for specific stems

Page 25 of 228 · Open the original GDoc ↗

There's no such thing like the best model. It depends on a song, even in specific genre, mixing, effects, etc.
You need to test the best models posted at the top here, and see what fits the best for your song or cut it into pieces and/or check ensembles. For constant vocal buzzing check phase fixer/swapper in e.g. UVR>Tools (and use bleedless inst result of a vocal model as reference/source). Create an account using MVSEP, or you’ll have a very long queue. Or use Colab.

- Most models here are Mel-Roformer and BS-Roformer model type in the compatible UVR version - not v2 model type
(there's only one V2 model so far); don’t confuse it with e.g. v2 versions/iterations of models below, which are just their names
- Check the reading about SDR and fullness metric. Evaluations are made on the multisong dataset on MVSEP (table can be sorted by also fullness/bleedless and other metrics, once you open a result, fullness/bleedless metrics are shown too, excluding old results)

TL;DR of the doc (shortened models list)

2 stems:

> for instrumentals (click here for inst. ensembles, phase fixer, or here for vocal models)

- Model names starting with MVSEP can be used only on MVSEP (no download links available)
- Metrics for Roformers are provided mostly for overlap 2 (50% on MVSEP)

- To fix ducking in some songs use delimit model (Colab) as preprocessor
- Sometimes you might benefit from using phantom center models as preprocessor

Good all-rounders from various categories (balanced, fullness, bleedless):

* MVSep Becruily/ZFTurbo BS-Roformer high instrum fullness 124 bands

Only for premium MVSep users (demanding architecture).
Inst. fullness: 34.76, bleedless: 44.29, SDR: 18.47’
It’s a paywalled model due to increased separation time from the model architecture. Iirc 1 credit per minute.
“It’s a fine-tune of ZFTurbo's model [BS-Roformer 124 bands], so unfortunately private” - becruily
“It’s dual model so vocals are also fullness, but whether they’re better or not than the original level 1-3 I don’t know”

Perfect mix of fullness and bleedless - dynamic64

Q: How does it compare to deux and HyperACE, any insight?

A: “I like it more”, “I feel like it functionally replaces the BS Rofo 124 fullness model” - -||-
“The instrumental fullness model makes cleaner acapellas than every other model

and the instrumentals sound so perfect its like they were phase inverted with the acapellas” - nymphi/nimfia

“For sure [it] sounds better than deux, but it has some difficulties keeping some instruments in instrumental compared to deux which is excellent at it (...) But yeah the model is amazing in how it sounds. Very high quality sounding especially with phase fix (...) [which] is optional.

I am still (...) going to use deux for some bands like Radiohead tho. Keeps more instruments as I said” - dca100fb8

- Becruily dual Mel-Roformer “deux” model (its instrumental stem)

Compatible with the latest UVR Roformer patch (including the RTX 5000 one) | makidanyee’s Colab | uvronline.app | mvsep.com (tips for both sites)

Inst. fullness 34.25, bleedless 41.36, SDR 17.55’
“The best fullness model and does not even need phase fix. SOTA even (...) my favourite fullness model” - dca100fb8

“The best fullness to bleedless compromise” - becruily.
Although the word compromise is really key here - while giving at least acceptable results for most songs, some might sound a bit muddy compared to other models. But it still might happen that if you have severe cross-bleeding with some specific songs, then proceed with other models listed below, or see ensembles.

Phase fixer/swapper (for even less noise):

On uvronline it uses vocal stem as phase fixer reference, and it happens automatically, so you don't have to click on the correct phase button (previously it was available only in premium, not sure how now). “First, phase inversion is performed, resulting in a muddy instrumental. But the result is only used for phase correction. The second stem, which is available for download/listening, is more full.” - Aufr33

Consider using MDX23C Phantom Center model by gilliaan as a preprocessor for better results.
Deux notes:

“More bleedless than Resurrection inst (...) on a song with mostly piano, sounds considerably less muddy than resurrection inst… maybe overall slightly more noise... but the noise isn't bothersome”, (...) deux just seems to make some things super muddy and/or break them up... like an instrument here is just really wobbly with deux, probably because it doesn't have the fullness required.

