Jump to content

Best music slow down program?

symphonyofdream

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Eddie Newbie

Eddie

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

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

 

 

That sounds pretty good. I think the problem is at slower speeds.

I think that all of the files I posted are usable, but if I had the choice, Tumenic (Audacity) would be my last pick. It just gets too annoying, particularly when listening again and again.

The Sliding Time Scale option in Audacity was actually not bad, but a bit slow to process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
GreenAsJade Newbie

GreenAsJade

Posted
  • Members
Posted

That sounds pretty good. I think the
problem
is at slower speeds.

.

 

I'm not sure what you mean.

 

The poster with a problem said that they get unusable flange at slower than 40%.

 

My demo shows that the sound produced by Transcribe at 30% (which is slower than 40%) is perfectly fine...

 

Audacity was only used to crop the sound clip rather than posting the whole song. And I've just realised I didn't even need to do that: Transcribe lets you export just a selection, doh!

 

The point is after all that slowing and processing, it sounds just fine :)

 

 

GaJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
JonR Newbie

JonR

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

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.

I have a cheap desktop PC with Windows Vista.

Just checking the data... The processor seems to be 2.2G at 539 MHz, and 2G RAM. That's better than yours I guess, but I had no real problems on my old Win 2K machine,with a way slower processor than that (I don't remember what it was but it was state of the art in 2000!).

 

Below is the beginning of the Black Dog riff, at 20% (maximum reduction). It's from an MP3 originally - not a CD track - and I can't remember where that came from, probably recorded from a youtube stream. Hardly top quality to begin with, IOW.

Transcribe always exports as WAV, and the sample rate is the default "same as original" (44100 it says). Like GaJ, I converted it to MP3 with Audacity - no other tweaks.

 

I guess there is some noticeable degradation here, but you can still hear the notes - that's all that matters. I never go that slow anyway. I think the furthest I've ever been was 25%. Mostly I find 50% is slow enough for 99% of what I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
GreenAsJade Newbie

GreenAsJade

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Heh heh yeah at 20% it definitely is starting to get a little hard to listen to :)

 

Interestikngly, I find that below about 50% it's less useful anyhow for some reason I can't quite understand. It's something to do with the how important it is to hear one note moving to the next or something? I occasionally slow a fast lick down further, then find myself moving back to around 50 and I can "pick it out best" at that speed. I think maybe it is to do with hearing "what the person's fingers are doing" ... at below 50% the dynamics are just too different. IE transcription is more than just hearing the frequency of each note, it's hearing how it's played, which gives you all sorts of extra clues...

 

GaJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
JonR Newbie

JonR

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Heh heh yeah at 20% it definitely is starting to get a little hard to listen to
:)

Interestikngly, I find that below about 50% it's less useful anyhow for some reason I can't quite understand. It's something to do with the how important it is to hear one note moving to the next or something? I occasionally slow a fast lick down further, then find myself moving back to around 50 and I can "pick it out best" at that speed. I think maybe it is to do with hearing "what the person's fingers are doing" ... at below 50% the dynamics are just too different. IE transcription is more than just hearing the frequency of each note, it's hearing how it's played, which gives you all sorts of extra clues...


GaJ

I agree. I think my forays into 25% were to confirm one or two notes in a very fast passage. Otherwise 50% is fine.

For me, it's "hard to listen to" not because of the audio quality (you can still make the notes out, as I say), but something like the reason you say: it loses musical sense.

 

The one thing that can suffer, btw, is the bass. I often raise the pitch an octave to hear the bass better, but if you slow it down as well (esp from a poor quality original) the grittiness can actually make it less clear, not clearer. Luckily it's extremely rare to have to slow bass down... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Eddie Newbie

Eddie

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Other programs I use handle the percentages differently. That is, the greater the percentage, the slower the speed. (i.e., it slows the file a little bit by 10%, or slows it much more by 60%). I thought that Transcribe! was the same but I was mistaken.

I used Transcribe and created 4 new files for comparison, in case anyone's interested :D

At 50% it doesn't sound bad. Still, I notice a warble at slow speeds and to me it's annoying.

