Oh, OK. We are hearing the same thing. It does alter the sound immediately. My point was that it usually stems from improper detection creating the need for tiny edits. You are correct, definitely alters the sound (until detection is corrected).

Regardless of any subtle dulling - IMO (as in the original thread) Melodyne DNA is now (years later) miles ahead of Autotune - that thing has a terrible sound and I've had far, far better results with Melodyne when I recently got a chance to compare the two (I already prefered Waves to Autotune from past experience). The rest of the Autotune package including the throat modeling software (especially) also sounds rubbish to me (YMMVetc), wheras Melodyne DNA for subtle corrections is amazing.

In my opinion Melodyne DNA is amazing for subtle corrections, radical corrections, inventing new melodies in new, exciting and creative ways, and everything in between. It's just an awesome tool end of story.

Actually, I agree with that - but that's more serious sound mangling - the last few posts are about subtlety, but I loved seeing my bass player's face last week when he came back and I'd tightened up and changed quite a few of his notes along with the song and he couldn't get his head round what had happened

Wait a minute! Is Melodyne DNA better sounding than Melodyne Plugin?
Then I will take a listen to it but the Melodyne plugin is totally useless for Lead pitch correction. Very nice for creative stuff though when soundquality doesn´t matter.

Latest Editor version DNA as a plug or as stand alone (they are the exact same thing as far as algorithm) leaves Autotune standing. This isn't a preference thing.... it's simple fact. Try it is all.

Hi people

I had another thread and just noticed this one and I have a relevant question. I hope you can help.

I have AutoTune EFX (3 settings) and also have Vari-Audio (on Cubase) which is a great feature, somewhat melodyne like.

I am considering getting either AutoTune Evo or Melodyne (not sure which version). Can you please let me know if

1. It's worth getting either
2. Which one of the two would compliment what I have

I am looking for SPEED, less CPU usage (I use a Mac Pro), more a real sound when pitched and added features that would do alot more to vocal shaping etc.

An example of Vari-Audio+AutoTune EFX can be found at

YouTube - KAYA: Can't Get You Out of My Mind.
, an artist that I produced. Thank you very much!

This is the kind of choice I was thinking of. Don't know about Cubase (I'm on Logic 8 - haven't upgraded to 9 with latest features because I like to lag until I'm ready), but for me - and whilst it's a personal opinion, I find it difficult to understand how anyone comparing the latest versions of each could come to any opinion other than Melodyne is what you wanted and Autotune is what you thought you might get - it is, for once, night and day - as always YMMVETCETCBIDIT

Autotune Evo Sounds MUCH better,

Melodyne have cool features, but the sound is no so good.

Now Evo do not catch great the first notes of Phrases (Graphicly...so hard to edit them) ....Melodyne does that better...


Again, overall ..Evo sounds MUCH better! and is very simple...even in Graphic mode.

Fair enough.... I'm just amazed. Graphical mode is the only way to compare, surely? I respect your view, I'm just totally amazed, unless there is some variation in platforms, or unless you are going for he 'hard tuned' sound. I could not bring myself to advocate to anyone making a purchase to go for Autotune over Melodyne; but that is simply my, very highly differentiated, preference. The more I think about sound, the more I have to realise that preference comes in and that one mans big plank of wood is obviously somebody else's tissue and only demoing can decide - and luckily this can be done No offence mate

I agree - but although it occasionally gets confused, I've never had the issue you mention there.

Melodyne for speed no doubt.

I personally think a well done vocal in AT beats melodyne, purely because the tone is unaltered (and I'm really not buying the "tweak it, it'll get rid of the dulling aspect!" issues).

Part of the danger with melodyne is that it is almost TOO easy to grid every note semi-transparently - so people do it. I don't know many people who use melodyne just to fix the notes that need it, and leave the rest alone.

