Видео

Of course!

I guess that was meant as a vox insert, not the entire mix? - At least that was my initial thought .. I'm using Ozone and was interested in the difference and also in how lightweight it is (+ how much CPU it consumes) .. 14 day trial, you got plenty of time to figure it out 🙂

@@larswillsen Appreciate the comment Lars, but it IS supposes to allow all parts of a mix to 'breathe' separately... I am unsure why the video features an isolated vocal track - AI-Impactor having little or no effect on the result... As there are no other instruments for the plugin to allow the vocal to 'breathe' within the mix, this seems like a strange addition to the video... Regards. Good luck with the fourteen day trial!!!

I think you didn't understand the goal of this plugin.

all parts of a sound... anything. but, yo can do this other ways, and the skills you'd learn doing it add up. The simplest way is not always the most rewarding with audio.

T-De-Esser 2 features a more advanced DSP algorithm and is more user-friendly, whereas T-De-Esser Pro offers more controls.

Nothing. Same here. Calibrated studio environment and Reference Studio Headphones. Same findings as yours. I don't think this is designed for professional use.

We currently have two AI-Powered plug-ins: AI-Loudener and AI-Clarity.

i dont know you so its not personal but.... you've been suckered. Or tell me what exactly improved? the demo here shows very very little difference

Yes. I think so. I've only had AI Clarity for a few days and have had Gullfoss for years but it's pretty similar, and dare I say, my initial thoughts are maybe even a little 'better'. I need to sit with Clarity for a lot longer to use it on as much stuff as I have Gullfoss, but my early observation is that AIC is very good. There's more control within Gullfoss to dial in the 'magic' of that plugin and AIC is simpler but the intro pricing for AIC makes it a great price for a plugin that is going to get a lot of use by me (alongside Gullfoss).

Please refer to this article :) techivation.com/blog/difference-between-techivation-m-series-and-t-series

incredible claims and marketing sure.

Of course, it can be used for live audio, like a mic feed. You would need to go through the learning process first. To do this, you'd need to imitate the busiest input you would expect during streaming and click 'Learn' while the audio is passing through the plugin.

@@Techivation Its worth mentioning that the plugin does induce latency though... so that would need copensated. You couldn't listen to the mic feed live in headphones etc

that could invite audio chaos. Also, you're not gonna be using this on a dozen tracks. also ALSO, you kinda want to focus on one of them at a time... no point in having an entire session suddenly and drastically change sound. You'd easily lose track of what's improving or actually being made to sound worse. Its a really bad workflow

It's a starting point

you're 100% correct. The other comment doesn't know what he's talking about - you could definitely use this on a dozen+ tracks. It's similar behavior to SmartEQ (which can analyze a bunch of tracks at once), but the examples here sound more natural. I really loved what it did with vocals - sounded like an expensive preamp just boosting all the right frequencies! I hope they take your feedback into consideration because I would love to analyze the starting point and then dial a single master dial up to maybe 60%, then adjust each track in just a bit more and see how it all turns out with no other processing.

@@musiclover-r9m I definitely do know what I'm talking about, but yeah sure cheers fuck you too haha. Come on man, so dismissive. I get it, different strokes for different folks, but it seems like if we start relying on this too much to begin with, then we're gonna lose sight of what's really going on Maybe its many years of experience under my belt speaking, and the worry that we're losing touch with learning "the basics", but i do feel there's a danger here... kinda like when Ozone started to get abused many moons ago because it had so many quick fixes and presets under the surface

🥰 I shall concur here.

Have you tried two instances in series?

@@uniopetitio2276 Yes, I've tried that, but it doesn't fully resolve the issue, and as often happens, each new instance seems to degrade the quality further.

Maybe it can work well with Deres from wa production

@@kuzkuz1078 You would LOVE DSEQ3 then... perhaps in conjunction with this, which is what I'm going to test. DSEQ3 in my opinion is better than Soothe 2

from the looks of the video, they are looking to create a more natural sounding result that can be used at extreme settings and still sound good. If they allow that adjustment, the whole algorithm would have to adjust for edge cases, like extreme resonances, which would then make it harder for users with slightly muddy tracks to dial in clean settings. I'm not sure if it's possible here unless they did something like soothe2 and created a "soft" and "hard" mode - the "hard" mode could be an algo that was trained on more extreme noise issues.

Absolutely. M-Clarity users can crossgrade to AI-Clarity for $25 (81% Off). Once you log in to your account during the checkout process, the price will be changed for you.

@@Techivation Thank you, just received my mail and upgraded. Works fine after a test in a complex sounding mix.

@@Techivation It is $35 for me. Why that?

​@@MotorpsychoGER Do you already have the M-Clarity?

Remember, this is the flat 1.0 or the first without any algorithmic improvements, etc. - updates, and so forth. (supposedly, it'll only get better or has positive trajectory)

It means the input signal wouldn't affect the saturation effect amount in your tracks, unlike how it works with regular saturation plug-ins. :)

@@Techivation Thx, but if most other saturators are gain dependant... wouldn't this be an expected default feature ? 😉

@@XRaymit means that it follows the signal and works in proportion to it. Tdr Limiter 6ge has a similar feature. It’s been done before and it works