Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
Search
"Tune Slower" better than Slow Gold?
|
Chris Smart
Transcribe! from Seventh String Software in the UK is great.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Others like Amazing Slowdowner. there are probably free plug-ins for programs like Windows MediaPlayer, Winamp, Foobar 2000 etc. that do this as well. Chris At 11:50 AM 11/24/2010, you wrote:
Hi! |
|
On Nov 24, 2010, at 9:50 AM, Marc Leduc wrote:
Hi!Yes and it's better than slowdowner too imo. Transcribe. Free d l for the working demo. I liked it so much I registered and paid for the license. Slowdowner is not as intuitive and was in your face about money every 5 minutes. Ron Living and playing outside the box. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
Any cheap software more user-friendly than Slow Gold to slow tunes?Audacity is free and user-friendly. It can also transpose. I recently used it to transpose _and_ slow down a tune. The resulting sound was not pretty, but quite good enough to practise with. You might get less sound degradation with Transcribe!. -Keith |
|
I bought slowdowner before I'd ever heard of transcribe. Slowdowner, it seems to me, couldn't be more intuitive.
You play the tune and click where you want the loop to start and click again where you want it to end. You drag a slider for pitch and another for speed. That's the bulk of it. I couldn't figure out how to do that in Transcribe without reading the manual. But, Transcribe has many more features which some find useful. |
|
On Nov 26, 2010, at 8:45 AM, Marc Leduc wrote:
Seems that Transcribe! may "guess" notes and/or chords! Any first handMarketing bullshit. I have this program and like alot over Slow [really a] Downer with it's `gimme my money now' screen in your face every five or ten minutes. The guess feature is not something I'd even mention. Then it wouldn't be marketing would it? I will tell you constantly that the track is to cluttered; yea with notes dipshit! or some other transparent excuse that it doesn't do what it's maker claims. I paid for it because I like what it does and how it does it. The guessing part is more in the context of chords it think. Sometimes it will even make some guesses about the notes in the chord if you isolate just the chord wave form, but then it's multiple choice. That said, guessing chords would accurately would take some very well written code and processing power. The last part we already have. But as we have discussed here many times chord naming is often ambiguous depending on context. Hence the need for some sophistication in the code. When you have the notes figured out you can let your ears get involved to home in on what the chords might be. Ron Living and playing outside the box. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
To be fair to Transcribe!, even if you can select the portion of the audio containing _only_ the chord you're trying to identify, the program is presented with all the overtones produced by the instruments (including the drums!) as well as the actual chord notes, so it's a much more difficult task for a computer than for the human ear + brain.
-Keith |
|
Because the 'slow down' effect isn't quite as good, the EQ settings not as comprehensive, the user interface not as friendly (for me personally) and it doesn't work will all different audio file types....
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
|
|
I'm pretty sure I said something to that effect in the unquoted post
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
you are responding to. Ron Living and playing outside the box. On Nov 26, 2010, at 11:58 AM, keithfre wrote:
To be fair to Transcribe!, even if you can select the portion of |
|
Haven't heard the freebie but I have to say the considering all the
processing going on to slow it down the sound quality in transcribe is quite good. I bought it. I was pretty good in the send money NOW software too. Ron Living and playing outside the box. On Nov 26, 2010, at 2:52 PM, jmc3940 wrote: Because the 'slow down' effect isn't quite as good, the EQ settings [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
|
George Hess
Marc; I'm not sure how useful the feature is but it is more than marketing bullshit as Ron calls it. Transcribe uses a frequency analyzer to identify the pitches and it works pretty well for single note lines but not so much for chords. It shows a graph with the amplitude of the frequencies present. If you understand the harmonic series, it's pretty easy to identify the fundamental as it's louder than the overtones and the overtones should conform to the series (octave, 12th, two octaves, 2 8ves +3rd, etc). But as I said I'm not sure how useful it is. You transcribe to improve your ears as much as anything else. If you want to let a computer do it for you, just buy a book of transcribed solos. George George Hess ghess1000@... |
|
aaron woolley
George wrote - You transcribe to improve your ears as much as anything else.
