It seems perfect. I can live with the slightly cumbersome GUI, and even the fact that uno can't handle my 32-bit float files directly.
Thing is, tho, the demo sounds terrible. With no pitch correction or anything -- just load a file -- it sounds thin and hyped, like it was run thru some cheap exciter or something.
I was a/b'ing against the same 24-bit .wav in SX3, and I couldn't believe the difference. I assume this isn't just some quirk of the demo. Too bad.
My initial demo with the leapfrog audio vsti was frustrating . . . the timing was all way off, and I really couldn't figure the thing out. Maybe I need to spend more time with it.
I already own intonator and the ob-tune thing. OB-tune was a disaster, and the intonator is fine for backing vocals but certainly doesn't have the power to do what melodyne's setting out to do.
Maybe autotune 4 will do it. Just too bad about melodyne, unless I'm missing something.
I really wanted to like melodyne
-
- KVRist
- 382 posts since 6 Apr, 2005 from Fair NJ, the Garden State, US
Grist for the glamour mill.
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
melodyne more like YELLOW DIME am i right people???
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
maybe someone will whip out an improved copy during recess....
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRist
- 307 posts since 28 May, 2002 from usa
Melodyne is a toy. If you want to get serious with vocal correction as well as shifting look no further than the Tranformer bundle by Waves ($899.00 at AMS).
Wordsong.info - because something GOOD is on the way!
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
the thing that so many don't think about with software for pitch correction, choirs, and other such fx is that they react to the signal not the vox....in other words noise can be part of the recorded signal you are trying to add the effects to. The software wont be very discreet between noise and the signal. So while it's processing the vocals it is also processing thhe noise which causes conflict with the vocals......a "cleaned up" and eq'd vox track might not be enough....in fact I think it's best to go with a raw signal with just background noise removed (voxengo redux should accomplish this well) when it comes to correction I believe it to be important to correct the rawest signal you can, then enhance it...but sadly some do not understand even a low noise level can effect how the software reads the track and thus throw off all the processing...
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- 1891 posts since 9 Oct, 2004 from Columbus,Ohio
kick ass!!! Woo!Chase wrote:melodyne more like YELLOW DIME am i right people???
"You are going to let the fear of poverty govern your life and your reward will be that you will eat, but you will not live."
-
- KVRian
- 921 posts since 14 Oct, 2002 from Sweden
opiadream wrote:just get the fcukers to sing in tune to begin with
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 382 posts since 6 Apr, 2005 from Fair NJ, the Garden State, US
I'm wondering whether it's the audio engine of melodyne, and not the processing itself. With the demo, you can't print the correction, so it's impossible to do what I want to do: load a .wav into melodyne, make NO correction, print the .wav, reimport it into SX3 and compare it to the original.
The reason I'm second-guessing my assessment is how many folks seem to really love this software. I can't imagine they wouldn't notice that their audio sounded radically different even with no processing.
Anybody own melodyne and feel like doing the comparison?
The reason I'm second-guessing my assessment is how many folks seem to really love this software. I can't imagine they wouldn't notice that their audio sounded radically different even with no processing.
Anybody own melodyne and feel like doing the comparison?
Grist for the glamour mill.
-
- AcousticHippie
- 4769 posts since 12 Mar, 2003
yup seems to be so..... I hear the difference in melodyne, too... but don't hear it when it's processed and loaded back into the host....
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 382 posts since 6 Apr, 2005 from Fair NJ, the Garden State, US
Nice!
Was really scratching my head. The reviews are such raves. And there's the answer -- I hope.
I think I'm going to have to buy it.
Any thoughts about getting 32-bit float files from SX3 into 24-bit format for uno to work on? No real simple way has occurred to me yet.
Was really scratching my head. The reviews are such raves. And there's the answer -- I hope.
I think I'm going to have to buy it.
Any thoughts about getting 32-bit float files from SX3 into 24-bit format for uno to work on? No real simple way has occurred to me yet.
Grist for the glamour mill.
-
- KVRAF
- 5629 posts since 22 Sep, 2005
I've found that Hell o Dyne is really only good on compressed/normalized vocal parts (like other vocal tuners out there). I belive it measures what gets processed by the actuall volume. So if you have a vocal that goes from soft to loud vice-versa and pitch up or down, the part with lower velocity value will give a kind of "mixed with the original" sound. This truly FVRKZ up the sound for sure.
C
C
-
- KVRAF
- 5629 posts since 22 Sep, 2005
Not sure if anyone has tried RBC voice tweaker pro. The gui is (in my opinion) much better that Antares Auto Tune's. You can also convert you files to 96khz and you dont get that washed out sound. If anyone knows of any others let me know..
C
C