[Industrial One]

So I got this track that's been remixed into a trance version. I
prefer it over the gay unmelodical original except the voice which has
been pitched up to infinity and is extremely annoying. I want to
transpose the voice down a couple octaves but only on the vocal parts
of the track, 'cuz then the SONG is gonna be trash. The problem is, if
I tranpose one part of the song by -4 semitones then it will sound
unnatural when it reaches the point where the transposition ends and
it's back to 0 semitones. I wanna know if I can do an "adaptive"
transposition where it gradually decreases the transposition upon
reaching the end, kinda like how a FadeIn/FadeOut or crescendo
operation works, only my interest is the pitch, not the volume.

[gareth magennis]

"Industrial One" wrote in message
...
So I got this track that's been remixed into a trance version. I
prefer it over the gay unmelodical original except the voice which has
been pitched up to infinity and is extremely annoying. I want to
transpose the voice down a couple octaves but only on the vocal parts
of the track, 'cuz then the SONG is gonna be trash. The problem is, if
I tranpose one part of the song by -4 semitones then it will sound
unnatural when it reaches the point where the transposition ends and
it's back to 0 semitones. I wanna know if I can do an "adaptive"
transposition where it gradually decreases the transposition upon
reaching the end, kinda like how a FadeIn/FadeOut or crescendo
operation works, only my interest is the pitch, not the volume.



Won't that sound a bit "gay"?




Gareth.

[jamesgangnc]

"Industrial One" wrote in message
...
So I got this track that's been remixed into a trance version. I
prefer it over the gay unmelodical original except the voice which has
been pitched up to infinity and is extremely annoying. I want to
transpose the voice down a couple octaves but only on the vocal parts
of the track, 'cuz then the SONG is gonna be trash. The problem is, if
I tranpose one part of the song by -4 semitones then it will sound
unnatural when it reaches the point where the transposition ends and
it's back to 0 semitones. I wanna know if I can do an "adaptive"
transposition where it gradually decreases the transposition upon
reaching the end, kinda like how a FadeIn/FadeOut or crescendo
operation works, only my interest is the pitch, not the volume.

Have you got the original recording tracks? Or is this another one of your
ideas that you want to perform on a stereo release of the music?

[[email protected]]

On Aug 15, 8:20*pm, Industrial One wrote:
So I got this track that's been remixed into a trance version. I
prefer it over the gay unmelodical original except the voice which has
been pitched up to infinity and is extremely annoying. I want to
transpose the voice down a couple octaves but only on the vocal parts
of the track, 'cuz then the SONG is gonna be trash. The problem is, if
I tranpose one part of the song by -4 semitones then it will sound
unnatural when it reaches the point where the transposition ends and
it's back to 0 semitones. I wanna know if I can do an "adaptive"
transposition where it gradually decreases the transposition upon
reaching the end, kinda like how a FadeIn/FadeOut or crescendo
operation works, only my interest is the pitch, not the volume.

Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.

[Richard Crowley]

"jamesgangnc" wrote...
Have you got the original recording tracks? Or is this another one of
your ideas that you want to perform on a stereo release of the music?

"Industrial One" is an IP pirate and troll by his own admission
in these forums. Best to plonk him rather than aiding abetting
his further illegal behavior.

[gareth magennis]

wrote in message
...
On Aug 15, 8:20 pm, Industrial One wrote:
So I got this track that's been remixed into a trance version. I
prefer it over the gay unmelodical original except the voice which has
been pitched up to infinity and is extremely annoying. I want to
transpose the voice down a couple octaves but only on the vocal parts
of the track, 'cuz then the SONG is gonna be trash. The problem is, if
I tranpose one part of the song by -4 semitones then it will sound
unnatural when it reaches the point where the transposition ends and
it's back to 0 semitones. I wanna know if I can do an "adaptive"
transposition where it gradually decreases the transposition upon
reaching the end, kinda like how a FadeIn/FadeOut or crescendo
operation works, only my interest is the pitch, not the volume.

Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.




Yes, I believe there is a "Mince-Away" plugin that works quite well. Good
reports too on the Waves' "De-Whoopsie" tool.


Gareth.

[Industrial One[_2_]]

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 09:11:40 -0700, Richard Crowley wrote:


"Industrial One" is an IP pirate and troll by his own admission
in these forums. Best to plonk him rather than aiding abetting
his further illegal behavior.