I am sort of flabbergasted by all these claims that Autotune is superior to Melodyne. To me, they aren't even comparable--Melodyne is on a completely different level. I think they might be comparable as far as the sound quality, but the features that Melodyne offers is above and beyond anything that Autotune could ever dream of. Perhaps those complaining about the sound quality are engaged in really dry, organic recordings. But for what I do (pop/rock records), the vocals get so processed that it isn't ever a noticeable issue.

I didn't check all the dates of these posts, but my only guess is that this is an old thread and many of these posts must be outdated because Melodyne's latest version is an amazing, indispensable audio editing tool. It isn't just for pitch correcting vocals. It has a polyphonic mode that can fix the unthinkable. Just the other day I pitch corrected a single note that went slightly out of tune on a certain chord on a finger picking guitar track. It was easy, way quicker than retracking, and completely transparent. I suppose if money is no object, you might as well purchase both. But for most of us, money matters, and I think Melodyne offers a much bigger bang for your buck.

Hi

Would you suggest the DNA version or plugin? Is there a huge differece and what is better on a value/price ratio?

Thanks,

I have Melodyne Editor which has DNA ("direct note access" for polyphonic material). It is a plugin as well as a standalone application. You can compare the different products at this site celemony_ :: Product Comparison

If you don't think you'll ever have the need to edit polyphonic material, you can probably get by with the "essential" (the free one that comes bundled with Pro Tools), or "assistant" (you can use with any DAW as well as save and export your audio as midi information which is a really cool feature for sampling).

Hi
The assistant sounds a little like Vari-Audio
Cubase: Pitch Perfect with VariAudio

I am curious to know how actually the application works itself.
With vari-audio., i double click the Audio file, then click Vari-audio, which breaks up the audio into the note block/grid type thing. Then I just pitch away.

If it's Melodyne, would it act as a plugin and would there be a new audio file created etc. Is Melodyne very quick in terms of usage and productivity or is there downtime in processing etc etc?

Thanks

Also, is the Melodyne Studio a good investment? Is it worth the extra 300?

I don't know if Studio is worth the investment since I only use Editor and have not tried studio. I think the only additional function that I would personally benefit from with the studio version is the ability to convert to midi within the plugin. As it is now, I have to use the standalone version to convert audio to midi, which is slightly inconvenient, but not worth the three hundred extra bucks for me to upgrade for that one function.

Here are some videos to see the workflow. It is very similar to working with midi. I find it fast and easy to use (but I use midi a lot so I'm familiar working in that capacity). There is hardly any downtime with processing. celemony_ :: Videos

you can use melodyne in PT. just open it as a plug in. I chose Melodyne over Autotune, DNA technology did it for me

OK, I tried the Melodyne Editor DNA version and still it´s dulling ( is that a english word...) the hi-end Totally useless for Lead editing.
Removing harmonics from the voice. So, learn how to use Auto Tune graphic mode instead guys.

Hey! I use Melodyne and it's really handy to use but it bothers me to record all the tracks in Melodyne first and switch every single track to "transfer" and choosing a track. Then after editing I have to import everything back.


Are Autotune and Waves better to get work done quickly??

Maybe it WOULD be better to read the whole thread before posting, much of what you write has been said before....

Yes, we're all aware of DNA mode - it was all over here a year and a bit ago when it was first announced - and yes it's a totally amazing concept, if needing a little development to make it into the product everyone wants it to be (I've experimented with it, and whilst I think it's useable in a mix situation, too much processing and it gets a bit weird sounding).

My issue with Melodyne is just the tone destruction on the top end - we spend all this time getting great vocal sounds and then process it and remove half of it! even in modern rock (and pop is much worse of course) - I'm really not that impressed with the richness of some of the vocal sounds, and I'm sure melodyne is partly to blame. It IS possible to get a modern sounding vocal that isn't choked (not saying yours are...but lots are)!

I'll repeat what I said earlier - Melodyne is definitely easier to use, quicker, and capable of some amazing things. AT is sonically more transparent, better (IMO) for the uses it was designed for (ie fixing the odd note in an otherwise great performance) and personally I prefer it for fixing up a lead vocal. But that's just it - preference. I don't think you're wrong (although try bypassing it and seeing the sound difference in the top end - you might be surprised).

