I'm pinning a note here for all the inevitable "But RESO sounds worse than Soothe" comments. Folks, remember that we always hear brighter-sounding things as "better" and louder-sounding things as "better". In this type of direct A-B comparison, your gut instinct will **always** consider the brighter-sounding option as "better". As producers/engineers, we have to watch for that tendency in our own perceptions. If you had heard ONLY the RESO version of the vocal in the context of this song, you wouldn't have thought twice about it. It would just be "the sound design" for those vocals. It is **impossible** to set up an apples-to-apples sound comparison between Soothe and RESO. Because Soothe is largely an automated black box. There's no way to tell exactly what frequencies its hitting, by how much, with what Q, etc. to attempt to duplicate those same general dynamic cuts over in RESO. What you're hearing come out of Soothe is significantly brighter and more resonant, because I'm just letting it do a moderate amount of its "black box" processing with settings that are close to its defaults. By contrast, what you're hearing come out of RESO are the specific settings I dialed in for this particular mix. I've scalpeled out most of the annoying resonant overtones, and as a result, the output is a bit darker and slightly more clouded up in the general sibiliance and presence range. So your brain's knee-jerk reaction when I directly AB back and forth between the two is "brighter is better, therefore Soothe is better". I'm not denying anyone's subjective "first impression" preference when I directly AB contrast RESO vs Soothe in some of the video segments. But there's a bigger picture here. When this song gets played at full volume on a big sound system, those harsh resonances that might not be too apparent on whatever you're using to watch/listen to this TH-cam video will likely become very intense and unpleasant and shrill. And again, if you'd _never_ heard the Soothe version in the context of this song, you wouldn't have thought anything was amiss about the vocals. (Aside from the also-inevitable difference in personal/artistic preferences in our mixing decisions and sound design decisions that we all have as individual producers/engineers.) Finally, for all the comments saying (essentially) "I hear phasing" or "I feel RESO causes phasing and smearing", etc. I'd like to point you at Wytse's commentary about RESO. If you watch the whole thing, you'll see him talk about "trying to break" RESO, about his tests for phase response of the filters, for pre/post ringing, and so on. Short answer: he found it really surprisingly clean in all these respects. That's my experience too. th-cam.com/video/cygXc0K1Sjw/w-d-xo.html
I will use try RESO now i never did before. But i have used Soothe and Soothe 2 alot and I could easily hear its lisping and filtering side effects to the point that now I have almost stopped using it for resonance control. I wonder how people can bear soothe sound it generally takes more out of the sound than it supposed to.
@@sawabhacks8050 Right. All of these resonance controllers--even RESO--are not magic, perfect siliver-bullet solutions. In the same way that not every sound can have its loudness improved **transparently** beyond a certain point, the same is true of annoying/shrill resonances. You can control them to a point, but you cannot always get rid of them entirely without ruining the original sound. As with many production and engineering decisions, it's the art of compromise. How much "damage" to the original, basic sound of a thing are you willing to tolerate, versus how much of some annoying resonance (that most of your listeners will never notice, lol) are you willing to still **hear**?
I'm one of those who think Soothe sounded better than Reso - not because Soothe sounds brighter, but I think Reso made the vocal a lot more "nasal" sounding.
I missed you Baph, all my mixes are now sounding loud and proud (CTZ strat' series is gold). I can't wait watching this one ! I'll grab a beer and click play in a minute , so exited !
this is so frustrating to watch, you can bandpass soothe very tightly as well as slow the attack and most importantly sharpen the peaks. the pre ringing makes reso unusable
As someone who owns DSEQ3, Reso, and Melda MSpectralDynamics....thought I'd chime in. I downloaded Soothe2 because of all the hype. It's beautiful to look at but DSEQ3 essentially did the same thing. I had a sound that had a gnarly comb filter on it...almost unusable. Neither DSEQ nor Soothe 2 could fix it....threw on the Melda MSD and was amazed. Reso has taken over everyday duties from the DSEQ but Melda is the best of them all. Reso's workflow is great...efficient, precise and to the point. Melda takes an afternoon and a few videos to learn to use properly...bang for your buck, go with Reso. The two work well as complimentary tools...
Baphy just wanted to thank you so much for all these videos. I’ve watched every single one with all my attention (repeatedly actually) and they have changed my game. Would love, if possible, to see a video on your take about how to use compression (I’ve listened a lot lately to jack joseph puig approach on it and I think its very interesting), and also one about saturation and different types, as technical as you can get! Again thank you so much man, love your content and best wishes.
Okay, after I've watched the video yesterday I was completely unconvinced. I just couldn't tell the difference between any variants when used on voice (I started to wonder how much was lost during TH-cam normalization). But I downloaded Reso and DSEQ trials, and I had Nova GE already which can do something similar. When soloed, the results didn't seem all that good (and again it was hard for me to tell that de-resed versions were "better" than the sources - drums and various synths) but when I moved to the mix context, Reso was a clear winner. I didn't bother with Soothe though since it's out of my anyway. In any case, the resulting mix was undeniably pleasant to hear (Reso ended up on most of the tracks except a few where it clearly made things worse or couldn't find much resonance). Cheers!
I've spent lots time with both plugz and I find that RESO is much more capable of SURGICALLY getting the job done. If you just wanna slap on a preset and forget about it sure Soothe will prob get u decent results on the fly... it does sound good (untiloverdone). For those who want more control over their projects RESO has much more potential and flexibility.
@@809rdl Sometimes more control = more rope to hang yourself with. 😅. More decisions to be confused by. But yeah, if you know your goals and the tool helps you pursue those goals in a way that makes sense to you, then more control is better.
I also have had frustrations with soothe, it either seems to not detect enough resonances or way too many including the lows i seem to cut with the low cut. What do you think of DSEQ?
Very good and informative video. I almost want to switch teams but: Will soothe be surgical enough if you turn up the selectivity knob and the knob next to it? This way, the “q” value is set higher and you retain more of the input. I agree on the part where you schouldnt remove all resonant frequencies, just the ones that really need to be removed wich Soothe doesnt let you do that with whatever setting. Iam just wondering about those 2 knobs you didnt talk about on soothe.
It's a crying shame how many so called producers and mix engineers don't appreciate what is being shown here. Soothe is still good for sidechaining but Reso is your surgical cleanup when specific frequencies you can hear needs to be tamed. One thing maybe overlooked is that soothe2 constantly changes the frequencies it 'rakes' where's the points on rest stay fixed; they can both have their separate uses.
..... and constant changing of frequencies puts Soothe on another level and you can't really compare it to Reso. So as far as I can see it, Soothe is more of a mastering tool, and Reso is a tool when you need to do surgical resonance cleanup of particular loop.
Soothe2 excels when the frequencies you need to control are dynamic. If you have static resonance frequencies you can try a dynamic EQ with a narrow Q factor. Pro-Q3 for example has a dynamic mode. Sweeping over almost any audio with a very steep narrow band will result in many whistle sounds that are just a side-effect of the filtering. The adjustability of something like a Pro-Q3 allows me to sweep with a tailored narrowness so I can find actual issues and not just self induced whistles.
I see what you're saying and agree with the principle. Bear in mind, though, that RESO is also a dynamic resonance controller. Watch the red trace at the top of the window during playback. You'll see that it responds only as much as it needs to when a specific node has some energy buildup. Soothe also has those same type of "nodes" under the covers of its black box. The settings control where those nodes are essentially sitting, waiting to respond to the input signal and to respond dynamically.
@@Baphometrix Is it correct that soothe continuously adjusts the frequencies it targets (basically continuously doing the kind of training reso only does on one chunk of the signal?) If that’s right, that might be a significant advantage for material where the resonant peaks significantly shift frequency over time. (It might also be a good reason not to give more fine grained control over peaks in the ui: because the plugin is meant to continuously change the frequencies it targets.)
@@ohwell2963 It's hard to say. Their manual isn't very forthcoming about their process. My guess is that it's an FFT-based detector that's simply identifying the highest resonant peaks within the detection range of the "band" and then doing a slight amount of "taming" (not unlike the "taming" action of Gullfoss). Since those resonant peaks will shift depending on the specitic notes/pitches happening, then yes, I'm guessing it "slides" back and forth as pitches change. But.... this might be a good thing in some cases, and might NOT be a good thing in other cases. Resonant peaks are not necessarily all bad or unwanted. It's the resonances of a sound that give it a unique timbre. How does a process like I describe know which of those resonances are a buildup area that is continuously "ringing" in an audible and unpleasant way? Sure, with RESO you are letting it pick some _static_ frequencies where it thinks there is "unpleasant" ringing. But it also lets you REMOVE those nodes if you disagree. Or move them slightly. Or add your own. You get to have full control over deciding exactly where the resonant buildup obviously rings in an unpleasant way. Then you put a control node there. Then IF energy in that one spot builds up too much, RESO dynamically clamps down on it to tame that one problem spot. (And all the other problem spots). It's a different **design philosophy**. Soothe has one approach and RESO has a different approach. For all the reasons I demonstrate in the video, I think RESO's approach is overall superior.
I’ve held off getting Soothe2 for a long time because of its pretty crazy price tag. $219 as of today. I’m glad I did. RESO is $63 and better. Thank you for this in-depth review!
