I use SL10Pro, now we got 10.0.10 with GPU support - check this :) I also use Acoustica Premium and RX9. I prefer SL10 for unmixing, but not impressed about de-noising in this tool.

@@GadesChannel you should give de-noising another try, it's probably the best of all 3 in that area as well. Can't link here, but I've set up a page comparing SL10 vs RX vs Acoustica. google: divideconcept spectralayers restoration comparison

Same feelings here!

Happy to have helped you!

No problem, Sam. Thanks!

Right? First version of a new module and already so good!

curious, why didn't you give it a chance initially ?

@@rldivide I tried v7, 8 and 9 and was rather unimpressed

@@glennloopez when it came out v7 had the best stem separator as well. But it wasn't improved until v10.

Nice to hear that. Give it a go, totally!

Thanks, Jim!

SL10 extractions played together perfectly null against original track, see my comment above

Thanks, James!

This is quite insane. Thanks!

Thx!

Wow, this is cool. Greetings!

Same feelings here. Cheers!

Yes, I did, I'm about to finish the documentation next week and send it to Metasystem.io for review :)

​@@FoliaSoundhaha that is great news!! Looking forward to it!

Sorry to hear that :( I bet switching to Cubase 12, even the trial version, should be the first step to check things out!

Superancko, dzięki za komplement! Spectralayers potrafi o wiele więcej niż tylko rozbierać materiał na warstwy - dlatego tyle kosztuje. Może kiedyś zrecenzuję go jako całość, ale to byłoby naprawdę dłuuugie wideo...

Thanks! Yep, I've heard good stuff about RipX, but I got bad experience with their marketing people ;)

Thx for all the tips! RipX once contacted me, but the demo they gave me expired and we had rather a weird talk back then, so I quite avoid them ;) Cheers!

Ah, kind of same findings you have, could have spared me my writings, if I would have read yours earlier :) And yes, also context dependend what's best prog for a specific task, right

They're different beasts. Liveacting or DJ sets - only Ableton. Deep audio editing - only Cubase :)

I'll try it then, thanks!

Go with Spectralayers and see what happens!

@@FoliaSound Spectralayers is not the cheapest, but if the piano separation is the best than i will buy it. Thanks.

I've had their demo, but it expired. They contacted me once, but it wasn't my best experience.

@@FoliaSound Okay. Bad to hear. RipX primarily aims at DJ's and producers. Stems creation and sound(s) replacement and arrangement. Where I think RX and SL focuses on sound designers and sound restoration. BTW: I am not linked to RipX.

Frankly - why would I need it? I need it to extract proper steams for further use. What's the advantage of the stems summing up to a null? What's the practical advantage of this? Is it good at all, because it means, that same frequencies are split and shared throughout different instruments? Doesn't it make them a bit hollow and empty, a bit like mp3 encoding? Serious question!

@@FoliaSound Dom Sigalas reffered to Mastering to see an opporunity there using it. Or kind of remixing, Dom put a delay for example on the voice, which wasn't there before and it worked perfectly. Also reverb, in general, is used in mastering sometimes, so if you can go a little more surgical, why not? Also when there is only a final mix left and the mix session or stemms aren't available anymore, nice to have a null. I for myself had some live recordings (single microphone, voice plus one instrument) where there was some room noise and talking and stuff and which I had then easily on (a) layer(s) which i could simply edit and/or delete, quick delivery was needed. So you can see it also in context of a restoration use case, if you will. Afterwards I was able to render it out merged back again. And when the extracted stems are in such a quality that they null gainst the original, bam! Same story with RipX, but I had artefacts being introduced in some cases. And comparing RipX against SL10 (which you hadn't in your test, I read about the reason), RipX would not have kicked SL10 from the throne, but quite often would have been on par.

