WXLF wrote:There has to be something wrong here, it's unusable.
Joking aside, thanks for your demonstration. This shows exactly what I am talking about. And this is just a simple saw wave. No complex vocals or acoustic instrument samples.
Latest News: Bitwig updates Bitwig Studio to v5.1
Will there be a better time-stretching algorithm?
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 265 posts since 25 Jan, 2016 from in my DAW
Joking aside, thanks for your demonstration. This shows exactly what I am talking about. And this is just a simple saw wave. No complex vocals or acoustic instrument samples.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 265 posts since 25 Jan, 2016 from in my DAW
Why would I make such a statement without testing / using them? Of course I tried and used them.Suloo wrote:you did not try them, but they are definitly better then bitwigs? How do you know?(no offence)
You don't have to have golden ears to hear the awful stretching of Bitwig. It's a thing of minutes to stretch a few loops in different DAWs and hear the result. (If you don't hear a difference in WXLF's example I am definitely offended by your ears. I mean, you can easily see the extreme difference in the wave form.)
-
- KVRAF
- 4633 posts since 21 Jan, 2008 from oO
that wasn't directed to you lol
it was at takaii, but all good, he has a point..
but for feature requests better write to support.. http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 9&t=420129
it was at takaii, but all good, he has a point..
but for feature requests better write to support.. http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 9&t=420129
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 265 posts since 25 Jan, 2016 from in my DAW
@Suloo
Bitwig's stretching bothers me that much, no matter how hard I try, I'm getting emotional about it. I am highly sorry for any loud tones or misunderstood posts.
@takaii
Regarding the Elastique algorithms it seems that the developers can integrate the algorithm differently (not knowing if this is true). That's why I believe you can't take it for granted that they all sound the same. I can't null Cubase Pro 8.5 and Studio One 3 (both Elastique 3) and in a blind test (depending on the program material) I usually pick Live's Complex algorithm (Elastique 2) over them. However I think if the Elastique stamp is on it, one is good to go!
Bitwig's stretching bothers me that much, no matter how hard I try, I'm getting emotional about it. I am highly sorry for any loud tones or misunderstood posts.
@takaii
Regarding the Elastique algorithms it seems that the developers can integrate the algorithm differently (not knowing if this is true). That's why I believe you can't take it for granted that they all sound the same. I can't null Cubase Pro 8.5 and Studio One 3 (both Elastique 3) and in a blind test (depending on the program material) I usually pick Live's Complex algorithm (Elastique 2) over them. However I think if the Elastique stamp is on it, one is good to go!
-
- KVRAF
- 4633 posts since 21 Jan, 2008 from oO
no worries, i mean this could even be a bug by watching the waveform. It is quite a difference yes. Best to report it.
-
- Banned
- 1601 posts since 29 Sep, 2014 from Halmstad, Sweden
Had chance to try reason 8.3 streching algorythm? it sound much better then fl studios, and fl studio sound much better then bitwigtedannemann wrote:@Suloo
Bitwig's stretching bothers me that much, no matter how hard I try, I'm getting emotional about it. I am highly sorry for any loud tones or misunderstood posts.
@takaii
Regarding the Elastique algorithms it seems that the developers can integrate the algorithm differently (not knowing if this is true). That's why I believe you can't take it for granted that they all sound the same. I can't null Cubase Pro 8.5 and Studio One 3 (both Elastique 3) and in a blind test (depending on the program material) I usually pick Live's Complex algorithm (Elastique 2) over them. However I think if the Elastique stamp is on it, one is good to go!
i hope bitwig can do something about this quality issue. But you aright maybe about jumping into conclusion but i havent. but for those daw that ive tried, bitwig is defently much worse. grainy and shitdesktop: windows 10 x64, i5 4690k, 32gb ram 1600mhz, 2x ssd 128 gb +2x3 tb, asus gtx 970, asus proz gamer motherboard, no external audiocard
laptop: windows 10 x64, i7 mq4700, 12gb ram 1600mhz, 1 tb, asus gt 750
laptop: windows 10 x64, i7 mq4700, 12gb ram 1600mhz, 1 tb, asus gt 750
-
- KVRist
- 32 posts since 12 Aug, 2015
I completely agree. I really hope developers have it in their list of future improvements:) Not so long time before i made a comparison. I took a vocal loop and made pitch shifting by - 5 semitones in three different DAWs (Bitwig, Ableton and Studio One). And Bitwig showed the worst result. Finally i couldn't avoid audio artifacts no matter what parameters i handled there.
