One can of course get very interesting samples from files stretched to the extreme.Īs for pitch-shifting, we’ll be transposing up and down a whole-step (2 half-steps), a fourth (5 half-steps), and an octave (12 half-steps). We won’t be taking into consideration time stretch applied in a “sound design” context, which is not the purpose of this comparison. Note, that because almost every program has its own system (BPM, tempo percentage, length, frames, etc.), certain values will be slightly different.įrom time to time, there’s an “extreme” setting like 400%, which will show the capabilities of these apps to produce useful results as tools(for transcribing a complex work for example), even if it won’t be used musically or in a mix. Here are the values applied to the length of the original files for the time-stretch section: 75%, 90%, 110%, 133%, 200%, rounded up to the nearest decimal point. Or the reverb and slides on the acoustic guitar sample. In short, it consists of simple and complex audio examples: the Gabriel mix, for example, has many elements that could potentially pose problems (the voice, sustained brass, the slightly open high hat, transients, different formants, etc.). Whew! To test the capabilities of this bunch, six audio files will be used: a bass line, a drum loop with reverb (from Groovemasters Rhythm Essence), an acoustic guitar with reverb, strings, a vocal melody and a whole mix (a song from Peter Gabriel’s album So). Here’s the list of the software that was tested: Two notable absentees that do however meet the two prerequisites are Audiosculpt and Speed by SoundToys. That therefore excludes Antares Auto-Tune, Intonator HS from TC-Helicon or Yamaha’s Pitch Fix, which only modify or correct pitch, and software like ReCycle! which uses the Rex format, or requiring special formats (such as Soundtrack Pro whose pitch functions are only available on Apple Loops), or various plug-ins included in sequencers. And plus there has to be limits, or at least very simple “prerequisites”, so: the software, whether sequencer, virtual instrument or plug-in should have both time-stretch and pitch shift capabilities. It’s difficult to be truly exhaustive in such a test. So let’s take a look at the software that’ll be used for this comparison. But maybe it would be better to take a look at this Wikipedia article to learn some of the basics, and it also has some very well-chosen links that can give further information on both technologies. Certain programs allow you to work on formants separately via independent or automatic adjustments. As for pitch shift, it has to, of course, maintain the same tempo (sometimes also referred to as Frequency Shift), while avoiding audio artifacts, and the chipmunk effect or the “voice from beyond the grave”. Some technologies include: phase vocoder, time domain harmonic scaling, sinusoidal/spectral modeling, granular re-synthesis, additive re-synthesis, neural networks, the wavelet transform, and so on. On top of that, it must preserve phase, transients, placement, stereo, etc. Time stretch and pitch-shift are two good examples: how is it possible to change pitch to such an extant without getting a horrible sound? Whatever technology is used, it often consists of just filling in holes and spaces, which requires extremely precise interpolation calculation, in the case of Time stretch, and harmonic and formant alteration in the case of pitch-shift. We sometimes get so used to the changes and/or new features offered by digital audio that we tend to become jaded and don’t realize the incredible possibilities that digital audio offers. The first can speed up or slow down an audio file without changing its pitch, the second change its pitch without changing its tempo (otherwise, it’s back to tapes and vari-speed …). We’ll be dealing with two important features that have more or less created a revolution in music since their arrival with the earliest samplers: time-stretching and pitch-shifting. Is this good or bad? Everyone has their own opinion but certain features have been improved, some totally new ones have emerged, while others are less effective or successful (knowing that many opinions are primarily subjective).īut the goal here is not to make (empty) comparisons between the two worlds. The competitors: 26 Mac and PC programs, from big sequencers to small applications, plug-ins to audio editorsĭigital audio has brought about many changes to the audio world when compared to analog. OK, here we go! This is the first of our comparative software tests on time-stretching and pitch-shifting.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |