My Honest Opinion on Adobe's Enhance Speech V2 // Comparison Video

[@StephenCarterStressExpert]

This is an instructive comparison. Thanks for posting this video. I can hear a slight difference between V1 and V2, , although to my ears several of the other tools did a better job than either Adobe version. I haven't tried V2 yet, but the free version of V1 is - as I recall - fixed at 90%. The paid version offered a 0 to 100% option. I'm assuming V2 has the same limitation for the free plan. I've used several de-reverb tools over the past couple of years and have settled on Hush, VEA (occasionally), and Auphonic. Speaking of Hush, do you recall what percentage you set when using that tool? I typically set Hush at 80%, although that can vary depending on the audio file. Thanks again for doing the work for this comparison and publishing the video.

[@jesse.mccune]

Thanks for the comments. I'm glad it was helpful to you. From the testing I've done, the only tool like this that performs worse in terms of overall audio quality is Riverside's built-in option. I feel Enhance Speech is best reserved for that last ditch effort on truly terrible recordings and it's not a tool I would depend on if my goal is good audio. For clips 1 & 3, I used Hush at 100%. Those were tougher situations and 100% is the one that performed best on those two. I usually start at 70% on Hush and adjust from there and usually try 2 other settings to find the one that sounds best. I don't use Hush outside of these comparisons simply because I can't make quick, real time decisions like I can with plugins.

[@ChrisPFuchs]

Sounds like you maybe had the Auto-Voice EQ setting enabled for the Auphonic example?

[@jesse.mccune]

It's possible I missed that setting, but I'm pretty sure I turned everything off except noise reduction...unless I left it on since I was using that clip in a video comparing to other tools that tend to have EQ turned on. That clip was created so long ago I honestly don't remember.

[@ChrisPFuchs]

@@jesse.mccune Hmm, yeah. It just caught my ear because Auphonic doesn't usually tonally change the sound like that unless you enable the Auto-EQ feature. I'd expect it to sound more like Hush in that example, in terms of the EQ. I ran that clip through Auphonic and on my end it confirms that. I don't recall that being the case in your previous shootouts though. Not sure if KZbin allows me to comment a link, but I'll try adding it in a separate comment in case you're curious.

[@jesse.mccune]

@ChrisPFuchs I only have the one set of Auphonic processed files. Thinking back on it, those were produced for my big shootout that included plugins and apps, so I probably did leave auto-eq on since that is so common in most of these tools these days.

[@Tricker17]

It's really a gamble and depending on the voice it strips all the life away, but still really impressive to recover a unusable recording, have you tried using the enhanced version but also keeping the original version at a lower volume? This way it blends nicely and doesn't sound so fake, maintaining some of the natural acoustics

[@jesse.mccune]

It can be impressive on terrible recordings. As a podcast editor, if someone provides a recording that is truly that bad, they're going to re-record it or deal with what I can do with plugins. I don't use Enhance Speech, so I haven't tried mixing it with the original. It just doesn't fit with my workflow, but it seems like something worth investigating for those who do use Enhance Speech. Thanks for providing that tip.

[@MarcoRaaphorst]

Yes both Vocal Enhance 1 and 2 totally changed the voice. Both suck big time. They sound like somebody else. I tend to feel that Hush is the most natural sounding one, kills the problems but keeps the voice natural. All the others are focussed on turning everything into a closed miced voice which is obviously not what we want all the time. Also the Adobe subscription model is weird.4 hours per day is really not okay for anyone doing serious documentairy, film, podcasting.

[@jesse.mccune]

I like Hush, but I'm really hoping he can bring it to a plugin format other than ProTools so we can audition its results in real time instead. dxRevive Pro does allow the user to choose an algorithm that doesn't have the shaping included, and I feel that helps quite a bit. On tougher audio, that shaping can sometimes be an acceptable artifact if it makes the audio more listenable. It really depends on the specific recording. I would hope that anyone doing serious work is hiring someone with professional tools to handle this.

[@alvallac2171]

*Yes, both *one. It kills *problems, but *voice, which *also, the *weird. Four *documentary, *film, or podcasting work.

[@Tomaslav16]

Здравствуй Дорогой))) планируешь ли делать обзор на ................ Supertone Air ? интересно твоё мнение!!!

[@jesse.mccune]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention because I wasn't aware of Supertone Air. I'll have to download the demo and hear how well it does. Once I've spent some time with it, I'll probably do some sort of video.

[@NeilFennell]

How do you still access v01?

[@jesse.mccune]

It looks like it's not possible to access V1 if you're using the free version. If you have n Adobe subscription, you'll see the option in a gray box in the upper right hand corner of the upload box. You'll see V2 and a dropdown arrow next to it.

[@jesse.mccune]

You can see at 15:57 in the video where you can make the change. I'm not an Adobe expert, so I don't know if the premium version of Voice Enhance is available with all subscriptions, or only some. I wish I could be of more assistance.

[@NeilFennell]

@@jesse.mccune Ah thank you so much! Wasn't sure where to look. Much appreciated!

[@jesse.mccune]

@NeilFennell I'm glad I was able to help. I didn't see it at first either.

[@reedeema]

Naahh Version 1 is still better .. V2 filters out way to much Ambiente noice .. even at 1% its allmost gone .. sometimes i still want some ambient noice .. i hope adoub will let V1 to choos like they have at the moment .. V2 is to much ...

[@richardsisk1770]

Enhance Speech 2 still sounds like Ai though the EQ is a hair better. RX11 awful. I have it, will not use it. DX Revive Pro pretty good. I just have the basic version.

[@jesse.mccune]

I agree that the EQ is a bit better, but still not great. To my ears, dxRevive Pro is worth the upgrade because it provides so much more control over which algorithm is being used. The only thing I've heard worse than Adobe's Enhance Speech is Riverside's monstrosity, though I expect them to get it better than Adobe fairly quickly.