Mmorph - pitch tracking?

[MeldaProduction]

I hate to disappoint you guys, but pitch-based morphing would be a different plugin really. Though perhaps a pitch shift for A and B would be helpful in MMorph? (not sure if it would be easily possible, but I think it would)

[vectorwarrior]

I hate to disappoint you guys, but pitch-based morphing would be a different plugin really.

Then I humbly request a new plugin Ha ha, sorry!

If you're going to do that though, I'd rather you put the time towards the spectral Phatik that I've mentioned a million times

Though perhaps a pitch shift for A and B would be helpful in MMorph?

Would that be the same as adding a pitch shift to A and B inputs in MXXX before the Morph... or would it instead adjust the processing that Morph does in some way? If it's the first, then I dont think it's necessary, if it's the latter, then that's more interesting IMO.

Thanks as always!

[sirmonkey]

This got me thinking about MAutopitch. I began to think that you could use a sidechain to pitch one track to another track. But MAutopitch doesn't have sidechain capabilities, does it? (No complaint! Geez, it's FREE, and it's very cool! )
Hey Vojtek, what if you did add sidechain capability to MAutopitch (and charge just a few $$buck$$ for that)?
I would definitely pay for that! And, given the complexity of what Melda Productions does, I think that this wouldn't be too hard to do. * The real challenge would be managing expectations. i think!

Decent idea?

[MeldaProduction]

Hmmm, what? How is that related to MAutoPitch?

[jmg8]

Hmmm, what? How is that related to MAutoPitch?

Autopitch changes the pitch of the input to match the defined scale. Instead, if there was a sidechain feature added, it could match to the sidechain instead of sale

In Morph.
Autopitch in A would listen (sidechain) to B and try to match it.
Then the morph parameter could change the depth of pitch correction.

[Neon Breath]

In Morph.
Autopitch in A would listen (sidechain) to B and try to match it.
Then the morph parameter could change the depth of pitch correction.

And I think that IS the real challenge no devs have succeeded. That’s why all realtime ‘morph’ plugin are more cross-synthesis / vocodish style than true spectral morphing à la Kyma, which is probably what most people have in mind when they talk about audio morphing.

[sirmonkey]

Hmmm, what? How is that related to MAutoPitch?

Autopitch changes the pitch of the input to match the defined scale. Instead, if there was a sidechain feature added, it could match to the sidechain instead of sale

In Morph.
Autopitch in A would listen (sidechain) to B and try to match it.
Then the morph parameter could change the depth of pitch correction.

Yes! That! Nicely explained.
I would guess that this would really not be a real-time effect. This would be more for something like getting two vocal tracks in tune with each other, for example.
My DAW, Studio One version 4 now has a chord track, which detects the chords in a track. It does a good job of detecting chords that a guitar or piano plays. It can even change a minor chord to a major chord! So, something along these lines does exist. Check this out:
This is a bit of a tangent, but it's a relevant point, I think, since we're talking about changing one aspect of a sound to mirror another.

[vectorwarrior]

In Morph.
Autopitch in A would listen (sidechain) to B and try to match it.
Then the morph parameter could change the depth of pitch correction.

And I think that IS the real challenge no devs have succeeded. That’s why all realtime ‘morph’ plugin are more cross-synthesis / vocodish style than true spectral morphing à la Kyma, which is probably what most people have in mind when they talk about audio morphing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, MMorph really needs to be more of a spectral level matcher. Currently it's like a spectral vocoder, which is more of a spectral level follower. The difference is that MMorph passes through signals in the main channels at the volume of the side chain, it does not MATCH them by doing a comparison of A and B signals, so the end signal could have very little correlation between A and B. To illustrate, put two very different signals into A and B, the result will not actually be a morph between them, instead it'll be the spectrum of B overlayed on to A, but if A doesn't have those frequencies then you get nothing.

In my opinion, the 'next gen' morph would have spectral matching and pitch tracking. Then you'd have a killer morphing process.

[jmg8]

In my opinion, the 'next gen' morph would have spectral matching and pitch tracking. Then you'd have a killer morphing process.

This would be amazing!

[MeldaProduction]

Well, hopefully one day

[Nspace]

In my opinion, the 'next gen' morph would have spectral matching and pitch tracking. Then you'd have a killer morphing process.

This would be amazing!

+1

[Nspace]

In Morph.
Autopitch in A would listen (sidechain) to B and try to match it.
Then the morph parameter could change the depth of pitch correction.

And I think that IS the real challenge no devs have succeeded. That’s why all realtime ‘morph’ plugin are more cross-synthesis / vocodish style than true spectral morphing à la Kyma, which is probably what most people have in mind when they talk about audio morphing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, MMorph really needs to be more of a spectral level matcher. Currently it's like a spectral vocoder, which is more of a spectral level follower. The difference is that MMorph passes through signals in the main channels at the volume of the side chain, it does not MATCH them by doing a comparison of A and B signals, so the end signal could have very little correlation between A and B. To illustrate, put two very different signals into A and B, the result will not actually be a morph between them, instead it'll be the spectrum of B overlayed on to A, but if A doesn't have those frequencies then you get nothing.

In my opinion, the 'next gen' morph would have spectral matching and pitch tracking. Then you'd have a killer morphing process.

Simon plays nicely with MMorph


However
First times I've heard a morphing sound, was truly impressed. Moroder and Bellote firstly did the trick 1977/78? in a song I don't quite remember now. Next example, a human voice "morphs" into a saxophone, done by Barry Leng (1979).


Notably, listen to min 4:31 when the lead voice sings a continuous high note until an overlapping tenor saxophone taking over 4 seconds later at 4:34, by playing the same sustained note during 6 more seconds while both (saxo and voice) sound almost the same in tone color/timbre terms (Spectrally) and also in pitch, so the perceived sound remains unchanged until 4:40, where it resolves into additional higher notes this time by the similar but slightly different tone of the saxophone.
Brilliant transition, of course, because the Mrs Steward tessitura could not reach up there.

///It would be nice to have an easy to access transition length setting with selectable variable curves, if its not already there.