Auto Tune v.s. Waves Tune

[macleodgrant]

Originally Posted by T. Gundersen

I have both AT Evo and Melodyne plug-in, but I never got Melodyne plug-in to work right. There's always little timing issues with it for me, using it in Logic. I have a few colleagues who are having the same problems with it but also know people that haven't noticed anything.

yes, i've experienced the timing things - i THINK this has to do with tempo automation in a song. just capturing those sections in between the automation has helped

also, when i recently had the timing i checked if there was an update and after going to the latest all was fine...much more stable

[T. Gundersen]

I'm sorry to say it haven't done the trick for me yet. I don't even use tempo automation (well, rarely, but not together with Melodyne yet). Melodyne support haven't been able to resolve it yet as well. I guess it'll work at some point but I'm pretty bummed to have bought it as of right now.

[Reggmail]

Macleodgrant: has a point, when I bought mine back in the day the CPU's was just incorporating ''Hyper Threading Technology'' on the P-4's PC.
Now we have the more powerful CPU's with the Core 2 Duo's and the Quad's as well as the i7 chips that can handle two and three programs running along with plugins simultaneously with no problem.
Although I keep my updates current it dose run smother but mine Melodyne cre8 still suffers minor cracks &pops associated with latency issues.

As I mentioned before that Auto Tune works fine, I just prefer the ''Roland V-Vocal in Sonar 8'' that's Bundled in the Sonar program as a plugin, (Part of the same program) so it runs flawlessly, it's also easer to use and have more features / adjustability. It's the best of both worlds like ''Waves Tune'' Same features and NO iLock required and Auto Tune and Melodyne combined.
Peace & blessings.

[Stepping_Stone]

I know I'm chiming in a bit late here, but I thought I would throw in my two cents worth anyway. I've used both Auto Tune and Waves Tune, and I definitely prefer the sound and tweakability of Waves Tune. The interface is much more user-friendly IMO, and the results just seem more natural to me. That being said, there are a couple of bugs with Tune that really irk me...the major one being that it doesn't support tempo changes in Pro Tools. If you have tempo changes in your song, the timeline in the Tune window gets out of sync with the Pro Tools timeline. You can usually still do what you need to do, but it makes it a bit of a pain when navigating. The other issue I have is that Waves Tune doesn't seem to get along with URS Console Strip Pro, or vice versa. I always get R6025 errors when I close Pro Tools after using Tune, even if URS CSP isn't instantiated in the session...it just being in the plug-in folder is enough. Of course, that's probably because URS has some of the worst housekeeping from any software company I've ever dealt with. Seems like they never update their plugs, which I expect if something was free or cheap...but I payed $500 for it!

[phillysoulman]

If you MUST use it,then Waves Tune wins,hands down...but ONLY if you're not tone deaf.
Sadly,99% of rappers are tone deaf...but not my main man,TONE DEF who spits with that dj,.MIX MASTER BATES

[benrawles]

Originally Posted by coyotekells

macleod, great insights man!!

Tune: my number one qualm is I can't figure out how to leave parts of the vocal UNAFFECTED! I often prefer to only tune/edit the parts of the performance I can hear errors in.. the rest I leave exactly as it was (assuming I'm working with a good singer).

How the **** do you do this without moving those parts to another track all together?


AutoTune: AT will remain a staple in every studio, no matter what they mix with, because you will get clients that NEED AT at tracking stage. You can be a purist all you want, but the reality is that some hit record makers (and lots of non-hit record makers) need to track their bad singing through AT. I want to give the client whatever makes them comfortable, and if they need to hear the tuned vocal in their headphones to get vibing, then I want to give it to them. I'm really not concerned with "vocal skills" as much as someone who can just make a great record. I've heard singers who's skill was amazing, but it didn't make them special on the track.. something with a more interesting voice, better vibe, and lots of AT (not T-pain, just no more flat notes)

Melodyne is super cool, but I've never used it extensively.. only when I had a surgical project I couldn't fix with anything else..

If you're tracking mostly, choose AT -- it will work for more situations.

If you're just editing/mixing, then Tune and/or Melodyne will serve better.


