Melodyne DNA

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by Blackback Drop

I used Mel Editor today, did it crash? NOPE!!!

Seems like they fixed everything, improved the sound and made the workflow faster/easy, the scub feature is fab.

The Polymode blew me away. I thought, NOWAY is this gonna work but it did.

Chasing when zoomed in isn't working right or at all

[author]

Originally Posted by Blackback Drop

improved the sound

I think you're the first to say that. Improved how?

[tonecontroller]

Something to be aware of - I am in the middle of a project where I tried to get the editor to load some sessions in progress I'd used the previous plug in on. This version changes the sound significantly, I even printed it and did a null test and they are not even close! I wouldn't like to say which is better for working on new material yet but I really didn't like how DNA changed the sound of existing sessions. I've gone back to the old version until I can get everything printed for mixing.

[xist]

Originally Posted by author

I think you're the first to say that. Improved how?

It's in the official press release: "... with their totally new technical infrastructure, both the plug-in and stand-alone implementations of Melodyne editor boast numerous improvements over previous editions of Melodyne, including ... in the note detection process and sound quality, and much else besides."

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by tonecontroller

Something to be aware of - I am in the middle of a project where I tried to get the editor to load some sessions in progress I'd used the previous plug in on. This version changes the sound significantly, I even printed it and did a null test and they are not even close! I wouldn't like to say which is better for working on new material yet but I really didn't like how DNA changed the sound of existing sessions. I've gone back to the old version until I can get everything printed for mixing.

It sounds SO MUCH BETTER to me now. That slight synthetic android haze is gone.

But this shows how sound perception is subjective, I guess.

- c

[hipass]

I tried it is usuable ...
and it sounds like $hit

[author]

Originally Posted by tonecontroller

Something to be aware of - I am in the middle of a project where I tried to get the editor to load some sessions in progress I'd used the previous plug in on. This version changes the sound significantly, I even printed it and did a null test and they are not even close! I wouldn't like to say which is better for working on new material yet but I really didn't like how DNA changed the sound of existing sessions. I've gone back to the old version until I can get everything printed for mixing.

But you can use both versions without problems?

EDIT: That's strange... I just saw this on Celemony's website:

ricstudioc wrote:
As I understand it, installing the editor will overwrite my existing plugin - gone, goodbye, sayonara - correct?

Claudio wrote:
Yes, this is correct.

[Ty Ford]

Granted this was not pushing the envelope because the bad guitar note was almost in the clear, but .....

I just uploaded a before and after tracks to my server so you can what a one note push sounds like in the stand alone version.

I'll try to screw up worse in the near future, not that I'll have to try that heard, to see if I can make Melodyne sweat.

MobileMe - iDisk

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Ty Ford]

OK, a more serious screw up this time. Check out the Oops! files

There are three bass notes ringing out under my three note screw up. I separated the section in PTLE, exported it, imported it into Melodyne, slid the three top notes up a fret, saved it, exported it, imported it into PTLE and plopped it back in the track.

Slicker than snake shit on a door knob!

MobileMe - iDisk

Regards,

Ty Ford

[ButchP]

Did anyone download the demo version of editor?.I did and it is whack all over the place buggy.It works.... then it doesn't.Many of the functions when it "does" work uhhh don't work..is it just me??

BP

[l.sicilian]

Just giving some feedback; I tested it and I am not very impressed personally. That's just me though. I tried on brass and strings.

Does it work for you?

[ButchP]

Originally Posted by l.sicilian

Just giving some feedback; I tested it and I am not very impressed personally. That's just me though. I tried on brass and strings.

Does it work for you?

If that question was for me. the answer is YES it works.I JUMPED THE GUN( as usual) The demo version only allows ten seconds if its exceeded it "doesn't work until my puter was rebooted.

There are also functions like resizeing the window,cycling, moving the playhead that don't work in the demo (at least for me!!).

Over all from what little I've been able to do I think its great.I tried it on some rendered Apple loops of pedal steel and fiddle and it did just what I hoped it would do!!I'm definitely going to get it ASAP.

BP

[BarbieDoll]

Celemony Melodyne Editor Test: Melodyne Blew Me Away - Audiofanzine

Here is one review I found...

