If you've been following this blog, you've probably noticed I've been singing the praises of the sound editing program Spleeter. To refresh your memory, it splits any song into five tracks: bass, drums, vocals, piano, and other. That has allowed me to edit songs in ways never before possible (unless one has the multi-track version, which almost never happens).
Anyway, the other day I was talking with my musical associate Mike Solof. He can't use Spleeter, because although it's free and easy to use, it only works for PC computer and he has a Mac. Instead, he found a similar program called X-Minus:
It only splits a song into the vocals on one track and the instruments on another. But it does something else that Spleeter doesn't do, which is pretty remarkable, in my book: it can split the backing vocals from the lead vocals. I don't know how it does this - how can it tell which is which?! But I tried it out on one song, and it worked like a charm. So thanks for the tip, Mike!
The song I experimented on is "Mary Ann" by Bob Dylan, from the 1973 album "Dylan." I was considering including this song on my recent compilation album "A New Morning Portrait," but I didn't because I found the backing vocals too prominent and heavy-handed. So last night I tried to remove the backing vocals. Sure enough, they were all gone, even when they overlapped with Dylan's voice!
I have a zip file here with three versions of the song. One has the original version from the "Dylan" album, unchanged. Another has all the backing vocals removed, using X-Minus. The third is kind of a halfway point, where I used X-Minus to edit the backing vocals way down in the mix (and cutting out some backing vocal bits I didn't like altogether). I actually like that halfway version the best, and I'm adding it to the "A New Morning Portrait" album today.
Here's the zip so you can judge how the program works itself:
https://www115.zippyshare.com/v/CET6AAOH/file.html
Anyway, the rest I'm explaining all this is to let you know of this promising new editing possibility. If you know of any songs where it would sound better with the backing vocals removed, or the main vocals removed but the backing vocals remain, etc... these are now things that may work. I'm not sure just how effective this program is, since I've only used it with one song, but I'm so impressed with what it did to that one song that I thought I'd share this news.
And on a somewhat related note, in putting together the CSNY 1969 live compilation I posted yesterday, I discovered another neat editing trick using Spleeter. Getting rid of hiss is a common problem with bootlegs. One can apply noise reduction to that, but it's a crude tool that effects everything, and usually degrades the sound of the music. That's still a problem with songs. But if there's a track that's just talking, I've discovered that if I run that through Spleeter, it usually puts all the talking on one channel and all the hiss on a different channel. So it's a cleaner and more effective way to get rid of hiss. (The reason it only works for talking tracks is because if it's a song, some of the music ends up on the same channel as the hiss.)
So if you know of a concert bootleg with lots of hiss through the talking, this could do wonders. If you know of any such recordings, let me know. Or you or other people could make these fixes yourselves, since these are easy programs to use. If you do improve some recordings, please let me know that too, and maybe I can share them through this blog.
I have always wanted to hear a lot of ABC Ray Charles records without the sweetening strings and choruses as opposed to the Raelets. If it could do that, it would be amazing!
ReplyDeleteHuh. That's an interesting idea. Do you have any specific albums in mind as the ones most needing a change?
DeleteA lot of songs from Modern Sounds in Country & Western comes immediately to mind.
DeleteHere's something for you. With help from Mike, I fiddled around with two songs from Modern Sounds that have overdone backing vocals, in my opinion. I kept some backing vocals in a couple of spots on one song, cos it seemed weird to have nothing there.
DeleteI made two versions. Both have the backing vocals removed (mostly). But one version of each song also has the strings removed. The problem though is that removing the strings also takes away the keyboards and guitar, so all you have left is bass and drums, pretty much. It sounds really sparse. Is that what you want? Which versions do you prefer?
https://www85.zippyshare.com/v/7TSUg4uT/file.html
If you like those, please suggest which other songs you think should have the backing vocals removed. I noticed some songs don't have backing vocals at all. And others I think it would be weird to remove them. "Bye Bye Love," for instance. Without them, there's no choruses.
DeleteI've always wanted to remove the flute from Nico's Chelsea Girls album. Nico hated it and it was added to her tracks by the record company without her permission. I always wondered how the songs would sound with just Nico, Lou Reed and John Cale. Is it possible you might try Spleeter on that record?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if just the flute could be removed. Spleeter dumps everything that isn't vocals, drums, bass, or piano onto an "other" track. So getting rid of the flute would mean getting rid of the guitar and strings and such too. But it might be interesting to see what that's like. I could test it out, anyway.
DeleteThanks for your response, Paul. I still look forward to hearing those tracks without the flute. I hope to find a solution one day.
DeleteSince I'm also on a Mac thanks for the tip about X-Minus.
ReplyDeletePaul... you can download Spleeter for mac but it has a very complicated multi multi step installation process that is very complicated. If anyone has spleeter for Mac and is willing to walk me through installation (Like i am a 2 year old LOL) I will make it very very worth their while!! MIKE
ReplyDeleteHi there,Paul did you get my email? This new programme looks great.Can you separate the Byrds From Jackie De Shannon on Splendour In The Grass ?
ReplyDeleteMuch as I like Jackie D.S I'd love to hear the Byrds On their Own
I got your email. I'll reply to that later - I want to send you some stuff so I have to get that ready first.
DeleteRe: Splendor in the Grass, that's a great idea. Unfortunately, I just tried it and X-Minus didn't separate the backing vocals. I'm learning there's a lot it can't do, esp. with the backing vocals are singing the same thing at the same time as the lead vocals. However, I can make an all instrumental version, if you want that.
Okay, forget what I wrote above. Mike Solof has been helping me learn the ropes of the X-Minus program. I found out that if you want to remove the backing vocals, you usually need to select the option to keep them!
DeleteAfter some more tinkering, Mike and I were able to come up with a version that mostly gets rid of Jackie deShannon's voice. I'll offer it here. But I should warn you it's kind of weird. It's hard to make out what the backing vocals are saying, and some of deShannon's voice is still there. But hey, this is probably as close as one can get to what you want, given the current technology.
https://www79.zippyshare.com/v/fez7KXrA/file.html
Hi Paul, wonderful job. Nowhere near as weird as you described.Great to hear Byrds up in the mix. Using old fashioned graphic eq enhanced it further.Now a challenge for you! Thretros version of Love is A long time would be great with A Gene Clark vocal from the demo on Gene Clark Sings For You. It would sound just like the Byrds.After what you did on Bound To Fall and Stranger Im guessing you could probably do it?
DeleteI'm not familiar with a Thretros version. Can you enlighten me?
Delete