New Melodyne (Check This Out!)

I think NL5 posted about this awhile ago...my opinion of it is pretty much the same...

Amazing technology but I personally don't like the idea of it...

One of the cool things though...is being able to use another WAV file (say, of a guitar chord) and using that as a sample/sound on a MIDI keyboard.
 
I would like to know what kind of processing it uses to exctract the notes. Also I would´t be that sure about the pristine audio quality of the changed notes.

They should make another part that could change syllebles, and then you just say Fu** into microphone and you have the whole song.
 
"i began to realize that what doesn't work in theory can still work in reality..."

really???

I use melodyne, it's nice for vocalists that aren't very good, however i feel slightly unethical about it. . .
 
melodyne

If you think about it, even just playing an instrument is "cheating". The human hand doesnt come with strings. We invented things so that emotion can be conveyed through chords etc. 12 note scale could be considered a raping of the rainbow of pitch variations that exist in "reality" as well. So saying this is cheating really is just a reaction based on fear of change.

If i had a brilliant creative mind, and an amazing ear for composition, but an out of tune upright piano, how is it "cheating" for me to use this program? Purists of any kind are insane. I do not envy the man who sees the ability to make his dreams a reality as "cheating". I respect great playing, but great playing is a distant second to great imagination. Besides, there will always be the times you will prefer natural imperfections. This program isnt so you dont have to know how to play, its so you can salvage moments of inspired performance with some control over the pitch. This makes recording more artistic. You will still have to use your imagination.

PS New music sucks at the inspiration and songwriting level, far before pitch comes into play. (MOST new music)
 
If you think about it, even just playing an instrument is "cheating". The human hand doesnt come with strings. We invented things so that emotion can be conveyed through chords etc. 12 note scale could be considered a raping of the rainbow of pitch variations that exist in "reality" as well. So saying this is cheating really is just a reaction based on fear of change.

If i had a brilliant creative mind, and an amazing ear for composition, but an out of tune upright piano, how is it "cheating" for me to use this program? Purists of any kind are insane. I do not envy the man who sees the ability to make his dreams a reality as "cheating". I respect great playing, but great playing is a distant second to great imagination. Besides, there will always be the times you will prefer natural imperfections. This program isnt so you dont have to know how to play, its so you can salvage moments of inspired performance with some control over the pitch. This makes recording more artistic. You will still have to use your imagination.

PS New music sucks at the inspiration and songwriting level, far before pitch comes into play. (MOST new music)

Kudos. I like your response!
 
Yeah, THIS is why most bands out there now sound like SHIT live....

wrong.

the reason they sound shite is because they are shite.

it wouldnt matter if someone pitch corrected them in the studio or not.

irrelevant.

that being said, i think the only drawback to pitch correction is an addiction to perfect pitch.

do you really think that the singers of the 70s were in tune, ALL the time?

listen again.
 
If i had a brilliant creative mind, and an amazing ear for composition, but an out of tune upright piano, how is it "cheating" for me to use this program?
You mean other than the fact that it's cheaper and will provide far better results to just have the damn thing tuned?

No real musician in their right mind would ever use an inferior, defective or out-of-tune instrument for recording purposes unless they were purposely going for such an effect.

You are throwing up kind of a false analogy there anyway; we're not talking about defective instruments, we're talking about defective performers, or more to the point, God-awful performers.
Purists of any kind are insane.
Wow, That's pretty large.
I do not envy the man who sees the ability to make his dreams a reality as "cheating".
I do not envy the man (or woman) who is willing to cut every corner they can try to make their dreams a reality by simply phoning it in and letting some computer program actually do all the work for them.

If one has the dream of being a great musician or even performer and works their ass off for it, that's wonderful. If one has the dream of pretending to be a great musician or performer by just kicking it easy and expecting a bunch of programming code give them the illusion of greatness, that's pathetic.
This program isnt so you dont have to know how to play, its so you can salvage moments of inspired performance with some control over the pitch.
If used that way, fine. Though it's amazing how the world has managed to get through almost a full century of recording just fine without it, without sacrificing quality or imagination.

But let's be realistic here. For the average person to say that they bought Melodyne for salvaging otherwise lightning-in-a-bottle takes is very much like Iran saying they are building their nuclear reactors with the purpose of supplying electricity to their country. Sure, that's what the reactors can be and are best used for, and Iran might even hook up a couple of transmission lines once they are built. But only someone with an IQ equal to the average indoor temperature where they live would believe that is the actual main reason they are building them.

In the real world, not the world of the ideal that exists on the far side of the imagination, 90% of the use for Melodyne and Autotune is to try and make non-performers into performers. This just has an intrinsic wrongness to it on about nine different levels.
PS New music sucks at the inspiration and songwriting level, far before pitch comes into play. (MOST new music)
P.P.S. People have been complaining that "new music sucks" since the says of Plato. Mozart played the devil's music. So did Ellington. So did Presley. Now that's all considered classic and holy.

G.
 
wrong.

the reason they sound shite is because they are shite.

it wouldnt matter if someone pitch corrected them in the studio or not.

irrelevant.

that being said, i think the only drawback to pitch correction is an addiction to perfect pitch.

do you really think that the singers of the 70s were in tune, ALL the time?

listen again.


does this imply singers started to be pitch corrected in the 80`s? or was it later?
 
does this imply singers started to be pitch corrected in the 80`s? or was it later?

I am not sure completely

but i have heard that some producers used synth pitch bends to alter singer's intonation from time to time. This would make sense in the 80s

then again, i ALSO heard that tape was manipulated for pitch, but i have a feeling that if this even existed, it was quite rare.
 
wrong.

the reason they sound shite is because they are shite.

it wouldnt matter if someone pitch corrected them in the studio or not.

irrelevant.

that being said, i think the only drawback to pitch correction is an addiction to perfect pitch.

do you really think that the singers of the 70s were in tune, ALL the time?

listen again.
You just said the same thing I did, only more wordy. I should have explained my post a bit, but I didn't.

So now I will explain myself... most bands sound like shit because the record companies don't want to spend the money for the studio time required to make a decent album. Since most of the bands out there are just a formula anyway, it doesn't matter that they are shite. The AE gets paid to polish the holy living shit out of that turd, throw it through a compressor until it's lifeless, then burned to CD so we the foolish public can buy it. That and a thousand other reasons are why they sound like shit live. But you are right, they started out shite.

I never claimed that music made before was any better. And you are right about the addiction to perfect pitch.

As far as the statement you made that I put in bold, no. But I know that they were alloted enough time to get their performance the best that they can, not told that it was good enough, we can 'fix it in the mix' with melodyne later....
 
You just said the same thing I did, only more wordy. I should have explained my post a bit, but I didn't.

So now I will explain myself... most bands sound like shit because the record companies don't want to spend the money for the studio time required to make a decent album. Since most of the bands out there are just a formula anyway, it doesn't matter that they are shite. The AE gets paid to polish the holy living shit out of that turd, throw it through a compressor until it's lifeless, then burned to CD so we the foolish public can buy it. That and a thousand other reasons are why they sound like shit live. But you are right, they started out shite.

I never claimed that music made before was any better. And you are right about the addiction to perfect pitch.

As far as the statement you made that I put in bold, no. But I know that they were alloted enough time to get their performance the best that they can, not told that it was good enough, we can 'fix it in the mix' with melodyne later....

ahh ok, sorry for the misunderstanding.

:)
 
Back
Top