Can someone help with delete wind? What is the best plug in or setting
any suggestion would help

Will

I'd consider any one or more of the following: Adobe Audition/Soundbooth, SoundSoap and Magix Audio Cleaning Lab.  Those use noiseprints to remove noise.  I've used Audition (which is now called Soundbooth) and Audio Cleaning Lab.  For the price, I doubt you could beat Audio Cleaning Lab.  If you already have Audition or Soundbooth available to you, that should work very well.

Sound Forge with built-in Audio Restoration or the Noise Reduction plugin might help but as far as I know, there's not a noiseprint capability so it won't work as well.

Some time ago, I posted a couple of examples of what the very inexpensive Audio Cleaning Lab can do.  See here.

Hostileto !

Some plug ins or stand alone programs may be very useful for noise removing. But, first of all, I would  try to remove the low frequencies that wind can produce, with an equalizer. Sometimes these low frequencies aren't necesary and can be suppressed. 

Scott !

Sound Forge also has (had) noise reduction plug ins, but aren't bundled with the program. They are sold separately. Anyway, they were, we have a noise reduction plug in for an older Sound Forge version (previously to the Sony days).

This is getting a bit off the topic but I want to clarify.  I've owned Sound Forge since v5 and currently have v9 which is the latest.

Sound Forge had no noise reduction built-in earlier, then had Audio Restoration built-in which was a limited version of the Noise Reduction plugin, and now it is all included.  For a while, at least one earlier version was bundled with the Noise Reduction plugin.  I updated to SF9 just recently which has the Noise Reduction plugin included and haven't had a chance to try it yet.  The current version can use a noiseprint as I've just found out.  Earlier versions of that plugin might not have noiseprint capability.

For something like wind noise, I'd use a noiseprint.  It's a waste of time and effort to use EQ or any other form of NR on that kind of noise when you can get a program like Audio Cleaning Lab for $40.  When you're making money at this or paying someone to do it, you'll easily spend more than $40 in labor monkeying around with EQ trying to get rid of the noise and not ruin the rest of the audio.  If you haven't spent more than that on just one job, you'll certainly do it over the course of several jobs.  The results will not be anywhere near as good - there's no comparison.

People using the high-end Avid editors could have Audtion/Soundbooth or Sound Forge with NR available where they work. 

smyers63:

This is getting a bit off the topic but I want to clarify. 

Yes, the whole thread is OT, we're indeed on the MC/MCA forum

 I've owned Sound Forge since v5 and currently have v9 which is the latest.

I use Sound Forge since V4

Sound Forge had no noise reduction built-in earlier, then had Audio Restoration built-in which was a limited version of the Noise Reduction plugin, and now it is all included.  For a while, at least one earlier version was bundled with the Noise Reduction plugin.  I updated to SF9 just recently which has the Noise Reduction plugin included and haven't had a chance to try it yet.  The current version can use a noiseprint as I've just found out.  Earlier versions of that plugin might not have noiseprint capability.

Sound Forge V4, I mentioned above had this plug in, WITH noiseprint, see attached file. This version is 10 years old, and run with WinNT

For something like wind noise, I'd use a noiseprint.  It's a waste of time and effort to use EQ or any other form of NR on that kind of noise when you can get a program like Audio Cleaning Lab for $40.  When you're making money at this or paying someone to do it, you'll easily spend more than $40 in labor monkeying around with EQ trying to get rid of the noise and not ruin the rest of the audio.  If you haven't spent more than that on just one job, you'll certainly do it over the course of several jobs.  The results will not be anywhere near as good - there's no comparison.

If you're a noise reduction aficionado, why not, I just said that a first approach of the problem could be a little try with an EQ. This could solve many (little) wind noise problems for me in the past, and avoids to leave the editing program. This is shorter in terms of time IMHO.