I have no skin in the game for either of these, but you don't touch the Depth control of Soothe 2, and it's set pretty aggressively high. I think that's why it comes across as a blunt instrument. The A/B test is probably not doing the argument for Reso any favours either since it's also set too aggressively and makes the vocal sound really nasal and unnatural. Again; zero skin in the game here, but I think perhaps this needs to be revisited on some other material to illustrate the differences in sound (which I believe are minimal once tuned equally).
I agree. I've always felt Soothe 2 took a little too much away from the overall sound. If I use it, I only use it sparingly with no more than about 3dB of max removal.
For me Soothe is great for overall softening tracks or even whole master. I've still used regular dynamic or static eq for resonance peaks. Reso seems to be perfect for those like the name suggests. I'm sold for sure.
I think the initial settings you had for Reso made it sound quite boxy. As if too much was being cut off. I was actually surprised that to me it sounded worse than Soothe 2. However, when you made targets later in the video, the signal sounded much better. Maybe those huge dipped targets are reason for this.
Melda MAutoDynamicEQ seem to be at least powerful as Reso is, if not more? But still I'm pretty new in this field and would like to hear some opinions about it. Generally, I could say that if you want to get _everything_ you need to have when it comes to audio production, Melda Complete Bundle may be the answer once and forever.
10:21 that is the best description of how I felt about soothe haha. I got DSEQ because of that. It's better but it's still "intelligently" chooses resonances for me, which mind you, still has it's uses. I'm gonna have to give this reso thing a shot though. It looks even more specific.
Hey congrats on 1 mil video views Baphy! It's more than deserved. I'm looking forward to the stereo width CTZ episode. I've been doing some experiments with panning/width combined with clipping, but am curious to hear your takes on it.
Reso sounds quite comb-filter-y to me here when soloed. And this sound is very evident in the studio hear on my Amphion 15s. Not trying to sound arrogant or anything, just informing what I'm using to listen on.
Typically you use use RESO (or Soothe, or any other resonance controller) to clean up harsh resonances on a specific sound (track, maybe a sub-bus) Gullfoss is a slightly different tool for a different purpose. Even though the "Tame" part of Gulfoss is acting on resonant peaks, it's not really to reduce harshness. Instead, it works in concert with the "Recover" part of Gullfoss to **unmask** sounds that are fighting with each other, to make as much of the mix audible and clear (in a musical way, according to their algorithm) as possible.
Soothe 2 has saved many harsh mixes for me. Indispensable in my mixes. 🤷🏾♀ And in your example, I prefer the dry version the best of all examples. Kinda has the Post Malone sound to it naturally.
For vocals, I'd say Reso isn't necessarily the best choice, because in some scenarios, resonances come and go and pop up all over the place. In some instances, having a static frequency that get's ducked at a given static threshold doesn't really cut it, except for in cases such as removing room modes/resonances that are always at a given frequency, or something inherent to the vocalist, such as a nasal tone that is exacerbated by certain notes. Having a detection that constantly finds and tames resonances that stick out as they happen can be more useful than static nodes IMO (if and when that happens to be this issue you're addressing). This is why for a vocal, I'd probably go with DSEQ3 or Soothe 2 as the flexibility is there. They do what Reso does and more. When it comes to this vs dynamic EQ, it's really a workflow choice. This is easily quicker than dealing with resonances via Pro-Q3 and has similar parameters (EG. just a threshold without attack and release).
Nice one! Thx for that! In the end i still believe in ProQ3 for all this, as you can there: - freeze the curve to see frequencies popping out from the line (and this for ANY LENGTH OF TIME, not 3 seconds or so like in Reso's "Calculate Target") - apply up to 24 EQs if needed, ...OR DYNAMIC EQs (very under rated)! - solo any dot, activate it or not, change the Q of each dot individually, EQ or dynamic EQ, - (Am i the only one to care about the magic:) infinite UNDO & REDO?!!!! - ...and definitely waaaaayyyyy much more: mid/side processing, EQ matching... - Ehhh, what about "External Sidechain Trigger for Dynamic EQ dotes"?! But this is going away from this topic... 🤩 But definitely, one need to HEAR what one is doing, and it might a good reason why so many people prefer to use an AI doing that for them, or a ONE button plugin solving all! Fair enough, it's usually not the favorite moment of the musical creation, but still, working on our ears ability to find what's disturbing the mix, is part of the way, isn't it? To me Soothe2, Reso and Spectral shaper, are very good plugins for a fast result (or for a soft gentle use over the main mix or buses, or even, an AI second check). But for a "track to track surgical precision EQ" or "dynamic EQ" i really love ProQ3 (the UNDO & REDO is a massive part of my choice). There only do I feel really in "control" of any detail. But let's say overall, how lucky we are to have so many option, i come from a time, where few parametric EQs on a mixing table, or a 31 band graphic EQ, were all we had to make it sound right! Blessed we are! Great day to each one of you!
Love your content, the clip to zero series is insane value! would like to ask tho, Do you mix exclusively in Slate VSX? And, whats your favorite room in the vsx?
I've been experimenting with using _only_ Slate VSX since January, when I moved into a new house. My new office for work/production is pretty small, and for various reasons (lots of windows and amazing views) I am reluctant to hang up a bunch of acoustic treatment. Plus, I needed space for my work macbook on my main production desk, and I used to use big Yamaha HS8s as my main monitors so my desk was always hella-cramped. A subwoofer in this small room would be overkill and _really_ hard to bass-trap the room well enough to mitigate out the room modes from a subwoofer. So yes, for about a half a year I've been using VSX exclusively. I even put my Subpac in the closet because I wanted to know if the sub response/detail in the VSX system would be good enough for accurate low-end. In short, I like the VSX system a lot, and I definitely do NOT miss my HS8s nor my subwoofer. I'm still on the fence about whether to put the Subpac back in use. It's nice not having all the wires running across my desk and over to my chair. I do feel that some of the farfield monitor emulations, plus the SUV emulation and the Club emulation do give me enough sub definition and detail that I don't **need** the Subpac any more. My favorite emulations are the Barefoot midfields in "Steven's Mix Room", the Empire farfields in "Archon Studio", and then the "Electric Car", "SUV", and "Club (Bass)" emulations. The first two sound FANTASTIC and give me really good feedback about the entire spectrum. The Car, SUV, and Club don't sound great, but they do really highlight all the typical/important problem areas, such as balance between your sub range and bass range vs the rest of the spectrum. The Club emulation also does a great job of highlighting mono-compatibility issues. I also check mixes on three other emulations: "Boombox", "SA-PODS" (apple air pods), and the single, mono Avantone Mixcube nearfield in "Steven's Room".
Baphy - what's your opinion on "Levels" - a plugin also by this same developer as Reso? Is levels accurate in its judgement of LUFS and its recommended settings for TH-cam, Soundcloud, Etc.? Curious as to what your thoughts are. Thanks.
LEVELS is accurate and interestingly designed. I tend to use different tools for monitoring things to do with loudness, crest factor, peak values, etc. But that's just personal preference.
Just sub'd , you presented hands on referencing application. I'm in agreement 100% with Reso. Plus they are gonna keep developing the app so no one will be able to challenge them.
The damping control in bx_refinement is nice for removing a little harshness, and the results are usually not bright which in this case seems to be what you are going for.
Now that I actually have my head around DSEQ, i'm a fan. It does a very transparent job when configured correctly. There's a big ole learning curve however. Reso looks a lot quicker and more precise
IDK what people mean about Soothe sounding "better" or more natural. It's not a cappella music, you have to separate the instruments. Too much across the spectrum per instrument causes them to kinda smear and "become" each other. The results he got were specific to what he wanted for the song, genre, and listening medium. The point is that it's surgical and you can get many different kinds of results depending on your decisions. I thought it sounded like it would be way easier to mix.
Hey Baph, within your workflow, do you mostly apply this plugin on the mastering chain? Or do you place it throughout your instrument and or bus chains?
You usually want to fix problems as close to the source as possible, if you can identify it. So I tend to use this on individual tracks, or maybe some lower-level busses. Yes, you can sometimes get some "resonant buildup" on a bus from all the different sounds that are summing on that bus, but here's the problem: notching out "bad sounding" resonances is a fairly destructive process. I mean, lol, look at all the indignant comments on this video describing how bad or phased or nasal my RESO settings for these vocal sound to some viewers. So you don't want to potentially harm an entire sub-mix (or your full mix) by cutting notches that will affect sounds that have no resonance issues at all. So if you can reduce the "bad sounding" resonances on an individual track or two, and now the downstream busses sound okay, then you're in good shape.
We need to stop thinking of soothe as a harshness removal tool and more like a separation tool. It's freaking awesome at separation. reset it to a flat, set it to hard, enable side chain. put it on the track you want to suppress, send the signal you want in front to it. dial it in and it will unmask the sound without changing the overall level of the sound its set to supress. if you want the level ducking too, slap on a compressor, multiband compor dynamic eq with sidechain or automate the level depending on the precision you need for the ducking.
compared to RESO, soothe2 has the advantage that you can set the attack and release times - at times it makes the difference if you can use it or not. but even more control you have on DSEQ. though soothe sounds the smoother and more transparent more often and faster, I am able to reach the same effect or better with DSEQ. but didn't notice the sweepable delta feature on RESO - that's really cool and useful! thanks!
isn't the moving up and down of resonances in reso the same as setting an attack and release where both controls are synced so having separate controls for attack and release is an improvement but of a very minor detail of control
Hey Baph, could you do a review on this new plugin fron Hornet Analogstage MK2. Sounds a great plugin for saturation, they say to have it on every channel, bus and group ,it's lightweight and low cost. Womdering what you'd thjnk about this for us edm producers. Thanks :-)
I understand what you're trying to tell us but I ca take you that seriously when you don't try to match as soon as possible the setting of Soothe 2 to reso. In the 41 minutes of video You never touch the Sharpness and Selectivity knobs to make the the two plugins sound as close as possible and by this way have a real comparison of which one is making a big difference. In my ears I hear in some way that Reso sound a little bit more "moody" when Soothe 2 is a little more brigther but this comparison is not judge at all when they are not as close as possible on the way the two are behaving. Good video by the way.
