pouët.net

kb is right it is hard (or impossible) to extract
proof ahead:
original: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIM4DCn7AlE
timbalized version: http://www.glenz.org/Nelly_Furtado-Promiscuous_Girl_(EviL_mix).mp3
believe it or not, it took longer to extract the voice in a nice way than making the music Oo

i object kb's statement about death metal and mention alex webster and chuck schuldiner, james murphy and any of the swedish/melodic musicians (in flames, haunted, at the gates) as proof.

Assuming the following interpretation of the OP:
Leadguitar voice one panned left
Chords (harmonics) panned center
Leadguitar voice two panned right

Why wouldn't a boolean AND, _in frequency spectrum_ work?

Is the fact that the notes (and therefore the frequencies) of the solo voices overlap with the chords the only reason?

schlonzman: because a thing like "_in frequency spectrum_" doesn't exist. There are always frequency and phase, and those two are impossible to separate. Otherwise we'd have had perfect time stretchers, pitch shifters, instrument extractors, stereo-to-surround decoders for twenty years now. Which we don't have even now. At least not "perfect" ones. Because, as said, it's mathematically impossible to do such things.

Fourier transform != frequency domain. That's all. A more detailed explanation is here: http://number-none.com/product/Mipmapping,%20Part%202/index.html. It's for graphics, but still applies.

Smash: I said "publicly", as in "not confined to your own intros". And seriously, playing an ACM compressed drumloop doesn't count as kicking someone's arse, especially if the other features can be counted with one hand :)

Gargaj: But then you even listen to that stuff. Talk about being prejudiced *g*

Just for kicks, here's the solo unedited:
www.student.dtu.dk/~s072421/hunger_noedit.ogg

And, mono-mixed with one channel in reverse phase:
www.student.dtu.dk/~s072421/hunger_phasemix.ogg

But kb_, you are right about the rules and all that - they've brought me very far, but I feel like cheating ;)

kb: hey, at least ours _has_ sample support. :) . and anyway, we had loads of features in that thing. karplus strong for guitar, vocoder, reverb.. and..
fuck it, why bother. i could just completely lie here because im never going to release it.
so.. it had everything! you could basically put a random number in and it gave you beathoven's 5th with a full orchestra. it's just reed's music that was limiting it!

i like the "publically released" clause though. i said after asm06 "we will never do another 64k until someone comes and releases one that kicks our asses!" - from now on, "releases one" means "releases with full source"! ;)

> it's just reed's music that was limiting it!

Sarcasm aside, this is actually the point. I'd love to hear what the thing is capable of when used by someone else; Reed's soundtracks were kinda too close to each other style-wise to really get an overview of what your synth is capable of. (and i hope i worded that well enough; I don't want to offend anybody with this... wait... then on the other hand... this is pouet after all. Ah what the heck, forget about what I've said, you suck :)

So, what's to say against releasing it? Well, apart from the support nightmare you're getting yourself in, that is? :)

listening to meshuggah - renothing, in this thread.

kb: well, the support factor was always pretty high on my mind, yes. its bad enough people bitching about your demo not working on such and such a config.. the bitching for support for tools is off the chart. :) there's no way i would be bothered to support it.

but over that, i was always against releasing scene tools (aside from utilities like kkrunchy or kkapture or crinkler.) - things that have a critical influence on the sound or look of the production. lets face it, you can spot a v2 tune over another synth from a pretty fair distance - it has a lot of influence on the sound of the track. the same can be said for werkzeug and visuals. it's only natural it's like that.

if i had released my synth all it would probably do is give some people another reason not to bother trying to write their own and do better. :) which is pretty much what happened with v2 - it takes quite a lot of effort to beat it, it's freely available.. why try harder? no wonder it's never been beaten in 8 years (or has only been beaten once ;) ). what you should have done is kept it to yourself and jumped around saying "my synth is so damn good, you can never beat it" - and hopefully people might try and shut you up. :)

the other part of that is,we're in the demo business to release demos, not tools, and thats what i want people to respect us for - not the tools we made along the way. i quite like the idea that the whole production process for our demos is a bit of a mystery. :)

finally, suppose our synth was entirely made to work around the target users (reed) and the prefered musical style of the productions (which it sort of is - features were added based on requirements that came up) - that wouldnt be a bad thing at all. :) v2 is bent towards certain styles too - if you tried to make disco with it i wonder what youd get.. :)

knos: i actually like some of the tunes on the original version better, the remastered version sounds too clean at some parts... (that said, rational gaze sounds vastly superior on the new mix)