Exactly..the trick is only to touch the notes tat are really bad...not all of them!h

I agree completely.

Well I've noticed the "phasiness" or whatever it is that Melodyne sometimes seems to impart on the signal too, though to my memory I don't recall noticing it on the unaffected transferred audio prior to any pitch alterations. Anyway, reading through this thread inspired me to perform the gold standard Gearslutz disagreement settler, the infamous null test.

Here's what I did:

1. Duplicate track
2. Insert Melodyne plugin on one track
3. Transfer a segment of audio
4. Insert Trim plugin on one of the tracks and invert the polarity

I did this a few times, and each time, the signals nulled completely. To my ears, and to the spectrum analyzer.

I also re-did the test by simply inverting the audio and having Melodyne analyze that inverted audio, and got the same result.

The only perhaps unusual aspect of my test is that it was on female spoken voice, as I'm working on voiceovers at the moment and was too lazy to close the session and open a new one. Still, if Melodyne is mangling the audio, it should be doing so to all types of audio without discretion, right?

Did I miss anything? Any flaws in the test that I'm overlooking?

*I will say this. For what it's worth, I've read elsewhere on the internets that the non-plugin version of Melodyne defaults to importing audio at 16-bit, and that you have to manually switch it to 24-bit if you so desire. Perhaps that could somehow be responsible for any sound weirdness you've heard? Because a successful run through the old null test suggests that any other sonic issues are the result of heavy-handed/sloppy/lazy tuning practices, which I'm sure we've all been guilty of at one time or another.

good vocal take + autotunethumbsup

im not liking melodyne at all, spoting back into pro tools isnt perfect... it adds latency (which i am aware may be something to do with delay compensation being on,but cant be bothered to investigate) when spotting back. i have to manually shift it into place... i dont like what it sounds like coming out of melodyne either... for fixing notes its great as a fast manual editor... but id prefer to get the singer to do his/her job and sing the song to the best of their ability instead of reaching for the lazy option. it makes them a better singer at the end of the day.

i cant see anyone worth their salt as a singer needing melodyne. i may be a tad spoil as the singers i work with are talented and patient and also pursue a good vocal take instead of relying on the editor to fix in the mix.

i think getting audio in and out of melodyne is its biggest down fall.

i am running Melodyne Studio 3.2.2.2

I've been recording the worse singers I know lately (amateurs) and while trying to save time I noticed that:

Melodyne is a lot more user friendly for manual/graphical fix IMO rather than EVO.

But for real time autotune seems the best tool so far being it Evo or not.

I just had my first serious round with melodyne. I think it does a much better job than autotune of easily correcting pitch with less artificats. However, it absolutely destroys the tone of your track. Not only is there severe high end loss, a digital sheen is placed over the track that is virtually unusable except in a dense modernp pop mix with 87 vocal tracks and 4028 synths. I'm not talking about corrected pitch, etc. I'm simply talking about inserting melodyne onto a channel.

I just wanted to add a mention for waves tune, the pitch shift quality is wonderful and so is the fake vibrato, as well as being crazy easy to use!

no times stretch though... but until version 7 neither did autotune!

This is an old thread, but thought I'd chime in. I have Melodyne Studio or whatever the 8 track stand-alone flagship is called. I LOVE the interface, do NOT love the sound. It's the exact opposite with AutoTune 7 EVO. I find the graphical interface a bit tedious, but much prefer the sound.

As someone said above, it would be nice to have a tuning feature built right into the Waveform view of Pro Tools that functioned like Melodyne but sounded like AT.

In the mean time, for demos and quick tuning, I use Melodyne because I can blast through a vocal in (almost) real time and I don't mind exporting and importing. For final vocals I'll spend the time drawing lines in AT graphical mode.

I need to find a good AutoTune EVO tutorial to get a deeper handle on it.