HyperACE sounds better in areas here, but noisy in others… I guess you really gotta use all 3 models if you want a great result”

Resurrection inst seems to be also fuller at times, but while being also noisier, and when the song has the noise in it intentionally, Resurrection inst tend to pick it up. - Rainboomdash.

“[I] love the new model, besides it being on par with v1e in terms of fullness (on some tracks it's even fuller) without the noise tradeoff, it's also noticeably better in terms of bleedlessness as well, it managed to completely remove some faint choir/vocals pretty much all other models weren't able to remove. Most definitely my favorite model so far.” - Shintaro

“I think V1e+ is still fuller, sounds more open” - rainboomdash

Doesn't work well with VHS recordings - MarsEverythingTech

Doesn’t eat flute - mohammedmehditber

More sensitive to keep some tiny sounds over gaboxflowersv10 - sakkuhantano’

“Worse than HyperACE v2 inst to remove scratching and beatbox”, also it might happen that loud synths can sound muddy compared to v1e (Eurythmics - Sweet Dreams intro) - dca100fb8
Settings:

“I do recommend trying a higher chunk_size for instrumentals with deux.

I find 661500 works for a lot of songs, 749700 for a good amount of others.

Higher=more fullness, less bleedless (...) 705600 might be a better default setting -

highest SDR and more chance it won't be noisy” - rainboomdash (it complies with jarredou's measurements of how the model behaves with different chunks). For vocals, the default 570K is well balanced. “Going beyond 882000 may sharply decrease SDR and other metrics.” - makidanyee

The stem named “other” on Colab is the muddiest, and the most bleedless, reminding vocal models results.

Some people like using it with overlap 8, although it might be better for vocals, while for instrumentals you might check overlap 2 instead.

Trained “almost from scratch” - becruily

- Unwa bs_roformer_inst_HyperACEv2 model (incompatible with UVR, use MSST) makidanyee’s Colab | MVSEP | nextgen.uvronline

Inst. fullness 38.03, bleedless 37.87, SDR 17.40

You need to replace bs_roformer.py in MSST for it (for v2_voc and v2_inst, .py is the same).

“Definitely way better than v1e+. But I have also noticed it's more noisy” - rainboomdash

“Picks up vocals better than the first model, but along with the vocals, it muffles other instruments, such as a synthesizer.” - Halif
Much slower than Unwa BS-Resurrection inst.

The aura_mrstft score was further improved, and the SDR also increased. (...)

Incidentally, this new model outperformed v1e+ on all metrics. (...) holds the highest aura_mrstft score on the instrumental side of the Multisong dataset.” - unwa

https://mvsep.com/quality_checker/entry/9475

“Kept the chants in [one song], resurrection inst isn't really much better, though...

It takes a high vocal fullness model to extract these (like fv7beta1, even fv7beta2 isn't enough), maybe that's why the instrumental models are getting confused... Surprised it's still very much there with resurrection inst…

I'm surprised, HyperACEv2 fixed vocal bleed on one song compared to the previous version. Does seem like vocal bleed with HyperACE v2 is a bit better. It's not removed, just quieter in areas where it did happen (...) I've found HyperACE works extremely well with a lot of acoustic songs, as it handles it well and has low vocal bleed

unlike deux which has a lot of vocal bleed due to the song not being very loud” - rainboomdash

Good at preserving SFX when phase fixed - wancitte (check e.g. becruily vocal or BS 2025.07 on MVSEP instrumental result as reference for phase fixer)

Doesn't remove vocoder - stray_kids_filters

Inst. fullness: 34.93, bleedless: 40.14, SDR: 17.25

MVSEP BS 2025.07 works as a reference for phase fix with 3000/5000 settings.

