hi Nigel and Alan,
i beg to differ that frequency analysis (i.e. FFT) is always necessary to do 
formant-preserving pitch shifting.� that's what this Lent 
(https://www.jstor.org/stable/3679554) or Hamon (i can't find a direct 
reference, but it is referenced
here:�https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4b8c/facc5e5af6850052fec6931d96124c7ee74c.pdf
 ) thing is about.� and i sorta analyze it
here:�https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Bristow-Johnson/publication/255966071_A_Detailed_Analysis_of_a_Time-Domain_Formant-Corrected_Pitch-Shifting_Algorithm/links/5625676308aeabddac91cd08/A-Detailed-Analysis-of-a-Time-Domain-Formant-Corrected-Pitch-Shifting-Algorithm.pdf
 . (don't
tell AES that a copy of this paper lives at that location.� they'll be pissed 
and want it taken down, even if it's a quarter century old.)
it needs a good pitch detector, but it can be used to shift pitch and formants 
independently of each other.� (the separate formants are *not*
independent of each other, just that the formants together can be shifted 
independently of pitch.)� and it surely seems to me to be a form of granular 
synthesis (or resynthesis).� the fricatives will get their asses all chopped up 
and mangled, but if they're quick, it won't sound too awful
bad.� the Digitech Vocalist and the Roland Voice Transformer were based on 
this.� i dunno if either Lent or Hamon gotta dime from any profits from these 
products.
not implying that this el-cheapo time-domain technique beats a good phase 
vocoder.� but it's cheap and does not
require soooo much delay that it is ruled out for real-time or live application.
bestest,

--



r b-j� � � � � � � � � � � � �r...@audioimagination.com



"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
�
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------

Subject: Re: [music-dsp] granular synth write up / samples / c++

From: "Nigel Redmon" <earle...@earlevel.com>

Date: Mon, March 5, 2018 9:50 pm

To: "A discussion list for music-related DSP" <music-dsp@music.columbia.edu>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------



> Hi Alan&mdash;extremely cool article, nice job!

>

> This is related to your closing question, but if you have time, I found this 
> course very interesting:

>

> Audio Signal Processing for Music Applications

> https://www.coursera.org/learn/audio-signal-processing

>

> It&rsquo;s a different thing&mdash;the main part pertaining to analysis and 
> re-synthesis in the frequency domain, with pitch and time changing and 
> including formant handling. It&rsquo;s not as well suited for real time, 
> since you need to capture something in its entirety before analyzing and
re-synthesizing (unless you go to a lot more work). On the other hand, it knows 
about pitch and individual harmonics, so it allows more sophisticated 
processing, more akin to melodyne. I completed the first offering of it over 
three years ago, don&rsquo;t know what improvements it might have now.
The lab/home work revolves around a python toolkit.
>

> If nothing else, it would give you idea about how to deal with formant (which 
> will need frequency analysis anyway). You can also audit and just check out 
> the course videos pertaining to the harmonic models, for instance.

>

> Nigel

>

>> On Mar 5, 2018, at 5:45 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>> Hello rbj!

>>

>> My techniques are definitely not that sophisticated. It's really neat to 
>> hear what the deeper layers of sophistication are.

>>

>> I'm particularly surprised to hear it is in the neighborhood of vocoders. 
>> That is another technique I'd like to learn sometime, but sounds "scary" 
>> (granular synthesis sounded scary too before I did this post hehe).

>>

>> Anyways, all I'm doing is placing grains after another, but repeating or 
>> omitting them as needed to make the output buffer get to the target length 
>> for whatever percentage the input buffer is at. I only place whole grains 
>> into the output buffer.

>>

>> There is a parameter that specifies a multiplier for playing the grains back 
>> at (to make them slower or faster aka affecting pitch without really 
>> affecting length).

>>

>> Whenever a grain is placed down, say grain index N, if the previous grain 
>> placed down isn't grain index N-1, but is grain index M, it does a cross 
>> fade from grain index M+1 to N to keep things continuous.

>>

>> In my setup, there is no overlapping of grains except for this cross fading, 
>> and no discontinuities.

>>

>> I use cubic hermite interpolation to get fractional samples, my grain size 
>> is 20 milliseconds and the cross fade time is 2 milliseconds.

>>

>> Would you consider this enough in the family of granular synthesis to call 
>> it GS for a layman / introduction?

>>

>> Thanks so much for the info!

