How do you do a tempo map when the waveform is incredibly unfun to work with?
- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Hi all
So I’m working on a song, and the way I do things is that I chart the drum track and work on the tempo map at the same time. I’m at a part where the drum part doesn’t perfectly match the last written BPM (it’s a little off, and it isn’t off in a consistent manner). As a result, I have to do individual BPM events, but the problem is that the waveform is extremely fucky and inconsistent. What should I do?
Here’s the wave form.
i suggest you focus and complete the tempo map to fullest before authoring at all
a majority of the songs you work on will have super messy waveforms (what this forum refers to as a result “loudness wars” in lots of rock music, so you just have to do your best. Out of the 13 songs i authored only 2 had easy to read waveforms
if a song is 150 BPM on average the BPM will change slightly anywhere from 148 – 152 i, in super rare cases a songs bpm could from 130 to 140 but VERY rarely though). you should also note that if the song was recorded by humans and is not an automated drum machine like in techno music or dubstep the bpm will always change with every measure even by .1, humans are imperfect.
you should always find the downbeat and set a new tempo marker for every single measure even if it looks ok just to make sure. Dont expect to find a magic BPM which lines up the entire song that aint gonna happen.
And to be honest, that’s not a hard to read waveform compared to the songs that fall into the loudness wars category. For example:
http://blog.fixyourmix.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/squashed-waveform-2.png
Scrub around to listen for cues that confirm you’re on the beat, like a kick drum or something else significant. It should be very close to the grid line since the BPM won’t vary too much.
Dont expect to find a magic BPM which lines up the entire song that aint gonna happen.
Not entirely true, I’ve done 4 songs by 3 different bands that were perfectly in sync by setting a static bpm, and I’ve got 4 more songs on the way that have been mappable (almost) entirely like this. Some bands can and will play perfectly to a click track.
The only advice I can give OP is to use your ears rather than your eyes for stuff like this. My method is to make sure metronome is turned on (it really should always be on if you’re tempo mapping), zoom in to a reasonable degree (make sure you zoom in by both enlarging the track vertically and especially using the horizontal scroll wheel at the bottom of the tracks window), try slowing down the song (I go as low as .25 in some faster songs), and you’ll typically be able to hear something that should be on the downbeat, at which point you just have to do some trial and error with placing and removing the tempo marker. What you should be listening for, and what will be made significantly easier by slowing the song down, is if that downbeat note in the song comes before or after the click from the metronome. It’s tedious, but that’s what you have to put up with if there isn’t something clear to use as a downbeat from the waveform.
But yeah, honestly, your waveform looks clear as day to me in comparison to what I’m used to working with, using Farottone’s picture as an all too familiar example.
Not entirely true, I’ve done 4 songs by 3 different bands that were perfectly in sync by setting a static bpm, and I’ve got 4 more songs on the way that have been mappable (almost) entirely like this. Some bands can and will play perfectly to a click track.
Yeah, but let’s not advertise this too much. Honestly laying down a marker every measure for a fixed BPM song leads to little if no problems; assuming a song has a fixed BPM when it does not leads to total apocalypse.
I don’t like using brick walled files for my customs, I generally go to hi-res downloads or needledrops it my CD is limited/compressed.
i suggest you focus and complete the tempo map to fullest before authoring at all
a majority of the songs you work on will have super messy waveforms (what this forum refers to as a result “loudness wars” in lots of rock music, so you just have to do your best. Out of the 13 songs i authored only 2 had easy to read waveforms
if a song is 150 BPM on average the BPM will change slightly anywhere from 148 – 152 i, in super rare cases a songs bpm could from 130 to 140 but VERY rarely though). you should also note that if the song was recorded by humans and is not an automated drum machine like in techno music or dubstep the bpm will always change with every measure even by .1, humans are imperfect.
you should always find the downbeat and set a new tempo marker for every single measure even if it looks ok just to make sure. Dont expect to find a magic BPM which lines up the entire song that aint gonna happen.
