But inevitably I end up with a voice track that is clean but now has lost the natural resonance
This is what dialogue mixers spend years, decades, perfecting - as well as dialogue editors, for their properly-prepared tracks make or break a dialogue mix.
In short, I recommend being more open and accepting of noise. Used decisively an treated with respect, ...
Short, honest answer: nope, forget it.
In principle it's possible nowadays to separate any part of a signal, using software like iZotope RX or the (rather dated, by now) Algorithmix Renovator. These are expensive heavyweight products; unfortunately I'm not aware of any more affordable or even open-source alternatives that get close to their performance.And ...
First of all I don't think there's an easy solution to these kinds of noises.
Although RX3 is great product, it's not a magic pill (nor any other product.
It totally depends on how loud/continuous/'wide' it is. Since this is a flyby
it could mean that the sound evolves dramatically over the course of a few seconds.
This is much harder to reduce (with any ...
Yes, there are plenty of ways to do this when mixing. Normally each of the left and right signals have their own channel in a mixer and can both be panned center or wide left/right or anywhere in between. There are also stereo imaging plugins that can narrow or widen the spread of a stereo signal and change the "center" of the signal. As Stelios mentions, it ...
I suspect that the 1kHz tone might be a DC-DC converter and/or insufficiently filtered noise from the +5V USB rail. The specs talk about "14mm condenser capsules". The price tag would suggest electret condensers (which could be operated at a nominal voltage of +5V, requiring very good decoupling from the digital ground and supply rail). If they use true ...
If you record dialog in the field, the audio you record should be clean, and flawless, and the dialog crisp and intelligible, under all possible conditions, including the vacuum of space.
No, it isn't easy to uphold this ideal. But it is the demarcation between sound captured by a professional, vs. a non-professional.
In my book, which is a bit different ...
Izotope denoise can help but I've had better luck with the declick or decrackle modules, depending on the length, spectral repair can be even better but takes more time. Cloth rustle can appear in many different forms and vary a lot depending on where the mic was placed and type of cloth.
Sounds like a job for iZotope RX. Using denoise with an isolated cloth rustle as a noiseprint to learn you might be able to lower the cloth sounds but I doubt you would be able to remove them entirely without affecting the voice dramatically.
You probably have selected some of the wanted audio while analyzing. You should take a quiet part of the track with pure noise to analyze, then after analyzing apply the noise reduction to the whole track (or the section you want filtered).
See page 87 to 89 of the Audition manual. It has not changed much since Adobe have purchased Cool Edit Pro. The ...
One thing to mention. Does the aeroplane really disturb, or does it only disturb you?
Ask another person to check that. Sometimes you get mad on things that are actually no problem at all. And make sure that the aeroplane is not vanishing in a cut or fade.
Airplane ? - No Chance ;( Go and record again. Maybe this saves your time instead figuring out RX and realizing, this doesn´t work. I tried several hours to eliminate Airplane pass bys, but it never leads to pleasing results
Fix the volume changing first, then reduce noise.
RX2 Advanced has an adaptive noise reduction feature (the one Andy Lewis is talking about), but I don't think it knows how to handle considerable gain changes. It's meant for noise that varies i.e. cannot be captured by a single "noise print".
Without RX2 Advanced, reduce the noise in parts.