Jump to content

Best music slow down program?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I have to second Jeremy: I'm equally enthusiastic about Transcribe. I've been using it for years, and it's still the best program I've ever used, of any kind: transparent in operation, almost no fat on it at all. (In earlier versions, there used to be none; recently they've introduced the odd bell or whistle which isn't strictly necessary or helpful. Not that they do any harm of course.)

 

One extra Jeremy doesn't mention (and which I don't think any competitor program does) is it will slow down video too.

 

BTW, slowing down more than 50% will affect quality depending on the quality of the original audio (not the slowdowner) - specifically the sample rate. MP3s, eg, don't slow down as cleanly as WAVs. If you're working from CD tracks (rather than downloaded MP3s or youtube tracks, etc), Transcribe will record directly to WAV, which is recommended. But even with MP3s, I find Transcribe usable down to 25% (and occasionally more). It doesn't sound too good of course, but that's not the point: you can still hear what you need to hear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I tried Transcribe! and Amazing Slow Downer a few years ago, but did not purchase either one.

Guitar Rig came with its own slow-down feature.

Later I got Wave Editor ($69) and it also has a very nice slow-down feature using Izotope. Twisted Wave (currently $39 bundled with 10 other applications) offers that feature using DIRAC. Then there's the free Sonic Visualizer which can also slow down audio. I'm not sure if it can be applied to specific sections or only globally.

Given the alternatives I thought that Transcribe! and Amazing Slow Downer were overpriced. I have not tried them recently so maybe they've added features to make them more attractive. I did like the software, btw.

On the Mac there's also Capo and Neutrino. Capo 2 only works in Snow Leopard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have Amazing Slow Downer, it even has an iPhone app for 15 bucks that is pretty good.

 

I have been using Transcribe lately and will probably buy that once I get a new computer because it is easier to navigate through the track. You can set markers which really help. With ASD I always forget where the guitar solo starts and have to go searching. ASD doesn't save my spot when I exit the program so that causes some frustration.

 

Both Transcribe and Amazing Slow Downer have free versions so try them out yourself. You can use the full version of Transcribe free for thirty days. The free version of ASD lets you slow down the first 2 tracks on a CD or the first 25% or so of a file on your computer.

 

Both cost $50 which is really not bad considering how much music you can learn. You can't put a price on getting better as a musician!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I might just add that Audacity - a FREE multitrack audio editing and recording program - will also slow down without changing pitch, or vice versa. It's not as intuitive as Transcribe (because it's not dedicated to learning songs), and an action such as changing tempo needs a few seconds processing time. It's immediate on Transcribe. You can also place markers (as in the most useful aspect of Transcribe Neehan mentions), but again it's a slower more fiddly process.

OTOH, Audacity is very easy to use for its main purpose: recording, editing and audio processing. I own both programs, but I always use Transcribe for learning and transcription. If you really can't afford $50, I'd recommend Audacity, if only for all the other cool things you can do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I might just add that Audacity - a FREE multitrack audio editing and recording program - will also slow down without changing pitch, or vice versa...

 

 

When I compared Wave Editor, Twisted Wave, and Audacity a long time ago, Audacity was the worst sounding when it came to slowing down the tempo.

I just tried it again and although the sound seems better, it's still worse than the others and took much longer to process. I only reinstalled it a few days ago since it deals with ogg files, but it has a lot of room for improvement.

I tried to upload the 4 files (original version, Audacity, Twisted Wave, and Wave Editor) but could not do it. Audacity sounds as though it's passing through a light flanger. The others retain more of the original clarity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Windows Media Player does as well as anything else. Only ripped tracks though. I guess those would be MP3.

 

-20% is pushing the tolerability but it's often good enough to make the changes - jam wise. If you need slow for practice only, MIDI tracks are the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
When I compared Wave Editor, Twisted Wave, and Audacity a long time ago, Audacity was the worst sounding when it came to slowing down the tempo.

I just tried it again and although the sound
seems
better, it's still worse than the others and took much longer to process. I only reinstalled it a few days ago since it deals with ogg files, but it has a lot of room for improvement.

I tried to upload the 4 files (original version, Audacity, Twisted Wave, and Wave Editor) but could not do it. Audacity sounds as though it's passing through a light flanger. The others retain more of the original clarity.