Per the details in the pinned post, it would be futile to try and "make the two plugins sound as close as possible". They operate in fundamentally different ways. The main thrust of this video was about the differences in control and workflow.
Reso is like a slightly quicker fabfilter on dynamic mode for taking out resonate frequencies. I think these are both good for different resonances but i agree that soothe can make something feel lifeless.
for me it almost sounds like it was recorded on a cellphone lol. but than at 11:46 Reso actually removed most of that distorsion. I have no clue how people can say Soothe sounds better in this example. it didn't do much at all and removed liveliness
@@adirsab second time I heard it I got so anoyed by that strong resonance at the "n" in "and" of "and I can ask a million" (and everytime that note returns) that I have a hard time judging it now
thank you so much for making these videos but seriously if you can't hear the difference between soothe and rezo you might have to check your monitoring environment because the sound gets absolutely horrible when you switch it to Rezo. It is boxy lifeless and broken.. Your Soothe settings could be hard as well. its not brighter or darker, the tonality changes and you end up hearing other resonaces
After years of using Reso, I have never been able to fix harsh vocals with Reso, also heavy guitars sound weird using Reso, you have to drive back Reso for a good sound. Reso is good for a whole mix.
What is your take on Luka pretolesi and his way of creating dynamics in a track? He has seemingly many ways to do so. For example, he says he wants the side information to be as dynamic as possible. Do you think this is something that could be incorporated using your technique? I wonder how I should approach that, since I do feel that my ears get a little more fatigued than before using this technique (which Luka claims is one of the upsides of leaving side information dynamic.)
Luca is a grammy-winning pro in a challenging space (dance music, pop music). He knows exactly what he's doing and why. Any advice he gives is good advice. That said, IMO don't try advanced things unless you really understand the principle behind those advanced things. If a pro tells you do try something, but you don't really understand their explanation, you can get in trouble by trying to do a thing without understanding what you're doing. To your specific question, a lot depends on the **context** in which Luca says he wants to leave the sides as dynamic as possible. If he's talking about it in the context of perceived width and using tools like his new Space Controller plugin, that means one thing. (And it's worth noting that one of Space Controller's main tricks is running a limiter on the sides, which is **reducing** the dynamic range of the sides.) So there's not enough info for me to really answer this question?
@@Baphometrix Ye. I am still educating myself and attempting to understand what he is doing and why. I hoped that maybe you had an idea about the how's and why's. I really like your videos and my mixes are so clean now. Thankd.
@@Baphometrix ah. I think i missed your last paragraph. I will read more about it and suddenly the pieces will fall in place. Im sure. Didnt know he limited the sides, so there are clear holes in my knowledge about his process.
For me, the very fact that you're saying it picks different problems out depending on the part of the audio you analyse immediately presents a problem as then it's going to be notching out things it doesn't need to depending on the section. I don't own Soothe but the fact that it's dynamic seems to me to be a much better option. I have to be honest, in the comparisons at the start Reso made it sound bottley to me.
I agree. Reso SOUNDED worse in that the result was completely changed/unnatural with more added metallic resonance somehow. My ears tell me the exact opposite of his claims.
For whoever in the comments say this or that is better, you forget the essence of what an engineer is supposed to do: find whatever suits your needs, style, client's desires and what YOU like. Baphometrix is doing an excellent job at explaining the differences and it's simply up to you to decide if it works or not. Clients come to you because they like your style so just follow your own needs/aesthetic. I personally am not so much into RESO but can see why it can be helpful for Baphometrix or others, who aren't sounding like I do. Cheers and let's stay positive :D
Exactly. And there's nothing essentially wrong with Soothe, either. I use both. If Soothe can quickly get the results I want, great. It's faster and easier. But I've definitely run into situations where Soothe has to cut into too much to tame the thing I'm really after, and that's where RESO can really shine.
There is a thing about "ears" and a thing about "engineer ears" and you definitely have engineer ears, because the points conveyed in the demonstration along with the comparisons and analogies that RESO is in a class of its own regarding resonance is correct! Soothe does just that, SOOTHE! RESO does what it claims, RESONANCE, at a clear "engineer-ear" level of listening that demonstrates RESO is better, useful, and very surgical (because having the ability to remove and reduce notable harmonics in the "trumpeted whistling resonance frequencies" is a bigger deal than most are entertaining!) I hear exactly what you hear Baph, and why, and see so many creative uses for RESO. Currently using it to solve a resonant frequency issue that bx_refinement is NOT doing for me for the selected purpose regarding its use. The spectrum snapshot in RESO made it easy to pinpoint the tiny "engineer ear" dog whistle of resonance that only I could hear...like the high frequency sine pitch from an analog TV or device that notes, without stating, that it is on or off. People are either going to "really listen" with their ears or "automatically listen" with their emotions. I have a big knob unit attached to NOTHING in my studio...I LOVE to turn it for those that want more bass, treble or volume...when turning the incredibly important looking knob it ALWAYS makes them THINK something has changed and sounds better.😂 #godblessthem #gottalovethem #engineertricks
Hey Baph, just wanted to say If you and your theory got more famous as your channel grows; we were the very first students in your class. Hoping you the best my friend:)
I use soothe as a mastering governor. I think if you you do a good job initially in the mixing and balancing phase, soothe just provides that extra de-harshing algorithmic trick . Prevents ear fatigue. Main question is what is the name of this Song you keep using ?
Thanks for this detailed video once again Baph! For this purpose, reso is definitely the better choice. But one use case I like to use soothe over reso is when taming "early reflections" on a drum room and pitch bends on the sustain of not properly tuned drum shells for example. Off topic P.S: Do you still use smart eq in your work?
@@Baphometrix you said something about sonnible's smart comp2 and smart limiter "robbing the lowest bass frequencies" (paraphrasing) when the signal is really pushed through them. Any way you can elaborate or make a vid on it? I love them both, but also make heavy bass music so yeah.. Also wondering how you use Smart EQ, it always comes out dull whenever I use it. Have you tried the Smart eq group function with multiple instances? I can't wrap my head around that either lol, but if you have any wisdom i would love to hear it! Love your vids Baphy and I recommend them to many of my producer friends!
@@coliny7027 Many uses for a compressor or limiter rely on some degree of "makeup" gain. Make the signal somehow shorter and narrower (push the peaks down), and you can raise the RMS of that signal until the new, shorter peaks touch the ceiling again. When this is a single wideband process, you can't squash too hard, because you start cutting into the sub and bass region with the most energy and causing distortion and softening. When you have an FFT process, with dozens and dozens of very narrow bands, you can essentially "turn down the gain" (and/or just use slower release times) on the one or two lowest FFT bands which are the highest "peaks" in the spectrum. They're so low in the sub region, that on a lot of playback systems you won't notice the drop in energy. But reducing that energy gives a lot more headroom to every other band to be evened out by the dynamics process, and then you can raise the total signal much higher than a wideband dynamics process would let you do cleanly.
@@coliny7027 As for smartEQ, it works in some cases when your mix is out of whack. If your mix is in pretty good shape, smart EQ might tend to fix things that don't need fixed. For example, boosting the low mids that you carefully sculpted to reduce muddiness and boxiness. No, I haven't had much use to try smart:EQ's group de-masking features, because I tend to do that all by hand track by track. But the concept is sound and the execution is sound, if you know what to prioritize over what else.
Different filters, different workflow, much more surgical nesting of filters nearby each other, etc. Also, most of the dynamic EQs (Pro-Q3, Kirchoff, etc.) can't easily push down nearly as far in a dynamic way.
@@jahhe2611 Because a "resonance" (a strong peak in the spectrum) is a natural part of every sound. It's the shape, position, and volume (energy) of the resonances--and the low points in between the resonances--that produce the "timbre" of a sound. The problem is when we as humans hear one or two or a few resonances as being too ever-present and sounding "annoying" or "bad" or "shrill" or "harsh". Or it might just sound like one "ringing" pitch that is somehow distracting or unwanted. A machine algorithm can only detect energy; it can't make subjective judgements like a human would.
Hey Baphy! This is unrelated to Reso but something that I noticed about clipping sounds as close to oblivion as possible, and I was hoping it was something you could provide a solution\advice for. I noticed low frequencies starting to build up for sounds that are highpassed prior to clipping. I figured this happens because driving the clipper means bringing up the volume of all frequencies. When i highpass after clipping i get some peaks again because of phase shift, which kind of defeats the purpose, so i was wondering if you had a workaround for that.
