Time Stretch Question

If “Preserve Pitch” is unchecked, wouldn’t “Time Localization ++” be a better quality setting than “Average Time/Frequency Localization” or “Frequency Localization ++” ? But if that was the case (which I don’t know it is, which is why I’m asking), why would the latter two take so much more time to process, even when “Preserve Pitch” is unchecked.

I just want to change the speed with the highest quality, like tape VSO. (which will obviously change the ptich, which is fine). Would adjusting the clock with a very fine control, and recording into another computer at the target rate accomplish the same, with the highest quality? Is there a clock with such fine control?

Actually that would have to involve an analog step, right? I wasn’t really wanting that.

So just the first question really, about the Time Stretch settings.

If “Preserve Pitch” is unchecked, only sample rate conversion takes place. Your remark is good, but I have no answer, as these algorithms are from third parties.

Thank you PG. That actually helps me out a lot, for comparing. Thank you.

Is wavelab using élastiq ?

No, ZTX from Zynaptiq

1 Like

Not related to this thread, sorry for that, but i got really curious while during some tests, is the resampler proprietary from steinberg or are you using 3rd party algo ? I got very good results from 96 to 44.1 compared to other SRCs.

For resampling alone, Sox Resampler is used, with carefully selected parameters.
For pitch correction, the Resampler is internal to ZTX.

1 Like

Linear phase ?

Of course

1 Like