I have Wavelab, I thought by now there would be more connections between the platforms.
When I say “wacky” I mean the UI - unlike anything I’ve ever worked with (perhaps Maya?), but I could tell it was insanely powerful and if you mastered it, you could crank out finished media at a frightening rate.
Never quite got ontop of it myself, but I respect mastering engineers and prefer to pay pros who know what they’re doing as opposed to futzing with it myself.
Yes, this. It’s a really powerful editor.
Maybe it’s a use-case thing. I only ever use it to correct small portions of vocals… a syllable or word here or there or perhaps anything up to half a phrase or so. Any more than that and we get the talent to do overdubs. I’ve never had an issue with pitch under these circumstances.
Most of the time, even though it analyzes and renders inaccurately it’s going to be close enough that most of us won’t notice anything wrong - that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be just that little bit better if it was doing it properly. It sounds like I use it much more than you do - the more you use it the more likely you are to come across incidences where it is far too far out to be useable, eg. times when it is more out of tune than when it started.
I can’t see how you attach files either here or in a message so I’ve uploaded a zip here: Unique Download Link | WeTransfer with a Cubase Project and accompanying files - an expanded repeat of the Retrologue tests (saw waves this time but almost identical results).
I can’t see how it’s going to help but I’ve also used the notepad to list the analyses in Cubase 11 so you can see if they’re any different in 13
Try some other notes - there seems to be a big difference in how well it copes. In the experiments I did it seemed to be a lot less reluctant to tune notes to C and G than to E or B
Interesting. I suppose I’m going to have to try out Cubase 13 to see if they’ve actually fixed it. As I said earlier, I did ask them if they had in 13 but they ignored that part of the question. I hope they have, but I’m not optimistic; whether it works or not does seem very randomly dependant on the source so maybe you’re right but I’d like a tool that worked on more than just perfect saw waves if so!
I just tried the same test as you - the same 4 notes on Vital on a saw wave and did not get the same results as you, though they were a bit closer than some of the tests. I’m interested to know how VariAudio analyzed the original waves you made in Cubase 13. In 11 I’m getting C+47, E+50, G+55 and B+45 (In Wavelab they’re all reading as +50, as expected)
Edit: Nevermind, I was missing the info line.
I got C#3 -48%, F3 -44%, G3+49, C4-42
That’s a deviation of up to 8 cents which seems pretty big. Would be nice to get that fixed.
If a pitch correction tool is 5 cents off I wouldn’t say that it works as intended. I expect the bar to be set higher than that. Especially if the source is a simple waveform such as a sine or a saw.
I’d agree with you on that but if everything was within 5 cents that, for me, would still make it a very usable and trustable tool, especially for vocals. But when it can start off with a note that’s nearly in tune and ends up with one 40 cents sharp, even if it’s only occasionally, that becomes a real problem, and not something Steinberg can justify marketing as a professional, working, feature.