Consider using MDX23C Phantom Center model by gilliaan as a preprocessor for better results.

Only 200MB. Some people might prefer it over V1e+, although it’s more muddy.

“use if the others [below] are noisy”

Models working for phase fixer (to alleviate the noise) are only BS-Roformer 1296/1297 by viperx and BS Large V1 by unwa, but generally the model might require phase fixing less than other models here - dca

Allegedly the one on MVSEP gives somehow different results - sai053020_48008

“One of my favorite fullness inst models ATM. Sounds like v1e to me, but cleaner. Especially with guitar/piano where v1e tended to add more phase distortion, I guess that's what you'd call it lol. This model preserves their purity better IMO” - Musicalman

“I like Resurrection inst for segments of piano, a lot of other models are too noisy there (...) I also needed to turn the overlap up for piano” (from 2 to 8). FNO was less noisy for it, but “the hit to fullness was extremely apparent” - rainboomdash

“The way it sounds, is indeed the best fullness model, it's like between v1e and v1e+, so not so noisy and full enough, though it creates problems with instruments gone in the instrumental sadly, but apparently it seems Roformer inst models will always have problems with instruments it seems, seems like a rule. (...) Instrument preservation (...) is between v1e and v1e+” - dca100fb8

“it seems to just nip some bits of random instruments like saxophone or guitar whereas v1e+ leaves them intact.” - dennis777

“In some songs leaves vocal residues. It is heard little but felt” - Fabio

“Almost loses some sounds that v1e+ picks up just fine” - neoculture

Mushes some synths a bit in e.g. trap/drill tune compared to inst Mel-Roformers like INSTV7/Becruily/FVX/inst3, but the residues/vocal shells are a bit quieter, although the clarity is also decreased a bit. Kind of a trade.

BS 2025.07/BS 2024.04/BS 2024.08/SW removes less noise than viperx models for phase fixer.

Inst. fullness: 37.89, bleedless: 36.53, SDR: 16.65

*) Phase fixer Colab (e.g. with FT3 as source or becruily voc)/UVR>Tools, or on x-minus with becruily vocal model used as reference model (premium) - for less noise/script.

*) introC script to get rid of vocal leakage in this model

*) “If you use Gabox Mel denoise/debleed model | yaml | MK Colab | on mixture, then put the “denoised” inst stem of that into unwa inst v1e+ you get a very clean result with good fullness and very little noise” - 5b. But it can’t remove vocal residues, just vocal noise.

Might also sound interesting when using as target in Phase fixer, and with source set as Becruily inst model (overlap 50/chunk_size 112455 was used; very slow - gustownis).

Or bigbeta5e as a source to get rid of vocal residues - santilli_

(single model inference descriptions below)

“strange leakage [robot-like] in the vocal-only section with no instrumentation” - Unwa

”less noise than v1e (probably due to different loss function), but it’s also less full, “somewhere between v1e and v1”

“sometimes a detail piece of instrumental sound was lost, while on becruily inst [below] can pick that sound”. Might be too strong for MIDI sounds - kittykatkat_uwu.

Problems with broken lead-ins not happening in instv7 and v1e. Some issues with cymbals bleed in vocals - dca.
Better than v1+. ”has fewer problems with quiet vocals in instrumentals than the V1+, “issues with harmonica, saxophone, electric guitar and synth seem to have been fixed” - dca100fb8.
“has this faint pitched noise whenever vocals hit in dead silence, you may need to manually cut it out.” - dynamic64. Check out also BS_ResurrectioN later below, it’s like v1e++ (more fullness).

- Unwa BS-Roformer-HyperACE inst (a.k.a. v1) | MK Colab | uvronline.app (doesn’t work in UVR)

Inst., fullness 36.91, bleedless 38.77, SDR 17.27

“sounding just like v1e+ after phase fix, but straight out of one single model

(...) quite bleedy, but honestly, it's a fair price to pay, I guess” - santilli_

Although for some people it can be even on pair with v1e+ bleed-wise, so check it out too (more fullness).