If you want to let a computer do it for you, just buy a book of transcribed solos. What a Rubbish statement. - Most books I've looked at are 'incorrect in places' - regardless of who has transcribed / published them, I'd much prefer to sit and transcribe - what I want from a track myself.. Using 'Transcribe' is a great help in transcribing - much more of a learning experience than buying a book - surely George . As far as 'chord recognition' goes - Transcribe is really helpful - on something like a 'Joe & Ella' or 'Barney & Julie' track - when it's just guitar(and bass) and vocal - gets those chords that you're 'just not sure about' (most times at least). |
|
I agree completely. The real benefit of transcribing is to improve your ears but not the ones on the sides of your heads. Transcribing teaches your inner ear how to hear things correctly and where what you transcribed and similar things are on your instrument. In my whole life I have never been able to play something I’ve transcribed earlier if it was more than a month earlier or something like that. After a month or so I’ve moved on and that’s it. It’s gone. Someone once told me that if I continued practicing the piece for three weeks after I transcribed it I would finally be able to remember it on a more or less permanent basis. Unfortunately I have never tried that. It’s not important to me but what is important is how transcribing has brought me closer to understanding where things are on my guitar and how to make them happen in the manner I hear them internally. However if years later I hear something I have transcribed I still probably cannot play it from just memory but I can play right alongside the recording with just a few mistakes. I am sure that this is common to others who transcribe material.
The other benefit is the noodling factor. For every lick I steal off a recording I can come up with at least 5 personalized versions of the original lick. Brian Kelly From: aaron woolley Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:02 AM To: jazz_guitar@... Subject: [jazz_guitar] Re: "Tune Slower" better than Slow Gold? George wrote - You transcribe to improve your ears as much as anything else. If you want to let a computer do it for you, just buy a book of transcribed solos. What a Rubbish statement. - Most books I've looked at are 'incorrect in places' - regardless of who has transcribed / published them, I'd much prefer to sit and transcribe - what I want from a track myself.. Using 'Transcribe' is a great help in transcribing - much more of a learning experience than buying a book - surely George . As far as 'chord recognition' goes - Transcribe is really helpful - on something like a 'Joe & Ella' or 'Barney & Julie' track - when it's just guitar(and bass) and vocal - gets those chords that you're 'just not sure about' (most times at least). |
|
George Hess
George wrote - You transcribe to improve your ears as much as anything else.Aaron, You'll need to learn to read for information and not take things out of context. I was talking about using the feature where Transcribe figures out the notes for you not the program in general. I've never had any success with it figuring out chords, though it's not something I've really needed. George Hess ghess1000@... |
|
In a message dated 12/3/2010 9:19:44 A.M. Central Standard Time,
robferrari@... writes: I seem to recall members uploading copies of out of print books to this forum. If memory serves, I believe it was OK/legal because they were out of print. Alisdair could probably confirm the appropriatness? If so it might be an option for those who have the book but are not willing to part with it. If not, nevermind ;-) ==== It sounds as if the author might agree with this. I think you could take it to Kinko's. They would convert it to a PDF file or hardcopy. Whoever wanted the copy could pay for it. Jack H |
|
Blueslogic
Hello Scott,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Yes, I'm looking "Style For The Studio" by Leon White. No one seems to have one. There are a few online for over $95.00. I can't come near that. I've spoken to Leon White and he's on the lookout for one, but no luck yet. I really can't afford anything close to that. If you have this book and you're willing to part with it, maybe we could work something out. Thank you so much for taking the time to post this. Sincerely Wayne, --- In jazz_guitar@..., Scott R Dercks <nearvana@...> wrote:
|
Scott Dercks
to navigate to use esc to dismiss