Btw, why do people thing AT sucks so bad? I think it's lack of knowing how to operate it correctly mixed with bad singing. If you have a singer who's good and just hit a few notes that could've been more on point, AT smooths everything out without ever touching graphical mode or doing anything fancy with the knobs. and if u need to really change things, the graphical mode seems to be sufficient... or maybe i'm the inexperienced one?

I have to agree with you on that. AT seems to get alot of bad press, but I find it the best of the bunch (haven't tried Waves yet). Melodyne is great, as you say for surgical work, when something specific is wrong, and needs to be dealt with neatly, but I notice far more artifacts in Melodyne than in Autotune when it's configured properly.

It sucks that we can't have the best of both worlds, a program with the tracking of AT Evo (evo is considerably better in my opinion for tracking, and ease of use), and the graphic abilities of Melodyne. Maybe that's what Waves were trying to achieve, but didn't consider the ease of use quite as much as they ought to have.

[AcoosticZoo]

Okay, In the past I've said Auto-Tune EVO is awesome terms of ease of use and musical results (when used effectively), however, I've just completed a mix where a singer couldn't pitch correctly and was all over the place.


In this instance, waves tune (lite) really excels in nudging the bad performance into shape with less "Autotuned" effect and sounded more natural. Thus, Waves Tune (lite) really excels in this instance.

If you prefer a less/more natural tuned production, then waves tune is definate a winner (when the performance is far from perfect).

Note: I couldn't get autotune to correct the notes without sounding "autotuned". However, waves tune (lite) does a far better job.

I'm a big fan of autotune evo, however, I'm glad that I have wave tune (lite) to save the day, when autotune isn't working and when I need absolute natural pitch correction.

Waves Tune (lite) beats AutoTune EVO hands down ie. when severe pitch correction is required.


Regards
Josef Horhay
Mixing Engineer
www.acoosticzoo.com

[Retrofreak]

Prefer Waves Tune tbh

[Storyville]

When transparency is the goal, I prefer waves tune on vocals, and auto-tune on instruments.

edit: although, I don't appreciate that waves tune does not extend to the full range of low bass vocalist or a coloratura soprano.

[butterfly]

edit: although, I don't appreciate that waves tune does not extend to the full range of low bass vocalist or a coloratura soprano.

.....................surely not much call for that.................unless your tuning a performance of The magic Flute

[Storyville]

Originally Posted by butterfly

.....................surely not much call for that.................unless your tuning a performance of The magic Flute

Or unless you track operatic work, young vocalists who like to show off, certain jazz vocalists, a cappella groups, doo wop inspired music, show tunes (especially 50s and 60s stuff)... no not much use at all.

In the last year I've only been pissed about it 2 or 3 times. Couple more whole steps wouldn't have killed them....

[AcoosticZoo]

Just to put things into perspective, Even though Wave-Tune is more transparent when compared to Auto-Evo - when correcting at extreme levels, I must clarify that both results aren't of release level when required to pitch correct severely. However, if you're after that T-Pain EFFECT then Wave-Tune won't do it and Autotune EVO will.

In my experience, nothing can fix a singer's really bad notes, thus they must do some homework and come back to re-track another time if possible.

So in practical terms, EVO and Waves-Tune are pretty much neck and Neck given that waves-tune doesn't have as much "tuned" artifacts but can't really save severely off notes where as Evo can save real bad notes but in doing so creates that Cool/Uncool T-pain effect. As a result both tools aren't transparent enough to pass when there's a really bad performance. Therefore, vocal pitch correction isn't magic bullet that cures all singing woes.

Regards
Josef Horhay
Mixing Engineer
www.acoosticzoo.com

[ten21studio]

Originally Posted by Keyflo

Hey which is better, I seen the vids with Waves tune and Auto tune, And i think Waves tune takes the cake.......Wut do u guys think

Neither!

I own Autotune, Waves Tune and Melodyne

and by far the best for monophonic tuning is

Digital Performer's pitch automation layer!

Why?

Cos it's not a plugin
So you don't have to run in the audio
It's automatically there on any track
To commit it to real audio you just merge (create new sound bite / "consolidate" PTs equivalent) the track
It's really transparent
But Best of all...... it's free with the software!

Don't believe me?