JFYI - there was no v1 of the voc variant.

Note: It uses its own inference script. “You can use this model by replacing the MSST repository's models/bs_roformer.py with the repository's bs_roformer.py.”

To not affect functionality of other BS-Roformer models by it, you can add it as new model_type by editing utils/settings.py and models/bs_roformer/init.py here (thx anvuew).

For error while installing py file for HyperACE model in Sucial’s WebUI:

from models.bs_roformer.attend import Attend

ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'models'"

The fix: “SUC-DriverOld/MSST-WebUI use the name "modules" and ZFTurbo/Music-Source-Separation-Training use the name "models". And Unwa's bs_roformer.py that you replace with, also use "models". So you'll have to do some coding and symlink to make it work.” - fjordfish

Metrically less fullness than v1e+: 37.89, but more bleedless: 36.53, SDR: 16.65 (v1e+).

While using locally, consider changing overlap from default 4 to 2 in the yaml of the model. The difference won’t be really noticeable for most people, but it will be faster.

“Currently, this model holds the highest aura_mrstft score on the instrumental side of the Multisong dataset. (...)

This weight is based on the following weights. Thank you, anvuew!” - unwa

“Does seem like HyperACE is picking up more instruments than v1e+

does seem like slightly worse vocal bleed overall (still need to test this more, though)... haven't encountered the super tinny vocal bleed like v1e+, at least

still fails to pick up that brass instrument on one song... Not really any worse than v1e+, though (...) resurrection inst does sound more muddy, but also a lot less noise... which makes sense... IDK, a little muddy for my tastes.

I did find one song/spot and resurrection inst was on par with HyperACE in picking up the wind instrument, v1e+ lost it for a bit.

I have found in the past that resurrection inst generally picks up more instruments than v1e+ (...) fullness of HyperACE is much closer to v1e+ than resurrection inst (...) it gets pretty staticy compared to v1e+ [on some drums] (...) v1e+ does this to a lot less extent

it's not super common, though… (...) I'm very confident in saying BSHyperACE picks up more stuff than v1e+.

Resurrection inst does pick it up much better than v1e+, but I think it's still too quiet

resurrection inst really does just pick up so much more instruments, despite having a lot less fullness” - rainboomdash

”fullness that is comparable to v1e+, but has significant more vocal crossbleeding in instrumental than BS Roformer Resurrection Inst, but still less than v1e+ and v1e” - dca100fb8

“I’ve found myself using a mix of both HyperACE v1 and deux.

I'm doing this literally on a Joy Division track right now. Convert both. Invert. Spectral down the residuals just enough to make the buzz less audible without going full Deux. I'm glad to have both models.

Convert the original track with each of the two models. Invert one against the other to get all the extra 'vocal residue' that the HyperACE model has compared to the deux model. Then use spectral editing to lower the volume of the vocal residue and mixing it back into the Deux model to create a kind of 'inbetween' result. Usually, I leave the higher frequencies alone (above 5 or 7k or so).” - CC Karaoke

- Gabox Mel-Roformer inst_gaboxFlowersV10 (yaml) | MK Colab | nextgen.uvronline or via special link (for free/premium accounts) | MVSEP

Inst. fullness 37.12, bleedless 36.68, SDR 16.95’

For UVR RTX 5000 patch and torch._dynamo error, edit “use_torch_checkpoint: True” to False (or delete the line).

All of the metrics above are better than Inst_FV8b.

The yaml is unique from the previous ones. Deux model fine-tune.
For less buzzing, use phase fix with becruily voc model - prodbyluke (phase fixer Colab), but ft2 bleedless instead seems to be even more effective than even becruily voc/inst setting - Squid.