I make deep house and in the style pitch shifting is very common tool for using. Finally, on mixing stage i always return all my audio files in the initial state and apply Pitch Shifter from waves for getting better result. So i really hope Bitwig will fix that and i don't do useless work anymore:)
I make deep house and in the style pitch shifting is very common tool for using. Finally, on mixing stage i always return all my audio files in the initial state and apply Pitch Shifter from waves for getting better result. So i really hope Bitwig will fix that and i don't do useless work anymore:)
-
- KVRian
- 1481 posts since 19 Aug, 2009
I dont want Melodyne integration, I prefer to have the things deeply integrated with built in tech.
Plus it wont on Linux.
But it really could sound better.
Plus it wont on Linux.
But it really could sound better.
-
- KVRian
- 631 posts since 22 Nov, 2006
+1000 Puleezz?!!Echoes in the Attic wrote:I think they should do melodyne ARA integration. Stretching and pitch shifting taken care of!
https://www.reverbnation.com/toddsilva
Ryzen 9 5950x with 64G, i7 5820K with 32G DDR4, networked using AudioGridder, Bitwig, NI, U-he, and Arturia soft synths to name a few
Eurorack system https://www.modulargrid.net/e/racks/view/432465
Ryzen 9 5950x with 64G, i7 5820K with 32G DDR4, networked using AudioGridder, Bitwig, NI, U-he, and Arturia soft synths to name a few
Eurorack system https://www.modulargrid.net/e/racks/view/432465
-
- KVRist
- 71 posts since 7 Mar, 2015
I have time-stretched a great amount and had generally decent results, but can't deny the evidence and any improvement would obviously be welcomed.
This is another reason why REX compatibility would be a great help though. As, currently, if you have WAVs and REX files of the same loops you want to time-stretch, Bitwig is going to force you towards lower quality. The REX files aren't compatible and the WAVs will have to be time-stretched.
Of course, you can use workarounds for both (i.e use external methods/plugins for time-stretching or REX playing) but the main pull of Bitwig for many is the speed and workflow, so it's unfortunate that quality must be sacrificed to work the best/easiest way.
Though, again, in my experience, the results of time-stretching have been acceptable, but my previous DAWs did a hilariously bad job of it, so Bitwig's efforts have always seemed a step up(!) And I have never really needed/expected a natural result.
This is another reason why REX compatibility would be a great help though. As, currently, if you have WAVs and REX files of the same loops you want to time-stretch, Bitwig is going to force you towards lower quality. The REX files aren't compatible and the WAVs will have to be time-stretched.
Of course, you can use workarounds for both (i.e use external methods/plugins for time-stretching or REX playing) but the main pull of Bitwig for many is the speed and workflow, so it's unfortunate that quality must be sacrificed to work the best/easiest way.
Though, again, in my experience, the results of time-stretching have been acceptable, but my previous DAWs did a hilariously bad job of it, so Bitwig's efforts have always seemed a step up(!) And I have never really needed/expected a natural result.
-
- KVRist
- 64 posts since 18 Mar, 2015
I really don't know how this thread does not get way more attention. This sucks to the point where i dont even stretch anything at all, not to mention if i was to stretch some material and than revers it (bug obviously).
This needs to get improved, Cubase, Fl, Reason, Live, you name it, they all do a better job when it comes to time stretching.
I think the reason they don't "fix" this is that in their opinion the algorithm is completely fine and better than the ones in other daws. They mentioned that in another thread saying other algos sound watery and not good at all.
So maybe we should make a pole which would contain same material stretched in different daws and than compared.
This needs to get improved, Cubase, Fl, Reason, Live, you name it, they all do a better job when it comes to time stretching.
I think the reason they don't "fix" this is that in their opinion the algorithm is completely fine and better than the ones in other daws. They mentioned that in another thread saying other algos sound watery and not good at all.
So maybe we should make a pole which would contain same material stretched in different daws and than compared.
