TheBlimp Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 Hello Denis, thanks for the reply! I can imagine it to be a bit enervating to have all kind of requests coming in while the priority is developing major versions of the application, and I understand most parameters are too complex for convential naming. Standard parameter for Adaption would be super neat, though ;-) I'll try the visual approach as suggested. I'm sure looking forward to future incarnations of the software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 Enervating? If I came across like I found your feedback enervating: that definitely wasn't my intention at all, it's just the nerd in me showing ;-) Actually, we love feedback of any type -- after all, we make these tools for the people using them, and feedback can only help improve them, which is a win-win thing. As to future incarnations, we've got some cool stuff for UNVEIL as well as some more advanced audio processing products in the pipeline....</tease> By the way....is there any other "nah, that can't be done ....but I'd LIKE to be able to do that" type process you guys are missing in your arsenal? We've got some stuff in the making that we think qualifies for that description, but if there's anything in particular that would enhance your workflow, or even change it for the better, it can't hurt to let us know ;-) Cheers, Denis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I would really like to see a shitty producer filter. My answering machine is great, but doesn't work very well on set Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundslikejustin Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 The 'improve script' plugin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 The 'improve script' plugin. Post has been asking for that for many years now. If only .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I would really like to see a shitty producer filter. I had that joke for 20 years in post! "What we need is the digital content improvement filter!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlimp Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Hello Denis, you didn't come over as enervated at all, I guess I was just overcautious in my wordings What would be super cool, and please excuse me if it sounds lame or crazy, cause i have not the slightest idea of how such a thing could be achieved, but lately I have been thinking of a noise reduction system that 100% focuses on vocals/speech. Like, in... take a noise print (say, voice print) of clean speech, speaker x. Then compare speaker x print to a "noise alone" print. Then be able to remove noise (adaptively) from a contaminated speech recording, where the system itself would know what not to touch (as it knows the voice print of speaker x). Even if we don't have a noise print, we could still tell the system to remove anything that is not speaker x (to some degree). Like a reversal of the Noise reduction systems we have at the moment. I'm not sure if this is understandable. Basically, I mean an advanced noise reduction algorithm that could work by comparing several prints (remove this, but leave that alone), as opposed to the standard algorithms where we have only one noise print (remove this, but do it blindly). Of course, it would be neat if the system would be able to analyze different selections of different input files and store them in a database, and then also be able to process them in a user defined matrix, as in: voiceprint1 compared to noiseprint2 would result in a combined analysis file (leave this alone but remove that), that then could be used to do the final noise reduction on the actual file, namely the contaminated recording. Maybe the system itself would need to "know" the human voice in all its shapes and shades of expression, or have an abstract "understanding" of the human voice. That's what I think would be the neuronal part. So, one would need all the basics of a super neat noise reduction system with all the standard parameters, plus the advanced (neuronal?) features aforementioned. I think what I basically mean is a cocktailparty effect noise reduction, where we can tell the system to concentrate on "this signal alone" and ignore the other stuff. Or at least, to some degree. Of course, matters are much more complex than that and it's all very far over my head... - I'm drifting away here, but I always wondered if something like that wold be possible some day. If it sounds like a good idea, I can send my PP adress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 I would really like to see a shitty producer filter. My answering machine is great, but doesn't work very well on set The 'improve script' plugin. Post has been asking for that for many years now. If only .... I had that joke for 20 years in post! "What we need is the digital content improvement filter!" Hehe, well our implementation of these will also include a causality inversion function, which causes directors to consider audio the most important aspect of the film and allocate more time & resources to that department. We're still having some issues with the code at this point, though ;- Funnily, PITCHMAP has a similar kind of effect for composers. When the director comes in to listen to the results of the only orchestral recording session that was in the budget, and goes "Oh, that's AWESOME, it came out just like we wanted....but can we please change that chord sequence to something more like...like...Ryuchi Sakamoto versus Motorhead, you know....yeah, that's what we need, can we hear that please?".....you can now just play some new target chords to implement just that, hopefully demonstrating that it's all fine as-is *grin* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 <denoising> Well, I am obviously not at liberty to talk about what we're currently working on, but let me say that I'm confident you will love what we're up to when it's ready ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundtrane Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Any chances of this being made available for Pro Tools? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Working on ProTools and VST for Mac & Win as we speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredS Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Could you work substantially stronger magic if we provided your system with two tracks -- one of our best effort that would contain dialog plus unwanted background, plus a second track recorded 2-3 feet from first mic that has primarily the unwanted background? For a few years the Grateful Dead implemented an analog version of this with phase inversion and matched instrumentation mics. They sang close into one of the mics, which let them stand in front of their speaker array (another spectacular undertaking of its own). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlimp Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Well, I am obviously not at liberty to talk about what we're currently working on, but let me say that I'm confident you will love what we're up to when it's ready ;-) Exciting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Could you work substantially stronger magic if we provided your system with two tracks -- one of our best effort that would contain dialog plus unwanted background, plus a second track recorded 2-3 feet from first mic that has primarily the unwanted background? Well, for any intelligent process, more information will always be better, yes. But I believe that a good tool should not depend on having other material than that which is to be processed to do what it does --- as it would then only help you achieve results if this condition is met. So IMHO relying on additional information is not an ideal strategy, and kind of "the easy way out". It is of course always good if the tool *allows* you to *optionally* supply it with additional information, but the tool needs to *already* know a lot so that it will always be able to deliver at least satisfactory results right out of the box. Cheers, Denis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlimp Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 (...) It is of course always good if the tool *allows* you to *optionally* supply it with additional information, but the tool needs to *already* know a lot so that it will always be able to deliver at least satisfactory results right out of the box. Cheers, Denis i think that was what i was trying to say but took me half a page, ha - i think any additional analysis data would be great for surgical precision processing, but sometimes you don't have of such discrete extra snippets, and that's why it would be great to have the tool already "know" what is considered good vs. bad, let's say in a worst case scenario. would be really good to have a combination of standard and advanced processing options at hand: a standard noise removal tool approach, combined with an intelligent module which has an intrinsic knowledge of "good" signal's characteristics (but should be able to do additional learning). the different processing options should be able to be combined to get the best of both worlds (i.e., to mix the "standard" noise print approach and the amount of "brain" work). even if the tool would concentrate on the human voice alone, it would need a major bulk of "brains" for the tool itself and maybe an intelligent database, because the human voice can take on so many shapes... i mean, one would have to be able to tell the brain what to look for: a whispered voice will have totally different chracteristics from a singing voice, let alone to think of the many shapes the human voice comes in with even standard speech. looking forward to see what you guys will come up with. really inneressing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berniebeaudry Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 Denis, Could PitchMap be used on the human voice to correct audio that has been thinned out too much due to extreme filtering or malfunctioning equipment. Would need to add missing low's and mids to the signal. Best, Bernie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted July 24, 2012 Report Share Posted July 24, 2012 I have a question. Altiverb allows post folks to use the clap of sticks to map reverb in order to add matching reverb to a dry ADR recording. Does this software allow a similar mapping to assist in removing/reducing undesired reverb in a production track? Or is everything manual? Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Bernie: no, PITCHMAP has no equalization functionality. Robert: at this point, there's no method of giving UNVEIL an impulse response as example, so yes, you need to set parameters manually. But in practice, it's a pretty fast process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Goekdag Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Hey all! Just a short heads-up that UNVEIL version 1.5 is coming November 15th, adding a bunch of stuff: Now supports RTAS, AAX Native and VST on MacOS X and Windows in addition to AudioUnits New preset management functionality accessible from within the plug-in GUI allows user presets to be used across all plug-in formats on all platforms New multi-mono capability in Logic Pro 9.x to allow for individual settings for channels in multi-channel/surround scenarios New authorization app for more streamlined user experience Completely re-designed automation system for improved automation workflow New factory presets New option to enter values numerically by double-clicking controls This is a free update for users of v1.0.x. We'll be showing it at AES in SF, Oct 26-29, booth 639, so if you're in the area it'd be great to meet you! Cheers, Denis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted October 22, 2013 Report Share Posted October 22, 2013 Have just been mucking around with Unveil on a particularly live room, and I'm blown away at how effective it is. There's not excuse for not utilizing all the tricks in our location recordists arsenal for minimizing reverb, but it's still great to know what's available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Rose Posted October 23, 2013 Report Share Posted October 23, 2013 No, but it's a great tool for us posties. Ditto the unreverberator in RX3. Now... just please don't tell DPs about it. Or else they'll be saying F#&k Sound even louder: "How cares if the boom isn't close? They can deverb it in post. I've got a friend with this great plugin..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.