Chunk size for the flowers model in the Colab should be 352800 (yaml value, might be not evaluated).

“A huge improvement over what Gabox has accustomed us to! I got amazing results. It truly achieves a stability that previous models lacked; the clarity is much greater in these.” - billieoconnell.

It might have louder constant buzzing vs even inst_fv4 without phase fixer, but the FlowersV10 fixes some issues of crossbleeding existing in previous models, and also with some distorted vocals and screams (dtn, dca100fb8, Tobias51).

“It’s the only one that doesn't make the instrumentals sound like they were dunked in water where the vocals are. - pitbulldale305”

- Inst_GaboxFv9 Mel-Roformer | nextgen.uvronline.app in Vocals>Test

Instrumental bleedless 36.20, fullness 37.19, SDR 16.56

Issues with vocal crossbleeding in instrumental, and it’s also too noisy - dca100fb8

“According to user reviews, this model is better than the FV10 in some cases.” - Aufr33

Much fuller than deux, and also separates some old radio/lo-fi voice recordings correctly.

- unwa BS-Roformer-Leap Xe instrumental

https://huggingface.co/pcunwa/BS-Roformer-Leap/tree/main/Xe | Colab

Instrumental fullness 35.00, bleedless 41.46, SDR: 17.53

It's 90-band. A bit better bleedless/fullness, but a bit worse SDR vs Deux (potentially a bit worse at recognizing instruments).

Unstable despite high metrics - “Big issue (...) is BV bleed, sometimes [BVs are] (...) kept almost intact (...) Very good model in how it sounds like (...) Fullness is very good, sounds fuller than deux and HyperACE, but less full than Flowers. Haven't found any tracks where it's muddy. (...) most of the tracks I tested it on, it really has almost no bothering noise (...) phase fix doesn't need to be always applied (...) quite song-dependent, which is not the case with Deux (...) For keeping instruments, it's better than HyperACE , but worse than Deux. (...) Considering SFX vocals sometimes [they’re] kept and sometimes [they’re] removed, so I don't think it has been improved since previous models. Deux was also not good at it, while Flowers shines for this.” - dca100fb8

“Sometimes leaves a bit of faint "crust" behind but still really fantastic stuff here” - pixelrino

“Mids sound a tiny bit muffled, but there's a lot of HF noise from about 7 kHz upward. I can hear what it's going for, it's trying to prevent the annoying kind of muddiness you get with a really bleedless model, but it's putting a lot of noise in a region I'm sensitive to.” - Musicalman

“A test of the new loss function.

It looks like it still needs some improvement.” - unwa

- Gabox Inst_GaboxFv8 v2 Mel-Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab (don’t confuse with Inst_FV8 or INSTV8)

Inst. fullness: 33.21, bleedless: 40.73, SDR: 16.57

Usually referred to as just Inst_GaboxFv8 without v2. Since its release, the checkpoint has been updated on 11.05.25 (same file name), metrics have changed (updated above).

It’s not the one on uvronline.
“Good result for bleedless instead, fullness went down instead of up a little.”
Might be an interesting competitor to Unwa inst v2 which is muddier.

Inst. fullness: 35.57, bleedless: 38.06, SDR: 16.51 are the metrics of the old v1 model.

0) Unwa Inst V1e (don’t confuse with newer +/plus variant above) | yaml (from v1)

Inst. fullness 38.87, bleedless 35.59, SDR 16.37

Higher fullness model - one of the first and still one of the favourite ones among people to this day (more higher fullness models later below).

One of the first Mel Kim model fine-tunes trained with instrumental (other) target. High fullness metric, noisy at times and on some songs.

