Starship Krupa

Hw are broadcast wav files different from regular wav files, and why would they be preferred for import to a different DAW?

Remember to breathe, eh? My bad, I guess. I went to a site for a program called Ultimate Vocal Remover, where the only description of what the program does is "The best vocal remover application on the internet...." and no hints that it does anything else. I came away with the impression that what it did was....remove vocals. I stand corrected. GitHub....GitHub is an awesome platform, we owe it much for the service it provides programmers for sharing code.....when I suggest that maybe programmers who do supply precompiled executables with their projects could make the download links more prominent, some folks push back as if I had insulted their grandma's cooking. Not only do I RTFM, in some cases I have written TFM, I have created build systems in my home just for fun, I am no stranger to having to put effort into understanding things. What I don't like is having to put needless effort into hunting for things on a website. If someone's trying to sell or, bless their heart, give away a program and there's not something near the top telling me how to purchase/download it, that creates needless effort. With the other 2 sites you posted, I spent about 15 minutes on each of them hunting for whether and where I could download compiled binaries, or whether the project was a Python script or what. Then I had to admit defeat. Are there programs there that one may download and run? I've seen GitHub repositories that were well-organized and had reasonably prominent links to precompiled binaries (if they existed), so I know it can be done.

What I meant by the 1:05 (or close) was that I was seeing 1:05+/- 5 seconds, and the date stamps on the dll's on you computer tell me that you live somewhere in the Eastern US Time Zone. I live in California. Windows' timezone settings affect how dates appear on Windows systems. As for the incomplete downloads, I've seen this before on MeldaProduction release days. Wherever they host their downloader gets overloaded. With this one, where the Windows installer would either result in a loss of all the dll's or a mismatch between the dll's and the engine, no surprise they're getting pounded.

Okay, can confirm that the installer is working correctly as far as I can tell. If you don't tell it to clean up it overwrites the .vst3 files, if you do tell it to clean up it deletes the old ones and installs the new ones. The date/time stamps on the .vst3 files are 8/10/2023 1:05 (or close, depending on when they compiled them), so if the dates on yours are earlier than that, you have an incorrect installation and should download the newer, larger installer. This means you, @TheSteven and likely @Philip G Hunt.

I did try there and it says it's a "vocal remover." I'm interested in instrument isolation. Specifically, I want to be able to hear nothing but the vocal sometimes for the purpose of figuring out lyrics. Other instruments, too. I'm familiar with GitHub and yes, I know that (theoretically at least), many projects have ready to use installers. Trying to figure out whether or where a project has pre-compiled binaries with or without installers is the needle-in-a-haystack proposition. GitHub has much in common with Linux and REAPER, in my mind. You don't have to be a programming freak to navigate them, but programming freaks have an easier time with them (and can't understand why other people don't?). I've had people tell me before that GitHub's function isn't to be a place where you download programs, and hey, I have to agree that they have done a great job of keeping to that, but then why do people post GitHub links as a way to obtain this or that program? I'm not going to compile binaries myself. The last time I did that was almost 10 years ago when I decided to see if I could build Audacity on Windows with ASIO support (I was eventually successful after a few days hacking at it, although I realized that if I wanted to stay current on Audacity-with-ASIO, I'd have to build it again every time Audacity came out with a new release). I'd also rather not have to install a script interpreter on my computer.

Yes, before August, and 16.08 came out on August 8. On the system where I opted out of the cleanup, the plug-in UI's say 16.08, but the .vst3 dates are 6/27/2023 8:38 AM. I've done it on 3 different systems now, with similar results: if the .vst3 files are not already on the system, the Meldaproduction installer won't put them there, and I'm pretty sure it's not overwriting old ones either. I'm not going to trust it 100% until we hear from Meldaproduction that it's been fixed. Running with dll's from a previous version and an engine from the current version may appear to work fine (and it may even work fine), but it can't be intended behavior from the installer. I don't know if everyone went on summer vacation the minute that 16.08 shipped, but they rely heavily on people being able to download and try their plug-ins (and using the mighty FreeFX bundle). If Windows users haven't been able to do that for a couple of days, that's potentially lost sales ("I downloaded their installer and I guess their stuff won't work on my system").

Ah, GitHub, the place where the hope that you'll be able to just download a program goes to die. I still fall for it, though, because I can't resist the temptation of something free. Gave up in this case, like many others. Is there actually a downloadable program there somewhere or is it just code that people can incorporate into their own programs?

I think that the way it's supposed to work is that the cleanup just gets rid of the old dll's (both .dll and .vst3) before installing new ones. If you opt out of the cleanup, the old ones get overwritten. I usually just go with the quick cleanup because it takes about 2 seconds, and it seems like the installer is kind of nudging me to use it. There's no difference in amount of disk space at the end of it. The MDrummer/SoundFactory files don't get touched by the cleanup operation. I suspect that the only people on Windows who this installer is "working" for are ones who opt out of the cleanup. Check the dates on your .vst3 files and I bet that they will be from earlier than August. It's not really working as intended, it's installing the new "engine" in ProgramData and leaving the old dll's in place. Who knows if this will work....