Ur a butt pirate and a penis eater

[Industrial One]

On Aug 16, 7:52 am, "jamesgangnc" wrote:
Have you got the original recording tracks? Or is this another one of your
ideas that you want to perform on a stereo release of the music?

Yeah I do, and I got no idea what you're talkin about next. I just
wanna make the remixed version sound more tolerable by fixing the
****in annoying high-pitched voice that DJ XTC cranked for some
reason.

On Aug 16, 10:11 am, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Industrial One" is an IP pirate and troll by his own admission
in these forums. Best to plonk him rather than aiding abetting
his further illegal behavior.

I think Inudstrial_one@yahoo likes you, Assclowney. Why not ask him on
a date?

On Aug 16, 7:55 am, wrote:
Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.

Aight, I'll check 'em out. What's the precise protocol I'm lookin for?

[[email protected]]

On Aug 17, 12:12*am, Industrial One
wrote:
On Aug 16, 7:52 am, "jamesgangnc" wrote:

Have you got the original recording tracks? *Or is this another
one of your
ideas that you want to perform on a stereo release of the music?

Yeah I do, and I got no idea what you're talkin about next. I just
wanna make the remixed version sound more tolerable by fixing the
****in annoying high-pitched voice that DJ XTC cranked for some
reason.

You should ask the DJ which software he used to mix tracks.

On Aug 16, 10:11 am, "Richard Crowley" wrote:

"Industrial One" is an IP pirate and troll by his own admission
in these forums. Best to plonk him rather than aiding abetting
his further illegal behavior.



On Aug 16, 7:55 am, wrote:

Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.

Aight, I'll check 'em out. What's the precise protocol I'm lookin
for?

Which software do you have? The demo downloads
can't do it. It depends on which full version you have.
What platform is supporting it? What plug-ins do you
have available?

[Industrial One]

On Aug 17, 6:48 am, wrote:
You should ask the DJ which software he used to mix tracks.

His contact ID is outdated, plus whatever software he used, he never
did any adaptive transpose, he just transposed the chords/vocals from
the song by a couple semitones and replaced the other staffs with
sawtooth/polysynth notes to make it sound more Industrial-ish. Since I
only got the finalized MP3, there's no way I could seperate the vocals
from the other staffs in order for a tranpose to not affect the music
in addition to the voice. Hence, I need to do an adaptive transpose so
the change would be gradual and not so obvious.

On Aug 16, 7:55 am, wrote:

Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.

Aight, I'll check 'em out. What's the precise protocol I'm lookin
for?

Which software do you have? The demo downloads
can't do it. It depends on which full version you have.
What platform is supporting it? What plug-ins do you
have available?

I use Nero, Audacity and Sound Forge. On Windows XP SP2 and only have
DirectX plugins ATM.

I looked up ProTools and its hardware specifications confuse the ****
outta me, but I'm able to decipher that my current hardware doesn't
support it, and I can't be ****ed to waste hours looking for hacks to
get around the limitations. I found Nuendo*3*, would you recommend
that one?

****, isn't there a simple script I can use in a hex editor to modify
the waveform? All I want is sample #2941 transposed by -4 semitones,
sample #2942 by -3.999, #2943 by -3.998 until 6941 where it is now
back to normal.

Get what I'm sayin?

[[email protected]]

On Aug 17, 12:42*pm, Industrial One
wrote:
On Aug 17, 6:48 am, wrote:

*You should ask the DJ which software he used to mix tracks.

His contact ID is outdated, plus whatever software he used, he never
did any adaptive transpose, he just transposed the chords/vocals from
the song by a couple semitones and replaced the other staffs with
sawtooth/polysynth notes to make it sound more Industrial-ish. Since I
only got the finalized MP3, there's no way I could seperate the vocals
from the other staffs in order for a tranpose to not affect the music
in addition to the voice. Hence, I need to do an adaptive transpose so
the change would be gradual and not so obvious.

* On Aug 16, 7:55 am, wrote:

* Are you using ProTools or Nuendo 4?
* Each has it's own protocol to un-gay a mix.

* Aight, I'll check 'em out. What's the precise protocol I'm lookin
for?

Which software do you have? The demo downloads
can't do it. It depends on which full version you have.
What platform is supporting it? What plug-ins do you
have available?

I use Nero, Audacity and Sound Forge. On Windows XP SP2 and only have
DirectX plugins ATM.

