Well, it would still be helpful to describe where you feel Melodyne doesn't perform well so others can try the same function with V-Vocal (or Auto-Tune, for that matter) and see if they get better results. 

What's wrong with Editor? I don't see any inherent huge differences between it and older versions of the plugin? Except for the positive (ARA, DNA, etc.).

I made a post in the software section under "Auto tune" just last week and I left my observations on the Celemony forum at the same time.
 
All of this was just coincidental to this thread.
 
I also searched out opinions about Auto Tune vs Melodyne and learned that with the advent of the latest bloated version of Auto Tune that a lot of guys that have both are dismayed at the performance of both.
 
Shouldn't be too hard to learn about.
 
A brief synopsis would be: 
 
1) Timing drift issues abound.
 
2) Sacrificing satisfactory single note melody correction capabilities for the promise of polyphonic fun and games.
 
I gave Melodyne Editor 2 years of optimism and then last week I used Acronis to restore and old closet classic DAW to a state where I have a licensed version of Melodyne Plugin running.
 
Got to go... guests arriving.
 
all the best,
mike
 
 

Right, well I'm sorry to hear that. All I can say is I don't share your experiences.

RexRed

Try spending some time in V-vocal and you will figure it out.

It's statements like this that ruin any valid point you may have.  Someone asks you a question and you tell them to go look for the answer.  Obviously if they were determined to use Vvocal they would have done so.  Your statement also assumes that they have not already.  Has it crossed your mind that they used Vvocal just as much of not more than you but simply came to different conclusions?  The general public, for whatever reason, simply did not embrace Vvocal.  i still have it and use it occasionally.  There are things I feel it does better than the version of melodyne  bundled with Sonar.  However, once you upgrade to Editor, it's not even close. The polyphonic capabilities alone are a simple "game over" in that contest.  The funny thing is it's not a contest because Roland chose to bow out and complaining to cakewalk about it is silly.  Even if you could convince all the people who had years to love Vvocal and chosae not  to finally embrace it, it would still be a zombie product.  Granted, dead products have gotten new life, but it's rare.  The 303 was a bit of a flop until techno embraced it.  Even the mighty 808 and 909 were modest sellers used mostly in the then small hip-hop and EDM markets.  Despite retro units selling for several times original values in later years, Roland chose to release completely new products with samples rather than re-issue the dead product.  We HAVE spent time with Vvocal.  Some of us liked.  Others did not.  It crashed on me a lot (ironically it got more stable in X3) but I still used it now and then.  I'm still trying to figure out the point of ranting about discontinued products.  It's not coming back no matter how many temper tantrums are thrown.  Even if tha tdid work, you would be better off ranting at Roland since it would be their decision to ressurect it.

It might have gotten a larger user base if they had ever sold it as a product in its own right. But I suppose they felt it was a unique selling point of Sonar. And it had a version of ARA avant le lettre, which would've been tricky to implement universally.

You know you must be right when Mike McCue is on your side.

I think it's funny he had to throw in that him commenting was a coincidence.  I actually don't think this guy is Mike this time.  I think the whole sample drift thing is a bit overblown anyway.  It's like rejecting a Ferarri because you hate the floor mats.  All software has quirks but for most of us the positive outweighs the bad.  Having to compensate for the occasional <200 sample draft is minor considering the tasks that can be achieved with no other software that I am aware of.

The days before vvocal...

http://youtu.be/F9nGyPz9uT0

dubdisciple

RexRed

Try spending some time in V-vocal and you will figure it out.

It's statements like this that ruin any valid point you may have.  Someone asks you a question and you tell them to go look for the answer.  Obviously if they were determined to use Vvocal they would have done so.  Your statement also assumes that they have not already.  Has it crossed your mind that they used Vvocal just as much of not more than you but simply came to different conclusions?  The general public, for whatever reason, simply did not embrace Vvocal.  i still have it and use it occasionally.  There are things I feel it does better than the version of melodyne  bundled with Sonar.  However, once you upgrade to Editor, it's not even close. The polyphonic capabilities alone are a simple "game over" in that contest.  The funny thing is it's not a contest because Roland chose to bow out and complaining to cakewalk about it is silly.  Even if you could convince all the people who had years to love Vvocal and chosae not  to finally embrace it, it would still be a zombie product.  Granted, dead products have gotten new life, but it's rare.  The 303 was a bit of a flop until techno embraced it.  Even the mighty 808 and 909 were modest sellers used mostly in the then small hip-hop and EDM markets.  Despite retro units selling for several times original values in later years, Roland chose to release completely new products with samples rather than re-issue the dead product.  We HAVE spent time with Vvocal.  Some of us liked.  Others did not.  It crashed on me a lot (ironically it got more stable in X3) but I still used it now and then.  I'm still trying to figure out the point of ranting about discontinued products.  It's not coming back no matter how many temper tantrums are thrown.  Even if tha tdid work, you would be better off ranting at Roland since it would be their decision to ressurect it.

Extremely rational argument.  One that sums things up very well.  Needless to say I agree with you.