It sounded cool for five minutes when Cher did it for effect, and it sounded hackneyed six months later when everyone was doing it. It's honestly a case of not liking the way Autotune turns voices into synths, as can be heard on every other mainstream pop record released these days. I havent tryed the newer Melodyne versions tho, so it could have been improving all this years.īut the original versions were so dissapointing it became really the last option for me You can do some polyphonic work, yes, but the result was light-years behid what was advertised, and that is lying. (Yes, those videos that they accepted were just a proof of concept, where they alter some acoustic guitar chord's tones on the fly with pristine sound quality.) i didnt even try the actually-fake polyphonic feature that was shown in the youtube demo videos. I always find the harmonics, timbre and tuning become completely disfigured, and it gets worse with every change you make.Īnd thats on single instrument tracks, with single note melodies. So much anticipation for the release, and when i finally tryed it I was completely dissapointed of how much digital-dirt it generated on the notes.
In fact I always wondered if Melodyne DNA was really serious or just vapour-ware. but imo the results didnt really compensate for it. It's a less intuitive program, wich requires the user to learn more about it. It's really not handy at all, everything seems to be hidden, and with no indication of what it actually does, or how are you supposed to be using it. On the other hand Melodyne gives you all the screen you need, and feels more solid, but the way it works is completely alien to me.
#WAVESHELL VST 9.2 SHOWS UP AS DUMMY SOFTWARE#
and they both give me a feel of volatility, as if they could loose the modifyed data at any point, with any missclick or software crash. WavesTune and Antares have great features and ease of use, but the screen always feels small and cramped to me. However if the required change is very minor, i prefeer to adjust it using Reaper and avoid messig with any of them. On another ocassion I had to adjust some female voice, and prefeered WavesTune results/ease of use over Melodine DNA. Of the three, I found Autotune EVO gave me MUCH better result when fine-tuning some Whistleing on a Western track.
I've been toying with WavesTune, Melodyne DNA and Autotune Evo over the last few years. That along with everything I've seen and read on the forums tells me it must be pretty good. I've never had or used Melodyne but all my friend that have it swear by it. However, I only use it to fix vocals that are just a little off. That's all I've used on the Win7 computer and never had a problem with it.
#WAVESHELL VST 9.2 SHOWS UP AS DUMMY MANUAL#
ReaTune actually works pretty well too in the manual mode.
However, once I got it working it really worked pretty well. The biggest problem I had with it was just getting it set up with the keycodes so that I could use it, which kind of left a bad taste in my mouth for Antares. I started with Autotune back when it came on 3 or 4 5-1/4" floppies. I will keep playing around with it to give it a fair shot. I have heard a lot about Melodyne being better, but it's not working for me at least not at the moment. Have recently tried Reatune and so far I am actually impressed with basic tuning in manual mode. Started on Autotune 15 years ago and wondering what everyone thinks is the best today? I have tried Melodyne a little, but have a problem with fine tuning passing tones unlike autotune being able to draw a line longer or shorter to effect or not the passing tones in a phrase.
0 kommentar(er)
