best timestretch
-
- KVRist
- 115 posts since 4 Sep, 2001 from Kiev, Ukraine
What about dirac LE by SMS? http://www.dspdimension.com/
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
-
- KVRAF
- 4749 posts since 15 Jul, 2001 from Holmfirth, West Yorkshire, U.K
I took a whole track from 106 upto 126 using MPEX2 in Cubase SX, the results where staggering.
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7042 posts since 28 Apr, 2004 from france
mmh
many advices...
I found someone owning a macintosh and Prosoniq TImeFactory, adn I was very disappointed !
It made many gltiches and artifacts on m y soundfile, some kind of narrowing/cuttingoff with resonance on the bassrange ?!!!
it really was terrible !
So i tried with SOnyExpresFX, and, beleieve me, it was waaaay better (at least in the bass range, the cymbals were a bit bad, but nothing bad compared to TImeFactory !)
For that track, i think i wikll stay with my Sony XpressFX, and sinceI'll hav tim, i'll check whatever i'll be able to check...
many advices...
I found someone owning a macintosh and Prosoniq TImeFactory, adn I was very disappointed !
It made many gltiches and artifacts on m y soundfile, some kind of narrowing/cuttingoff with resonance on the bassrange ?!!!
it really was terrible !
So i tried with SOnyExpresFX, and, beleieve me, it was waaaay better (at least in the bass range, the cymbals were a bit bad, but nothing bad compared to TImeFactory !)
For that track, i think i wikll stay with my Sony XpressFX, and sinceI'll hav tim, i'll check whatever i'll be able to check...
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111304 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
ttoz wrote:Topaz, speeding up is a hell of a lot easier and always gives better results than slowing down. But yes, mpex is probably good for a whole mix maybe 15% speed up. 10% slowdown.
depends what your after,i ofetn take a 20 second drumloops and over stretch it to about 4 mins
obviously tho your after a different effect ie cleanliness ive heard melodyne is pretty shizzle hot in these stakes
-
- Banned
- 380 posts since 11 Aug, 2005
Elastique seems to be both: excellent and highly specialized .
Timestretching must relate to the kind of input material (very much). Elastique solves that great!
(There is no general purpose algorithm, which works with everything for some certain reasons.)
.
Timestretching must relate to the kind of input material (very much). Elastique solves that great!
(There is no general purpose algorithm, which works with everything for some certain reasons.)
.
-
- KVRian
- 520 posts since 13 Aug, 2002 from Salzburg, Austria
I have been doing some beta testing to the next Elastique engines and they are very very good, way better than Melodyne's timestretching.
-
- KVRist
- 207 posts since 28 May, 2005
Hm... I wonder how you listen. With Soundshifter image collapses on one single percent shift - something happens to stereo imaging, freq content (phase probs, I suppose) and it is very obvious. Elastique is a lot better then the Waves, but it also suffers from bad artifacts, different from the Soundshifer, tho. At least it preserves stereo imaging and overall frequency balance very good. MPEX2 in Cubase is better then the Soundshifter too... None of them can timestretch 15% near lossless. I don't have much experience with others but I wouldn't be suprised if those in Sonar, Samplitude, etc are as well better then Soundshufter.
-
- Banned
- 380 posts since 11 Aug, 2005
Hmm.Spyro wrote:I have been doing some beta testing to the next Elastique engines and they are very very good, way better than Melodyne's timestretching.
Not that *way* better. But still verry very good.
.
-
- KVRist
- 207 posts since 28 May, 2005
Here's a rar archive with the unprocessed file, Soundshifter timestretched, Wavelab and MPEX-2 (Cubase SX3) 5% down. Transient mode suffers the least in Soundshifter but still we can hear a drastic collapse in imaging, Wavelab one is the best of the bunch in terms of imaging but it's got some jumpy artifacts, and MPEX-2 got a bit of both but still preserved imaging and tonal balance far better then the Waves one. Soundshifter is totally unusable when it comes to "clean" stretch. If its phase problems are something of a sweetener you've been looking for then... there's nothing I can say. I don't have Elastique, only demo version but it is far better then any of those represented here.
The file is around 8mb http://d4.yousendit.com/C/1Q40YK14GYP9E ... h_test.rar
The file is around 8mb http://d4.yousendit.com/C/1Q40YK14GYP9E ... h_test.rar
-
- Banned
- 380 posts since 11 Aug, 2005
DIRAC may be good also for some purposes. But very very slow (on highest quality) and don't match the grade of specialisation of Elastique (formant processing, transient protecting and so on).
The big disadvantages of cheap alternatives are mostly:
- very limited range (+-) for satisfactory results
- using merely one technique (either completely time domain or frequency domain processing - which all have drawbacks)
- mostly NO stereo phase stability resulting in a completely demage of the stereo image.
- do no formant correction, rhythmic analysis or transient preservation
.
The big disadvantages of cheap alternatives are mostly:
- very limited range (+-) for satisfactory results
- using merely one technique (either completely time domain or frequency domain processing - which all have drawbacks)
- mostly NO stereo phase stability resulting in a completely demage of the stereo image.
- do no formant correction, rhythmic analysis or transient preservation
.
-
- KVRAF
- 37476 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
What is this "Elastique" - is this a new plugin or programme?