 

I somewhat agree with JonR when he says "you can still hear the notes - that's all that matters"

In my case, I don't do many transcriptions, but slow down audio as a practice tool. Once I slowed it down, I listen again and again and again, often while playing guitar. In this sense poor audio quality starts to bug me after a few passes.

 

I also added a Black Dog sample. JonR's has the "warble" I dislike. Mine does not. Mine comes from an MP3 but I believe it was from a CD originally. Even using the same source, Transcribe! has that sound I dislike at slow settings.

 

If I just wanted to hear the notes once or twice, I would actually use Transcribe! since high quality converters are considerably slower, at least on my old Mac.

 

The attached files are from Wave Editor, Twisted Wave, and Transcribe! at 2 corresponding speeds. Black Dog was done with Twisted Wave in 2 passes, since the maximum slowdown it has did not match JonR's example.

I really wanted to use Audacity as well, but it's just not behaving in my system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Eddie Newbie

Eddie

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Wow, Transcribe really whipped TW at 20%, eh?


I wonder if some of the "warble" is actually what is in the original: obviously faster. Maybe what's nice vibrato at 100% is nasty warble at 25%?

 

The Twisted Wave file is at roughly the speed of Transcribe! at 50%. I think both sound OK.

 

The other TW file (Black Dog Slow) would be similar to the one JonR posted (20%), and TW sounds much better IMO.

The warble or sometime flangey sound is constant so it's not the vibrato. Bass and drums can also sound odd. It's also present when using the same source material. Not very noticeable at higher speeds, though.

 

In terms of speed and convenience, Transcribe! is certainly the winner. After all these tests, the one I'm seriously considering buying is Twisted Wave. It's better suited for my needs :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
mugwump Newbie

mugwump

Posted
  • Members
Posted

GaJ, Eddie, JonR - Thanks for the input.

 

I originally noticed this effect when I tried to slow down a very fast, distorted riff (IOW - sonically dense). It's also played on a way downtuned guitar (C or maybe lower, I can't figure it out (sounds A to me!?!?)). Then I tried some other, slower songs and noticed the same issue. FWIW I'm using Pyro to rip waves from CD's and then playing them back via Transcribe. I also own SlowGold, and that has a similar issue. This has never been a problem if I only slow to 60% or so. South of that is where issues arise.

 

I'm going to experiment with other, faster machines if Transcribe isn't somehow locked to the machine I originally downloaded it to. I may just need to upgrade the machine. I hate the thought of re-installing all of that SW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
mugwump Newbie

mugwump

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Gaj,

I tried this again last night. Slow Gold did a better job, but it also had problems below 50%. I will post samples when I get a chance, assuming I can figure out how to record the output of the programs while they are using the sound card to play the slowed material.

 

For reference, the song that got me fixated on this issue is called Man's Ruin. It's by Prong off Rude Awakening. The problem exists with other songs, but I think something about the nature of this detuned, distorted beast aggravates it. I think it's also the 1st time I tried slowing things down this much with Transcribe, which I've only owned about 2 months.

 

I think the software may be doing some aliasing as I force it to spread the actual data points farther and farther apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members
JonR Newbie

JonR

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

Gaj,

I tried this again last night. Slow Gold did a better job, but it also had problems below 50%. I will post samples when I get a chance, assuming I can figure out how to record the output of the programs while they are using the sound card to play the slowed material.


For reference, the song that got me fixated on this issue is called Man's Ruin. It's by Prong off Rude Awakening. The problem exists with other songs, but I think something about the nature of this detuned, distorted beast aggravates it. I think it's also the 1st time I tried slowing things down this much with Transcribe, which I've only owned about 2 months.


I think the software may be doing some aliasing as I force it to spread the actual data points farther and farther apart.

My guess is this is down to the original song file. There would be reason (surely?) for slowdown software to introduce anything to diminish the audio quality.

Did you use MP3, CD audio or WAV?

