Hi everyone,

I've been using iZotope RX (Version 1) for some time. I'm a big fan of the declipper especially, and the denoiser is fantastic in certain situations.

I'm considering upgrading to Version 2 but after comparing the versions I don't really see how the upgrade is that compelling for sound effects restoration:


Has anybody used both 1 and 2? Is the upgrade a big improvement? How does that adaptive denoising hold up? Thoughts, opinions? I'd also be interested to hear what people think of the additional features in the Advanced version.

Thanks in advance,

Paul Virostek

  • This is something I've been wondering for some time.
    – g.a.harry
    Commented Jun 4, 2011 at 0:52

5 Answers 5


I got the early upgrade at a low price, so I took the step from Izotope RX 1 to RX 2 Advanced, at the about the same price as it would cost to buy Izotope RX 2 from the start.

I really like the adaptive noise reduction, it does really help when the background noise changes, and gets the job done a little quicker. It sounds better, though, when unchecking the adaptive noise, but then you have to spend more time learning the noise, especially if the background noise changes. It is all a matter of quality versus time. Generally the denoiser just sounds better, and the new D mode for offline noise reduction sounds even better than the old C mode (which is still there too)

The decrackler is a new plugin in the RX 2 package, and it can remove some of the distortion the declipper can't remove. It also removes a little bit of cloth rustle.

In the advanced version there is also the multi-resolution option in some plugins, it also sounds clearer and more transparent with less artifacts.

If you can get a cheap update at a campaign price, I would say upgrading is a very good idea, it all sounds just a little bit better, there are more features and the overall user experience is better.

  • What a great response. Thanks for writing that! I think I will indeed update now. Cheers, Paul Commented Jun 4, 2011 at 12:47

I'd never go back to RX 1 because of the new features in 2 that have been integrated into my sfx prep workflow.


RX2 can now host plugins, so its very simple for me to do a little multiband expansion in addition to whatever eq and denoising needs to get done.

Rx2 can now do fade ins and outs

RX has a new (slower) more powerful and transparent denoising algorithm that is pretty superior to RX1 IMO

RX2 is a bit more ergonomic, with the various modules available as one-click buttons on the side.


RX2 is definitely worth the upgrade and in my opinion, if you can afford it, Advanced is worth the extra expense. Many of the features Rene mentions are only available in Advanced.

The following are the new features that I find the most useful:

  1. Algorithm D - provides superior results 99% of the time for all modules
  2. New selection tools for Spectral Repair - the improved accuracy really helps to isolate unwanted impulse noise (tip: the bigger the monitor, the easier it is to achieve good results)
  3. Multi-resolution processing for spectral repair (Advanced only) - processing takes longer, but the end result is worth it if you have the time
  4. Azimuth Alignment (Advanced only) - I specialise in conversion and restoration of archival material, so I use this a lot. It has application in sound FX and sound design, although for the opposite of its intended purpose.
  5. Export history as XML (Advanced only) - useful as a future reference, e.g. when dealing with similar material

The new Decrackler is handy if you have no other noise reduction application. However, personally, I prefer Sound Forge NR2 or Waves Restoration for this.

I find many of the other new features (Parametric EQ, Batch Processing, 3rd party plug-in support, SRC, dithering, time & pitch control, etc) less important, as they are duplicated in most mastering applications and, of course, their own Ozone plug-in. The benefit here is in terms of time-saving when working on individual samples that can be processed entirely in RX, but this becomes less relevant when working with longer, more complex material.

  • Thanks for the detailed response. I pretty much sold on it based on everyone's responses. Cheers, Paul Commented Jun 7, 2011 at 13:13

I've never used RX1 before, but I spent a week with RX 2 Advanced in demo mode before I purchased. Personally, I couldn't see value for money in the advanced version - sure, the adaptive mode is handy (and saves you a bit of time), but worth the extra cash (it's a whole lot more expensive!)? I don't think so. And I don't really have a use for any of the other functions that advanced offers.

I've just spent the last 3 weeks cleaning dialogue tracks for a feature, and have to say that I don't regret at all not buying the advanced version. RX2 is unbelievable (it really is amazing just how noisy your tracks can be, and get away with it!) and I'd recommend it to anyone who needs good quality noise reduction tools. Coupled with Waves WNS, there's almost nothing that can't be cleaned!


RX version 1 is a helluva program. Doing documentary work there was a water heater that would come on near a room we taped in and there wasn't time to stop rolling.

Noise reduction with Algorithm C sounded fantastic, like it wasn't even there.

I had some old recordings that were digitally clipped. RX cleaned these right up.

I plan on upgrading to version 2 shortly. Izotope gives you a lot in the non-advanced version. If you're on a budget don't worry about what you're losing out on. If you have money to spare then Advanced does have some nice time-saving and advanced (non pun) features. Their sample rate converter and MBit + are top of the line if you ask around.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.