I have! The problem is that the low energy i had cut before clipping returns to an extent and masks the low end slightly (these are low mid fm leads made from bass octaves). A highpass filter adds peaks a couple of dbs higher. I guess what i could do is sandwich the hp filter between two clippers to maintain a consistent level
@@shivbhalla Okay, I see. Well, four answers: A. In mixing, you can't always completely remove "everything bad-sounding". Sometimes, the best you can achieve is **reducing** the bad-sounding somewhat. You might be in that situation here. Mixing is often a matter of trade-offs and compromises. Chase one particular problem too hard and you end up butchering the original sound. B. Are you high-passing far enough up the spectrum on all those sounds that are summing together again later? If your filter is still too low in the bass range, yes, you are effectively putting a little EQ bump right near the knee of the filter. C. You **could** try a steeper HPF. That would reduce more of the energy you're later raising back to an audible level when you make the track louder (by pushing it up into a clipper). Just be careful that the steeper HPF is giving you the results you want. D. It might not be any real problem at all? What you're describing? Again, see answer A. You can't always remove everything you think is problematic. And that's assuming it really IS problematic. Yes, if you're hearing audible low end buildup that "sounds bad", then yeah, you need to reduce that as best you can. But if you're just seeing some low energy happening in a spectrum analyzer and thinking "that's bad, isn't it?" even though you can't actually **hear** anything that sounds bad, then maybe there's no problem to solve?
@@Baphometrix Thank you for the detailed reply! Tbh I think the answer is either A or D, and my ears are too annihilated to tell right now, so I'll troubleshoot this when they'r fresh! B doesn't apply because there isn't any summing happening, these are sounds playing one at a time causing problems in frequencies they have no business being in C is an option, I'll have to try. Usually filters that steep tend to cause some amount of post ringing,
Tbh, I don't care if it sounds slightly better or worse than Soothe 2, I am currently using a Patcher Preset in FL that was cobbled together with Stock EQs has only 45 bands and eats CPU for breakfast and that one is definitely worse then either, but I do care about the fact that RESO costs like a third (as of right now). I'd be more interested in a comparison between DSEQ3 and RESO since those are roughly in the same priceclass (and actually affordable lol).
At first the RESO sounded unnatural and nasally, but when you played it in context of the whole track, RESO did sound better than Soothe. I would just not do such a steep cut, personally, but that would just be a matter of taste at that point. You just went a little too deep to plant that seed to make your point, I would say. Is all. Very informative video overall. Thanks!
Yes, I could choose to cut less with Reso. And I could alternatively fiddle with Soothe 2 for a while and get a good result too. We get into some very subjective territory with these tools and how much to cut with them. It's easy to go overboard. I often go too hard at first and then come back and lighten up the amount of cut after listening more on different occasions with fresh ears.
In Reso vocal sounds like it's in the bucket, soothe is more naturaly sounding, if to combine both you might come up with smth better than with one, but not of them are amazing, don't elude yourself that Reso is very good.
No. I took one look and realized it was another "black box" for less experienced producers, much like Spectral Shaper. I do like some products that Baby Audio makes (Crystallize is GREAT), but I hard passed on Smooth Operator.
Where have this video been all these years, this video alone teaches us about resonance than any video ever on the whole internet. like subscribe for sure to someone like this.
It was clearly just to demonstrate what used to be the way to handle resonances, and not trying to pretend dynamic EQ doesn't exist. We all own Pro Q 3 lol.
Thanks for making this video, I was very close to purchasing Soothe2 (a little overpriced in my opinion). RESO is a much better product and you saved me $200!
RESO being a third of the price with finer controls makes it a win imo. Acquired a... version... of soothe for testing purposes (for SCIENCE!) and I find that it's not worth the cost considering there's a cheaper, and in my opinion more detailed, alternative in RESO. Soothe is cuter looking though
Seems like you left soothe2 on its default settings which I don’t think makes this a fair comparison. Turning up the resolution and oversampling can make it sound smoother and changing the style to hard (which is a different algorithm) can make soothe more “powerful and tweakable”
I totally disagree around min 13 - I think the soothe keeps the energy of the performance way more intact. The other one totally sucks the life out of it at least that's what I feel.
Reso sounds worse to me. Also, why is the frequency spectrum in reso not log scaled? It's a bit weird to have 50% of the interface below 500hz for a resonance taming plugin imo
Another interesting video. I'm fully aware of louder is better and brighter is better. Still, in your given context I think soothe gave the better sounding result. And this is the first time I ever heard about any of these plugins. The Reso version sounded unnaturally EQed, phasey ... hard to describe. It sounded processed, while soothe did not. To me at least, this is of course highly subjective...
Yep. I'm not denying anyone's first impression at the AB comparison. But this is IMO explained by the phenomenon I describe in the pinned comment, and should be tempered with an understanding of the mixing goals I had for this particular song and its intended playback environment.
@@Baphometrix mmm i dont know man. It sounded boxy to me, even when played in context. I love Soothe, but It I do agree that it’s not always as surgical as I need it to be, but most of the time it does the job. love the sidechain option as well. Incredible tool when you have two elements fighting for space.
@@Jonas-jq5xl The original vocal processing is already verging on boxy. It's not really RESO itself doing that. This is very specific processing to make the vocal sit a certain way in the mix when it's being accompanied by the full instrumental.
Bapho, thank you for this amazing Lesson 👍✨What do you think about the Sonnox Supressor ? This Puppy was a long time the King for taming Resos. (Btw at 22:53 it sounds like a SoundFx from Star Trek 🤪)
Honestly, I bought soothe and barely use it, i got caught up in the hype and thought this is it, the silver bullet i needed. I justify using it on atonal signals mostly (sweepers, percs, hats, cymbals etc) to tame harshness, but never on main instruments. I've been eyeing Reso for a while now, but was too skeptical about dynamic spectral suppressor tech currently implemented in the industry, so i dismissed it. I know MtM plugins are generally good so this video has just bolstered my decision to go ahead and buy this when it is on sale next! Now I must sell off my Soothe2 license...
Best demonstration of Reso on vocals. I just grabbed reso finally. this thing is ridiculous. top notch. i will use soothe only for percussion loop de harshing. and i will use soothe on instruments. never on vocals. vocals are delicate. and reso is for delicate signals. also mastering.
Boy, people are so tactless in some of their comments. Sorry about that; I appreciate your efforts. Hey, I was wondering how you deal with the changing problem areas in a performance. One of the positive things I've heard about Soothe is that it applies itself progressively to the changing performance. I guess with Reso you would have to automate different setting (snapshots) for different areas of the performance. You wouldn't want to apply it to parts of the performance that didn't need it, right? What are your thoughts on this?
They're both dynamically responsive to the input signal. Neither of them are static EQ notches. If Soothe actually moves its filter points that can honestly be a *bad* thing, IMO. Many resonant peaks are just part of the timbre of a sound and aren't necessarily "bad" or "harsh" or "too ringy", etc. You only want the tool to respond to the problem resonances.
I'm pinning a note here for all the inevitable "But RESO sounds worse than Soothe" comments. Folks, remember that we always hear brighter-sounding things as "better" and louder-sounding things as "better". In this type of direct A-B comparison, your gut instinct will **always** consider the brighter-sounding option as "better". As producers/engineers, we have to watch for that tendency in our own perceptions. If you had heard ONLY the RESO version of the vocal in the context of this song, you wouldn't have thought twice about it. It would just be "the sound design" for those vocals.
It is **impossible** to set up an apples-to-apples sound comparison between Soothe and RESO. Because Soothe is largely an automated black box. There's no way to tell exactly what frequencies its hitting, by how much, with what Q, etc. to attempt to duplicate those same general dynamic cuts over in RESO. What you're hearing come out of Soothe is significantly brighter and more resonant, because I'm just letting it do a moderate amount of its "black box" processing with settings that are close to its defaults. By contrast, what you're hearing come out of RESO are the specific settings I dialed in for this particular mix. I've scalpeled out most of the annoying resonant overtones, and as a result, the output is a bit darker and slightly more clouded up in the general sibiliance and presence range. So your brain's knee-jerk reaction when I directly AB back and forth between the two is "brighter is better, therefore Soothe is better".
I'm not denying anyone's subjective "first impression" preference when I directly AB contrast RESO vs Soothe in some of the video segments. But there's a bigger picture here. When this song gets played at full volume on a big sound system, those harsh resonances that might not be too apparent on whatever you're using to watch/listen to this TH-cam video will likely become very intense and unpleasant and shrill. And again, if you'd _never_ heard the Soothe version in the context of this song, you wouldn't have thought anything was amiss about the vocals. (Aside from the also-inevitable difference in personal/artistic preferences in our mixing decisions and sound design decisions that we all have as individual producers/engineers.)
Finally, for all the comments saying (essentially) "I hear phasing" or "I feel RESO causes phasing and smearing", etc. I'd like to point you at Wytse's commentary about RESO. If you watch the whole thing, you'll see him talk about "trying to break" RESO, about his tests for phase response of the filters, for pre/post ringing, and so on. Short answer: he found it really surprisingly clean in all these respects. That's my experience too. th-cam.com/video/cygXc0K1Sjw/w-d-xo.html
I will use try RESO now i never did before. But i have used Soothe and Soothe 2 alot and I could easily hear its lisping and filtering side effects to the point that now I have almost stopped using it for resonance control. I wonder how people can bear soothe sound it generally takes more out of the sound than it supposed to.
@@sawabhacks8050 Right. All of these resonance controllers--even RESO--are not magic, perfect siliver-bullet solutions. In the same way that not every sound can have its loudness improved **transparently** beyond a certain point, the same is true of annoying/shrill resonances. You can control them to a point, but you cannot always get rid of them entirely without ruining the original sound. As with many production and engineering decisions, it's the art of compromise. How much "damage" to the original, basic sound of a thing are you willing to tolerate, versus how much of some annoying resonance (that most of your listeners will never notice, lol) are you willing to still **hear**?
I'm one of those who think Soothe sounded better than Reso - not because Soothe sounds brighter, but I think Reso made the vocal a lot more "nasal" sounding.
@@RampusChannel same.
@@RampusChannel Fair enough!
Bapho don't you hear a sort of flangy/phasey boxiness in Reso? In particular at 11:19 when you compare Soothe and Reso for the first time...
See pinned post.
I missed you Baph, all my mixes are now sounding loud and proud (CTZ strat' series is gold). I can't wait watching this one ! I'll grab a beer and click play in a minute , so exited !
this is so frustrating to watch, you can bandpass soothe very tightly as well as slow the attack and most importantly sharpen the peaks. the pre ringing makes reso unusable
RESO sounds very weird and comb filtered. Soothe sounds way more natural
The vocal in soothe in this clip better to me..
this video is incredibly useful and eye opening honestly, I was shocked that I'm not already subscribed to this
THANK YOU!
As someone who owns DSEQ3, Reso, and Melda MSpectralDynamics....thought I'd chime in. I downloaded Soothe2 because of all the hype. It's beautiful to look at but DSEQ3 essentially did the same thing. I had a sound that had a gnarly comb filter on it...almost unusable. Neither DSEQ nor Soothe 2 could fix it....threw on the Melda MSD and was amazed. Reso has taken over everyday duties from the DSEQ but Melda is the best of them all. Reso's workflow is great...efficient, precise and to the point. Melda takes an afternoon and a few videos to learn to use properly...bang for your buck, go with Reso. The two work well as complimentary tools...
Nicely detailed, objective comment. Thanks!
Those are great features indeed. You find incredible plugins when you scratch beneath the surface. Thank you for the in-depth video.
Hey, I deeply appreciate all of the knowledge you have shared here. Thank you for being amazing
Baphy just wanted to thank you so much for all these videos. I’ve watched every single one with all my attention (repeatedly actually) and they have changed my game.
Would love, if possible, to see a video on your take about how to use compression (I’ve listened a lot lately to jack joseph puig approach on it and I think its very interesting), and also one about saturation and different types, as technical as you can get!
Again thank you so much man, love your content and best wishes.
Great stuff! Have had reso for a while now and learnt the finer details after watching this. Thanks Baph!
Great video! I have had RESO for over a year and I learned so much from this video. Thanks!
Thank you for this series of videos, very interesting and educational. great job.
Yes I was waiting for this one thank you so much
Your channel is great and very informative, helps me a lot. Thank you!
You don't happen to offer mix down services? What you do is so incredibly precise.
Okay, after I've watched the video yesterday I was completely unconvinced. I just couldn't tell the difference between any variants when used on voice (I started to wonder how much was lost during TH-cam normalization). But I downloaded Reso and DSEQ trials, and I had Nova GE already which can do something similar. When soloed, the results didn't seem all that good (and again it was hard for me to tell that de-resed versions were "better" than the sources - drums and various synths) but when I moved to the mix context, Reso was a clear winner. I didn't bother with Soothe though since it's out of my anyway. In any case, the resulting mix was undeniably pleasant to hear (Reso ended up on most of the tracks except a few where it clearly made things worse or couldn't find much resonance). Cheers!
Excelent demo , obviously for those that are very experienced! Thank you .
I've spent lots time with both plugz and I find that RESO is much more capable of SURGICALLY getting the job done. If you just wanna slap on a preset and forget about it sure Soothe will prob get u decent results on the fly... it does sound good (untiloverdone). For those who want more control over their projects RESO has much more potential and flexibility.
Yep. Exactly the point I'm trying to make with this video!
More control is always better :p
@@809rdl Sometimes more control = more rope to hang yourself with. 😅. More decisions to be confused by. But yeah, if you know your goals and the tool helps you pursue those goals in a way that makes sense to you, then more control is better.
Great insight. Have this and Smooth Operator. Need to spend more time with both.
you just demonstrated how a lazy sooth2 setup blew reso out of the water
I also have had frustrations with soothe, it either seems to not detect enough resonances or way too many including the lows i seem to cut with the low cut. What do you think of DSEQ?
I haven't used DSEQ yet, but I'm sure it's very good. TBProAudio makes some great plugins, and I use several of theirs.
Very good and informative video. I almost want to switch teams but: Will soothe be surgical enough if you turn up the selectivity knob and the knob next to it? This way, the “q” value is set higher and you retain more of the input. I agree on the part where you schouldnt remove all resonant frequencies, just the ones that really need to be removed wich Soothe doesnt let you do that with whatever setting. Iam just wondering about those 2 knobs you didnt talk about on soothe.
It's a crying shame how many so called producers and mix engineers don't appreciate what is being shown here. Soothe is still good for sidechaining but Reso is your surgical cleanup when specific frequencies you can hear needs to be tamed. One thing maybe overlooked is that soothe2 constantly changes the frequencies it 'rakes' where's the points on rest stay fixed; they can both have their separate uses.
..... and constant changing of frequencies puts Soothe on another level and you can't really compare it to Reso. So as far as I can see it, Soothe is more of a mastering tool, and Reso is a tool when you need to do surgical resonance cleanup of particular loop.
Soothe2 excels when the frequencies you need to control are dynamic.
If you have static resonance frequencies you can try a dynamic EQ with a narrow Q factor. Pro-Q3 for example has a dynamic mode.
Sweeping over almost any audio with a very steep narrow band will result in many whistle sounds that are just a side-effect of the filtering.
The adjustability of something like a Pro-Q3 allows me to sweep with a tailored narrowness so I can find actual issues and not just self induced whistles.
I see what you're saying and agree with the principle. Bear in mind, though, that RESO is also a dynamic resonance controller. Watch the red trace at the top of the window during playback. You'll see that it responds only as much as it needs to when a specific node has some energy buildup. Soothe also has those same type of "nodes" under the covers of its black box. The settings control where those nodes are essentially sitting, waiting to respond to the input signal and to respond dynamically.
@@Baphometrix Is it correct that soothe continuously adjusts the frequencies it targets (basically continuously doing the kind of training reso only does on one chunk of the signal?) If that’s right, that might be a significant advantage for material where the resonant peaks significantly shift frequency over time. (It might also be a good reason not to give more fine grained control over peaks in the ui: because the plugin is meant to continuously change the frequencies it targets.)
@@ohwell2963 It's hard to say. Their manual isn't very forthcoming about their process. My guess is that it's an FFT-based detector that's simply identifying the highest resonant peaks within the detection range of the "band" and then doing a slight amount of "taming" (not unlike the "taming" action of Gullfoss). Since those resonant peaks will shift depending on the specitic notes/pitches happening, then yes, I'm guessing it "slides" back and forth as pitches change.
But.... this might be a good thing in some cases, and might NOT be a good thing in other cases. Resonant peaks are not necessarily all bad or unwanted. It's the resonances of a sound that give it a unique timbre. How does a process like I describe know which of those resonances are a buildup area that is continuously "ringing" in an audible and unpleasant way?
Sure, with RESO you are letting it pick some _static_ frequencies where it thinks there is "unpleasant" ringing. But it also lets you REMOVE those nodes if you disagree. Or move them slightly. Or add your own. You get to have full control over deciding exactly where the resonant buildup obviously rings in an unpleasant way. Then you put a control node there. Then IF energy in that one spot builds up too much, RESO dynamically clamps down on it to tame that one problem spot. (And all the other problem spots).
It's a different **design philosophy**. Soothe has one approach and RESO has a different approach. For all the reasons I demonstrate in the video, I think RESO's approach is overall superior.
Dry mix 12:28
s2 mix 12:40
reso mix 12:59
I’ve held off getting Soothe2 for a long time because of its pretty crazy price tag. $219 as of today. I’m glad I did. RESO is $63 and better. Thank you for this in-depth review!
I have no skin in the game for either of these, but you don't touch the Depth control of Soothe 2, and it's set pretty aggressively high. I think that's why it comes across as a blunt instrument. The A/B test is probably not doing the argument for Reso any favours either since it's also set too aggressively and makes the vocal sound really nasal and unnatural. Again; zero skin in the game here, but I think perhaps this needs to be revisited on some other material to illustrate the differences in sound (which I believe are minimal once tuned equally).
Thanks for the video. I may check out RESO, but I’ll definitely rethink my seed-planting strategy of using a rake while wearing winter gloves. 😉
We missed you Baphometrix. As always your teachings are gold
This is so dope! Thank you!
I agree. I've always felt Soothe 2 took a little too much away from the overall sound. If I use it, I only use it sparingly with no more than about 3dB of max removal.
For me Soothe is great for overall softening tracks or even whole master. I've still used regular dynamic or static eq for resonance peaks. Reso seems to be perfect for those like the name suggests. I'm sold for sure.
