If you have the original file in Cubase I think you can just change the tempo there?

If you do it with some other software afterwards it loses some quality.

Yeah i have the project but it has lots of bounced audio and samples scattered around the midi tracks.. so just bumping the tempo up as far as i'm aware will speed up all the midi leaving all the audio out of whack.. unless each audio file is warped aswell, but it just seems simpler to try and apply whatever digital process the CDJ pitch control does to the whole wav file..

As I said though messing with warping samples and audio is not my forte, so i'm definitely open to any and all ideas here..

___________________
i7 | Cubase | Virus TI KB | Motu 828mk3 | K&H O300 | Dell U2410 x2 | Maschine | Soundcloud

warp it in ableton is probably your best bet. Even as a single audio file , the results are pretty good.

___________________
"This is why Superman works alone." GC
old stuff from days gone by (2001-2004)
Mad For Brad's gay little contest

If your track is finished I wouldn't mess with it tbh. Let the DJs play it faster if they think it sounds better.

quote:

Originally posted by meriter If your track is finished I wouldn't mess with it tbh. Let the DJs play it faster if they think it sounds better.

+1

or just speed it up in Wavelab, also mind you, often increasing speed adds sense of excitement.

___________________
Analogue Mastering
Esoteric sound for the discerning ear

oh, im very excited now

warping it as the name suggests, will definitely alter the final quality of the mix, you'll en up with very slight variances in the sound quality, obviously because you is stretching it forwards or backwards...amirite?

___________________


Found Atlantis - Mixography [mix archive/mokumentary/my soul]?
i writed a song.

quote:

Originally posted by KilldaDJ warping it as the name suggests, will definitely alter the final quality of the mix, you'll en up with very slight variances in the sound quality, obviously because you is stretching it forwards or backwards...amirite?

Can't remember where but I'm sure I read that pitching up wont affect the quality but it will be affected by slowing it down.. Anyway as already mentioned ableton will do it in seconds for you.


Speeding things up slightly almost always makes tracks sound better, the same as the loudness thingy.

Yeah don't have ableton.. tho.

it's only a 3% increase.. So the original 132bpm would be 136, maybe even 138 would be better. I started out writing a more proggressive type tune and it ended up being closer to psy trance so the few extra bpm I think suits the track better, definitely boosts the excitement a little as was said.

I'm wanting it to go up on soundcloud which is why I want to build in the speed change rather than leave it up to a DJ.

I could probably take it round to someone who uses ableton but i'm surprised if it has better algorithms for audio processing than cubase 5?? maybe just easier to use? Haven't got to grips yet with the different modes of warping in cubase, musical mode and free warp.. i've got it to work on small loops well enough but yeah I don't want any damage done to the audio over a long file hence the research.

___________________
i7 | Cubase | Virus TI KB | Motu 828mk3 | K&H O300 | Dell U2410 x2 | Maschine | Soundcloud

I used to have a habit of cranking up the BPM on all the music I put onto my MP3 player because I run in the mornings, and I wanted my favorite tracks to motivate me at high speeds.

My technique for doing this was to use Goldwave and use the Playback Sample Rate option. Change it from 44hz to say 48hz or 52hz or just experiment with higher numbers to find the speed you want. Then just save as to a new file, and there is your track at it's new playback speed.

A 2nd option would be to use the pitch plugin for Winamp, adjust to your liking, then record it into the app of your choice.

___________________

-Facebook- -SoundCloud-

This render is for soundcloud not DJ's guys so it needs to be pre-processed..

Magnus when I mastered it I converted from 96/32 to 44.1/16 and compared the output files in adjacent tracks, the 44.1 track was half as long, (or twice as fast) as the 96 original, so i'm thinking increasing the sample rate would do the opposite, ie make the file longer and slower? (unless it was because the project containing both the tracks was still set to 96 though..)

Also some players might struggle to play something that isn't 44.1 presumably?

izotope radius looks like it would work but it also looks like its mac/logic only unless i'm on the wrong page or something.

___________________
i7 | Cubase | Virus TI KB | Motu 828mk3 | K&H O300 | Dell U2410 x2 | Maschine | Soundcloud

quote:

Originally posted by Osmodiar Yeah don't have ableton.. tho. it's only a 3% increase.. So the original 132bpm would be 136, maybe even 138 would be better. I started out writing a more proggressive type tune and it ended up being closer to psy trance so the few extra bpm I think suits the track better, definitely boosts the excitement a little as was said. I'm wanting it to go up on soundcloud which is why I want to build in the speed change rather than leave it up to a DJ. I could probably take it round to someone who uses ableton but i'm surprised if it has better algorithms for audio processing than cubase 5?? maybe just easier to use? Haven't got to grips yet with the different modes of warping in cubase, musical mode and free warp.. i've got it to work on small loops well enough but yeah I don't want any damage done to the audio over a long file hence the research.

Able ton warp is why most people use it. Way better than cubase's method. You can do that change with zero perceptible degradation in ableton.

___________________
"This is why Superman works alone." GC
old stuff from days gone by (2001-2004)
Mad For Brad's gay little contest