I looked up ProTools and its hardware specifications confuse the ****
outta me, but I'm able to decipher that my current hardware doesn't
support it, and I can't be ****ed to waste hours looking for hacks to
get around the limitations. I found Nuendo*3*, would you recommend
that one?

****, isn't there a simple script I can use in a hex editor to modify
the waveform? All I want is sample #2941 transposed by -4 semitones,
sample #2942 by -3.999, #2943 by -3.998 until 6941 where it is now
back to normal.

Get what I'm sayin?

Nuendo 3 is a legacy product, couldn't tell you if the plug-in
would work. I don't understand why you would think that
lowering the vocal by two whole notes would make it less
gay.

[[email protected]]

On Aug 17, 12:42 pm, Industrial One
wrote:
****, isn't there a simple script I can use in a hex editor to modify
the waveform? All I want is sample #2941 transposed by -4 semitones,
sample #2942 by -3.999, #2943 by -3.998 until 6941 where it is now
back to normal.

Samples don't have any frequency ( sample CAN'T have
a frequency). What's the frequency of a sample whose
value is 21389? Or -8912? So exactly what's to transpose
in each sample? One can assume you want to keep
the amplitude the same, so whatever you do in your
"sample transposition, you'll start with 21389 or -8912
and end with, uhm, 21389 and -8912.

Get what I'm sayin?

We do indeed, and it won't work.

Pitch-shifting software, done right, is not a trivial
excercise, and a "hex editor" approach is about
as close to a DOA of an approach as ANY APPROACH
for solving ANY software or signal processing problem
I have ever encountered in the last 35 years.

Then again, you say it's an MP3, and there a good
chance that either the MP3 compression or the
actual piece of music itself is a sifficiently worthless
piece of crap that ANY method will work.

[Industrial One]

On Aug 17, 1:21 pm, wrote:
Nuendo 3 is a legacy product, couldn't tell you if the plug-in
would work. I don't understand why you would think that
lowering the vocal by two whole notes would make it less
gay.

The remix is trippy, the ORIGINAL was fagtastic. The new voice is just
annoying cuz of the high pitch, but other than that, the song's aight.

On Aug 17, 1:26 pm, wrote:
Samples don't have any frequency ( sample CAN'T have
a frequency). What's the frequency of a sample whose
value is 21389? Or -8912? So exactly what's to transpose
in each sample? One can assume you want to keep
the amplitude the same, so whatever you do in your
"sample transposition, you'll start with 21389 or -8912
and end with, uhm, 21389 and -8912.

Ok then, I want samples #2000-2050 transposed by -4, 2051-2100 by
-3.95. If 50 is still too short then 100, still too short? Make it
200, I don't care. I just want the transpose effect to abate at a
certain point where I want the proceeding audio to be at its normal
pitch. Not to suddenly change from -4 semitones to 0 when it reaches
that point.

Get what I'm sayin?

We do indeed, and it won't work.

Pitch-shifting software, done right, is not a trivial
excercise, and a "hex editor" approach is about
as close to a DOA of an approach as ANY APPROACH
for solving ANY software or signal processing problem
I have ever encountered in the last 35 years.

K, to hell with a hex editor then. What do you suggest?

Then again, you say it's an MP3, and there a good
chance that either the MP3 compression or the
actual piece of music itself is a sifficiently worthless
piece of crap that ANY method will work.

I know. But the bitrate is really high (256) so I doubt it would be
too much of a problem.

[[email protected]]

On Aug 18, 2:57 am, Industrial One wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:21 pm, wrote:

Nuendo 3 is a legacy product, couldn't tell you if the plug-in
would work. I don't understand why you would think that
lowering the vocal by two whole notes would make it less
gay.

The remix is trippy, the ORIGINAL was fagtastic. The new voice is just
annoying cuz of the high pitch, but other than that, the song's aight.

On Aug 17, 1:26 pm, wrote:

Samples don't have any frequency ( sample CAN'T have
a frequency). What's the frequency of a sample whose
value is 21389? Or -8912? So exactly what's to transpose
in each sample? One can assume you want to keep
the amplitude the same, so whatever you do in your
"sample transposition, you'll start with 21389 or -8912
and end with, uhm, 21389 and -8912.

Ok then, I want samples #2000-2050 transposed by -4, 2051-2100 by
-3.95. If 50 is still too short then 100, still too short? Make it
200, I don't care.