To alleviate the noise, it can be used with automated phase fixer Colab or UVR>Tools>Phase swapper (Kim Mel as reference removes more noise than 2024.10 vs muddier Unwa v1/2 on their own; optionally use VOCALS-MelBand-Roformer by Becruily or unwa's Kim FT; you can also use FT2 as reference, but it “cuts instruments” vs FT3 which can be rather better alternative, lately also UVRonline can be used with Deux as phase fixer for premium users). Optionally, in Phase Fixer you can set 420 for low and 4200 for high or 500 for both and Mel-Kim model for source; and bleed suppressor (by unwa/97chris) to alleviate the noise further (e.g. phase fixer on its own works better with v1 model to alleviate the residues). Besides the default UVR default 500/5000 and Colab default 500/9000 values, you could potentially “even try like 200/1000 or even below for 2nd value.” “I would say that the more noisy the input is, the lower you have to set the frequency for the phase fixer.” Later you can ensemble the result with BS 2025 on MVSep or the BS-Roformer SW inst result Max Spec/FFT, it can even surpass Deux+HyperAce v2 ensemble, and have less noise and sound fuller - dca.

It might depend on a song when it will be the best choice to use particularly this model, and maybe even paste fragments from other models when necessary for the best results.

(more about the model in the higher fullness section later below).

_____

- Gabox Inst_GaboxFv7z Mel Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab | nextgen.uvronline/x-minus.pro | mvsep a.k.a. Gabox V7 (and it's not INSTV7)

Inst. fullness: 29.96, bleedless: 44.61, SDR: 16.62

“Focusing on the less amount of noise, keeping fullness”

But if you want even less of it, the model used for phase fixer for it on x-minus.pro/uvronline (premium feature) is Becruily vocal.

For the single model “the results were similar to INSTV7 but with less noise” but “the drums are totally fine with this model ”- neoculture

“it seems to capture some vocals better” - Gabox

In some songs, “it leaves a lot of reverb or noise from the vocals. unva v1e+ a little better” - GameAgainPL

“[one of the] best bleedless, good fullness, almost noiseless” - Aufr33

- Gabox Inst_FV8 (yaml) a.k.a. “Mel-Roformer by Gabox V8” on nextgen.uvronline (test) | MK Colab. Previously exclusive uvronline model via special link (free/premium)

Experimental; don’t confuse with “InstGaboxFv8”.

It gives decent results too. “it's on the higher bleedless side” - Rainboomdash (although less bleedless than fv7b and fv7z).

Previous epoch of the FV8B model, previously only on uvronline.

- MVSep SCNet vocals model: SCNet XL IHF (high instrum fullness by bercuily).

Inst. fullness 32.31, inst. bleedless 38.15, SDR 17.20

“One of my favorite instrumental models, Roformer-like quality.

For busy songs it works great, for trap/acoustic etc. Roformer is better due to SCNet bleed” - becruily

“bring[s] such near perfect instrumentals”

vs the previous XL models “It's high fullness version for instrumental prepared by becruily.”

It can also be an insane vocal model too.

Still good, but older/less frequently used

- Gabox INSTV7 a.k.a. Inst_GaboxV7 Mel-Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab | Huggingface / 2 | “F”, for fullness, “V” for version.

Inst. fullness: 33.22, bleedless: 40.71, SDR: 16.51
*) Phase fixer Colab/UVR’s Phase Swapper (for less noise; e.g. with FT3 by Unwa vocal model as source).

It's actually not on MVSEP, and Gabox V7 there is actually INSTV7.

“I hear less noise compared to v1e, but it has a worse bleedless metric” and might be less full.

It might still have too much noise like v1e for some people, but less.
“Relatively full/noisy model. Fvx [below] is a sort of middle ground between v3 and v7.”
More fullness than V6, but vs v1e, sometimes “leaves noises throughout the song, sometimes vocal remnants in the verse of the song, and some instruments are erased.”
Less muddy than Mel 2024.10 on MVSEP, and V7 doesn’t preserve vocal chops/SFX.

Gabox claims it's not the same as V7 on uvronline, but FV7z, despite both appear on the list while using a special link for: free/premium.

