Is there a simple De esser diy?

Unless it's switching between full cut and flat, there is probably a variable element of some kind.

Operating over just a narrow bandpass may also accommodate using a lower performance gain element, but any serious studio box should spring for a decent VCA (IMO).

JR

I could be wrong about that. I have to use the box every day all day. I can't afford to have curiosity kill the cat. It's a really serious box, VCA or not.

Did you use the search option to find this thread ?

http://www.groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=26692.0

Yes Rob, That's the first replay that i got. I tried to find the other diy design if they exist. I really like to see what inside that orban module. I use it for vocal track, I'm a not mastering guy. I often receive bright vocal track, i have no idea why they record vocal with a lot of treble boost.. ???.

That black box contains frequency shaping to make it responsive to sibilance and probably time constants.

If you have a unit you could measure the static transfer function vs. frequency to determine shaping, and with tone bursts you could measure attack/release characteristics.

I suspect you just want to copy their schematic, which is why they potted it...

JR

If i have a unit i wouldn't ask here, why should i?

JohnRoberts said:

I suspect you just want to copy their schematic, which is why they potted it...

JR

Click to expand...

What's that mean John?

simonsez said:

If i have a unit i wouldn't ask here, why should i?

JohnRoberts said:

I suspect you just want to copy their schematic, which is why they potted it...

JR

Click to expand...

What's that mean John?

Click to expand...

Potted? That means hard encapsulated to prevent easy reverse engineering of parts and circuits.

They apparently consider that part of the design proprietary and their private property. They don't want people, taking for free what they had to spend time, effort, and money to figure out. Especially competitors who would use their work effort to take sales away from them.

Most companies are not very concerned about individual hobbyists doing them much financial damage, but even they displace actual sales. And publishing designs on the internet make it too easy for the serial copiers to use their work.

One very successful business model in recent decades has been copying successful designs from small companies and then building them in China. Why make it easy for them?

I may be confusing threads.  I thought you said you wanted to copy this particular unit because you used it and liked it.

The hard part in my mind is determining the frequency shaping and time constants, which can be determined by measurement. The execution is just selecting Rs and Cs and some cookbook circuits.

JR

I thought it is a discontinued product John, and i don't thing i'm gonna make business with it or other diy.I don't like chinesse product either, because the quality is poor. My diy give me satisfaction more than stuff made in china. I wonder why so many country move their company into china, include US. I thought they don't like China?

No, i don't have this unit, the big studio have it. I use it when i'm doing mixing in that studio. Ok, i think it's become more irrelevant discussion now. Sorry if i'm doing something wrong...   

I have been inside factories in China that were cleaner and better run than some factories I've seen in the US.

Just like DIY outcomes depend on using good parts and following good designs, the quality of products from China depend on quality of parts used and quality of design.

Many US companies have moved production to China to defend their market share against other companies that moved to China first and enjoy several tens of % price advantage.

Behringer went from a sleepy rack efx company, to a major player in several categories by cherry picking successful products from other companies and then tooling them up in China so they could compete with the originals enjoying a significant price advantage. The rest is history.

If the Orban box is obsolete consider contacting them,. I don't know if Robert is still around but if they don't consider you a threat maybe they will share the information with you.

JR

I've used the Orban De-Esser for a couple of years. There were a couple of versions; the one which we had was the two-channel one with the two lights (one yellow one red) -Looked alike a two-channel version of this:


It is one of the worst De-Essers I've ever had the misfortune to use.

...Of course, I thought it was okay, until I met my first dbx 902. -We sold it a month after I discovered the dbx.

Seriously.

It is no more use than a sidechain-equalized limiter, but with the added disadvantage of making things sound 'strangled' when it did operate.

Seriously... if you're looking for something to clone, forget the Orban. It's a piece of junk. The fact that they potted a part of it just adds to the perversity; -once you've used a dbx, you'll never WANT to clone the Orban.

Other design? -Why bother? -the dbx is the best vocal track De-Esser there is. -think about this for a moment: How many rental companies stocked dbx 902's? -Now, how many rental companies stocked Orbans? -Why do you think they never stocked Orbans? -Because once people used the dbx's; everyone wanted the dbx's.

Keith

...Of course, I thought it was okay, until I met my first dbx 902. -We sold it a month after I discovered the dbx.

Click to expand...

I agree about 902. That was best thing i ever used but i wonder did somebody tried M*A*N*L*E*Y H FREQ LIMITER. What's inside???

I also tried the Ortofon... More for full-bandwidth processing than solo work, but still better than the Orban. (a LOT better.)

Keith

He,he I agree with keith concerning the Orban  . I bought a Drawmwer de-esser (that isn't very good either) and got the Orban for free.
It's rather useless. Might use the case for something. You can have the guts for free if you want.

I'll bet  your're not talking about the 526A one...