Check out my video for "Intonational Rescue"

YouTube - Intonational Rescue Vocal Tuning.mov

Regards

Sean Kenny

Intonational Rescue - Professional Vocal Tuning Online, Vocal Editors
Ten21 Recording Studio | Near London | Maidstone | Kent | UK

[logichead]

Well, I watched the video, I think I was viewer number 1.

The DP pitch tool looks pretty good interface wise. Hard to tell how it sounded because the vocal always had delays and verbs going, even when soloed. Hard to judge transparency when the vocal is awash in fx. I will say the tuned vocal sounded duller and less interesting to my ear over my computer speakers. This may be due to the way DP handles formant correction. One of the things I like about Tune is the ability to turn formant correction off.

The tuning was quick, so it was missing much of the subtlety I prefer, slower attack of the tuning for example. I'm sure DP is capable of it.

Overall, if you are a DP user, it's free, nothing wrong with that. But I don't think anyone will change DAWs to use it. And DP users would still be wise to consider Waves, Melodyne, and AT Evo.

The reality is, all of these are valid. I use Waves Tune mostly, AT occasionally, and Melodyne seldom, but that could change at any time.

Best...H

[ten21studio]

Originally Posted by logichead

Well, I watched the video, I think I was viewer number 1.

The DP pitch tool looks pretty good interface wise. Hard to tell how it sounded because the vocal always had delays and verbs going, even when soloed. Hard to judge transparency when the vocal is awash in fx. I will say the tuned vocal sounded duller and less interesting to my ear over my computer speakers. This may be due to the way DP handles formant correction. One of the things I like about Tune is the ability to turn formant correction off.

The tuning was quick, so it was missing much of the subtlety I prefer, slower attack of the tuning for example. I'm sure DP is capable of it.

Overall, if you are a DP user, it's free, nothing wrong with that. But I don't think anyone will change DAWs to use it. And DP users would still be wise to consider Waves, Melodyne, and AT Evo.

The reality is, all of these are valid. I use Waves Tune mostly, AT occasionally, and Melodyne seldom, but that could change at any time.

Best...H

Hi H

Nice one, yes you were number one, only just posted it.
DP is as transparent as Waves and in IMHO better than Melodyne/AT
Sorry for the FX that's for the potential clients.
As for attack this isn't a plug so if you want a more gradual pitch variation you just draw it in.

I agree you wouldn't buy DP on the strength of it but if you were considering it, it may help you make your mind up.

Regards

Sean Kenny

Ten21 Recording Studio | Near London | Maidstone | Kent | UK

[AcoosticZoo]

Originally Posted by logichead

Well, I watched the video, I think I was viewer number 1.

The DP pitch tool looks pretty good interface wise. Hard to tell how it sounded because the vocal always had delays and verbs going, even when soloed. Hard to judge transparency when the vocal is awash in fx. I will say the tuned vocal sounded duller and less interesting to my ear over my computer speakers. This may be due to the way DP handles formant correction. One of the things I like about Tune is the ability to turn formant correction off.

The tuning was quick, so it was missing much of the subtlety I prefer, slower attack of the tuning for example. I'm sure DP is capable of it.

Overall, if you are a DP user, it's free, nothing wrong with that. But I don't think anyone will change DAWs to use it. And DP users would still be wise to consider Waves, Melodyne, and AT Evo.

The reality is, all of these are valid. I use Waves Tune mostly, AT occasionally, and Melodyne seldom, but that could change at any time.

Best...H

DP looks great Are you going to be doing a autotune vs waves vs DP example? Be very interesting to see how DP stacks up against the other two.

[Storyville]

Originally Posted by AcoosticZoo

Just to put things into perspective, Even though Wave-Tune is more transparent when compared to Auto-Evo - when correcting at extreme levels, I must clarify that both results aren't of release level when required to pitch correct severely. However, if you're after that T-Pain EFFECT then Wave-Tune won't do it and Autotune EVO will.

In my experience, nothing can fix a singer's really bad notes, thus they must do some homework and come back to re-track another time if possible.