Well, you might not, but the physics does. Assume
the original sample rate was 44.1 kHz. 50 samples
has no appreciable repetive frequencies below about
900 Hz. 100 samples, nothing below around 440 Hz,
200 samples: nil below 220 or so Hz. That's just the
way it is.

I just want the transpose effect to abate at a
Get what I'm sayin?

We do indeed, and it won't work.

Pitch-shifting software, done right, is not a trivial
excercise, and a "hex editor" approach is about
as close to a DOA of an approach as ANY APPROACH
for solving ANY software or signal processing problem
I have ever encountered in the last 35 years.

OK, to hell with a hex editor then. What do you suggest?

Getting and paying for the right tool to do it. You want
a varispeed resampler of some sort.

[Industrial One]

On Aug 18, 6:39 am, wrote:
Ok then, I want samples #2000-2050 transposed by -4, 2051-2100 by
-3.95. If 50 is still too short then 100, still too short? Make it
200, I don't care.

Well, you might not, but the physics does. Assume
the original sample rate was 44.1 kHz. 50 samples
has no appreciable repetive frequencies below about
900 Hz. 100 samples, nothing below around 440 Hz,
200 samples: nil below 220 or so Hz. That's just the
way it is.

I don't follow. What are you saying? That the audio will sound choppy?
if 50, 100 or 200 samples won't work, then how many will?

I just want the transpose effect to abate at a
Get what I'm sayin?

We do indeed, and it won't work.

So you're saying this is impossible:

http://www.zshare.net/download/17359033de1f242e/

?

OK, to hell with a hex editor then. What do you suggest?

Getting and paying for the right tool to do it. You want
a varispeed resampler of some sort.

Like what? *sigh* I'm gonna have to build my own script. Basically,
transposing works by resampling and then stretching the audio to the
original length, right? What I need to do is gradually decrease the
amount of semitones to pitch-shift the audio by on samples of a
specified length. What length do you suggest?

[[email protected]]

On Aug 20, 5:05 pm, Industrial One wrote:
On Aug 18, 6:39 am, wrote:

Ok then, I want samples #2000-2050 transposed by -4, 2051-2100 by
-3.95. If 50 is still too short then 100, still too short? Make it
200, I don't care.

Well, you might not, but the physics does. Assume
the original sample rate was 44.1 kHz. 50 samples
has no appreciable repetive frequencies below about
900 Hz. 100 samples, nothing below around 440 Hz,
200 samples: nil below 220 or so Hz. That's just the
way it is.

I don't follow. What are you saying? That the audio will
sound choppy?

No, I'm not. not in the least.

I am simply summarizing the classic time-frequency
uncertainty principle. Audio that's short does not have
low frequency in it, simple as that. 50 samples is only
1.13 milliseconds long. Quick, tell us how much 100
Hz information can fit into 1.13 milliseconds.

if 50, 100 or 200 samples won't work,
then how many will?

Given your method, nothing will.

I just want the transpose effect to abate at a
Get what I'm sayin?

We do indeed, and it won't work.

So you're saying this is impossible:

No, I am saying YOUR method is impossible..

OK, to hell with a hex editor then. What do you suggest?

Getting and paying for the right tool to do it. You want
a varispeed resampler of some sort.

Like what? *sigh* I'm gonna have to build my own script. Basically,
transposing works by resampling and then stretching the audio to the
original length, right?

Wrong, it does not work that way at all.

Pitch shifting works by identifying (through some pretty
sophisticated analysis), redundant wave forms and then
selectively as needed. Then it's resampled.

Yeah, it sounds really simple, but it's not something
you're going to accomplish with a "script" of some sort.
The resampling alone is NOT a trivial excercise. PROPER
resampling requires a significant amount of fairly high
horsepower signal processing.

What I need to do is gradually decrease the
amount of semitones to pitch-shift the audio by on samples of a
specified length. What length do you suggest?

You keep basing your questions on a method which
is not going to work, so we're not going to bother to
thry to answer them.

Go find a copy of MATLAB with the DSP add-on. Figure
how it works. Then do it.

If you can't be bothered, instead of trying to get someone
to show you how to do this for free (no on will), put out
the request for someone to do it for you for an appropriate
fee.

But, please, before you embarass yourself even further,
if that's possible, give up the notion that you're going
to design some magic script to do this on your own. This
is not a file operation, it's a pretty sophisticated DSP
operation.

Do you have DSP expertise? If you hesitate for even the
teeniest fraction of a second, the asnwer is not.

