Auto Heal

[cashandkerouac]

this may be of interest to some folks who are picky about post-production and/or have an "occupational dislike" for clappers...

the Auto Heal function in Adobe Audition (i use version CS5.5) has fixed many "blemishes" that would have otherwise hindered the listening enjoyment of the recording.  attached are before and after screenshots showing audience applause at the end of a solo.  i've also attached mp3 files that correspond to the screenshots so you can hear it. 

Auto Heal essentially "deletes" or significantly lessens the presence of the clap (depending upon its intensity) without hindering the music.  you can see in the "after" screenshot that the claps have largely "disappeared" compared to the "before" screenshot.  you'll also hear that the claps closest to the mics have been removed, but the applause of the crowd and all of the music remains in tact.   

Auto Heal is labor intensive because you have to isolate each clap to "heal" it.  it's also only effective for sounds that have an extremely short duration (like a clap).  if you try to heal anything longer than a fraction of a second it will do noticeable damage to the recording.  if your recording needs a lot of "healing" it can also be very time intensive, so it's not a cure-all by any means.  nevertheless, it's a nice tool for what we do, as nearby audience noise is one of the major hazards we deal with in any live setting.   

[Gutbucket]

These types of tools are seemingly designed specifically for our type of recording!  The results seem near magical the first time one gets into using this.  Does take a good bit of time to do, but can put a polish on (and sometimes rescue) an outstanding recording that warrants the work.

This looks very similar to the 'Spectral Cleaning' function in Izotope RX (which I haven't used) and Samplitude (which I have).  I think Sony offers something similar as well, and probably others now too.   Do you draw a box around the offending sound in a visual spectral display screen?  The Samplitude version I use has various options for how it interpolates which information is removed and what it uses to replace it.  Choosing the best sounding option depends both on the material and the nature of the offending noise.  The result of an incorrect choice can be worse than the noise, but correct one basically unnoticeable and can allow for repairing longer segments.  One difficulty I've found is sometimes isolating the sound in a dense visual field if there are lots of other sounds happening concurrently.  It's easier if the offending sound sticks out enough to be obviously visible and thus easier to isolate.

The version I've been using in Samplitude is an older version of their optional Cleaning & Restoration Suite which came bundled with the SAM 10 Mastering Edition.  I have a newer version of Samplitude X and that functionality is now built-in, although I think the newer Cleaning & Restoration Suite offers more options or has higher quality settings but I haven't gotten into that.

The other tool in this category I've found similarly quite useful is the 'click & pop remover' which is designed primarily to reduce LP surface noise, but with careful calibration can transparently remove 'fabric rubbing against the mics' noise very effectively.  That's more of a 'set it correctly and let it catch them', type of process which doesn't require targeting each instance individually.

I've also had some luck trying noise reduction tools for reducing background HVAC noise or hum if I can get a good isolated sample of the noise to train the algorithm, but that requires a long enough 'moment of relative silence' during the performance, or keeping the mics in the exact same location and doing so before or after the performance without any crowd noise or other noises present.

All these things take a good ear, good enough monitoring and close listening to make sure you are doing less harm than good in the end result.  Usually it's better to aim for reducing the annoyance of a noise rather than trying to completely eliminate it.  Non-transparent remedies are usually worse than the ailments.

[cashandkerouac]

These types of tools are seemingly designed specifically for our type of recording!  The results seem near magical the first time one gets into using this.  Does take a good bit of time to do, but can put a polish on (and sometimes rescue) an outstanding recording that warrants the work.

This looks very similar to the 'Spectral Cleaning' function in Izotope RX (which I haven't used) and Samplitude (which I have).  I think Sony offers something similar as well, and probably others now too.   Do you draw a box around the offending sound in a visual spectral display screen?  The Samplitude version I use has various options for how it interpolates which information is removed and what it uses to replace it.  Choosing the best sounding option depends both on the material and the nature of the offending noise.  The result of an incorrect choice can be worse than the noise, but correct one basically unnoticeable and can allow for repairing longer segments.  One difficulty I've found is sometimes isolating the sound in a dense visual field if there are lots of other sounds happening concurrently.  It's easier if the offending sound sticks out enough to be obviously visible and thus easier to isolate.

yes, you can draw a box around the offending sound in the spectral display (see attached "select1") or select the area to edit in the wav form (see attached "select2").  for claps i edit from the wav form.  if the offending sound is a whistle, a "woo-hoo" (or something similar) that has a longer duration than a clap i work from the spectral display to isolate it and attenuate it so it is less prominent.  auto heal is not effective for fixing whistles or "woo-hoos" specifically because of the extended duration of the noise. 

i also agree that fixing prominent sounds against a quiet background is much easier than doing so when there is a dense field of activity.  it's a real PITA to listen to a loud clapper during a quiet performance when i'm at the show, but it's easier to clean up in post-production.

The version I've been using in Samplitude is an older version of their optional Cleaning & Restoration Suite which came bundled with the SAM 10 Mastering Edition.  I have a newer version of Samplitude X and that functionality is now built-in, although I think the newer Cleaning & Restoration Suite offers more options or has higher quality settings but I haven't gotten into that.

The other tool in this category I've found similarly quite useful is the 'click & pop remover' which is designed primarily to reduce LP surface noise, but with careful calibration can transparently remove 'fabric rubbing against the mics' noise very effectively.  That's more of a 'set it correctly and let it catch them', type of process which doesn't require targeting each instance individually.

the click and pop remover in Adobe Audition works in a similar manner.  i use this tool every once in a while and it can be effective (depending on the noise).

I've also had some luck trying noise reduction tools for reducing background HVAC noise or hum if I can get a good isolated sample of the noise to train the algorithm, but that requires a long enough 'moment of relative silence' during the performance, or keeping the mics in the exact same location and doing so before or after the performance without any crowd noise or other noises present.

there is a "Noise Reduction/Restoration" menu in Adobe Audition that i use if i have to add gain to the recording that results in audible "tape hiss".  i select a portion of the recording in which there is no music (usually it's a segment in between songs in which the audience has finished clapping and the band has not yet started the next song), and that segment becomes the basis for the "algorithm" that scans the recording and then reduces the hiss.  it does take some practice, as it is easy to do more damage than good with this tool.  but with a little practice you quickly figure out its usable applications and its limitations.

All these things take a good ear, good enough monitoring and close listening to make sure you are doing less harm than good in the end result.  Usually it's better to aim for reducing the annoyance of a noise rather than trying to completely eliminate it.  Non-transparent remedies are usually worse than the ailments.

like most audio tools less is more.  when used with discipline audio tools can make a good recording better and they can make a bad recording "less bad".  trying to use tools to turn a bad recording into a good one is (almost always) a futile effort.   i aim to do as little as possible when processing/editing my recordings.  with the exception of fades between songs (which is sometimes necessary if the audience is a total PITA), if i can hear where the recording has been altered then i have not done my job correctly.     

[Gutbucket]

..if i can hear where the recording has been altered then i have not done my job correctly.

Therein lies the most basic golden rule of post editing for me.

[blg]

..if i can hear where the recording has been altered then i have not done my job correctly.

Therein lies the most basic golden rule of post editing for me.

^ completely agree.

I've been using "auto heal" off and on for a long time and love it (I use CS 5.5 as well).