Pigini.
NeoDavinciJust a suggestion for a new feature (or two depending on how you count):
If there is a means for creating a ritard/accelerando in the timeline in Podium (other than entering a new tempo in every beat), I don’t know what it is, but a separate tempo control grid could allow you to do that and to control the tempo in a more user friendly way.
Many professionals I know make a tempo track as their first item of business. If there were a simple tool where you could map out what you’d like (or change it mid-project), it would be simpler than the current method of clicking on the time track at the top for a lot of people.
For instance:
Measure—-Beat—-Time Signature
It would be especially easy to set up this way, but if the grid reflected the track throughout, you could change things either from this sort of setup or from the current timeline methodology.
Thoughts?
P.S. Sorry for the dashes, but the board just deletes spaces. 🙂
druidSorry to resurrect this item, but I think an easier way to do this is how energyXT does it; which is to say, you can map an envelope (automation) track to the tempo! So you can just automate the tempo!!
Frits, I don’t suppose this would be fairly easy to integrate, and would you have any interest in such a feature being included?
I would’ve started a new thread, but perhaps my suggestion is of a similar nature to the original thread starter’s?
I searched for “tempo” in the future Podium thread at top, but it was not there.
I’d really love this feature… Probably limits would have to be made, like the minimum tempo would have to be 10 and maximum 300 or something… Otherwise some mathematics could get screwy? energyXT had a bug or two with tempo automation when it came out, I can’t recall the exact issues… But anyway, I’d love this feature! (Did I mention that already? :D)
Klemperer@druid wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this item, but I think an easier way to do this is how energyXT does it; which is to say, you can map an envelope (automation) track to the tempo! So you can just automate the tempo!!
I haven’t looked for the (for my way of music really sad and disappointing) EnergyXT2, but when I last looked this nice feature of XT1.41 was not integrated in V2 (like quite a lot of others, really unusual for a V2…but it was compiled in another coding language, and so difficulties arose)
But I agree, this is a very nice and convenient way of handling this, in case it would be not too difficult to integrate into Podium.
acousmodYou can take a look at how this is implemented in Reaper : an automation envelope on the Master track, which can be recorded in realtime, and with optional pitch/time compensation with Elastic time-stretching algos or internal pitch plugin…
I hope that when Frits will work again on the promizing timestretching/speed feature he will also consider this.
PiginiIt seems to me that a few useful features, like thatone, only are difficult to implement as long as one expects them to work on the audio just as well as on the midi. And then for the audio, the infamous time/pitch shift would be needed, putting a hold on the whole thing.
IMHO time/pitch-shifting/stretching gets overused and is overrated mainly by hobbyists today. No pro who knows his trade would use time/pitch-shifting/stretching for anything but very small changes on material where a new take is not possible.
It was never meant to be the best choice, rather a last resort.
When the affected material is only some midi tracks rendered to audio, the best way to deal with it is apply the changes first to the midi and render the audio again. No time/pitch-shifting/stretching algo can give such good results.
I think that is the way it should be done in podium.
That approach might even make some other things easier to implement, like slaving to MTC etc.
And for audio which cannot be rerendered because it didn’t originate from midi, a retake is in order. If not possible, just tweak those wav-parts in some dedicated wav-editor and reimport.
acousmodYou know, there is not only conventional musical styles, some are very happy to play with sound, in every manner that is possible…
If don’t like time/pitch/speed variations, just don’t use them 😉
Pigini @acousmod
you completely missed my point.
I’m not against implementing pitch/time-shifting/stretching into podium in general. But I don’t like to see important features put on hold, because they don’t work on audio without pitch/time-shifting/stretching.
It’s better having them working on midi with the option to render the audio again, rather than not having them at all. Particularly, since those pitch/time-shifting/stretching algos – no matter how advanced – do not produce prime quality output when used for larger changes.
I don’t expect the implementation of pitch/time-shifting/stretching very soon, since most good algos have to be licensed for big money, I doubt there are any good free algos around (would be great, if I was wrong with that assumption, though). The other option is Frits rolls his own, which is no trivial thing to do, a probably very time consuming task.
If don’t like time/pitch/speed variations, just don’t use them
they can all be done in midi, btw.
acousmodOK !
Me too I don’t see any dependence between tempo/speed automation and pitch/time stretching. Of course, the first one can be done without the second one.
I know also that Elastic will certainly never be available in Podium due to its huge cost. Which for me is not a problem, because I am sure that when Frits will work again on a custom timestretching algo it will be good enough for me (and it would be always possible to use Reaper in other cases…).
I was just saying that I agree that tempo/pitch/speed automation will be very nice to have in Podium.
Considering the pitch/speed compensation with a timestretching algo, yes, it is astonishing in Reaper, not for music fine corrections of course, but as a sound design feature it is rather extraordinary.
It is always interesting to be inspired by what others do when it is good.
Klemperer@acousmod wrote:
It is always interesting to be inspired by what others do when it is good.
Indeed, in Reaper it works great.
I understand Pigini’s point also, even if he’s wrong in this one sentence about “no pro is using”. (but that’s not important now;-).
By the way, just yesterday mailed with a user of another host who told me he loved Podium’s bounce- and automation-features plus the sheer beauty of Podium all around, but had difficulties in areas where other hosts are just a bit more “mature” (like rescanning of vsts, changing names, running midi from vsti to vsti for more experiments, and so on). So of course it is Frits’ choice what to implement first. Just comes to mind often that there *are* a lot of users testing Podium, then they get puzzled by something and don’t buy it. Which isn’t a good thing 😀 .
PiginiKlemperer?
The “Pro”, I had in mind was rather the console-guy who records takes and the mixing and mastering kind of pro in the studio. I was talking about using quality pitch/shift in the classical sense in a studio situation, where you would rather have the bloke playing a retake, instead of time-stretch-pitch-warping his guitar solo all around.
In short, situations where high quality precise recordings of instruments (virtual or real) or voice, would be your aim.
Taking that approach over to working with podium, would mean to favor retakes (rerenderings of corrected midi) and then rendering audio again over mangling the audio further and further.
Or in other words: In cases where time and pitch correction can be done on the midi and the audio rendered again, there is no need for the time pitch shifting stuff with the audio… and the result would be of better quality (in the classical sense)
I wasn’t thinking of effect creation, where of course, everything is allowed.
Hope I got my point better across this time. Don’t want to get into that kind of length every time. Afterall I’m not writing Wikipedia here. 😉