I had great luck on my previous song, where 130 lined up the entire song. Unfortunately, the 155 BPM used here doesn’t line up this part (but it does the rest of the song).
I don’t understand why it’s important to map the tempo map absolutely first… wouldn’t seeing the notes of the drum track in the preview window give you immediate feedback on how accurate it is, considering the metronome in REAPER kinda sucks?
And to be honest, that’s not a hard to read waveform compared to the songs that fall into the loudness wars category. For example:
I should show you the chorus waveform, haha. Looks just like that.
My problem with the waveform I have above is that the peaks aren’t consistent in time.
Scrub around to listen for cues that confirm you’re on the beat, like a kick drum or something else significant. It should be very close to the grid line since the BPM won’t vary too much.
I do that, but when I match it when the preview window things get off time.
Not entirely true, I’ve done 4 songs by 3 different bands that were perfectly in sync by setting a static bpm, and I’ve got 4 more songs on the way that have been mappable (almost) entirely like this. Some bands can and will play perfectly to a click track.
The only advice I can give OP is to use your ears rather than your eyes for stuff like this. My method is to make sure metronome is turned on (it really should always be on if you’re tempo mapping), zoom in to a reasonable degree (make sure you zoom in by both enlarging the track vertically and especially using the horizontal scroll wheel at the bottom of the tracks window), try slowing down the song (I go as low as .25 in some faster songs), and you’ll typically be able to hear something that should be on the downbeat, at which point you just have to do some trial and error with placing and removing the tempo marker. What you should be listening for, and what will be made significantly easier by slowing the song down, is if that downbeat note in the song comes before or after the click from the metronome. It’s tedious, but that’s what you have to put up with if there isn’t something clear to use as a downbeat from the waveform.
But yeah, honestly, your waveform looks clear as day to me in comparison to what I’m used to working with, using Farottone’s picture as an all too familiar example.
Why use ears instead of eyes? The default metronome in REAPER blows, and the waveform is inconsistent in peakage.
The metronome in Reaper is actually quite accurate and always sounds a click on time with the grid, even when playback is slowed down or sped up. This lets you rely on it to make sure your downbeats are synced up if your waveform isn’t doing you any favours. The fact of the matter though is that the vast majority of songs have inconsistent tempo and thus you have to learn how to tempo map using the waveform and, if needed, the metronome.
The metronome in Reaper is actually quite accurate and always sounds a click on time with the grid, even when playback is slowed down or sped up. This lets you rely on it to make sure your downbeats are synced up if your waveform isn’t doing you any favours. The fact of the matter though is that the vast majority of songs have inconsistent tempo and thus you have to learn how to tempo map using the waveform and, if needed, the metronome.
The problem I have w/ the REAPER metronome is the sound. It doesn’t sound right. Subjective sort of thing.
The problem I have w/ the REAPER metronome is the sound. It doesn’t sound right. Subjective sort of thing.
Ahh, fair enough. I know it’s tweakable to some extent but I don’t know if you can replace the sound itself.
Ahh, fair enough. I know it’s tweakable to some extent but I don’t know if you can replace the sound itself.
I would like to replace it with the sound of my actual metronome.
If you right-click the metronome button, there’s a whole bunch of settings you can tweak, including replacing the sound entirely with your own sample.
Having just recently dealt with a waveform worse than any other I have ever tempo mapped, and probably worse than any I will ever map in the future (for reference – even though it’s not a picture of the waveform, I’m sure you can imagine what it looks like), I think Chips offers some good advice. Slow it way down and you should be able to pick out what sounds like a downbeat, at which point you can just slightly adjust the tempo of the marker until the metronome lines up with it. The scrubbing technique often used for vocals (as shown in Nyx’s tutorial) can also be used to pinpoint exactly where a beat hits, if there is a defined hit to begin with.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.