Recent bleedless models
- Gabox Inst_GaboxFv7z Mel Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab | uvronline.app/x-minus.pro
Inst. fullness: 29.96, bleedless: 44.61, SDR: 16.62
(duplicate from the above)
Becruily vocal used for phase fixer on x-minus.pro/uvronline (premium feature).
“Focusing on the less amount of noise, keeping fullness”
“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
Despite the metrics, it can have more constant buzzing than fv7b.
- Gabox inst_fv7b Mel Roformer (yaml) | MK Colab
Inst. fullness 27.07, bleedless 47.49, SDR 16.71
(duplicate from the above)
Fullness worse than even most vocal Mel-Roformers (incl. BS-RoFormer SW and Mel Kim OG model).
“on the fuller side, somewhere around inst v1e+, maybe a tiny bit below. The main thing I notice is it captures more instruments than v1e+, but isn't muddy like [HyperACE] (which also captures more instruments)
can be a little on the noisy side sometimes... but it at least isn't muddy and sounds natural (...) I'd still ensemble if you want the noise reduced - rainboomdash (src)
In some lo-fi beats, it can keep muffling hi-hats by being too muddy.
0) Rifforge by mesk model final | MK Colab
Can be even more destructive for drums than the two above, muddier, but it has even less buzzing by straight up picking noise existing in the mixture along with vocals. It’s slow and big. Generally dedicated to metal, achieving better results there, but can work for e.g. hip-hop (along with caveats above).
- Unwa BS-Roformer-Inst-FNO | MK Colab
Inst. fullness: 32.03, bleedless: 42.87, SDR: 17.60
Incompatible with UVR, install MSST, then read model instructions here (requires modifying bs_roformer.py file in MSST, also models_utils.py for PyTorch newer than 2.6).
Actually similar results to BS-Resurrection inst model above, less fullness.
Some people even prefer Gabox BS_ResurrectioN instead.
“Very small amount of noise compared to other fullness inst models, while keeping enough fullness IMO. I don't even know if a phase fix is needed. Maybe it's still needed a little bit.” dca
“seems less full than the Resurrection, which I would expect given the MVSEP [metric] results. (...) I'd say it's roughly comparable to Gabox inst v7”
“I replaced the MLP of the BS-Roformer mask estimator with FNO1d [Fourier Neural Operator], froze everything except the mask estimator, and trained it, which yielded good results. (...) While MLP is a universal function approximator, FNO learns mappings (operators) on function spaces.”
“(The base weight is Resurrection Inst)”
- Unwa BS-Roformer-Large-Inst a.k.a. bs_large_v2_inst (there was no v1) | MK Colab
Fullness: 32.06, bleedless: 43.95, SDR: 17.61
It uses a custom bs_roformer.py file attached - just replace it in the MSST installation (UVR is incompatible).
Training details:
"Instead of increasing the depth to 16, I added a four-layer TransformerBlock to the MaskEstimator." 238MB weight.
“sometimes was good and other times it completely missed the separations”, more noise than flowersv10 model - mesk (spectrogram example with lacking fragments missed by the model). “It leaves residue in some places” - fabio06844
“Just looking at metrics, fullness is ranked about the same as (...) FNO” - rainboomdash
Lower fullness models
(if you find the ones above too muddy, but here you get more noise)
0) Gabox inst_gabox3 (yaml) | MK Colab | Huggingface / 2 | Phase fixer Colab
Inst. fullness 37.69, bleedless 35.93, SDR 16.50
Actually worse fullness than v1e+ (37.89), and lower bleedless (36.53).
When used with Unwa’s beta 6 as reference for phase fixer (thx John UVR), slightly less muddy results than phase-fixed Becruily inst-voc results, but also slightly more vocal residues and a bit more inconsistent sound, fluctuations across the whole separation at times.
0) Gabox INSTV7N | MK Colab | Huggingface / 2
Inst. fullness 36.83, bleedless 35.47, SDR: 16.65
More noisy than INSTV7; “it's [even] closer to v7 than inst3”
- Inst_GaboxFv8 v1 Mel-Roformer (yaml) | fork of makidanyee’s Colab
Inst. fullness: 35.57, bleedless: 38.06, SDR: 16.51
The OG link to the model changed to the v2 variant of the model, but the old link to the v1 was retrieved above
(the model name remained the same and if you used the regular non-v1 in the Colab before it, the ckpt won’t be replaced) .
It has “v1+ metallic noise” - Gabox. And even nasty residues louder than buzzing vs the v2 variant.
VS V1e+ “A bit cleaner-sounding and has less filtering/watery artifacts. Both models are prone to very strange vocal leakage [“especially in the chorus”].
And because Fv8 can be so clean at times, the leakage can be fairly obvious. For now, my vote is for Fv8, but I'll still probably be switching back and forth a lot. Still has ringing” - Musicalman. Although, you might still prefer it over V1e+.
Might have some “ugly vocal residues” at times (Phil Collins - In The Air Tonight) - 00:46, 02:56 - dca.
“Sometimes V1e+ has vocal residues which sound like you were speaking through a fan/low quality mp3” - dca
”Seems to pick up some instruments better” Gabox.
__
0) SCNet XL model called “very high fullness” | MVSEP
Inst. fullness 34.04, bleedless 35.15, SDR 16.60
It might work better than Roformers for less noisy/loud/busy mixes or genres like alt-pop, orchestral tracks with choir, sometimes giving more full results than even v1e, but at the cost of more noise. Might struggle with some vocal reverbs or effects.
"One thing with SCNet. If you process the song twice, once with the phase inverted, re-invert the phase and then mix together you will cancel most of the noise" - Dry Paint Dealer Undr
“Very hit or miss. When they're good they're really good but when they're bad there's nothing you can do other than use a different model”
Compared to the high fullness variant, more crossbleeding of vocals in instrumentals (along with SCNet XL basic model). Some songs which sound full enough even with basic SCNet XL (and HF variant) while others will sound muddy (dca)
“has a lot of noise/bleed, and I haven't found the best way to get rid of it, but it does tend to pick up harmonies and subtle BGV that other models don't.” dynamic64
0) MVSEP SCNet XL high fullness
Inst. fullness 31.95, bleedless 34.06, SDR 17.26
“I have a few examples where it's better than v1e+
Sometimes there is too much residue but most of the time it's fine” dca
“Really loving the way SCnet high fullness [variant] handles lower frequencies, below 2K [let’s] say. Roformers are better with the transients up high, but decay on guitars/keys on the SCnet is more natural”
“seems to also confuse less "difficult" instruments for vocals”
“I noticed classic SCNet XL preserves more instruments than the high fullness one, but has more vocal crossbleeding in instrumental compared to high fullness
So if you want instrument preservation use SCNet XL 1727 but if you want less crossbleeding of vocals in instrumental use SCNet XL high fullness
I ignore the very high fullness one because it has too much vocal residue” dca
(regular SCNet XL moved below)
_______
- Gabox BS_ResurrectioN model | yaml | MK Colab
“It is a fine-tune of BS Roformer Resurrection Inst but with higher fullness (like v1e for example), it needs [MVSEP’s] BS 2025.07 (as a source/reference) phase fix
I requested it because I found some songs where Resur Inst was producing muddy instrum results (...) I requested it not just for me because I saw other people were looking for something like v1e++” - dca