IRCAM TS is $99 right now

[mhschmieder]

Whoah! That is a SERIOUS product! I just watched the video over at the linked product site and am purchasing this NOW.

I have some legacy material from the 80's that was POORLY recorded from a Casio CZ-101 and Roland Juno-106, that needs WAY more than simple EQ and transient processing to be palatable, but which actually was some inspired work that simply desperately needs some formant shifting and other tricks that these IRCAM TS tools seem to have a pretty unique grasp of. And yes I have MachFive but I need this outside of that context!

Thanks for the link; somehow I either didn't get this announcement or didn't fully read my recent mailing from Don't Crack.

[toodamnhip]

I just got an email from Don'tCrack... looks like introductory sale on IRCAM TS. It seems to be a capable of a whole lot more than this, but I'm thinking of it for adjusting tempo of 2 track masters after mixdown.

http://store.dontcrack.com/product_info ... ts_id=1680

If you already have isotope RX, RX may be better at time and pitch still.

[mhschmieder]

Yeah, but IRCAM TS has some unique capabilities (e.g. formants). At $99, it's likely to help a lot of people even with standard time/pitch shift, who couldn't afford RX Advanced or Melodyne.

[toodamnhip]

Yeah, but IRCAM TS has some unique capabilities (e.g. formants). At $99, it's likely to help a lot of people even with standard time/pitch shift, who couldn't afford RX Advanced or Melodyne.

Yes, it is cheaper for sure. That's why I told James "already" as in , if he already has it. There is a site somewhere that has a detailed shootout and RX beat out everyone. I always complain to izotope that this feature is too hidden in the app. As far as ircam, none of these programs are worth a nickel if they don't show their processing of vocals. Even izotope isn't as good at vocals as id like it to be. NO ONE has mastered vocal pitch change yet..... No one. Sad
That said, ircam seems to be a decent product and sometimes, audio is source dependent, thus ,the more tools the better

[mhschmieder]

Interestingly, I have zero interest in this tool for vocals.

I didn't buy Melodyne for vocals originally either, but was blown away when I used it on vocals for the first time on my current production job, where the singer had to move to Ohio to take care of an ailing grandfather and isn't available to punch in any edits. He was pretty much a one-take wonder, but there were a couple of notes here and there that benefitted from tightening up. Totally transparent results!

This does make me realize, however, that the formant feature in IRCAM TS may be to help avoid unwanted character shifts during transposition of vocals.

One thing's for certain: the industry's best-selling vocal pitch-shift tool (Antares) is anything but transparent (I re-try it every year or so), so it's good to see other tools get a bit more publicity and to have occasional sales that raise their profile and awareness.

As for hidden features in RX, I'm still finding them (a few of which were NOT hidden in previous versions), but what's interesting is that the pitch/time shift stuff used to be available in Wave Editor (for practically free) but did NOT make the transition to Triumph.

[James Steele]

I haven't purchased yet, but my main interest was in the context of some songs I'm working on that were tracked at a tempo that now feels just a few bpm too slow. Rather than mess with all the individual audio tracks in the project, I'm thinking it might just be easier to go ahead and mix down at the current tempo and then use IRCAM TS to time compress it just a bit after the fact.

[toodamnhip]

I haven't purchased yet, but my main interest was in the context of some songs I'm working on that were tracked at a tempo that now feels just a few bpm too slow. Rather than mess with all the individual audio tracks in the project, I'm thinking it might just be easier to go ahead and mix down at the current tempo and then use IRCAM TS to time compress it just a bit after the fact.

This is been a big question for me in the past, a song that is a bit too slow. After a lot of experimentation, and I mean a lot, I have found it better to process the individual tracks. This avoids artifacts. There is no perfect solution. And at times, afterspeeding up a track, you may have to make slight mix adjustments. But I have research this thoroughly and I am completely positive about what I say. Now, in a pinch, you can always beat up the whole track.because you are speeding up several tracks, it is all the more important that whatever program you use creates a minimum of artifacts as you can understand, slight artifact multiplied by 50, will be something you can hear and and could give the mittens and an unpleasant timbre

[mhschmieder]

I was about to say the same thing. We had to do this on the heavy metal project I'm working on -- mainly in the guitar solos, which were recorded too slow -- and also found we could only get transparent results by applying the changes to each track individually.