Is there anyway I could send you my song? would be nice if you could tell me your opinion on it
I think the initial settings you had for Reso made it sound quite boxy. As if too much was being cut off. I was actually surprised that to me it sounded worse than Soothe 2. However, when you made targets later in the video, the signal sounded much better. Maybe those huge dipped targets are reason for this.
Melda MAutoDynamicEQ seem to be at least powerful as Reso is, if not more? But still I'm pretty new in this field and would like to hear some opinions about it. Generally, I could say that if you want to get _everything_ you need to have when it comes to audio production, Melda Complete Bundle may be the answer once and forever.
10:21 that is the best description of how I felt about soothe haha. I got DSEQ because of that. It's better but it's still "intelligently" chooses resonances for me, which mind you, still has it's uses. I'm gonna have to give this reso thing a shot though. It looks even more specific.
Soothe always makes everything sound like a bad quality mp3 to me. Definitely gonna give rezo a try
Hey congrats on 1 mil video views Baphy! It's more than deserved.
I'm looking forward to the stereo width CTZ episode. I've been doing some experiments with panning/width combined with clipping, but am curious to hear your takes on it.
Reso sounds quite comb-filter-y to me here when soloed. And this sound is very evident in the studio hear on my Amphion 15s. Not trying to sound arrogant or anything, just informing what I'm using to listen on.
I have never tried reso but in this vocal example
It’s sounding very strange and would definitely skip it in the mix or dial it way back.
I know it's a little different of a tool but will this work or compete with Gullfoss in the chain?
Typically you use use RESO (or Soothe, or any other resonance controller) to clean up harsh resonances on a specific sound (track, maybe a sub-bus) Gullfoss is a slightly different tool for a different purpose. Even though the "Tame" part of Gulfoss is acting on resonant peaks, it's not really to reduce harshness. Instead, it works in concert with the "Recover" part of Gullfoss to **unmask** sounds that are fighting with each other, to make as much of the mix audible and clear (in a musical way, according to their algorithm) as possible.
Soothe 2 has saved many harsh mixes for me. Indispensable in my mixes. 🤷🏾♀
And in your example, I prefer the dry version the best of all examples. Kinda has the Post Malone sound to it naturally.
For vocals, I'd say Reso isn't necessarily the best choice, because in some scenarios, resonances come and go and pop up all over the place. In some instances, having a static frequency that get's ducked at a given static threshold doesn't really cut it, except for in cases such as removing room modes/resonances that are always at a given frequency, or something inherent to the vocalist, such as a nasal tone that is exacerbated by certain notes. Having a detection that constantly finds and tames resonances that stick out as they happen can be more useful than static nodes IMO (if and when that happens to be this issue you're addressing).
This is why for a vocal, I'd probably go with DSEQ3 or Soothe 2 as the flexibility is there. They do what Reso does and more. When it comes to this vs dynamic EQ, it's really a workflow choice. This is easily quicker than dealing with resonances via Pro-Q3 and has similar parameters (EG. just a threshold without attack and release).
Nice one! Thx for that! In the end i still believe in ProQ3 for all this, as you can there:
- freeze the curve to see frequencies popping out from the line (and this for ANY LENGTH OF TIME, not 3 seconds or so like in Reso's "Calculate Target")
- apply up to 24 EQs if needed, ...OR DYNAMIC EQs (very under rated)!
- solo any dot, activate it or not, change the Q of each dot individually, EQ or dynamic EQ,
- (Am i the only one to care about the magic:) infinite UNDO & REDO?!!!!
- ...and definitely waaaaayyyyy much more: mid/side processing, EQ matching...
- Ehhh, what about "External Sidechain Trigger for Dynamic EQ dotes"?! But this is going away from this topic... 🤩
But definitely, one need to HEAR what one is doing, and it might a good reason why so many people prefer to use an AI doing that for them, or a ONE button plugin solving all!
Fair enough, it's usually not the favorite moment of the musical creation, but still, working on our ears ability to find what's disturbing the mix, is part of the way, isn't it?
To me Soothe2, Reso and Spectral shaper, are very good plugins for a fast result (or for a soft gentle use over the main mix or buses, or even, an AI second check).
But for a "track to track surgical precision EQ" or "dynamic EQ" i really love ProQ3 (the UNDO & REDO is a massive part of my choice).
There only do I feel really in "control" of any detail. But let's say overall, how lucky we are to have so many option,
i come from a time, where few parametric EQs on a mixing table, or a 31 band graphic EQ, were all we had to make it sound right! Blessed we are! Great day to each one of you!
Love your content, the clip to zero series is insane value!
would like to ask tho,
Do you mix exclusively in Slate VSX?
And, whats your favorite room in the vsx?
I've been experimenting with using _only_ Slate VSX since January, when I moved into a new house. My new office for work/production is pretty small, and for various reasons (lots of windows and amazing views) I am reluctant to hang up a bunch of acoustic treatment. Plus, I needed space for my work macbook on my main production desk, and I used to use big Yamaha HS8s as my main monitors so my desk was always hella-cramped. A subwoofer in this small room would be overkill and _really_ hard to bass-trap the room well enough to mitigate out the room modes from a subwoofer.
So yes, for about a half a year I've been using VSX exclusively. I even put my Subpac in the closet because I wanted to know if the sub response/detail in the VSX system would be good enough for accurate low-end.
In short, I like the VSX system a lot, and I definitely do NOT miss my HS8s nor my subwoofer. I'm still on the fence about whether to put the Subpac back in use. It's nice not having all the wires running across my desk and over to my chair. I do feel that some of the farfield monitor emulations, plus the SUV emulation and the Club emulation do give me enough sub definition and detail that I don't **need** the Subpac any more.
My favorite emulations are the Barefoot midfields in "Steven's Mix Room", the Empire farfields in "Archon Studio", and then the "Electric Car", "SUV", and "Club (Bass)" emulations. The first two sound FANTASTIC and give me really good feedback about the entire spectrum. The Car, SUV, and Club don't sound great, but they do really highlight all the typical/important problem areas, such as balance between your sub range and bass range vs the rest of the spectrum. The Club emulation also does a great job of highlighting mono-compatibility issues. I also check mixes on three other emulations: "Boombox", "SA-PODS" (apple air pods), and the single, mono Avantone Mixcube nearfield in "Steven's Room".
Baphy - what's your opinion on "Levels" - a plugin also by this same developer as Reso? Is levels accurate in its judgement of LUFS and its recommended settings for TH-cam, Soundcloud, Etc.? Curious as to what your thoughts are. Thanks.
LEVELS is accurate and interestingly designed. I tend to use different tools for monitoring things to do with loudness, crest factor, peak values, etc. But that's just personal preference.
Just sub'd , you presented hands on referencing application. I'm in agreement 100% with Reso. Plus they are gonna keep developing the app so no one will be able to challenge them.
Thank you for this great tutorial
Awesome tutorial. I love Reso.
The damping control in bx_refinement is nice for removing a little harshness, and the results are usually not bright which in this case seems to be what you are going for.
Now that I actually have my head around DSEQ, i'm a fan. It does a very transparent job when configured correctly. There's a big ole learning curve however. Reso looks a lot quicker and more precise
IDK what people mean about Soothe sounding "better" or more natural. It's not a cappella music, you have to separate the instruments. Too much across the spectrum per instrument causes them to kinda smear and "become" each other. The results he got were specific to what he wanted for the song, genre, and listening medium. The point is that it's surgical and you can get many different kinds of results depending on your decisions. I thought it sounded like it would be way easier to mix.
Exactly!
Hey Baph, within your workflow, do you mostly apply this plugin on the mastering chain? Or do you place it throughout your instrument and or bus chains?
You usually want to fix problems as close to the source as possible, if you can identify it. So I tend to use this on individual tracks, or maybe some lower-level busses. Yes, you can sometimes get some "resonant buildup" on a bus from all the different sounds that are summing on that bus, but here's the problem: notching out "bad sounding" resonances is a fairly destructive process. I mean, lol, look at all the indignant comments on this video describing how bad or phased or nasal my RESO settings for these vocal sound to some viewers.
So you don't want to potentially harm an entire sub-mix (or your full mix) by cutting notches that will affect sounds that have no resonance issues at all. So if you can reduce the "bad sounding" resonances on an individual track or two, and now the downstream busses sound okay, then you're in good shape.
Thanks for this one and for the rest of the series I already saw, if you do more videos could you please change the track ? thanks
Thanks, great video
We need to stop thinking of soothe as a harshness removal tool and more like a separation tool. It's freaking awesome at separation. reset it to a flat, set it to hard, enable side chain. put it on the track you want to suppress, send the signal you want in front to it. dial it in and it will unmask the sound without changing the overall level of the sound its set to supress. if you want the level ducking too, slap on a compressor, multiband compor dynamic eq with sidechain or automate the level depending on the precision you need for the ducking.
compared to RESO, soothe2 has the advantage that you can set the attack and release times - at times it makes the difference if you can use it or not. but even more control you have on DSEQ. though soothe sounds the smoother and more transparent more often and faster, I am able to reach the same effect or better with DSEQ. but didn't notice the sweepable delta feature on RESO - that's really cool and useful! thanks!
isn't the moving up and down of resonances in reso the same as setting an attack and release where both controls are synced so having separate controls for attack and release is an improvement but of a very minor detail of control
Hey Baph, could you do a review on this new plugin fron Hornet Analogstage MK2. Sounds a great plugin for saturation, they say to have it on every channel, bus and group ,it's lightweight and low cost.
