Question: Melodyne versus compression for dynamic control

[sambaji]

Am I correct to assume there are fewer artifacts using the new note leveling macro, Melodyne, to control dynamics, than standard compression? Compression is limited to real-time processing, introducing partials in the process, whereas Melodyne analyzes the entire sample/track first before applying the dynamic changes. It would seem that using Melodyne to control dynamics would be fairly similar to manual automating amplitude in a DAW, retaining more of the original sound than compression. Compression seems better suited for micro-dynamics, controlling the ASDR (Attack-Sustain-Decay-Release) and parallel processing.

Do any of you prefer using Melodyne for controlling macro-dynamics, and if so have you notice any artifacts or other oddities when doing so?

[megadude]

I like reducing dynamics with melodyne for bass guitar. It's really impressively smooth.

[sambaji]

I like reducing dynamics with melodyne for bass guitar. It's really impressively smooth.

That's what I have noticed as well--much more natural sounding than compression. As I said above compression seems better suited for changing the character of the bass--e.g., making it more punching by emphasizing the attack.