I would happily share recordings and .slp files to help train AI
…both for IVs and music
Should we start a repository? Or has that already happened?
We use WeTransfer for this at my company. Google drive can be finicky IME.
Sounds good to me too 
1 Like
Quoting myself, but…
Wow, these RF blasts are pretty straightforward to reduce/ remove…Especially after Unmix Noisy Speech
sure, plenty of manual editing…for which a touch screen might really help me…nevertheless, once you learn how to navigate the spectrograph and use SL tools it’s a bit magic
frankly, a great deal of the magic comes from the Unmix Noisy Speech module…makes it easier to deal with noise alone
Hi Rajiv,
We definitely need De-Plosive in SL11, as I have to go back to RX for that currently, as well as Mouth De-Click and Guitar De-Noise. The latter removes all sorts of broadband buzz and hum and is pretty good at leaving location audio and dialogue alone. I’d say these three tools would keep me in SL11 permanently.
D
1 Like
Of course we need it but already SpectraLayers Pro does a decent job as we have explored in our tutorial, but internally they are very different. For example RX was built ground up for such task. And it might be running several algorithms to achieve its results.
so it would not be wrong to say that zotope RX has some unique tools and Steinberg’s SpectraLayers Pro has its own. They are both coming from unique and different backgrounds.
For example Steinberg’s SpectraLayers Pro was marketed by Sony as a Spectral editor and not so much as Postproduction tool.
Both have evolved to becoming highly focused tools. This has given Steinberg’s SpectraLayers Pro an edge in some areas such as Ai separation and it will continue to maintain that lead.
I will breakdown their specialities in the following points minus AI where Steinberg’s SpectraLayers Pro has a clear advantage.
iZotope RX and Steinberg SpectraLayers Pro are both advanced audio restoration and editing tools, but they have distinct focuses and strengths:
-
iZotope RX is specialised in audio restoration, noise reduction, and post-production repair, while Steinberg SpectraLayers Pro excels in spectral editing and manipulation for sound design and creative purposes.
-
RX provides a more traditional audio editor interface focused on restoration tasks, while SpectraLayers uses a visual, layer-based approach akin to photo editing for detailed spectral manipulation.
-
iZotope RX is equipped with a comprehensive set of tools for specific restoration tasks like de-click, de-hum, and de-reverb. SpectraLayers, while capable of restoration, offers fewer dedicated tools but excels in spectral editing.
-
SpectraLayers Pro provides more advanced and flexible spectral editing capabilities, allowing users to work with sound like layers in an image editor, while RX offers more straightforward, automatic processing for common audio issues.
-
RX tends to be more accessible for beginners with its preset-driven workflow, while SpectraLayers requires a deeper understanding of spectral analysis and editing.
-
iZotope RX has more advanced algorithms-based features for automatic noise detection and repair, which simplifies complex tasks, while SpectraLayers is more manually driven.
-
RX integrates seamlessly into DAWs like Pro Tools via plug-ins modules, while SpectraLayers Pro has tighter integration with Steinberg’s Cubase and Nuendo.
-
RX is widely used in post-production, film, and broadcasting for cleaning dialogue and removing noise, while SpectraLayers Pro is favored by sound designers and musicians for creative sound manipulation.
-
SpectraLayers offers more freedom in reshaping sound textures, while RX focuses on offering precision tools to fix specific problems efficiently.
-
RX is typically easier to master due to its focus on restoration, whereas SpectraLayers has a steeper learning curve due to its complex and flexible spectral layer system.
1 Like
Thanks. I’ve been on RX since version 1 and was a beta tester from V4-9 so I’m well aware of the differences. I think De-Plosive is a next logical step, as even in the video I watched there was a manual approach to reducing plosives on a mere 4 instances. I deal with hundreds or more on a 48 minute TV episode, on the narration alone.
Mouth clicks are quite different than other clicks. They can differ from broadband to those focussed in the HF range. They require tool that has machine learning at its heart.