Part of a flash sale. For Ultra Analog VA-3 and A|A|S Player: https://www.applied-acoustics.com/sounds-from-blkrtz/

The Windows install failure has been brought up by several people on the Meldaproduction forum, including me. Confirmed that it only "works" if you tell it to skip the clean-up. Which results in the previous versions you had installed staying in place, although the UI says that they are 16.08. That's probably due to the Meldaproduction core not being a part of the .vst3 files. It's a mess, and it's uncharacteristic of Melda to fail to address it within 24 hours. It's an installer, that ain't rocket science.

One of the things that has put me off from the company is the apparent "in your face" snotty locker room bro attitude. Naming the company "Cockos?" Calling their plug-in language "Jesusonic?" That indicates (to me) limp high school rebellion. People are supposed to outgrow that crap. I have a hunch that you won't find many women working there.

He was kidding, hence the laughter emoji.

The bakers actually recommend nVidia over AMD. I've been on "Team Green" for over 25 years, going back to when I was doing desktop support for Windows systems. nVidia's drivers worked well with Win 95 and made things a lot quicker. Many years later, a friend gave me his old Radeon 5770, a very nice card, which I installed in my main DAW system. I was using Mixcraft at the time, while they were transitioning from 32-bit to 64-bit. I had them both installed on my Win 7 system and the 64-bit version was unusable. Switched to an nVidia card and 64-bit Mixcraft ran great. The difference was astonishing.

Sure. I also remember that the people who came up with those UI's revised them to look better, to keep up with the times. The appearance of the tools I use to create audio and visuals is important. It affects the amount of enthusiasm I feel for using the tool and my mood while using the tool. This is true for instruments, software, etc. If I have to shield my eyes from a program that looks dated/ugly, I'm less likely to want to use it. I definitely don't mind functional UI's; my favorite plug-in house is Meldaproduction, but they have also made many changes over the past several years to their UI's, based on customer feedback. They're never rude about customer suggestions. If they don't like them, they dismiss them politely or just stay silent.

You have a truly astonishing background! Please forgive my musiciansplaining ?. I went back and watched/listened to a couple of your CBBTV videos and your voice is GREAT. It gave me an opportunity to hear your vocals as recorded. So I gotta question, even more now: why are you applying Melodyne to such a beautiful instrument? Your raw takes I would consider "perfect" if they happened in my studio. I have the same astonished feeling I get when beautiful women of my acquaintance mention that they want to get "work" done: why would you pay someone to take a knife to one of the prettiest faces I've seen? Human voices do vary a little in pitch. IMO, at least, that tiny variation is something that our ears like. It makes a sound more interesting if it varies a little from "perfect." But in matters of taste, I suppose. You must be of the opinion that music like you want to make needs to have vocals that are as perfectly in tune as technique and technology can make them, and if that's the sound you're going for, I'll leave you to it. One last suggestion: maybe you've hit the point where Melodyne is unable to improve upon what you already have.

Based on how many times I see people repeating this piece of Steinberg ad copy, I'd say that it's one of the biggest misconceptions about the VST3 spec. The VST3 spec doesn't require or guarantee that this feature will be implemented in any given VST3 plug-in, and so far, I've seen exactly one plug-in manufacturer implement this feature (Meldaproduction), and they also have the same feature in their VST2 versions. The same much-repeated Steinberg blurb also trumpets that the VST3 spec now supports sidechaining, when I think we all know that sidechaining was possible for years with VST2's even though it wasn't part of the spec. I think the only plug-in maker who use the VST3-native sidechain feature are Waves. The VST3 spec is just that, a specification. There's no magic hand that comes out of the sky and forces developers to implement all the features that are outlined in the spec. And since even now many developers still ship their products in both VST2 and VST3, the code used to build both versions doesn't implement the "advanced" VST3 features. Since I actually have plug-ins that do the silence=sleep thing, I have to say that during mixing, it makes little difference. Plug-ins generally only eat resources when they're processing audio. Check Cakewalk's Performance meter. You can throw on 12 instances of iZotope Neutron and as long as you don't hit Play, the Performance meter will show that few resources will be eaten up. Hit Play, and that's when you better have a rocket sled computer, or dropouts happen. So the thing about it being something great that plug-ins go to sleep when they're not processing audio is kinda snake oil. Maybe @Byron Dickens could weigh in on this? ? I will humbly suggest that if it's your own vocals that regularly "need" Melodyne, yes, learn how to sing in tune. It's not a mysterious innate talent (even I can do it). Your singing voice is an instrument, and the way to get better with any instrument is...practice (duh). Put Cakewalk into loop record mode and sing a verse 5 times in a row over your instrumental track. Then play back each take. Listen for where you're not hitting the notes and take a mental note. Sing the bad notes a few times in tune to wear a groove in what being in tune sounds like. Let your voice rest for a spell, drink some water, then repeat until you get diminishing returns. Do this for a few days (doesn't even have to be in a row) and you'll find substantial improvement. You'll get to the point where subsequent takes will be so on pitch that you can have a choir of Rexes all singing in unison. Melodyne, IMO, is for fixing performances that you don't have control over, like tracks brought in by other people, and/or singers that want to sound professional without doing the work it takes to learn to sing in tune. It's much better if you don't have to fix anything in the first place. As I said, I'm able to do it, and I've never had a voice lesson in my life. I just used the method I suggested (stumbled on it, actually) and it worked a treat. Part of what you're doing is teaching your brain how to hear a note and then direct your voice to create that note. Our brains love learning new ways to better control our bodies and will happily comply, working the problem even when you're not actually practicing. It's actually great fun. Once you're comfortable with hitting the notes, your voice will relax and you'll get performances with better feel. If this doesn't work, then re-record the lines where you missed the note(s) and comp. It takes much less time than farting around with Melodyne, and there's no concern about unwanted artifacts and such.