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by l.sicilian

Just giving some feedback; I tested it and I am not very impressed personally. That's just me though. I tried on brass and strings.

Was this with the full version? Specifically, what about it did not impress you?

I was pretty impressed by my last test in the polyphonic mode on acoustic guitar.

I also see additional uses of the MIDI export. I'm working on a production now in which I have exported the MIDI from a finger-picked acoustic guitar part to "play" a string section and other instruments.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[l.sicilian]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Was this with the full version? Specifically, what about it did not impress you?

No, it's with the demo. Shouldn't make any difference in the algorithm? I tried strings ensembles and brass sections, to my ears it just doesn't sound right/work.

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by l.sicilian

No, it's with the demo. Shouldn't make any difference in the algorithm? I tried strings ensembles and brass sections, to my ears it just doesn't sound right/work.

Earlier in the thread, someone was complaining about the demo version. I don't know if there is a difference.

I'm just guessing here, but I'm sure there are limitations to the polyphonic capability.

I'm pretty amazed by what I can get it to do so far.

[Jenz]

Originally Posted by World Studios

I wanna hear reports on this as well. I know many who never noticed this problem. To really hear it, you should melodyne just a short section of say a verse vocal with some audio unprocessed before and after. Even if you don't even tune or fix the section, you can hear how the section that went thru melodyne sounds worse. Duller. But it is not as simple as a loss of treble. My way of describing it is that it sounds like you used a lesser mic for that take. Not a huge difference, but for us chasing the extra ten percent, surely a bummer. Auto Tune Tdm does not have this problem

Exactly!! I've been chocked that so few actually notice this. I'd describe it as the difference between wav and mp3. Not what you want if you're using a $10k vocal chain! Hint: the Autotune RTAS (ever since version 4) sounds better (sounds the same, but handles the pitch better) than TDM. On the EVO version, TDM will sound different every time you play back the same piece (this was the case with both RTAS and TDM on version 4 and 5). EVO RTAS is the most correct one to date.

[Gemylon]

Originally Posted by World Studios
I wanna hear reports on this as well. I know many who never noticed this problem. To really hear it, you should melodyne just a short section of say a verse vocal with some audio unprocessed before and after. Even if you don't even tune or fix the section, you can hear how the section that went thru melodyne sounds worse. Duller. But it is not as simple as a loss of treble. My way of describing it is that it sounds like you used a lesser mic for that take. Not a huge difference, but for us chasing the extra ten percent, surely a bummer. Auto Tune Tdm does not have this problem

Exactly!!... I'd describe it as the difference between wav and mp3. Not what you want if you're using a $10k vocal chain!...

I'm curious to know what Celemony got to say...


G

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Gemylon

I'm curious to know what Celemony got to say...


G

Dunno, but I'm not hearing degradation here. Perhaps under certain circumstances, but what are they? Could this be operator error? That's a possibility with a new piece of software.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Ricey]

right now i'm in the middle of tuning the G string on a rhythm guitar track. it's a bit of work, but i am so stoked to be able to do this and had to share back to work...

[errorspending]

This program is the best thing to happen to sampling since the fairlight

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by errorspending

This program is the best thing to happen to sampling since the fairlight

I know, right?!?

It's a life-changing thing for sure!

I'm doing really crazy stuff with it.

- c

[zboy2854]

What kind of stuff are you guys doing with it that can't be done with anything else?

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by zboy2854

What kind of stuff are you guys doing with it that can't be done with anything else?

You can reach "inside" a piece of music and draw out notes and bend them to your compositional will.

So you can adapt a sample to wrap around the contours of your existing musical context.

I kinda don't want to get myself in trouble. But hypothetically, this would mean you could grab the gorgeous opening string section of Etta James' "At Last" and... contort it harmonically, transforming it to be nearly unrecognizable. Then you could use those tones in new and creative ways within the context of your own music.

...Not that I would ever do that, of course...

'Cause that would be wrong.

So wrong.



- c

[Thomas Johansen]

I've used it for tuning string quartets and a live recording where two singers ( both out of tune) decided to share one mic for most of the song...


---

Thomas Johansen Record Producer