of amateurism cannot but recede, until there will be left only the mechanical device and the professional executant." - John Philip Sousa, 1906
"The tide of amateurism cannot but recede, until there will be left only the mechanical device and the professional executant." - John Philip Sousa, 1906
-
- KVRist
- 320 posts since 9 Sep, 2017
I'm late here but in lack of comments and perhaps you are still listening...
Once ago I tried an old x-hum (and I believe its basic methods have not changed),
today there should be tools that are much more modern, which I would recommend testing.
Various restoration and cleaning suites.
It depends all on sensitive settings, tuned to the project.
Still, automated classification and thereby computed starting point in modern tools is good.
You will need very dynamic settings, hand-tuned to the parts where the hum is hitting hard. Like fading in and out the level of suppression.
It won't ever be gone without the good sound gone with it. But you will probably find a sweet spot where it does not disturb.
Caveat also, the basic (50 or 60) often needs a different tool component than the high harmonics (e.g. above 3k).
Can you create some noise prints, where nothing is played but the hum is loud? There may be different "sounds" of that type, and in the end different noise prints to choose from or to merge.
The noise footprint method probably works better with the high frequency parts, if the denoiser is modern and precise. (old types create "warbling".)
Anyway you can tune its spectrum to adapt even better, where it should clean stronger, and where not because it makes sound damage.
For the basic frequency, and next 2 harmonics, a set of sharp notch filters may work, unless the frequency was unstable (in some countries the electricity companies don't care about that, because it is expensive, and the first thing to care for is voltage).
Basic f's should be cleaned first.
There is a free "engineers filter" by RS-MET to experiment with.
OTOH in case the hum is diffuse and chaotic, still the noise print method may help. Automation can help, when it adapts to what was played on the guitar.
Also, when the net hum was 50 and the musician played a note at 50, well that's a case for manual spectral editing. (modern tools have that also, and will predict some useful moves on that level.)
With Waves x-noise (is that the name of the footprint denoiser?) I used to get quite good results, also with hum, as long as the noise was not insanely dominant. At some point we would switch to forensic tools, to get any intellegible signal at all, but the sound will change.
Once ago I tried an old x-hum (and I believe its basic methods have not changed),
today there should be tools that are much more modern, which I would recommend testing.
Various restoration and cleaning suites.
It depends all on sensitive settings, tuned to the project.
Still, automated classification and thereby computed starting point in modern tools is good.
You will need very dynamic settings, hand-tuned to the parts where the hum is hitting hard. Like fading in and out the level of suppression.
It won't ever be gone without the good sound gone with it. But you will probably find a sweet spot where it does not disturb.
Caveat also, the basic (50 or 60) often needs a different tool component than the high harmonics (e.g. above 3k).
Can you create some noise prints, where nothing is played but the hum is loud? There may be different "sounds" of that type, and in the end different noise prints to choose from or to merge.
The noise footprint method probably works better with the high frequency parts, if the denoiser is modern and precise. (old types create "warbling".)
Anyway you can tune its spectrum to adapt even better, where it should clean stronger, and where not because it makes sound damage.
For the basic frequency, and next 2 harmonics, a set of sharp notch filters may work, unless the frequency was unstable (in some countries the electricity companies don't care about that, because it is expensive, and the first thing to care for is voltage).
Basic f's should be cleaned first.
There is a free "engineers filter" by RS-MET to experiment with.
OTOH in case the hum is diffuse and chaotic, still the noise print method may help. Automation can help, when it adapts to what was played on the guitar.
Also, when the net hum was 50 and the musician played a note at 50, well that's a case for manual spectral editing. (modern tools have that also, and will predict some useful moves on that level.)
With Waves x-noise (is that the name of the footprint denoiser?) I used to get quite good results, also with hum, as long as the noise was not insanely dominant. At some point we would switch to forensic tools, to get any intellegible signal at all, but the sound will change.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 96 posts since 22 Jan, 2009 from California
Thanks for the thoughtful and excellent remarks on the subject.
In this particular case I am not dealing with house line noise, but intermittent buzz caused by a performer using a single coiled pickup guitar (e.g. strat) and moving around the stage.
I have resolved it as best as possible by removing any compression from those spots. It made it less 'in your face'. Fortunately it is a live blues album so there is tolerance for more artifacts than other types of music.
Hum is like flu...you know you can't just take a pill and get rid of it, but there are ways to make it more comfortable to endure.
In this particular case I am not dealing with house line noise, but intermittent buzz caused by a performer using a single coiled pickup guitar (e.g. strat) and moving around the stage.
I have resolved it as best as possible by removing any compression from those spots. It made it less 'in your face'. Fortunately it is a live blues album so there is tolerance for more artifacts than other types of music.
Hum is like flu...you know you can't just take a pill and get rid of it, but there are ways to make it more comfortable to endure.
Sworkshop
"The tide of amateurism cannot but recede, until there will be left only the mechanical device and the professional executant." - John Philip Sousa, 1906
"The tide of amateurism cannot but recede, until there will be left only the mechanical device and the professional executant." - John Philip Sousa, 1906
-
- KVRAF
- 2417 posts since 17 Jun, 2003
Try the RX Elements demo. I know it's $129 at the minute, but they do sales of it at $29 all the time, a bit like waves do, and it has a De-Hum module
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/rep ... ments.html
https://www.izotope.com/en/products/rep ... ments.html
"my gosh it's a friggin hardware"