- Becruily’s inst model | MK Colab | Huggingface / 2 | on MVSEP a.k.a. Mel-Roformer “high fullness” | uvronline via special link for: free/premium (scroll down) or nextgen.uvronline.app

Inst. fullness 33.98, inst. bleedless 40.48, SDR 16.47
or on x-minus/uvronline (with optional phase correction feature in premium) | UVR
*) It's an older model, but it’s great to get less vocal residues when used in phase fixer Colab (also in UVR>Tools) and “becruily's vocals as source and inst as target”.
If it’s too muddy, consider using a result of nosier single model as Inst_GaboxFv8_v1 (or some fullness models) as reference for Matchering in e.g. UVR.

Alone, Becruily’s inst is as clean as unwa’s v1, but has less noise, and it can also be got rid well by:
*) Mel denoise and/or Roformer bleed suppressor by unwa/97chris. That model “removed some of the faint vocals that even the bleed suppressor didn't manage to filter out” before”. Doesn’t require phase fix. Try out denoising on a mixture first, then use the model.

On its own, the inst model correctly removes SFX voices. The instrumental model pulled out more adlibs than the released vocal model variant, when it can pull out nothing.
Currently, the only model capable of keeping vocal chops.
“Struggles a lot with low passed vocals”

More instruments correctly recognized as instruments and not vocals, although not as much as Mel 2024.10 & BS 2024.08 on MVSEP, but still more than unwa’s inst v1e/v1/v2.

- If you use lower dim_t like 256 (or maybe also corresponding chunk_size) on weaker GPUs, these are the first Mel inst models to have muddy results with it.

- In the phase fixer you can experiment with “using becruily's vocals as source and inst as target, and changing high frequency weight from 0.8 to 2 makes for impressive results” you can do it automatically after separation in this Colab (santilli_ suggestion).
Using Kim Mel FT2 as source instead might be more problematic as it tends to be more harmful to instruments, and in noise removal both are similar (dca).

- To demudd the results from phase fixer, you can use Matchering and a well sounding fragment of single instrumental model separation with high fullness metric (e.g. 7N) as a reference and becruily inst/voc phase fixed result set as target (e.g. in UVR>Tools>Matchering). It will have less bleeding than models with low bleedless metric, but still fuller than phase-fixed results (more here and here). Phase fixer can also be used in a standalone Python script or in the latest UVR. Matchering can be used in Colab or songmastr or locally (it’s very lightweight and doesn’t require a GPU).

- Gabox inst_fv4 Mel-Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab

Inst. fullness 39.40, bleedless 33.49, SDR 16.44

Don’t confuse it with inst_fv4noise - the regular variant was never released before (and with voc_fv4).

“Seems to be erasing a xylophone instrument. Does sound not too noisy and not muddy, I like it. (...) A little noisy with piano (I split the song up and process with resurrection inst there). (...) Does have some issues that resurrection inst doesn't have, but it doesn't sound muddy! It usually works great. (...) In my opinion, fv4 still has vocal traces, I don't know if in all of its songs and v1e plus doesn't have them, but the noise can bother you even though it's not much. Does have more vocal bleed at times. I think a lot of what I thought was vocal bleed was a synth, it did a pretty good job... There was one segment on a song where it caught vocal residues, though” - rainboomdash

It has more constant buzzing than becruily inst, but it’s fuller (might be a no-go if you’re sensitive to it e.g. using headphones).

- Gabox Inst_FV8b Mel-Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab
Inst. fullness: 35.05, bleedless: 36.90, SDR 16.59.

Muddier than V1e+ (37.89), but cleaner. Some people might prefer it over INSTV7.

“Preserves its volume stability to the original sound of the songs, it does not go down or lose strength, which is the most important thing, it manages to capture clear vocal chops, the voice is eliminated to 99 or 100% depending on its condition, it captures the entire instrumental and when making a mix it remains like the original that with other models the volume was lowered,” - Billie O’Connell