>>

>> PS do you happen to know any gentle / short introductions to formants or 
>> vocoders?

>>

>> On Mar 5, 2018 3:58 PM, "robert bristow-johnson" <r...@audioimagination.com 
>> <mailto:r...@audioimagination.com>> wrote:

>>

>> this is very cool. i had not read through everything, but i listened to all 
>> of the sound examples.

>>

>> so there are two things i want to ask about. the first is about this 
>> "granular" semantic:

>>

>> Thing #1: so the pitch shifting is apparently *not* "formant-corrected" or 
>> "formant-preserving". when you shift up, the voice becomes a little 
>> "munchkinized" and when you shift down, Darth Vader (or Satan) comes 
>> through. that's okay (unless one does not want
it), but i thought that with granular synthesis (or resynthesis), that the 
grains that are windowed off and overlap-added where not stretched (for 
downshifting) nor scrunched (for up-shifting). i.e. i thought that in granular 
synthesis, the amount of overlap increases in up shifting and decreases
during downshifting. this kind of pitch shifting is what Keith Lent writes 
about in Computer Music Journal in 1989 (boy that's a long time ago) and i did 
a paper in the JAES in, i think, 1995.
>>

>> without this formant-preserving operation, i think i would call this either 
>> "TDHS" (time-domain harmonic scaling), "OLA" (overlap-add), or "WOLA" 
>> (windowed overlap-add), or if pitch detection is done "SOLA" (synchronous 
>> overlap-add) or
"PSOLA" (pitch synchronous overlap-add). however i have read somewhere the 
usage of the term PSOLA to mean this formant-preserving pitch shifting a.la 
<http://a.la/> Lent (or also a French dude named Hamon). BTW, IVL Technologies 
(they did the pitch-shifting products for Digitech)
was heavy into this and had a few patents, some i believe are now expired.
>>

>> Thing #2: are you doing any pitch detection or some attempt to keep 
>> waveforms coherent in either the time-scaling or pitch-shifting 
>> applications? they sound pretty good (the windowing smoothes things out) but 
>> might sound more transparent if you could space the input grains by an 
>> integer
number of periods.
>>

>> with pitch-detection and careful cross-fading (and windowing can be thought 
>> of as a fade-up function concatenated to a fade-down function) you can make 
>> time-scaling or pitch-shifting a monophonic voice or harmonic instrument 
>> glitch free. it can sound *very* good and companies like Eventide
have been doing something like that since the early-to-mid 80s. (ever since the 
H949.) and i imagine any modern DAW does this (and some might do 
frequency-domain pitch-shifting and/or time-scaling using something we usually 
call a "phase vocoder".
>>

>>

>> but your examples sound pretty good.

>>

>> r b-j

>>

>>

>> ---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------

>> Subject: [music-dsp] granular synth write up / samples / c++

>>

From: "Alan Wolfe" <alan.wo...@gmail.com <mailto:alan.wo...@gmail.com>>

>> Date: Mon, March 5, 2018 5:14 pm

>> To: "A discussion list for music-related DSP" <music-dsp@music.columbia.edu 
>> <mailto:music-dsp@music.columbia.edu>>

>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> > Hey Guys,

>> >

>> > Figured I'd share this here.

>> >

>> > An explanation of basic granular synth stuff, and some simple standalone

>> > C++ i wrote that implements it.

>> >

>> > https://blog.demofox.org/2018/03/05/granular-audio-synthesis/ 
>> > <https://blog.demofox.org/2018/03/05/granular-audio-synthesis/>

>> >

>> > Kind of amazed at how well it works (:

>> >

>> > Thanks for the answer to my question BTW Jeff.

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list

>> > music-dsp@music.columbia.edu <mailto:music-dsp@music.columbia.edu>

>> > https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp 
>> > <https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>>

>> r b-j r...@audioimagination.com <mailto:r...@audioimagination.com>

>>

>> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list

>> music-dsp@music.columbia.edu <mailto:music-dsp@music.columbia.edu>

>> https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp 
>> <https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp>

>> _______________________________________________

>> dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list

>> music-dsp@music.columbia.edu

>> https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp

>

> _______________________________________________

> dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list

> music-dsp@music.columbia.edu

> https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
�
�
�

        
�
�


        --

        

        r b-j� � � � � � � � � � � � �r...@audioimagination.com

        

        "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

_______________________________________________
dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp

Reply via email to