Womdering what you'd thjnk about this for us edm producers.
Thanks :-)
I understand what you're trying to tell us but I ca take you that seriously when you don't try to match as soon as possible the setting of Soothe 2 to reso. In the 41 minutes of video You never touch the Sharpness and Selectivity knobs to make the the two plugins sound as close as possible and by this way have a real comparison of which one is making a big difference. In my ears I hear in some way that Reso sound a little bit more "moody" when Soothe 2 is a little more brigther but this comparison is not judge at all when they are not as close as possible on the way the two are behaving. Good video by the way.
Per the details in the pinned post, it would be futile to try and "make the two plugins sound as close as possible". They operate in fundamentally different ways. The main thrust of this video was about the differences in control and workflow.
Not having narrowed down the frequency ranged focused on and pointing holes in the unadjusted frequency range is the biggest mistake IMO
Reso is like a slightly quicker fabfilter on dynamic mode for taking out resonate frequencies. I think these are both good for different resonances but i agree that soothe can make something feel lifeless.
for me it almost sounds like it was recorded on a cellphone lol. but than at 11:46 Reso actually removed most of that distorsion. I have no clue how people can say Soothe sounds better in this example. it didn't do much at all and removed liveliness
to me sooth sounds better on solo. but in the mix reso sounds better.
@@adirsab second time I heard it I got so anoyed by that strong resonance at the "n" in "and" of "and I can ask a million" (and everytime that note returns) that I have a hard time judging it now
Do you have any videos that show how to set up your template?
th-cam.com/video/B1FDzgEYNjo/w-d-xo.html
What about just using EQ from the get-go as that does the job?.
An EQ is not dynamic, so no, it will not do the same job.
thank you so much for making these videos but seriously if you can't hear the difference between soothe and rezo you might have to check your monitoring environment because the sound gets absolutely horrible when you switch it to Rezo. It is boxy lifeless and broken.. Your Soothe settings could be hard as well. its not brighter or darker, the tonality changes and you end up hearing other resonaces
Very useful. Thank you
After years of using Reso, I have never been able to fix harsh vocals with Reso, also heavy guitars sound weird using Reso, you have to drive back Reso for a good sound. Reso is good for a whole mix.
I would argue that Soothe is better in most instances. I use when mastering problem tracks with resonances.
What is your take on Luka pretolesi and his way of creating dynamics in a track? He has seemingly many ways to do so. For example, he says he wants the side information to be as dynamic as possible. Do you think this is something that could be incorporated using your technique? I wonder how I should approach that, since I do feel that my ears get a little more fatigued than before using this technique (which Luka claims is one of the upsides of leaving side information dynamic.)
Luca is a grammy-winning pro in a challenging space (dance music, pop music). He knows exactly what he's doing and why. Any advice he gives is good advice. That said, IMO don't try advanced things unless you really understand the principle behind those advanced things. If a pro tells you do try something, but you don't really understand their explanation, you can get in trouble by trying to do a thing without understanding what you're doing.
To your specific question, a lot depends on the **context** in which Luca says he wants to leave the sides as dynamic as possible. If he's talking about it in the context of perceived width and using tools like his new Space Controller plugin, that means one thing. (And it's worth noting that one of Space Controller's main tricks is running a limiter on the sides, which is **reducing** the dynamic range of the sides.) So there's not enough info for me to really answer this question?
@@Baphometrix Ye. I am still educating myself and attempting to understand what he is doing and why. I hoped that maybe you had an idea about the how's and why's. I really like your videos and my mixes are so clean now. Thankd.
@@Baphometrix ah. I think i missed your last paragraph. I will read more about it and suddenly the pieces will fall in place. Im sure. Didnt know he limited the sides, so there are clear holes in my knowledge about his process.
For me, the very fact that you're saying it picks different problems out depending on the part of the audio you analyse immediately presents a problem as then it's going to be notching out things it doesn't need to depending on the section. I don't own Soothe but the fact that it's dynamic seems to me to be a much better option. I have to be honest, in the comparisons at the start Reso made it sound bottley to me.
This is the right answer for me, I though about the same, this is why I like dynamic more than static EQ, just a personal preference
I agree. Reso SOUNDED worse in that the result was completely changed/unnatural with more added metallic resonance somehow. My ears tell me the exact opposite of his claims.
reso has very obvious pre ringing. you didn’t change the sharpness on soothe! lol
For whoever in the comments say this or that is better, you forget the essence of what an engineer is supposed to do: find whatever suits your needs, style, client's desires and what YOU like. Baphometrix is doing an excellent job at explaining the differences and it's simply up to you to decide if it works or not. Clients come to you because they like your style so just follow your own needs/aesthetic. I personally am not so much into RESO but can see why it can be helpful for Baphometrix or others, who aren't sounding like I do. Cheers and let's stay positive :D
Exactly. And there's nothing essentially wrong with Soothe, either. I use both. If Soothe can quickly get the results I want, great. It's faster and easier. But I've definitely run into situations where Soothe has to cut into too much to tame the thing I'm really after, and that's where RESO can really shine.
@@Baphometrix i have all plugins possible and use them in different contexts.
There is a thing about "ears" and a thing about "engineer ears" and you definitely have engineer ears, because the points conveyed in the demonstration along with the comparisons and analogies that RESO is in a class of its own regarding resonance is correct! Soothe does just that, SOOTHE! RESO does what it claims, RESONANCE, at a clear "engineer-ear" level of listening that demonstrates RESO is better, useful, and very surgical (because having the ability to remove and reduce notable harmonics in the "trumpeted whistling resonance frequencies" is a bigger deal than most are entertaining!) I hear exactly what you hear Baph, and why, and see so many creative uses for RESO.
Currently using it to solve a resonant frequency issue that bx_refinement is NOT doing for me for the selected purpose regarding its use. The spectrum snapshot in RESO made it easy to pinpoint the tiny "engineer ear" dog whistle of resonance that only I could hear...like the high frequency sine pitch from an analog TV or device that notes, without stating, that it is on or off. People are either going to "really listen" with their ears or "automatically listen" with their emotions. I have a big knob unit attached to NOTHING in my studio...I LOVE to turn it for those that want more bass, treble or volume...when turning the incredibly important looking knob it ALWAYS makes them THINK something has changed and sounds better.😂 #godblessthem #gottalovethem #engineertricks
Even with how poorly soothe is set up in this example, I still prefer it
Hey Baph, just wanted to say If you and your theory got more famous as your channel grows; we were the very first students in your class. Hoping you the best my friend:)
I use soothe as a mastering governor. I think if you you do a good job initially in the mixing and balancing phase, soothe just provides that extra de-harshing algorithmic trick . Prevents ear fatigue. Main question is what is the name of this Song you keep using ?
Cos Live Engineers Are Idiots
Damn I’ve been planting my seeds for years with a rake. This video opened my eyes to the mysteries of gardening 👩🌾
10/10
Thanks for this detailed video once again Baph! For this purpose, reso is definitely the better choice. But one use case I like to use soothe over reso is when taming "early reflections" on a drum room and pitch bends on the sustain of not properly tuned drum shells for example.
Off topic P.S: Do you still use smart eq in your work?
Sometimes I do, yes.
@@Baphometrix you said something about sonnible's smart comp2 and smart limiter "robbing the lowest bass frequencies" (paraphrasing) when the signal is really pushed through them. Any way you can elaborate or make a vid on it? I love them both, but also make heavy bass music so yeah..
Also wondering how you use Smart EQ, it always comes out dull whenever I use it. Have you tried the Smart eq group function with multiple instances? I can't wrap my head around that either lol, but if you have any wisdom i would love to hear it!
Love your vids Baphy and I recommend them to many of my producer friends!
@@coliny7027 Many uses for a compressor or limiter rely on some degree of "makeup" gain. Make the signal somehow shorter and narrower (push the peaks down), and you can raise the RMS of that signal until the new, shorter peaks touch the ceiling again.
When this is a single wideband process, you can't squash too hard, because you start cutting into the sub and bass region with the most energy and causing distortion and softening.
When you have an FFT process, with dozens and dozens of very narrow bands, you can essentially "turn down the gain" (and/or just use slower release times) on the one or two lowest FFT bands which are the highest "peaks" in the spectrum. They're so low in the sub region, that on a lot of playback systems you won't notice the drop in energy. But reducing that energy gives a lot more headroom to every other band to be evened out by the dynamics process, and then you can raise the total signal much higher than a wideband dynamics process would let you do cleanly.
@@coliny7027 As for smartEQ, it works in some cases when your mix is out of whack. If your mix is in pretty good shape, smart EQ might tend to fix things that don't need fixed. For example, boosting the low mids that you carefully sculpted to reduce muddiness and boxiness.
No, I haven't had much use to try smart:EQ's group de-masking features, because I tend to do that all by hand track by track. But the concept is sound and the execution is sound, if you know what to prioritize over what else.
How is using Reso any different from dynamic EQs? It seems to me that it's doing the same exact thing, isn't it?