@@FoliaSound In the extraction process, yes, frequencies are always shared between insturments, thats where a quality algorithm is needed, that cuts out precicely, but only what is really needed, a really surgical clean cut, that keeps part alive and musical, thought about that too, but... What I can say, at least, that I had that empty and hollow feeling a little with RipX, had the feeling like a little bit of liveliness was sucked out, got a little dry, dont have that impression with SL10 so far. But both were often, in my tests, quite on par, just nuances. I guess it also has to do with the quality of the track you want to split (mixing, format), obviouly. But what RipX and Sl10 both weren't able to accomplish was extracting the bells out of the Smashing Pumpkins song "Disarm". But anyways, SL10 makes best musical separation and leaves you with a null if necessary, whats not to like about it?

@@cpssounds3656 , I believe, that nulling when reverse separating is actually not a good thing and I can easily explain it to you. The fact, that separate instruments of your mix share frequencies over time doesn't mean that when you render them solo, they'll null when being added up, right? They create a mix because of all the routing, harmonic content and tonal and dynamic processing. When dissecting the track, using SL10, it's different - you separate from the sum of sound that you have, and then, in reverse, you simply sum the channels up. No routing nor any dynamic/tonal/harmonic work and character is recreated. Thus rendering a solo instrument from you master will always sound better and fuller that something that nulls. When it nulls, it means it lacks a lot of info about the instrument and its real content that has been masked in the master, but it's still there. In SL10 it's not masked - it's just not there. I'd realli like to see the elements of separation not nulling in SL, which would give me the hope, that this algorithm tried to retrieve something masked instead of sharing the master it had at the input. This is really not the best way to recreate the source instrument. Hope it's 100% clear on my side now!

​@@FoliaSound Ah, I guess here is the culprit, that maybe brought in some confusion: "Afterwards I was able to render it out merged back again. And when the extracted stems are in such a quality that they null gainst the original, bam!" - "Afterwards", meaning after i removed room noise, talking and coughs and stuff, no fx, eqs or stuff - "renderign out merged back again", meaning only the cleaned stems (without the noise) rendered back into a single stereo track - "...they null against..." meaning, you have less artefacts in such processes, when the untreated stems alone null against the original, generally speaking - of course the extracted - and - treated stems wont null against the original But just to clarify, in case there is a misunderstanding, this was what I was actually discussing: 1) Null Test - original track (full mixdown) - SL10 unmixing the track, creating stems - taking all the SL10 extracted stems into the daw - taking the original track in a daw - playing all SL10 stems at once, together with the original track - flipping phase on original track, while playing - result: silence, null -> good thing, cause no artefacts created during unmix operation in the stems 2) Remix, Mastering, Restoration use case - unmixing a track in SL10 for having it separated into stems (- removing noise or unwanted stuff from a live recording in SL10) - rendering out the single stems with the edits - taking all the edited stems into daw - processing stems further on with fx, gain manipulation, etc but only slightly more in terms of mastering, depends whats possible - in my case reducing room reverb, bringing vocal more into focus, balancing the track - rendering everything out into a stereo track

SpectraLayers can also do a lot more :) But they are different tools anyway.

I don't remember anything like this, sorry...

Write it again, it seriously wasn't me!

@@FoliaSound no, I'm sorry, guess that youtube really has bad relations with links

Depends on what you're trying to post.

@@thisguy5611 not only links, but a mentioning of certain resources makes my message disappear. I've rewrited it like 2 or 3 times now, it's about a gcollab model, letting people use newest demixing models in their browser, without need of a good GPU. Maybe I should email mr. Paul instead..

I will, thanks!

It doesn't provide as many stems, is pretty destructive and doesn't have any tool to correct AI mistakes...

I need to see a RipX comparison

True, but my experience with their marketing people is very so-so, so I decided to skip it. They didn't give me an NFR, they simply sent me the trial and said I can make a test using it. Then the trial expired, because I had other vids to shoot. Happens!

He doesn't care, the goal of this video is clickbait. The best solution, which is free, is not even talked in the video. Meaning that this chan makes video about things he doesn't know anything at all about it, or he's just a liar and a clickbait whore telling you that dog shit is gold.