Whatever format it's in, "Mansruin" certainly has too much distortion - I would think - for any software to be able to reliably distinguish much more than your ears can. I know Transcribe gives up guessing chords in this kind of thing, and my ears are certainly better (slightly) than the software in that respect (tho not in others). IMO, this is down to the nature of the recorded sound, not a defect in the software. The sound is a mess (in the nicest possible way!) that no program could disentangle. How could it know which parts of the sound belong to which instrument, or which overtones belong to which fundamental pitch?

IOW, such tracks expose the limitations of all transcription software - with the possible exception of real high-end programs, but I'd be suspicious even there. (Melodyne looks good at disentangling chords, but I doubt very much it would work cleanly with highly distorted guitars.)

 

With Transcribe, btw, you can export the soundfile, or a selection from it - no need to record it again. Not sure about SlowGold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
mugwump Newbie

mugwump

Posted
  • Members
Posted

JonR,

Thanks for the reply.

 

FWIW - I use Pyro to rip wave files from CD's.

 

I think it's a combination of things. Transcribe is trying to do a lot more than slow gold (i.e. music analysis), so that's extra bandwidth it needs that my machine may not have. That may explain a little as to why SG seems to work a little better. I agree that the nature of the beast (that song) is probably also part of the problem. But I have noticed this phasing (whatever) effect on other, more normal tracks.

 

SG doesn't give me a way to directly export it's output. That's why I didn't post samples for comparison (I would have to introduce other software, making it a faulty comparison).

 

If anyone wants to hear what my computer is doing with Man's Ruin, let me know and I'll post it. Right now I'm pretty sure the situation will be improved when I get a faster machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
guitar_face Newbie

guitar_face

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I recently stumbled on transcribe and I'm loving it. I'm 2/3ish of the way transcribing Blue in Green (just single notes; I still need to work on my ear for chords); just finished Coltrane's solo :D. Awesome tool, personally I found I had to go down to 20% for a few licks in Coltrane's solo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
erold Newbie

erold

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Need a bit of a vote of confidence here. Reading through this thread it would seem that the best all over software for transcribing is Transcribe!? I've been trying it out for the trial period and it was good, been trying some other software, a lot of free options but nothing so far has been as good, so I'm thinking about investing in a piece of software now. Don't mind shelling out the 50 bucks for Transcribe!, but I'd feel like a fool if there is something better out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
JonR Newbie

JonR

Posted
  • Members
Posted

 

Need a bit of a vote of confidence here. Reading through this thread it would seem that the best all over software for transcribing is Transcribe!? I've been trying it out for the trial period and it was good, been trying some other software, a lot of free options but nothing so far has been as good, so I'm thinking about investing in a piece of software now. Don't mind shelling out the 50 bucks for Transcribe!, but I'd feel like a fool if there is something better out there.

I agree with the above two. I'm not aware of any software that outdoes Transcribe as a dedicated transcription tool.

If you have a Mac it might be worth you demo-ing Capo for comparison, but AFAIK that's the same price, and no better (it would be a matter of personal taste whether you prefer the interface). You'll certainly not "feel like a fool" for buying Transcribe! Even if you don't do a lot of transcribing now, it might persuade you to do a lot more - which can only be a good thing.

As I think I said earlier, when I first demo'd Transcribe (some years ago), I held out for two months before registering (I just clicked away the irritating messages for the 2nd month - it still worked fully). But even a cheapskate like me could see it was an amazing program - I think it's the best designed interface of any program I use, for anything. I use it probably twice a week (often more), and it was well worth the money. There've been many (free) updates since then of course, including one or two non-essential bells and whistles, but it's still pretty transparent and intuitive to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Eddie Newbie

Eddie

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I'll add another option for slowing down audio; Tracktion 3.

It's currently $19.99 at Musiciansfriend. Guitar Center has it for $249.99

Pros:

Very cheap at the current price.

Lots of features, speed/pitch being only one of them.

Cons:

Last updated almost 3 years ago

Ugly interface

Unintuitive

 

http://emusician.com/sequencers/mackie_tracktion3_03/

Mackie offers a demo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
erold Newbie

erold

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Thanks for the replies guys. I might try Capo, but unless it strikes me as significantly better for some reason, I'll probably end up buying Transcribe! since I've already started using that, and feel somewhat familiar with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...