I don't know those other programs, but I'm sure you're right. Are they also free ones? As I said, I only use it for recording and editing, and I have no problem with it there. Well, except for the dropouts it introduces when changing the pitch or tempo (which I do occasionally for creative reasons, not for learning other recordings)... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not to sound like a company schill or anything (I definitely am not) The price for Transcribe ($50) is ridiculously low for the quality of app it is. I have used it so many times it isn't funny. You'd pay this for 2 or 3 guitar lessons. I used to use some of the free ones and they work to a degree - but not close in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know those other programs, but I'm sure you're right. Are they also free ones? As I said, I only use it for recording and editing, and I have no problem with it there. Well, except for the dropouts it introduces when changing the pitch or tempo (which I do occasionally for creative reasons, not for learning other recordings)...
:(

 

Wave Editor is $69, and it used to cost $250. http://www.audiofile-engineering.com/waveeditor/ (IIRC, Bob Katz praised it over at Gearslutz)

Twisted Wave costs $79, but it's currently on sale for $39 bundled with 10 additional programs. http://twistedwave.com/

 

Both are Mac only, but there are probably more applications like these on the PC side. They are primarily used as audio editors, and the slow-down feature is like an added bonus. Both license their speed/pitch technology from other companies (iZotope, DIRAC), which is one of the reasons why the software is (or was) expensive and also explains the better audio quality. Usually this quality is OK with Audacity, but IIRC when I was learning Tumeni Notes I used Wave Editor. I'll try to post a brief example using that song and the different audio editors, just for reference. :)

 

@Jeremy,

I don't doubt that Transcribe! is great. I liked it back when I tried it. In my case I just found these other options that met my needs and offered a lot of bang for the buck. Speed control has been one of the best features in Guitar Rig in my opinion, and now AmpliTube also has it (SpeedTrainer). Transcribe! is more focused on that particular feature and I really like the way they display the information. Just offering other options :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Whats the site for transcribe? does work for macs?

 

http://www.seventhstring.com/

and yes it works for macs.

 

But - much as I love Transcribe - there is also Capo for macs, and v 2.0 displays a spectrogram too: very neat:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2010/08/capo-2-for-mac-music-learning-software-done-even-better.ars

 

From my experience of spectrograms, they don't work very well with dense audio (such as rock with distorted guitars and drums etc) - but it does look pretty! If I were you, I'd download demos for both and compare. (If I had a Mac, I'd be trying Capo to see if it was any better than Transcribe. I doubt it, but I do like the spectrogram...)

 

Capo does tab too (!), but I'd be suspicious how accurate or good-looking that is. (I prefer to use a separate notation program.)

The one drawback I've spotted is the demo seems to be limited to 5 minutes work. With Transcribe you get the whole program with no limitations for a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Here's an example so that you can compare sound quality:

 

FILES

 

The link has 8 files, the original Tumeni Notes.wav, and 7 slowed down files as follows. I'll only comment on the software in alphabetical order, but not the sound quality. You can judge for yourselves, and hopefully post your comments :)

 

Audacity: Took a few minutes to open each time, vs. a few seconds. Then crashed, and crashed, and crashed, and crashed. Tumenic is the result of Change Tempo -75%. Tumenid is the result of Change Tempo -50%. Tumenie is the result of Sliding Time Scale -50%. This last one took a few minutes to process, but it's good to have different options.

Sonic Visualiser (Tumeni a and b): Probably the easiest to operate for slowing the tempo, since it uses a simple knob. It provides the slowest option of all (Tumenib).

Twisted Wave (Tumeni): Has different quality settings (Good, Better, Best), which is a plus. Higher quality can take a long time, though. I used "Better" and maximum slowdown used. has other options as well (e.g., Voice, Duet, Standard, etc.).

Wave Editor (Tumeni1): Lacks different levels of quality for slowdown, but it's fast and easy to operate. Maximum slowdown used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Wave Editor is $69, and it used to cost $250.
(IIRC, Bob Katz praised it over at Gearslutz)

Twisted Wave costs $79, but it's currently on sale for $39 bundled with 10 additional programs.


Both are Mac only, but there are probably more applications like these on the PC side.

Thanks. Seeing as I have a PC, and Audacity and Transcribe work fine for me (in their respective roles), I won't check you files, and I'll take your word about relative quality. I've tried one two other PC audio editors, but haven't found anything free that's as easy and well featured as Audacity. (I also have Cubase LE, but never use it because Audacity is so much easier.)

I used to use WaveLab Lite, an old Steinberg freebie, but it doesn't work on Vista.

 

There's a couple of drawbacks I will mention about Audacity (for other readers): the older version (1.2.4) won't display VST plugin interfaces (just uses sets of generic sliders) - that was why I liked Wavelab lite because it did. The new beta version of Audacity (1.3.12) will display them, but then it takes a lot longer to process the usual tasks. So although I have both versions installed, I tend to go back to v 1.2.4 for most of my work. (Despite a few other minor improvements in v.1.3.)

 

I've had no problems with Audacity crashing during processing tasks. But there is the occasional annoying instance when I've just recorded something (usually streaming audio), and it closes down at the end automatically without saving. Doesn't happen too often, fortunately (and could possibly be caused by something else I'm doing, I haven't tested it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The OP asked about "slowing down with good sound quality", and Eddie has helpfully listed a raft of options.

