M. Wagener’s and other’s opinions about “varispeed” or “multitempo” tracks

[darkwater]

Originally Posted by blueman

Hi Killahurts.

Thanks for your comments.

The way you do it is very similar to the way I do it. In fact, I think my way is a bit more accurate (in the way to obtain the tempo that I’ve played “free” or “live”). I begin, like you, recording a “natural” take with a guitar and voice. I don’t have a band to do it, so I have to overdub everything, like you. If I would have a band, I wouldn’t have this problem, cause we would play live all together.

I realize that my fist post in this thread is maybe too heavy to read , but if you dare , you will find that what I’m saying is very similar to your way. One of the things overlooked along the thread is that I don’t have a band to do the real live thing (if I’m lucky, I’ll pay for a drummer and, if I still have money, for a bassist), so I have to do everything overdubbing while trying to achieve the most “natural” “servicing to the song” tempo dynamics.

I've gotta say that Killahurtz method seems a lot easier. Sure would like to know how to tap out a tempo map performance in Logic and record it. I'm SURE it exists, but that damned manual is my NEMESIS. It has gotten better since Apple, but .....DAMN Logic is a b^tch.

[Killahurts]

Originally Posted by blueman

I realize that my fist post in this thread is maybe too heavy to read , but if you dare , you will find that what I’m saying is very similar to your way.

Hi Blueman,

Actually, I had read your first post before I posted. You're right, our methods are similar, but the result is still different. You use the audio "guide" track to create an average tempo for each of the different parts of the song. Then you do whatever it takes to smooth out the curve between tempo changes. Understood. But you've still synthesized a tempo map based on averages for each part. The song is still partially serving the click. Still, it's better at getting the emotion across than just a single tempo, because it's based on a real performance. And it might be the best option, depending on the song.

What I mentioned takes the idea a step further, and makes the click/grid 100% dependent on the song. There's no averaging or smoothing. The tempo is slightly different between every beat.

If I record a song without a click, whether it's a band or just one instrument, I usually go ahead and tap in the tempo map, if for no other reason than to make it easier to get around on the sequencer - when I use the "go to" command, I don't like typing in timecode, I would rather use measures.

So no worries mate, we have so many ways of achieving the same goals, and they're all good as long as they work, right?

I was just throwing an alternative out there.

Why would you record the song to a grid when you could record a grid to the song?

[blueman]

Hi Killahurts.

I can see you really read my post. My apologies.

In the end, we're doing the same, but different ways. I can see that your way is faster.

Anyway, I do the thing in a way that there's no averages. I haven't said it, but after all I play the "free" take together with the click track to check that they go together, and the results use to be amazing.

The shame for me is that, in PT, if you push the tap button, the playback stops, so I can't do it your way. But with the information from you and other posts in this thread, I'll keep thinking and I'm sure I'll find a way to improve it.

Thank you very much, Killahurts.