See my previous post. Dead simple, really. Put the plug-in in the FX rack of the track that whose dynamics you want to control. Make a send on the track you want to do the controlling and choose the name of the plug-in as the destination. Tuning it is more complicated. In the case of compression, the level of the send on the controlling track will affect how the plug-in works. Obviously, the harder you hit it, the more it's going to squash the target track. It's pretty much the same result as adjust the threshold control on the plug-in. I usually leave it at default and adjust it using the plug-in's threshold control.

I was inquiring about MAutoDynamicEQ, not Trackspacer. I've never used Trackspacer on a full mix; the more things you're ducking with it the more likely you are to hear it working, which you aren't supposed to. The way I see its job is to reduce collisions between instruments rather than to carve out a space for one instrument in a full mix. I use it on things like guitar vs. synths, where I have one or more synths that are stepping on the guitar(s). What I do in that situation is that (if I don't already have one) I create a bus for Synths. Then I insert Trackspacer in the FX Rack of the Synths bus. On the guitar track (or bus, depending), I create a send, with Trackspacer as the destination. Then set the large center knob on Trackspacer for the amount of ducking I want. A good starting place is to apply it until I can hear the process of the synths being ducked, then back off a bit and finalize. (that took way longer to type than it does to actually get Trackspacer set up) That is a fine concept for a mixer who can choose his bass and kick sounds from an endless menu before he starts trying to get them to fit together. For people who are working with "a 22-inch cylinder with a plastic membrane stretched across it, hit with a felt hammer operated by someone's foot, recorded with a microphone" vs. "a steel wire plucked by someone's finger exciting a magnetic transducer," there will more often be situations where the sounds will overlap and become indistinct. If I'm creating a song from the ground up with complete control over what sounds I'm using (synthetic), I'll usually just pick and choose the source sounds so that they won't interfere with each other. I hadn't thought about it, but I guess my compositional brain kind of does that automatically. I imagine that Mr. Mau5 works the same way. In electronic genres, you can have way different kick and bass sounds on each song. If it's a rock song with guitar, bass, keys and drums, and the band have a signature sound they want to get across, it's a much different process. Trackspacer is a problem solver. Of course it's best to avoid problems as far upstream as possible.

I think I had the Free/Pro bundle upgrade and MModernCompressor. It was like having bought a sedan and then having the dealer drop off an inverted hovercraft to get me interested in future vehicles. Oddly enough, it worked, although I struggled at first to "get a handle" on MSpectralDelay rather than just tossing it on a letting it do its thing. Something I find is that unlike with say, Glitchmachines or Unfiltered Audio, Meldaproduction's "lab equipment" look encourages me to look at their FX as surgically precise tools, while the truth is there's plenty of weird sound-design-y warpy wibblly wubbly fun to be had there, even in the FreeFX bundle. Throw MComb on a drum mix some time with one of those presets with the moving filters.

That was a loyalty perk. When they released it (has it been 5 years?), anyone who had a license for any Meldaproduction product got an NFR license for MSpectralDelay added to their account.

With sidechaining enabled, I take it? Tell me more about how you set it up. As much as I my policy is usually "try to do it with my Meldaproduction FX first," there are exceptions, and Trackspacer is one of them. I have every effect that Meldaproduction has ever made (also, eventually, ever will make ?), plus iZotope Music Production Suite 5, and nothing (so far) touches Trackspacer for fast, good-sounding results. Attractive, clean UI in standard mode, just the right amount of access to advanced parameters if you want. It's so easy and quick it still feels like cheating after all these years. ? There are some plug-ins that are industry standards for good reason, and after demoing them, I ended up setting aside "I can do this with my existing collection of plug-ins." XLN's RC-20 is another one.

Have you noticed that over the years, in reviews, writers seem to hit Cakewalk/SONAR/Cakewalk/Sonar for being "Windows-only," but give Logic X more leeway? Is that just my perception as a Cakewalk user?

For the most excellent (and free) Soundpaint sampler: https://soundpaint.com/products/copperphone

That is only true for the very bottom of the line stuff. Once you take a step up from the bottom, they do have "real" Asio drivers. Another case of Behringer shooting themselves in the foot by further messing up their reputation.