 

What the OP didn't explicitly ask for is "which is the best tool for helping transcribe stuff". I think that it's this question that other posters are recommending Transcribe! for.

 

Me too.

 

Transcribe's interface is the best for looping and marking bars, starting, stopping, going back and those few very simple things that you just need to do all the time.

 

Aucity is next-to-useless by comparison *for this job*. (Its a great free tool for recording!)

 

 

Incidentally. Transcribe! also has a spectogram, which is definitely helpful for picking out notes in the middle of chords.

 

So it's horses for courses, but if the question is "what's the most useful tool to help with transcription" my vote goes with Transcribe!, as well

 

(and GuitarPro for writing down the transcription and listening back to it to see if it is right. I only just discovered the free equivalent: Tux, which might be as good, not sure yet).

 

 

GaJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Incidentally. Transcribe! also has a spectogram, which is definitely helpful for picking out notes in the middle of chords.

Yes, but it's not the actual graphic representation of the sound in time that Capo shows.

IOW, Transcribe processes the spectrum in order to display the pitches against the piano keyboard - extremely useful as you say (the central element of the program, really).

Capo just shows the sound as it is, the pitches suspended in space and time - I mean a 2D space with pitch vertical and time horizontal, making the music look like a fuzzy piano roll.

I'm not saying Capo's system is any more useful - although, in its 2D aspect, it does present a "picture of the sound", with a slightly nearer relationship to notation or tab than Transcribe's 1-dimensional spectrum. Capo is pretty to look at, IOW - but maybe no more functional.

 

Both programs will have problems the denser the sound is, the less clear the individual pitches are. (IOW, at just the point our ears start to give out, the programs do too.)

 

I just discovered tux elsewhere too - looks pretty good for a free program, but not one I'd make much use of myself.

 

Slightly more OT is this fun site I found out about yesterday, which will play your tab for you (and you can strum chords with your mouse!:)):

http://www.tabnplay.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is a quote from JonR, which I botched (new format...lol...):

 

BTW, slowing down more than 50% will affect quality depending on the quality of the original audio (not the slowdowner) - specifically the sample rate. MP3s, eg, don't slow down as cleanly as WAVs. If you're working from CD tracks (rather than downloaded MP3s or youtube tracks, etc), Transcribe will record directly to WAV, which is recommended. But even with MP3s, I find Transcribe usable down to 25% (and occasionally more). It doesn't sound too good of course, but that's not the point: you can still hear what you need to hear.

 

Jon, can you tell me a little about your system? I have a 1.5G processor with a ton of RAM. If I go below about 40%, even with WAVE data, I get a chorusy-flangy effect that renders the audio useless. I have the Transcribe bit rate at the lower setting. I know the Transcribe FAQ says that it isn't very forgiving with weak systems, but I was expecting better performance. I have other machines, but all of my work is on that box right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

This is a quote from JonR, which I botched (new format...lol...):


BTW, slowing down more than 50% will affect quality depending on the quality of the original audio (not the slowdowner) - specifically the sample rate. MP3s, eg, don't slow down as cleanly as WAVs. If you're working from CD tracks (rather than downloaded MP3s or youtube tracks, etc), Transcribe will record directly to WAV, which is recommended. But even with MP3s, I find Transcribe usable down to 25% (and occasionally more). It doesn't sound too good of course, but that's not the point: you can still hear what you need to hear.

 

 

Jon, can you tell me a little about your system? I have a 1.5G processor with a ton of RAM. If I go below about 40%, even with WAVE data, I get a chorusy-flangy effect that renders the audio useless. I have the Transcribe bit rate at the lower setting. I know the Transcribe FAQ says that it isn't very forgiving with weak systems, but I was expecting better performance. I have other machines, but all of my work is on that box right now.

 

Here is a segment of a Paramore's "Decode" MP3 (not WAV) slowed down to 30% by Transcribe, exported as WAV at 128k, loaded into Audacity, clipped to this segment and exported as MP3.

 

I don't know what "sound quality" anyone would expect, but this is very usable...

 

GaJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is a quote from JonR, which I botched (new format...lol...):


BTW, slowing down more than 50% will affect quality depending on the quality of the original audio (not the slowdowner)...


...If I go below about 40%, even with WAVE data, I get a chorusy-flangy effect that renders the audio useless.

 

I would suggest that you try some of the other alternatives mentioned in the thread. The software does have an impact on the sound quality, whether your using WAV, AIFF, MP3, etc. They don't use the same algorithms for slowing down audio. Even using the same software you may have different options for slowing the audio down, as is the case with Audacity. The examples I posted clearly show the effect you mention, but it is not present in all cases. IIRC, Transcribe! also has that effect, but I did not include an audio file for it.

 

One thing you can also do is use 2 programs, one to slow down the audio with better quality, and Transcribe! to focus on transcribing. The many alternatives don't have to be mutually exclusive :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...