Antares still the best autotune?

[Carey Carlan]

Need a DirectX plugin or hardware that won't empty the bank account.

I've never been really happy with the artifacts that Antares generates. Is
there a better alternative in the few-hundred-dollar range?

I saw the review of the new TC Helicon VoiceOne in Pro Audio Review, but
$1300 is a bit much for a tool I may use for a few hours a year.

[Ty Ford]

In Article >,
(Tom Hartman) wrote:
>Carey Carlan > wrote in message
>...
>> Need a DirectX plugin or hardware that won't empty the bank account.
>>
>> I've never been really happy with the artifacts that Antares generates. Is
>> there a better alternative in the few-hundred-dollar range?
>>
>> I saw the review of the new TC Helicon VoiceOne in Pro Audio Review, but
>> $1300 is a bit much for a tool I may use for a few hours a year.
>
>
>The latest version of Autotune is great. They really fixed the
>problems with weird clicks, pops, and crackles that were making it
>almost unusable. The fidelity even sounds better. Accept no
>substitutes. ;)
>I think it's 3.25, on the Mac anyway.


It works miracles. My only complaint, so far, is that while trying to
correct a vocal track in a take which an acoustic guitar was recorded on
another track, I heard delay (latency) in the guitar when I Auto-tuned just
the vocal track. In order to eliminate it, I had to activate Auto-tune in
the guitar track and by pass it.


Regards,

Ty Ford

**Until the worm goes away, I have put "not" in front of my email address.
Please remove it if you want to email me directly.
For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Ty Ford]

In Article >,
(Tom Hartman) wrote:
>Carey Carlan > wrote in message
>...
>> Need a DirectX plugin or hardware that won't empty the bank account.
>>
>> I've never been really happy with the artifacts that Antares generates. Is
>> there a better alternative in the few-hundred-dollar range?
>>
>> I saw the review of the new TC Helicon VoiceOne in Pro Audio Review, but
>> $1300 is a bit much for a tool I may use for a few hours a year.
>
>
>The latest version of Autotune is great. They really fixed the
>problems with weird clicks, pops, and crackles that were making it
>almost unusable. The fidelity even sounds better. Accept no
>substitutes. ;)
>I think it's 3.25, on the Mac anyway.


It works miracles. My only complaint, so far, is that while trying to
correct a vocal track in a take which an acoustic guitar was recorded on
another track, I heard delay (latency) in the guitar when I Auto-tuned just
the vocal track. In order to eliminate it, I had to activate Auto-tune in
the guitar track and by pass it.


Regards,

Ty Ford

**Until the worm goes away, I have put "not" in front of my email address.
Please remove it if you want to email me directly.
For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Tom Hartman]

Carey Carlan > wrote in message >...
> Need a DirectX plugin or hardware that won't empty the bank account.
>
> I've never been really happy with the artifacts that Antares generates. Is
> there a better alternative in the few-hundred-dollar range?
>
> I saw the review of the new TC Helicon VoiceOne in Pro Audio Review, but
> $1300 is a bit much for a tool I may use for a few hours a year.


The latest version of Autotune is great. They really fixed the
problems with weird clicks, pops, and crackles that were making it
almost unusable. The fidelity even sounds better. Accept no
substitutes. ;)
I think it's 3.25, on the Mac anyway.

[Tom Hartman]

Carey Carlan > wrote in message >...
> Need a DirectX plugin or hardware that won't empty the bank account.
>
> I've never been really happy with the artifacts that Antares generates. Is
> there a better alternative in the few-hundred-dollar range?
>
> I saw the review of the new TC Helicon VoiceOne in Pro Audio Review, but
> $1300 is a bit much for a tool I may use for a few hours a year.


The latest version of Autotune is great. They really fixed the
problems with weird clicks, pops, and crackles that were making it
almost unusable. The fidelity even sounds better. Accept no
substitutes. ;)
I think it's 3.25, on the Mac anyway.

[am]

Try this:
http://www.rbcaudio.com/html/vt_pro.html

Plenty of folk regard Voice Tweaker Pro as being better than Autotune.

[am]

Try this:
http://www.rbcaudio.com/html/vt_pro.html

Plenty of folk regard Voice Tweaker Pro as being better than Autotune.

[Monte P McGuire]

In article >,
Ty Ford > wrote:
>It works miracles. My only complaint, so far, is that while trying to
>correct a vocal track in a take which an acoustic guitar was recorded on
>another track, I heard delay (latency) in the guitar when I Auto-tuned just
>the vocal track. In order to eliminate it, I had to activate Auto-tune in
>the guitar track and by pass it.