 

Sure, it's not going to hurt to try EQ.  EQ isn't a noise reduction tool, though.  It affects all the audio instead of just the noise.  If it works well enough for someone, that's fine.  In my long experience, using EQ to remove noise takes more time and never works as well.  I think once anyone sees how quick and easy using a noiseprint really is and sees how much better it takes care of the noise, they won't attempt using EQ on it again.  In a professional environment, I wouldn't hesitate at all to use real noise reduction on a noise problem.

To each his own.

smyers63:

  In a professional environment, I wouldn't hesitate.....

That's my concern, and noise reduction, counter to your statements, isn't lossless! To use only as an ultimate solution. 

You apparently didn't listen to the examples I posted.  You're entitled to that opinion whether it's right or wrong.  I heartily disagree with it and I never said noise reduction is lossless.  What I did say and still say is that the results from NR are far better than from EQ on that type of noise.

That's all I have to say about it.  The original poster can make up his own mind.

Besides hardware-dedicated gear (and having those too) both traffic and wind are difficult to deal with.
I never heard of Audio Cleaning Lab (I'll check for a demo right now), though I remember I once had the chance to use a VST plugin (don't remember if other hosts were available) called Voxengo Redunoise.
It didn't work with sampled noise (which always gets a tremendous amount of digital stuff in) but rather analog-wise sampled frequencies, with settings such as threshold and amount of reduction and so forth. Results were pretty awesome, since it didn't get any digital artifacts into your sound, and I could save quite a few shots that were doomed for dubbing.
Hope this helps, though VST is not something Avid MC deals with. But well, MC is not for sound anyways.

SaintYorke,

Check here.  I don't think you can beat it for the price.  I've used some other fairly good plugins (Raygun from Arboretum was one) on tape and phonograph record noise in the distant past but I've had no need for anything else since I got ACL.

smyers63:

You apparently didn't listen to the examples I posted. 

Do you really think my web computer is directly connected to professional audio monitors ?

 You're entitled to that opinion whether it's right or wrong.  I heartily disagree with it and I never said noise reduction is lossless. 

No but you said EQ will affect the audio, I mean the 40 bucks audio cleaning software also will do that.

What I did say and still say is that the results from NR are far better than from EQ on that type of noise.

depending on the kind of noise

That's all I have to say about it.  The original poster can make up his own mind.

Let's hope it

 

SaintYorke:

It didn't work with sampled noise (which always gets a tremendous amount of digital stuff in) but rather analog-wise sampled frequencies, with settings such as threshold and amount of reduction and so forth. Results were pretty awesome, since it didn't get any digital artifacts into your sound, and I could save quite a few shots that were doomed for dubbing.

Agreed about analog treatment, we have an old Elison Ysma 18 which can do a correct job (in some situations).

Sep,

I really don't know why you want to keep arguing about this.  I don't care if you have studio monitors connected to your computer or to anything else.  It's irrelevant.

As I've said, EQ does affect the sound noticeably (although maybe not to someone who hasn't heard the original) and does not remove the wind noise completely.  A noiseprint will remove the wind noise completely and when done correctly will not affect the rest of the audio in a way that is noticeable.  I don't know if there's a language problem here or if you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

In your quote of what I said, you'll see if you actually read it that I said "on that type of noise" although you had to add "depending on the kind of noise" as if to say you're right and I'm wrong.  We said the same thing.  There's no need to make up an argument where there isn't any.

I still hope the original poster will make up his own mind by actually listening to the examples and trying both methods.

It's NOT irrelevant to have quality audio monitors when it goes to appreciate the noise reduction you refer to ! I am unable to detect audio "artefacts" with the poor loudspeakers currently connected to my web computer, that may explain why I spoke about professional audio monitors. Audio monitoring is indeed determinant, and so often underestimated.

I do not exclude the use of noise reduction, I only say that a first step may be an EQ try. However, as i mentionned above, I would prefer hardware analog professional noise reduction to a 40 bucks toy. 

Arguing, for the sake of arguing isn't actually my concern, I only would expose my point of view, which seems not to be your's.