[Industrial One]

On Aug 20, 3:20 pm, wrote:
No, I'm not. not in the least.

I am simply summarizing the classic time-frequency
uncertainty principle. Audio that's short does not have
low frequency in it, simple as that. 50 samples is only
1.13 milliseconds long. Quick, tell us how much 100
Hz information can fit into 1.13 milliseconds.

Oh **** me, I wasn't thinking. The loops are a certain length and
terminate when truncated, right right.

if 50, 100 or 200 samples won't work,
then how many will?

Given your method, nothing will.

I just tested this with Sound Forge (never realized it had support for
scripts/batch processing) and the result sounded like ****.

No, I am saying YOUR method is impossible..

I realize now.

Like what? *sigh* I'm gonna have to build my own script. Basically,
transposing works by resampling and then stretching the audio to the
original length, right?

Wrong, it does not work that way at all.

Pitch shifting works by identifying (through some pretty
sophisticated analysis), redundant wave forms and then
selectively as needed. Then it's resampled.

Yeah, it sounds really simple, but it's not something
you're going to accomplish with a "script" of some sort.
The resampling alone is NOT a trivial excercise. PROPER
resampling requires a significant amount of fairly high
horsepower signal processing.

What I need to do is gradually decrease the
amount of semitones to pitch-shift the audio by on samples of a
specified length. What length do you suggest?

You keep basing your questions on a method which
is not going to work, so we're not going to bother to
thry to answer them.

Go find a copy of MATLAB with the DSP add-on. Figure
how it works. Then do it.

If you can't be bothered, instead of trying to get someone
to show you how to do this for free (no on will), put out
the request for someone to do it for you for an appropriate
fee.

But, please, before you embarass yourself even further,
if that's possible, give up the notion that you're going
to design some magic script to do this on your own. This
is not a file operation, it's a pretty sophisticated DSP
operation.

Do you have DSP expertise? If you hesitate for even the
teeniest fraction of a second, the asnwer is not.

Hey, hey now, you're one of the more intelligent posters around here,
don't go out your way to make an ass outta yourself.

I got a friend who has MATLAB, I'll be seeking a copy. 'Later and
thanks for the tips.

[Industrial One]

All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.

[gareth magennis]

"Industrial One" wrote in message
...
All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.


You should have spent the money on some counselling instead.

[Industrial One]

On Aug 28, 7:58 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.

You should have spent the money on some counselling instead.

You're tweakin on some poor-ass peanut butter crank if you think I'd
pay $100 just to accomplish a simple 2-second operation once or twice.

[Gareth Magennis]

"Industrial One" wrote in message
...
On Aug 28, 7:58 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.

You should have spent the money on some counselling instead.

You're tweakin on some poor-ass peanut butter crank if you think I'd
pay $100 just to accomplish a simple 2-second operation once or twice.



What is your obsession with Penises and Male Anus'?

[Industrial One]

On Aug 28, 11:44 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

On Aug 28, 7:58 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.

You should have spent the money on some counselling instead.

You're tweakin on some poor-ass peanut butter crank if you think I'd
pay $100 just to accomplish a simple 2-second operation once or twice.

What is your obsession with Penises and Male Anus'?

Not too bright (or straight), are ya mang?

Peanut-butter crank

1. Poorly cooked and bad quality methampetamine.
2. The affordable **** uneducated trailer trash peeps buy for a buzz.

You must've been thinkin about literal peanut butter, the **** you and
your boyfriend probably use for lube. Those are your obsessive
thoughts, man, not mine.

[gareth magennis]

"Industrial One" wrote in message
...
On Aug 28, 11:44 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

On Aug 28, 7:58 am, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
"Industrial One" wrote in message

...

All right, I got MATLAB, give me the DSP plugin.

You should have spent the money on some counselling instead.

You're tweakin on some poor-ass peanut butter crank if you think I'd
pay $100 just to accomplish a simple 2-second operation once or twice.

What is your obsession with Penises and Male Anus'?

Not too bright (or straight), are ya mang?

Peanut-butter crank

1. Poorly cooked and bad quality methampetamine.
2. The affordable **** uneducated trailer trash peeps buy for a buzz.

You must've been thinkin about literal peanut butter, the **** you and
your boyfriend probably use for lube. Those are your obsessive
thoughts, man, not mine.



Well now you've explained what you mean by "Peanut Butter crank", what is
your obsession with Penises and Male Anus'?



Gareth.



Gareth.