Autotune has reasonably high latency, but what's worse is that the
latency is not constant when it's doing correction. The way I use it
is to fix up small sections, print these to disk and patch them into
the original track as needed. Unfortunately, you have to zoom in and
find the latency in order to do a high quality edit, and it varies all
the time. Sometimes I end up processing much more audio through AT
than I wanted to just becuase the latency will change mid cut and I
can't therefore cut within a phrase because the phase won't match both
going in and coming out.

It's a pain, but I just don't want to pass the entire track through AT
and suffer possible degradation, and I refuse to use it in automatic
mode because I don't want the performance to be completely stomped on.


Regards,

Monte McGuire

[Monte P McGuire]

In article >,
Ty Ford > wrote:
>It works miracles. My only complaint, so far, is that while trying to
>correct a vocal track in a take which an acoustic guitar was recorded on
>another track, I heard delay (latency) in the guitar when I Auto-tuned just
>the vocal track. In order to eliminate it, I had to activate Auto-tune in
>the guitar track and by pass it.

Autotune has reasonably high latency, but what's worse is that the
latency is not constant when it's doing correction. The way I use it
is to fix up small sections, print these to disk and patch them into
the original track as needed. Unfortunately, you have to zoom in and
find the latency in order to do a high quality edit, and it varies all
the time. Sometimes I end up processing much more audio through AT
than I wanted to just becuase the latency will change mid cut and I
can't therefore cut within a phrase because the phase won't match both
going in and coming out.

It's a pain, but I just don't want to pass the entire track through AT
and suffer possible degradation, and I refuse to use it in automatic
mode because I don't want the performance to be completely stomped on.


Regards,

Monte McGuire

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"Tommi" > wrote in message
...
> Has anyone tried melodyne from celemony software?

They have a demo you can download.

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"Tommi" > wrote in message
...
> Has anyone tried melodyne from celemony software?

They have a demo you can download.

[Dudleys100]

I haveed Melodyne and love it. The main thing I like is that it does
quantizing of audio. I fixed up a lot of tracks getting them right on
time. You can stretch individual notes, and fix the pitch of
individual notes very easy. It separates all of the notes visually so
you can see them all and play around. It is also now available to be
used as a plug in in thier new version. It is awsome!! I like
autotune for quik work, however for specific and high quality editing
Melodyne takes the cake.

[Dudleys100]

I haveed Melodyne and love it. The main thing I like is that it does
quantizing of audio. I fixed up a lot of tracks getting them right on
time. You can stretch individual notes, and fix the pitch of
individual notes very easy. It separates all of the notes visually so
you can see them all and play around. It is also now available to be
used as a plug in in thier new version. It is awsome!! I like
autotune for quik work, however for specific and high quality editing
Melodyne takes the cake.

[Chris Coleman]

(Ty Ford) wrote in message >...

> It works miracles. My only complaint, so far, is that while trying to
> correct a vocal track in a take which an acoustic guitar was recorded on
> another track, I heard delay (latency) in the guitar when I Auto-tuned just
> the vocal track. In order to eliminate it, I had to activate Auto-tune in
> the guitar track and by pass it.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
> click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

I'm working on a female vox/acoustic guitar project right now where
about half of the tunes' basic tracks include guitar and vocals
recorded at the same time, with a bit of leakage into each mic. I
find I cannot use Autotune during phrases where it's just those two
tracks, because when the vocal is corrected (even slightly), it phases
and flanges against the guitar track. If a part *really* needs it
(which hasn't been the extreme case so far), I could duck the original
guitar track and bring up the double for that phrase.

So Ty - aren't you finding that as Autotune works on the vocal it
completely destroys the phase and pitch relationship between you vox
and guitar tracks? By the way - I'm only using it as an Audiosuite
processor where needed, not as an RTAS insert working all the time.

-Chris

[Blind Joni]

>I fixed up a lot of tracks getting them right on
>time. You can stretch individual notes, and fix the pitch of
>individual notes very easy. It separates all of the notes visually so
>you can see them all and play around.

This process is also available as a native effect in Samplitude...very easy to
use...and free!

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

[Hal Laurent]

"Chris Coleman" > wrote in message
om...

> I'm working on a female vox/acoustic guitar project right now where
> about half of the tunes' basic tracks include guitar and vocals
> recorded at the same time, with a bit of leakage into each mic. I
> find I cannot use Autotune during phrases where it's just those two
> tracks, because when the vocal is corrected (even slightly), it phases
> and flanges against the guitar track. If a part *really* needs it
> (which hasn't been the extreme case so far), I could duck the original
> guitar track and bring up the double for that phrase.

I don't have any answers for that, but I'll offer you my sympathy. I
have the same problem on a current project. I had the singer/guitarist
come in and retrack both, but the feel was never as good as the first
time (which was supposed to be a throwaway). It's a damn shame
the take with the best feel is the one with the intonation problems.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore