Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Advice on software ..Please!!

  • 20-01-2013 11:57pm
    #1
    davylee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 386 ✭✭


    Hi. if anyone can help me i'd be hugely grateful. I'm a one man who strums guitar and sings over backing tracks. However backing tracks are massively inconsistent. some songs need tempo changes, volume changes, key changes etc. up until now i've been using audacity and adobe but they dont really cut it. after i export the mp3's they're coming out awful. is anyone else in this situation? Do i need cubase or cakewalk? i dont need all the features of these programs. any advise appreciated


Comments

  • #2
    Lightbulb Sun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,405 ✭✭✭Lightbulb Sun


    davylee wrote: »
    Hi. if anyone can help me i'd be hugely grateful. I'm a one man who strums guitar and sings over backing tracks. However backing tracks are massively inconsistent. some songs need tempo changes, volume changes, key changes etc. up until now i've been using audacity and adobe but they dont really cut it. after i export the mp3's they're coming out awful. is anyone else in this situation? Do i need cubase or cakewalk? i dont need all the features of these programs. any advise appreciated

    Pro Tools has elastic audio to handle the tempo changes. Cubase should have a similar feature.


  • #3
    franktheplank
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,168 ✭✭✭franktheplank


    Volume changes are straightforward, i haven't used elastic audio methods much but these should be ok once you don't overdo it, or over complicate it. Key changes are much more difficult, i'm not familiar with the latest algorithms but you tend to loose quality, or sound unnatural very quickly, if you start pitch-shifting an entire song.

    My advice, unless you're gonna just make very simple changes, get better backing tracks. You might find the time and effort you put into trying to improve them would be best spent just getting better source material.


  • #4
    davylee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 386 ✭✭davylee


    Cheers for the replies lads, probably will end up getting cubase for its quality. the backing tracks i get are really good. but if its different volume than my other tracks, it has to be fixed. or most songs will want to be sped up a bit from the original. think have to be cubase


  • #5
    franktheplank
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,168 ✭✭✭franktheplank


    davylee wrote: »
    Cheers for the replies lads, probably will end up getting cubase for its quality. the backing tracks i get are really good. but if its different volume than my other tracks, it has to be fixed. or most songs will want to be sped up a bit from the original. think have to be cubase

    I actually don't think you need cubase. You can change tempo in audacity without changing pitch and it's perfect for volume changes.



  • #6
    davylee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 386 ✭✭davylee


    hey frank
    actually using audacity is no problem. its when i export the mp3 back to my desktop and play it, the quality is nowhere near as good as it was going in.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Lightbulb Sun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,405 ✭✭✭Lightbulb Sun


    davylee wrote: »
    hey frank
    actually using audacity is no problem. its when i export the mp3 back to my desktop and play it, the quality is nowhere near as good as it was going in.

    Could be to do with your export settings. Try 48hz export and as high quality as you can manage.

    Reaper is free and is far more powerful than Audacity. It's a full DAW and has time stretching features.


  • #8
    franktheplank
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,168 ✭✭✭franktheplank


    davylee wrote: »
    hey frank
    actually using audacity is no problem. its when i export the mp3 back to my desktop and play it, the quality is nowhere near as good as it was going in.

    I'm not overly familiar with audacity myself but what will tell you a lot is whether this is for every song you edit, or just those you do tempo/pitch changes on?

    If you're just making volume changes and the quality is being lost then I'd say it's something to do with how you have audacity set up. As Lightbulb Sun said it might just be the import/export settings.

    If it's just effecting edits where you're doing more complicated changes ie pitch or tempo then it's most likely that audacity's algorithms for these aren't up to scratch. It could possibly be that mp3's just don't lend themselves to being messed around with on pitch/tempo (this stuff involves quite heavy digital processing)

    Lightbulb Sun wrote: »
    Reaper is free and is far more powerful than Audacity. It's a full DAW and has time stretching features.

    Yup i was gonna recommend this too! It's an excellent program but it does take a bit of learning so i'd try playing around with audacity a bit more first.


Advertisement