 removing music and leaving the vocal |
@1$-)
unregistered
 |
|
|
ok i basically want to know if thers a way of creating accapellas. ive tried the phase reverse/inversion technique but is doesnt usually work,only on certain tracks.but itss very rare....... ive tried using noise reduction tools but theres usually to many frequencies that that you just cant get rid off, any one know if its possible, ive got loads of tracks i want the vocals from, and theres no way ill ever find em on p2p or anytrhing similar, not gonna happen. so anyone got any suggestions???
|
|
|
11-05-2005 16:37 |
|
|
Surora23 
Agressive Melodic Disorder
Registration Date: 05-07-2004
Posts: 2,127
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by MUNKI C
ok i basically want to know if thers a way of creating accapellas. ive tried the phase reverse/inversion technique but is doesnt usually work,only on certain tracks.but itss very rare....... ive tried using noise reduction tools but theres usually to many frequencies that that you just cant get rid off, any one know if its possible, ive got loads of tracks i want the vocals from, and theres no way ill ever find em on p2p or anytrhing similar, not gonna happen. so anyone got any suggestions??? |
the reason why your phase inversion technique didnt work is because youre not using the proper music files...
everything has to be exactly the same to the very amount of volume, pitch...everything...the bit sizes have to be exact and everything...if one thing is off the conversion of the music reduction will be cprrupted and thus you still get music or just a messed up sounding track...
__
Rinse it OUT!!!! 
|
|
|
11-05-2005 16:50 |
|
|
@1$-)
unregistered
|
|
|
its got more to do with the fact it wont work on certain tunes
|
|
|
11-05-2005 18:03 |
|
|
spudleyq
Master Producer
Registration Date: 23-09-2004
Posts: 838
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by MUNKI C
its got more to do with the fact it wont work on certain tunes |
It will work on every tune. Think about it, if you have the instumental version of a song, which is JUST the instrumental, which is EXACTLY what you want to get rid of.......then inverting the waveform and placing it PRECISELY on top of the original WILL cancel out all of the intruments.
Like Surora said though, it's a very precise science and needs to be EXACT. I've never had a successful attempt at this method, but that's because I didn't have original copies of the tunes I wanted to accapella-ize.
Best way to get it done: Have a copy of the original song, and a copy of the instrumental either on vinyl, or on a CD. Rip both tracks at the SAME volume, at the SAME bitrate, everything. Take the instrumental, invert the waveform, and find the VERY first speck of movement in the wave, and lay it EXACTLY on top of SAME spot on the full song. It's not easy......at all. It's not for the faint of heart......at all. But it does indeed work perfectly if performed perfectly.
@ Ultradark: He wanted an accapella......not an instrumental. Removing the vocals will not get you an accapella, no matter what your imaginary friends tell you.
Continueing with that though, It is possible to obtain an instrumental version of the track by using Analog X vocal remover, or any other good quality vocal remover. Like he said, it removes everything that is in the center channel, and the center channel only. This doesn't work with every song though, especially Beatles songs.......they hardly EVER kept their vocals in the center. Bouncing back and forth, left and right.....crazy Beatles. I think they even did some work with quadraphonic.....try removing the vocals from that shit!!!
Regardless, once you have an instrumental, which was made from the same file as the one you're altering......it is quite possible that you can do the inversion technique on it. Try it......might be worth it.
__
Click on the pic above to visit my music profile on Myspace.
This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by spudleyq: 11-05-2005 20:56.
|
|
|
11-05-2005 20:50 |
|
|
@1$-)
unregistered
|
|
|
the beatles vocals are easy to sort out, u only need to pan the older stuff left or right and theres loads of stuff to sample
|
|
|
11-05-2005 22:05 |
|
|
Muad'Dib
Andrejnalin
Registration Date: 02-12-2003
Posts: 4,197
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
So what's with this "instrument removal" shit? What do you mean by "inversing the instrumental track" and then "layering over it" (?!). How to layer it? Should you paste it over (like in Sound Forge paste from file) or something else?
BTW What is inverting of sounds? Reversed sounds (like popular done with crash percussion) or somewhat reversed in sound signal 
__
Thinking about becoming an Image-Line/FL Studio customer? Want a 10% reduction in price? Use this affiliate link:
http://affiliate.image-line.com/BADEBDG473
There is no such thing without its opposite
-Bene Gesserit
|
|
|
12-05-2005 02:00 |
|
|
Halph-Price
Zombie Algorithm
Registration Date: 22-12-2004
Posts: 6,160
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
you flip it.
you know about DC offset, or even just how a wave shape is. there's the middle line, called zero pint. that's the point that you, more appropraitly termed "INVERT" the waveform. so than all the wave shape, above the middle line , or zero-point, is than on bottem, and vice-versa, the bottem waveshapes are on the top.
__
|
|
|
12-05-2005 02:07 |
|
|
Muad'Dib
Andrejnalin
Registration Date: 02-12-2003
Posts: 4,197
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
Yeah, I thought about it a minute and I got how it works.
For everyone:
if you have a signal in upper part (above the line) and you add a signal which is with the same form but below the line, the two signals cancel, and that leaves a 0 signal.
88888888
--------------
plus
--------------
88888888
gives minus 8's + positive 8's = 0
But still, I don't get how this doesn't affect the vocals
__
Thinking about becoming an Image-Line/FL Studio customer? Want a 10% reduction in price? Use this affiliate link:
http://affiliate.image-line.com/BADEBDG473
There is no such thing without its opposite
-Bene Gesserit
|
|
|
12-05-2005 02:13 |
|
|
Halph-Price
Zombie Algorithm
Registration Date: 22-12-2004
Posts: 6,160
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
yea...... it should actually cancle it all out.
__
|
|
|
12-05-2005 02:28 |
|
|
Halph-Price
Zombie Algorithm
Registration Date: 22-12-2004
Posts: 6,160
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
yea, that's a good one.
__
|
|
|
12-05-2005 03:07 |
|
|
spudleyq
Master Producer
Registration Date: 23-09-2004
Posts: 838
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by ultradark
with analog x vocal remover that removes everything mono you can get vocal because the beats and basses are mostly mono or less stereo than vocal. the name is actually misleading. |
Actually, it's called a vocal remover, because most vocals are placed right in the middle, and everything else is spaced outwards from there. This may not apply to EVERY single genre out there, but in most genres, this is the case.
You really aren't that intelligent, are you? 
__
Click on the pic above to visit my music profile on Myspace.
|
|
|
12-05-2005 18:29 |
|
|
spudleyq
Master Producer
Registration Date: 23-09-2004
Posts: 838
Helpfulness rating:
|
|
| quote: |
Originally posted by muaddib
Yeah, I thought about it a minute and I got how it works.
For everyone:
if you have a signal in upper part (above the line) and you add a signal which is with the same form but below the line, the two signals cancel, and that leaves a 0 signal.
88888888
--------------
plus
--------------
88888888
gives minus 8's + positive 8's = 0
But still, I don't get how this doesn't affect the vocals
|
It doesn't affect the vocals because the inverted waveform you're laying on top of it doesn't have the vocals in it. There's no anti-vocals to annihilate the vocals, only anti-instrumental annihilating the instrumental, leaving the vocals.
__
Click on the pic above to visit my music profile on Myspace.
|
|
|
12-05-2005 18:32 |
|
|
|
