Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » De-Esser Plugin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: De-Esser Plugin? [message #64395 is a reply to message #64392] |
Wed, 08 February 2006 20:04 |
mike audet[1]
Messages: 129 Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi DJ,
I have no doubt at all that your SPL 9629 blows the DB De-esser away!!!
I guess my point was taking yours a step further even.
I think that even ok, cheap-beacuase-it's-old hardware blows the doors off
plugins, and given that such gear is so cheap, it might be a better a solution
than plugins.
We use the DB de-esser at work doing voice overs for TV, and it helps, but
we're still not happy with it. We're working with a very tight budget, so
adding hardware isn't an option - we don't even have the outputs and inputs
to interface with external devices, so it's a non-starter.
I can appreciate not having the hardware option.
But, if you've got it, I think it's worth looking at.
All the best,
Mike
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>Well, my SPL 9629 blows it away too and the deesser in my RED7 outperforms
>it as well, but we're talking plugins vs hardware here. Good hardware's
in a
>different league. As far as software goes, if I'm needing a deesser, I'll
>usually reach for the DB multiband first.
>
>Deej
>
>
>"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
>news:43ea76f8$1@linux...
>>
>> Not to be a pessimist, but I've got the DB de-esser, and it's ok at best.
>> Better than nothing. My DBX 263 hardware unit blows it away. I paid
>only
>> $60 for it, too.
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Curt Cassingham <curtNOSPAM@curtNOSPAMcassNOSPAM.com> wrote:
>> >All this talk about Waves reminds me to ask:
>> >
>> >What's a good free- or shareware Direct X de-esser plugin?
>> >
>> >Curt
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
Re: De-Esser Plugin? [message #64400 is a reply to message #64395] |
Wed, 08 February 2006 23:40 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149 Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Undestood Mikie. I wasn't trying to be argumentative (honest ;o). the DBX is
actually a very good unit and for $60.00, I can sure see your point. I've
been happy with the DB De-esser, but I've never really thought of it as
being in the same league with hardware.
Regards,
Deej
"Mike Audet" <mike@....> wrote in message news:43eab120$1@linux...
>
> Hi DJ,
>
> I have no doubt at all that your SPL 9629 blows the DB De-esser away!!!
>
> I guess my point was taking yours a step further even.
>
> I think that even ok, cheap-beacuase-it's-old hardware blows the doors off
> plugins, and given that such gear is so cheap, it might be a better a
solution
> than plugins.
>
> We use the DB de-esser at work doing voice overs for TV, and it helps, but
> we're still not happy with it. We're working with a very tight budget, so
> adding hardware isn't an option - we don't even have the outputs and
inputs
> to interface with external devices, so it's a non-starter.
>
> I can appreciate not having the hardware option.
>
> But, if you've got it, I think it's worth looking at.
>
> All the best,
>
> Mike
>
> "DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
> >Well, my SPL 9629 blows it away too and the deesser in my RED7
outperforms
> >it as well, but we're talking plugins vs hardware here. Good hardware's
> in a
> >different league. As far as software goes, if I'm needing a deesser, I'll
> >usually reach for the DB multiband first.
> >
> >Deej
> >
> >
> >"Mike Audet" <mike@mikeF-SPAMaudet.com> wrote in message
> >news:43ea76f8$1@linux...
> >>
> >> Not to be a pessimist, but I've got the DB de-esser, and it's ok at
best.
> >> Better than nothing. My DBX 263 hardware unit blows it away. I paid
> >only
> >> $60 for it, too.
> >>
> >> Just a thought.
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Curt Cassingham <curtNOSPAM@curtNOSPAMcassNOSPAM.com> wrote:
> >> >All this talk about Waves reminds me to ask:
> >> >
> >> >What's a good free- or shareware Direct X de-esser plugin?
> >> >
> >> >Curt
> >>
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Dec 13 16:45:53 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01477 seconds
|