Different filters, different workflow, much more surgical nesting of filters nearby each other, etc. Also, most of the dynamic EQs (Pro-Q3, Kirchoff, etc.) can't easily push down nearly as far in a dynamic way.
i was thinking the same, wouldn't we need a plugin that actually detects these frequencies without us having to do basically anything? :D
@@jahhe2611 Because a "resonance" (a strong peak in the spectrum) is a natural part of every sound. It's the shape, position, and volume (energy) of the resonances--and the low points in between the resonances--that produce the "timbre" of a sound. The problem is when we as humans hear one or two or a few resonances as being too ever-present and sounding "annoying" or "bad" or "shrill" or "harsh". Or it might just sound like one "ringing" pitch that is somehow distracting or unwanted. A machine algorithm can only detect energy; it can't make subjective judgements like a human would.
@@Baphometrix i get it, give it some time and it will 😂 these AI things are getting smarter by the day!
Hey Baphy! This is unrelated to Reso but something that I noticed about clipping sounds as close to oblivion as possible, and I was hoping it was something you could provide a solution\advice for. I noticed low frequencies starting to build up for sounds that are highpassed prior to clipping. I figured this happens because driving the clipper means bringing up the volume of all frequencies. When i highpass after clipping i get some peaks again because of phase shift, which kind of defeats the purpose, so i was wondering if you had a workaround for that.
It's the highpass filter that's making problematic peaks down in the low end. Have you seen episode 17 yet? th-cam.com/video/kmRyWePW9UY/w-d-xo.html
I have! The problem is that the low energy i had cut before clipping returns to an extent and masks the low end slightly (these are low mid fm leads made from bass octaves). A highpass filter adds peaks a couple of dbs higher. I guess what i could do is sandwich the hp filter between two clippers to maintain a consistent level
@@shivbhalla Okay, I see. Well, four answers:
A. In mixing, you can't always completely remove "everything bad-sounding". Sometimes, the best you can achieve is **reducing** the bad-sounding somewhat. You might be in that situation here. Mixing is often a matter of trade-offs and compromises. Chase one particular problem too hard and you end up butchering the original sound.
B. Are you high-passing far enough up the spectrum on all those sounds that are summing together again later? If your filter is still too low in the bass range, yes, you are effectively putting a little EQ bump right near the knee of the filter.
C. You **could** try a steeper HPF. That would reduce more of the energy you're later raising back to an audible level when you make the track louder (by pushing it up into a clipper). Just be careful that the steeper HPF is giving you the results you want.
D. It might not be any real problem at all? What you're describing? Again, see answer A. You can't always remove everything you think is problematic. And that's assuming it really IS problematic. Yes, if you're hearing audible low end buildup that "sounds bad", then yeah, you need to reduce that as best you can. But if you're just seeing some low energy happening in a spectrum analyzer and thinking "that's bad, isn't it?" even though you can't actually **hear** anything that sounds bad, then maybe there's no problem to solve?
@@Baphometrix Thank you for the detailed reply! Tbh I think the answer is either A or D, and my ears are too annihilated to tell right now, so I'll troubleshoot this when they'r fresh!
B doesn't apply because there isn't any summing happening, these are sounds playing one at a time causing problems in frequencies they have no business being in
C is an option, I'll have to try. Usually filters that steep tend to cause some amount of post ringing,
Tbh, I don't care if it sounds slightly better or worse than Soothe 2, I am currently using a Patcher Preset in FL that was cobbled together with Stock EQs has only 45 bands and eats CPU for breakfast and that one is definitely worse then either, but I do care about the fact that RESO costs like a third (as of right now). I'd be more interested in a comparison between DSEQ3 and RESO since those are roughly in the same priceclass (and actually affordable lol).
Hope you are doing ok. Love u Baphy
At first the RESO sounded unnatural and nasally, but when you played it in context of the whole track, RESO did sound better than Soothe. I would just not do such a steep cut, personally, but that would just be a matter of taste at that point. You just went a little too deep to plant that seed to make your point, I would say. Is all. Very informative video overall. Thanks!
Yes, I could choose to cut less with Reso. And I could alternatively fiddle with Soothe 2 for a while and get a good result too. We get into some very subjective territory with these tools and how much to cut with them. It's easy to go overboard. I often go too hard at first and then come back and lighten up the amount of cut after listening more on different occasions with fresh ears.
In Reso vocal sounds like it's in the bucket, soothe is more naturaly sounding, if to combine both you might come up with smth better than with one, but not of them are amazing, don't elude yourself that Reso is very good.
Read the pinned comment.
do you tried Smooth Operator by Baby Audio? What do you think?
No. I took one look and realized it was another "black box" for less experienced producers, much like Spectral Shaper. I do like some products that Baby Audio makes (Crystallize is GREAT), but I hard passed on Smooth Operator.
Just picked it up. Easily worth the whole $61. So glad I didn't have to buy Soothe for $200+
Yo i just picked it up as well! Reso works fantastically well.
.....and you missed whole lot of functionalities. Soothe2 and Reso are not even up for comparison.
Where have this video been all these years, this video alone teaches us about resonance than any video ever on the whole internet. like subscribe for sure to someone like this.
You do know Fab Filter is a dynamic eq, I’m sure you do but you talked like it wasn’t.
It was clearly just to demonstrate what used to be the way to handle resonances, and not trying to pretend dynamic EQ doesn't exist. We all own Pro Q 3 lol.
@@endresleby6339no, actually at 4:05 he says the problem with this approach is that it is static. And that it was the only approach.
Thanks for making this video, I was very close to purchasing Soothe2 (a little overpriced in my opinion). RESO is a much better product and you saved me $200!
RESO being a third of the price with finer controls makes it a win imo. Acquired a... version... of soothe for testing purposes (for SCIENCE!) and I find that it's not worth the cost considering there's a cheaper, and in my opinion more detailed, alternative in RESO. Soothe is cuter looking though
Seems like you left soothe2 on its default settings which I don’t think makes this a fair comparison. Turning up the resolution and oversampling can make it sound smoother and changing the style to hard (which is a different algorithm) can make soothe more “powerful and tweakable”
See the pinned comment.
@@Baphometrix I don’t see how that’s relevant to my comment
I totally disagree around min 13 - I think the soothe keeps the energy of the performance way more intact. The other one totally sucks the life out of it at least that's what I feel.
Reso sounds worse to me. Also, why is the frequency spectrum in reso not log scaled? It's a bit weird to have 50% of the interface below 500hz for a resonance taming plugin imo
See pinned comment at the top.
Another interesting video. I'm fully aware of louder is better and brighter is better. Still, in your given context I think soothe gave the better sounding result. And this is the first time I ever heard about any of these plugins. The Reso version sounded unnaturally EQed, phasey ... hard to describe. It sounded processed, while soothe did not. To me at least, this is of course highly subjective...
Yep. I'm not denying anyone's first impression at the AB comparison. But this is IMO explained by the phenomenon I describe in the pinned comment, and should be tempered with an understanding of the mixing goals I had for this particular song and its intended playback environment.
@@Baphometrix mmm i dont know man. It sounded boxy to me, even when played in context. I love Soothe, but It I do agree that it’s not always as surgical as I need it to be, but most of the time it does the job. love the sidechain option as well. Incredible tool when you have two elements fighting for space.
@@Jonas-jq5xl The original vocal processing is already verging on boxy. It's not really RESO itself doing that. This is very specific processing to make the vocal sit a certain way in the mix when it's being accompanied by the full instrumental.
@@Baphometrix Fair enough! Thanks for all the amazing videos man!
Bapho, thank you for this amazing Lesson 👍✨What do you think about the Sonnox Supressor ? This Puppy was a long time the King for taming Resos. (Btw at 22:53 it sounds like a SoundFx from Star Trek 🤪)
I don't have any hands-on experience with Sonnox Suppressor.
Honestly, I bought soothe and barely use it, i got caught up in the hype and thought this is it, the silver bullet i needed. I justify using it on atonal signals mostly (sweepers, percs, hats, cymbals etc) to tame harshness, but never on main instruments. I've been eyeing Reso for a while now, but was too skeptical about dynamic spectral suppressor tech currently implemented in the industry, so i dismissed it. I know MtM plugins are generally good so this video has just bolstered my decision to go ahead and buy this when it is on sale next! Now I must sell off my Soothe2 license...
Would love to see an analysis of Smart EQ.
Best demonstration of Reso on vocals. I just grabbed reso finally. this thing is ridiculous. top notch. i will use soothe only for percussion loop de harshing. and i will use soothe on instruments. never on vocals. vocals are delicate. and reso is for delicate signals. also mastering.
Boy, people are so tactless in some of their comments. Sorry about that; I appreciate your efforts. Hey, I was wondering how you deal with the changing problem areas in a performance. One of the positive things I've heard about Soothe is that it applies itself progressively to the changing performance. I guess with Reso you would have to automate different setting (snapshots) for different areas of the performance. You wouldn't want to apply it to parts of the performance that didn't need it, right? What are your thoughts on this?
They're both dynamically responsive to the input signal. Neither of them are static EQ notches. If Soothe actually moves its filter points that can honestly be a *bad* thing, IMO. Many resonant peaks are just part of the timbre of a sound and aren't necessarily "bad" or "harsh" or "too ringy", etc. You only want the tool to respond to the problem resonances.
@@Baphometrix I see. Thanks.
probably a good idea to fix your acoustics and calibrate your speakers before digging into a plugin like this.