SL11 is an evolving tool, just as RX. From my vantage point, in recent years iZotope has tried to shift focus a little to the music market, whereas this was always the focus with SpectraLayers. With more of us post people finding our way to this software, there’s no reason not to suggest the evolution of the product might well support some of our core needs as well.
D
1 Like
Totally agree with you 
I handle these NR tasks with other NR software before putting audio into SL
SL manual work will yield less artefacts…BUT it will take longer
As far as I can tell, the number one difference between SpectraLayers and RX is that with SL you edit in a “multitrack” environment as opposed to single track editing with RX, no?
I think these features requested in this post are the key to completing a wholesale move for post, away from RX. We need some refinements in De-Plosive, so that it’s not applying blanket bass reduction to areas without a plosive present. De-Wind is something that can be achieved in UnMix Noisy Speech but a dedicated tool or module with some options would be slick. The big thing is lavalier noise reduction and removal. In RX it’s called De-Rustle and the ability to do this is sorely needed for a lot of dialogue work. I’m wondering that an UnMix Rustle might be more effective than a standard noise reduciton module? I don’t always want the rustle gone but I do like to lower it and remove any clicks from it.
1 Like
To be honest I always felt that these specialized modules in RX were never exactly free of tweaking and rarely gave good results when used broadly. So I seeked Spectralayers exactly because I felt I needed to tweak things manually anyways, so I might as well do it on a spectral editor. Then RX connect absolutely completely sucked to use, even more so than ARA. So here I am in SL and having better results than ever. Since iZotope stuff was always very expensive, I moved to Acon digital for restoration plugins and sold all my iZotope plugins to a friend that used them and liked them, so everybody is happy.
1 Like
Steinberg could just acquire the RX assets from NI now that they’re entering insolvency… 
2 Likes
Yeah, I mean that’d be great. Get iZotope assets.
I don’t buy much software at all, and have made it a point to not upgrade RX because I hate iZotope’s business strategies, but I still have three reverbs (with shaky support and not 100% predictable performance) that I care about. Maybe I won’t miss out on much if it folds along with NI since iZotope software support has been ass anyway. But still.
It’s all quite a bit annoying though. I wonder what will happen with NI’s software catalog and getting access to everything including licensing. 
2 Likes
well, I still find manual editing required to arrive at the quality I desire…same with certain low end tones in human voice; blanket or dynamic EQ often doesn’t deliver what I want either…becomes a syllable by syllable editing affair
I never dabbled in RX, yet Henrique’s path is very similar to mine. I used Acon Restoration Suite since 2012 after finding Sonnox Restore and RX far too expensive. For me, tho, Acon’s move to JUCE made Acon plugs non-functional in my DAW of choice (SAWStudio). I tossed about 2 years of work with Acon in the trash and started over with SLP. The reclamation of high end and getting rid of NR artefacts has been exhilarating with SLP. It has been a hard slog, tho. Learning to read transforms has certainly been a challenge.
I just heard of this today. Thank goodness I didn’t dive too deep into purchasing NI stuff. I only have a horn sample set…I guess that’s dead too soon? Ugh
Having been onboard with iZotope for years, their greatest assets are their people, like Mike Rozett, Matt Hines and Alexei (I can’t remember how to spell his name). They’ve been shackled ever since the takeover happened. I personally would acquire that company just for the people and dump almost all their products except Ozone. Bring these people on to help make SL the only spectrographic editor game in town.
3 Likes
100% SL is just to good to be left alone.
Agreed. No new people necessary unless Robin thinks he could use a hand. Then, this is where I’d start looking.
I do have an iZotope Everything license - so if they would go under, that wouldn’t be great.
My most used tool is still iZotope RX 10 Advanced. 11 wasn’t worth an update and they ever ignored any feedback or GUI suggestions I’ve sent them many years ago (not exactly ignored - they said thank you and never added any of those features). Some simple things like holding SHIFT to lock the axis when moving a selection, basic stuff. Really low hanging fruits, and the lack of those still makes me angry every time I work in RX.
I am really baffled how they keep ignoring their most expensive tool.