reverse engineer your tracks(this is pretty cool)

seannash

http://www.prosoniq.com/editing-products/sonicworx/


kinda stunned by this actually.kinda similar to melodyne but its meant to enable you to remove individual elements from finished tracks
very expensive though,expect brewer to be pushing this down your throat soon
:pac::pac:(j/k)

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

http://www.prosoniq.com/editing-products/sonicworx/


kinda stunned by this actually.kinda similar to melodyne but its meant to enable you to remove individual elements from finished tracks
very expensive though,expect brewer to be pushing this down your throat soon
:pac::pac:(j/k)

Didn't someone post on this before? With a video demo of a Peter Gabriel song? and didn't it sound shyte?

SeanHurley

I just watched the youtube of the Peter Gabriel track and it sound gash!

They are having a Steffi Graf thinking they can charge nearly 2 grand for that. The only benefit for a tool like this is for remixes etc. IMO you would spend your money more wisely paying session musicians to recreate the track thus having better results, more control and escaping mechanical royalties if you were to make any money from the said remix.

ICN

Its hilarious from 3.39 with the Trumpet.

He says that the HiHhats you can hear in the background could be the Musicians Headphones bleeding into the Microphone. Then, as deadpan as you like - says "Just Kidding!".

I dont know too much about it.. but I'd say that its a bit rough around the edges still - far from perfect.

jtsuited

while it might be shight, think of how many people ask on this very forum about separating a track into individual elements.

Massive market.

ICN

jtsuited wrote: »

while it might be shight, think of how many people ask on this very forum about separating a track into individual elements.

Massive market.

Time for everyone to start saving up the Butter Vouchers so..

How much was it again? 2K?

Sound as

madtheory

It's fantastic, great technology. The first digital recorders were crap too, that's how it goes.

ICN

Early days alright.. Brilliant though!

seannash

as for it sounding ****e,its a youtube vid.not exactly going to sound impressive.

madtheory

seannash wrote: »

as for it sounding ****e,its a youtube vid.not exactly going to sound impressive.

Yes, but we're comparing Peter Gabriel played back processed and unprocessed via Youtube, which levels the playing field.

studiorat

What a funny man...

seannash

madtheory wrote: »

Yes, but we're comparing Peter Gabriel played back processed and unprocessed via Youtube, which levels the playing field.

ha ha,okay are you comparing the video of the peter gabriel track,coz you can get a higher quality music(just music)upload.
(as far as im aware):D
anyway i still think its good,still in its infancy so imagine what it will be like in a few years.

madtheory

Well it's clear even with the youtube lossy compression that the extraction process is not perfect, the other instruments bleed through. I would've thought that was obvious... this is a good example of the phrase that scientists often use: "all else being equal".

But it is odd that they don't have uncompressed audio demos available.