The main reason for this is that different relationships of harmonic and rhythmic content as well as transient signatures mean that it might not be the same tool that ends up be ideal for each track, as well as the tools working better when thrown more cohesive and similar information.

Also, as I think TDH was saying in a different way, the rhythmic relationships of the instruments might change by a pip or two here and there, after the tempo change.

[toodamnhip]

I guess you could turn this into an audio recording 101 rule:

"The earlier and simpler you get to any sound source, the better you can manipulate it’s pitch and time and the lower the odds of artifacts are”

Processing 3 guitars as a group is harder than processing one guitar . Processing Guitars and drums together is harder than guitars alone...etc.

Also, and this is really important from experience-------
Processing a vocal DRY is easier than a vocal with reverb.

Once you get beyond simple, single instrument or vocal sound sources, the user starts having to adjust and tweak deeper parameters to avoid problems, also, one has to choose from more pre set options as the material gets more complex..
Thus, dig deep my friends and get to audio as nascent as possible.

[James Steele]

Are there really a lot of artifacts when only speeding up a stereo master by a few bpm?

[James Steele]

Also it might be worth it to do a rough mix and then try to time compress before all the individual tweaking to be able to do some trial and error on what tempo you DO eventually want. Seems like that would at least save time before you start on doing this to individual tracks.

[toodamnhip]

Are there really a lot of artifacts when only speeding up a stereo master by a few bpm?

It depends on the material and your ears. And it spends how important the recording is. It’s one of those things that can sneak up on you too. At 1st, maybe it sounds “ok”. Then you may notice the decay of a reverb , guitar, or crash cymbal has a “warble” to it. Or you’ve lost some “snap” to your snare. It also depends on how critical you are to your prior mixes timbre. Does the speed up change the stereo field just a touch? Yikes!
I have spoken many times here about how I love the way DP’s throughput monitoring allows me “click-less” A-B comparisons to prior mixes, allowing me to “ratchet up” my mix, refining by the smallest shades of quality, and also allowing me to see where I have gone backwards a bit. Well...you A-B the timbre of mix “A” with a sped up, ENTIRE MIX, and you may start noticing those “warbles’ etc....
There’s no right answer here expect your pickiness, luck of the draw on whether or not your source material works well with the speed up, etc. A few bpm is generally not a big deal for most material, especially if it isn;t Faith Hill or your best song right? But just think of how many complex timbres are being manipulated and then listen really critically and let’s see what you think? I stick by that rule: The earlier you get to any sound source..the better.
Also, Yes, sometimes making a rough mix and playing with tempo can save a lot of headaches.
I think I am quite able as a producer and I am astounded by how many times I end up realizing I made a track too slow...It’s makes me nuts sometimes...lol Maybe it isn;t too slow and I am just getting bored of it...

[toodamnhip]

PS, all of this advice applies 5x to vocals and PITCH/Key changing.....

[daniel.sneed]

[...]Also, Yes, sometimes making a rough mix and playing with tempo can save a lot of headaches.
I think I am quite able as a producer and I am astounded by how many times I end up realizing I made a track too slow...It’s makes me nuts sometimes...lol Maybe it isn;t too slow and I am just getting bored of it...

Welcome in the real world!

[Shooshie]

Yes, sometimes making a rough mix and playing with tempo can save a lot of headaches.
I think I am quite able as a producer and I am astounded by how many times I end up realizing I made a track too slow...It’s makes me nuts sometimes...lol Maybe it isn;t too slow and I am just getting bored of it...

One of the great conductors was Leonard Bernstein. He played a huge variety of music, including his own. One of his pieces that I liked a lot (and I liked nearly everything he wrote) was the Overture to Candide. Over the years he played it faster and faster. I finally realized the problem: he was too familiar with it. He kept speeding it up, because HE was bored with it. It had finally reached the point that you couldn't make out a lot of the detail, and players were up against the technical limits of their instruments and hands. I hear that a lot in classical music, and often wonder why conductors do that. Having been a conductor on many occasions (and studied orchestral conducting in college), I know the thrill of being up there on the podium, where all instruments are pointed directly at you. Amazing sound. I can see how that might cause someone to get excited and start the tempo too fast. You can't just slow it down, then. But some probably should start over. When it happens in baroque music, such as Vivaldi concertos, it turns the piece into a comic parody of itself. Yet that still seems to be the trend: playing movements from The Seasons in under three minutes, or something like that. OH well... there's no accounting for poor taste. (though boredom is a good excuse)

Shooshie