Tuning for VSTi's (finetune) possible?

Relabsoluness · January 23, 2009, 15:46:14

.

Saga Musix · January 23, 2009, 17:58:15

according to the german wiki, there was only a suggestion by Verdi in the 19th century to use 432hz, but no other hints at 432hz being a standard that has been dropped.

LPChip · January 23, 2009, 18:17:48

The article that lead me to this can be found here:

http://niburu.nl/index.php?articleID=20092

Its in dutch however, so you'll need to translate it using bablefish or something.

I tried various tuning VST's but they don't do what you expect them to do. They only measure the tuning, not allow options to alter it.

If you know one that actually allows to alter the pitch, I'd be happy to try it out.

But wether this is valid or not, it doesn't change the fact that I personally want to make music on this frequency because I feel a difference and like the 432hz way better than the 440hz.

EDIT: http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&u=http://niburu.nl/index.php%3FarticleID%3D20092&sl=nl&tl=en&swap=1

Relabsoluness · January 23, 2009, 19:05:36

Quote from: "LPChip"If you know one that actually allows to alter the pitch, I'd be happy to try it out.

I tried the approach with Madshifta. It does alter the pitch and at idea level it seemed like a possible solution, but there were at least some sound quality problems so perhaps it's not a solution in practice.

Saga Musix · January 23, 2009, 19:05:41

Realtime tuning is cpu-heavy and it doesn't sound very good most times. If this was that easy, we would already have perfect time stretchers and pitch benders. That's why you have use VSTis that have a built-in detune option.

Here's a quote from kb (the guy who wrote the V2 synth):

Quote from: "url]http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=5329[/url]"](...) because a thing like "_in frequency spectrum_" doesn't exist. There are always frequency and phase, and those two are impossible to separate. Otherwise we'd have had perfect time stretchers, pitch shifters, instrument extractors, stereo-to-surround decoders for twenty years now. Which we don't have even now. At least not "perfect" ones. Because, as said, it's mathematically impossible to do such things.

LPChip · January 23, 2009, 20:16:42

I already had the feeling altering the pitch on the waveform would be impossible.

For now I'll settle with tuning my samples, and in addition I'll build me some VSTi's (or perhaps just one) that works the way I want it.

I already made a good plugin with SynthEdit before that I use in many many songs of mine. But I think about trying SynthMaker.

Harbinger · January 24, 2009, 00:30:01

If 440 is the universal setting, why not track the music at 440, save it to .wav, and then detune the .wav down to 432? I can't imagine this will upset the harmonies....

Relabsoluness · January 24, 2009, 13:15:09

Quote from: "LPChip"I already had the feeling altering the pitch on the waveform would be impossible.

Quote from: "Jojo"Realtime tuning is cpu-heavy and it doesn't sound very good most times.

Playing a sample with different pitch is rather basic feature in sound software(e.g. consider playing a sample with different note). Altering pitch without affecting the playback time is a different story, but that doesn't seem to be required if the option is to modify samples which changes the playback time. And there are players that time stretch in real time with quite acceptable quality(at least for many purposes), so without better knowledge I wouldn't rule out the possibility of even having a good enough time invariant pitch shifting in real time especially as the needed pitch shift range in this case is very small.

Sam_Zen · January 24, 2009, 20:21:24

Anybody tried to make a digital Harmonizer as an application or in VST format ?