So in practical terms, EVO and Waves-Tune are pretty much neck and Neck given that waves-tune doesn't have as much "tuned" artifacts but can't really save severely off notes where as Evo can save real bad notes but in doing so creates that Cool/Uncool T-pain effect. As a result both tools aren't transparent enough to pass when there's a really bad performance. Therefore, vocal pitch correction isn't magic bullet that cures all singing woes.

Regards
Josef Horhay
Mixing Engineer
www.acoosticzoo.com

This is only half true. As someone who does ALOT of tuning work I'll concede that neither is transparent. Waves tune is significantly more transparent - and if you use it carefully, and in combination with pitch shifting, time stretching, and surgical editing you can do some pretty impressive stuff.

Let me put it this way - I did some major tuning to a song a couple of days ago. Lead vocals and four part harmony - almost every note was off. There's only a few places where the tune can really be heard. On top of that, the lead vocalist had a place where he choked on the letter "L" ending a word. He didn't have a word ending in "L" properly anywhere else in the song - so i was able to grab an L from one of the background vocalists, eq it, pitch shift, and volume match it, then cross fade it and make it seem like it belonged. I actually didn't think it was going to work when I first set out.

Point being is that you can do some serious magic bullet work when you have to. But it's EXTREMELY tedious.

Moral of the story - some jobs are best charged by the hour. Oh yeah, and Waves Tune is great. Auto-tune would have sounded all sorts of screwy.

[AcoosticZoo]

Originally Posted by Storyville

This is only half true. As someone who does ALOT of tuning work I'll concede that neither is transparent. Waves tune is significantly more transparent - and if you use it carefully, and in combination with pitch shifting, time stretching, and surgical editing you can do some pretty impressive stuff.

Let me put it this way - I did some major tuning to a song a couple of days ago. Lead vocals and four part harmony - almost every note was off. There's only a few places where the tune can really be heard. On top of that, the lead vocalist had a place where he choked on the letter "L" ending a word. He didn't have a word ending in "L" properly anywhere else in the song - so i was able to grab an L from one of the background vocalists, eq it, pitch shift, and volume match it, then cross fade it and make it seem like it belonged. I actually didn't think it was going to work when I first set out.

Point being is that you can do some serious magic bullet work when you have to. But it's EXTREMELY tedious.

Moral of the story - some jobs are best charged by the hour. Oh yeah, and Waves Tune is great. Auto-tune would have sounded all sorts of screwy.

Cool, would you like to post an example of b4 and after?

[Gdupproductions]

Auto-Tune!?

Omg!.... that aint hip hop at all.And if you want a sound like that in your vocals then Atleast buy a Moog or a synthesizer wich is based on moog keyboards + a banshee talkbox ( i remember that you can use the banshee talkbox + your mic with a Vsti to get that 80,s-90,s talkbox) have to google it....i mean cmon Who df is T pain compared to Roger troutman and he,s brothers ?

[OneWerd]

Originally Posted by phillysoulman

If you MUST use it,then Waves Tune wins,hands down...but ONLY if you're not tone deaf.
Sadly,99% of rappers are tone deaf...but not my main man,TONE DEF who spits with that dj,.MIX MASTER BATES

Didn't Mixmaster do a collab with Stickfingaz?

[Mushroomagical]

I do freelance sound design and editing in Scandinavia, and I use both Waves Tune and Antares Auto-Tune. I frequently use Waves Tune for quick fixes of background vocals, especially if I am in a time-crunch and the singers are relatively 'in the ballpark' (the Waves GUI is great). For lead vocals, however, I tend to use Auto-Tune. Why? Because I can achieve a more natural sound with Auto-Tune. I have done many comparisons with the exact same vocal tracks, and I can always get good results with Auto-Tune. I find that with Waves Tune at certain points the sound is a bit tinny, that same sound that you get when you cut out selected partials in the overtone series. Formant correction in Auto Tune is a bit better. It's very subtle indeed, but noticeable to the trained ear. In any case, both programs are great, and the Waves GUI is spectacular. The graphic mode in Auto-Tune is, however, getting better, and the latest release is definitely easier to handle.

Mushroomagical's recommendation: if you are doing high-end professional jobs where you absolutely must have a very natural vocal sound, I'd go with Auto-Tune. If you are doing electronica or some style where you are coloring the vocals with other effects, you might check out Waves for the the easy-to-use GUI. With Waves Tune, you can get working right away even if you've never used the program. With Auto-Tune, you might need to put in a bit more time, but the results are stellar (the majority of pop vocals you are hearing on the radio have been corrected with Auto-Tune).

I am very curious about Melodyne -- never tried it -- perhaps I'll check out a demo if one is available.

[rickrock305]

Autotune has really made some great improvements lately. Graphical mode is way less clunky now, easier and faster to use. And sounds better than earlier versions. That said, I'm a melodyne guy. But I wouldn't hesitate to use either one. I'll have to check out Waves Tune. Ive never used it.

[RyanC]

To me you kinda half to have both (AT + WT or AT + Melo).

AT in manual is still king for me in terms of being able to take a vocal performance that really always was very good, and make it great. For me this is almost always a matter of making them sing for tone, telling them about the scouping and the going sharp when they belt, AT'ing. Let them hear, re-sing, re-AT etc, until they are really starting to kill it tone AND pitch wise. And then taking the final take and making some very slight corrections.

Waves tune and melodyne wont pin it on the note like AT will, and both do something to the high end that I don't like (especially for bright pop vocals). Also neither really understands scooping and dipping or give you the control to say "that isn't supposed to be a note". That said for somebody that's scoops like Bob Dylan and swears up and down they sound better singing in their shower, they will both (melo or WT) make drastic fixes better then AT will IME.

AT in auto mode running live is great for songwriters who cant sing, don't laugh some of these cats get placements.

And Waves tune in midi to pitch mode has easily made me more money, and more clients for life then any other plugin bar none. Let some rapper hit the booth with his horrible sung hook, hit that button and play something better then he ever dreamed of with his vocals on the keys and it's a done deal. And nothing like a talkbox (I have several). Talkboxes are great, but they never sound like the original vocalist and in the studio you have to deal with the whole "let me try" thing, which is gross. I'm not trying to swap spit with these guys.

That's my 2c. . .

[bonusbmusic]

[jrockx3]

Originally Posted by sevendaysoff

I'll give you guys a freebie from my bag of tricks.

When tuning, roll off the high-end around 1k . Tune your passage, when you're done deactivate the filter.

thank me later

ohh and melodyne kills all of em.

and if you can only get the T-Pain "effect" when using auto-tune. Read the manual and start moving knobs.. LIKE THE RETUNE SPEED (duh)

Quick Question for your, when tuning, roll off the high-end around 1k trick.
I thought Melodyne in plug in mode after you transfer the audio plays back the audio not your DAW so I am just trying to figure out how I can roll off the high end around 1K, tune it and then bypass the filter so the 1K comes back if melodyne is playing back the audio with the filter applied?

BTW I agree Melodyne kills em all. But both Waves Tune and Auto tune are strong tools as well, just depends on what you are working on.

[Mikey MTC]

Originally Posted by jrockx3

Quick Question for your, when tuning, roll off the high-end around 1k trick.
I thought Melodyne in plug in mode after you transfer the audio plays back the audio not your DAW so I am just trying to figure out how I can roll off the high end around 1K, tune it and then bypass the filter so the 1K comes back if melodyne is playing back the audio with the filter applied?

You're right - you can't filter in front of Melodyne because you will "print" that filtered signal. The pre-EQ trick only works with Waves Tune and Auto-Tune (in pitch mode). The new Auto-Tune 7 in pitch & time mode works like Melodyne in that it records the data to a file so you can't pre-filter.

[rickrock305]

That's one thing I really don't like about Melodyne. I like to be able to edit the track I'm tuning without having to recapture it.

[jrockx3]

Originally Posted by Mikey MTC

You're right - you can't filter in front of Melodyne because you will "print" that filtered signal. The pre-EQ trick only works with Waves Tune and Auto-Tune (in pitch mode). The new Auto-Tune 7 in pitch & time mode works like Melodyne in that it records the data to a file so you can't pre-filter.

Thanks Mikey...thought I was missing something. I will try it out in Waves Tune and Auto Tune 6 (I haven't upgraded to 7 yet). Sounds like a cool trick.. thanks for the clarification on using with Melodyne.