|
Slight change of topic, but does anyone know where I could get good trumpet samples? I'm looking for like big stabs and chord sounds. The only samples I have right now are Reason's and they suck. Something that sounds like this maybe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sVJNGIdPJE Or, even better, this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6zDfxZ4NcE
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
whoa guys chill here have some downtempo with attitude http://home.monet.no/~darkbeat/track/Kai_Handberg_-_Midsummers_Night.mp3 By the time this ends you will be at peace, but slightly pumped. (or disgusted) (I'd like a few reports on the mix, low/mid/high balance, and if anyone has intro suggestions i'll love you forever)
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 00:43
|
|
|
Quincy Smallvoice posted:(i'll love you forever) I really like the intro, at first it seems like it's going to end up being something Lindstromm-esque (very electronic, but flowing) then when the break beats come in I was totally not expecting it. Very good stuff, just so drat detailed. Seriously, not knowing the genre that well I can't really comment on how well it seems within the genre, but I like it. Only suggestion: you use bitcrushing a lot, and when un-tweaked the bit-crushing can be very grating on the ears, especially if the recipients speakers tend to emphasize the highs (which I suspect the case is with me). A few times the bit crushed synth lines seem higher than the high hats too, but I don't know if it's a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 01:27
|
|
|
it's pretty awesome, sounds like chilled out psytrance to me. I'd have the bass a bit thicker. Maybe a few more organic sounds or vocal samples and this should be great stuff to be tripping to!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 01:40
|
|
|
Pickman posted:In that case, I might wait a while longer and save up for something better, while I carry on using the mouse to play notes in the piano roll.  .http://www.thomann.de/gb/m-audio_keystation_49e_usbmidikeyboard.htm 20 quid extra and while it's not full-featured, it's miles above one of those nano key thingies. An alternative is to try to find a bog-standard "arranger" (Yamaha PSR-keyboards) - one of those keyboards with built-in rhythms. Due to their speedy obsolescence they drop in price fast, so you might find a relatively decent 61-key keyboard with a MIDI output that has last year's sounds (doesn't matter anyway with softsynths) for a nice price. The biggest problem with those is generally a lack of knobs, but it's always easier to draw automation with your mouse than to play chords with your mouse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 06:57
|
|
|
IanTheM posted:I really like the intro, at first it seems like it's going to end up being something Lindstromm-esque (very electronic, but flowing) then when the break beats come in I was totally not expecting it. Very good stuff, just so drat detailed. Seriously, not knowing the genre that well I can't really comment on how well it seems within the genre, but I like it. Only suggestion: you use bitcrushing a lot, and when un-tweaked the bit-crushing can be very grating on the ears, especially if the recipients speakers tend to emphasize the highs (which I suspect the case is with me). A few times the bit crushed synth lines seem higher than the high hats too, but I don't know if it's a bad thing. You are absolutely right, I went overboard with bitcrunching, and I should probably tone it down. The reason i use it is the cut through the mix primarily but whats the loving point when everythings crunches  I guess my brain stopped working or something. Beleg posted:
I guess I need to find another beefier soundsystem to listen to, because the bass is thick as gently caress right here. Organic sounds are a very good idea wich I didnt think of at all, It will balance all the digital. Got a few ideas too, thanks alot! Thanks for the compliments too, and for listening! (both of you)
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 10:44
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:Point of fact - if you are using attack times below 50ms, you are not compressing, you are limiting. Many people prefer limiting on their drums, and many "compressors" have attack times that can be set to limit. But to take a compressor, lower it's attack to 1ms, and start trying to school people on how this is your preferred means of "compression"... well, that's like telling someone that a reverb box is the best way to create delay. It's one way to create delay, I suppose, but you're going to confuse anyone who doesn't know the difference themselves. I could also take a delay box, crank the feedback all the way up, and use it to create loops, but if I called it a looping box and posted on a forum that this was the best way to do live looping, I'd be doing a lot of beginners and novices a great disservice. Uh, a limiter is just a very fast and hard compressor, trying to say that someone is limiting if they use a fast attack on a compressor is kind of weird logic, because limiting IS compressing. They are just compressing it a lot. If I used a compressor with a 1ms attack time and a ratio of 4:1 would you call that a limiter or compressor?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 12:20
|
|
|
Stux posted:Uh, a limiter is just a very fast and hard compressor, trying to say that someone is limiting if they use a fast attack on a compressor is kind of weird logic, because limiting IS compressing. They are just compressing it a lot. If I used a compressor with a 1ms attack time and a ratio of 4:1 would you call that a limiter or compressor? You're kinda both right, you know. This debate cant go anywhere, nor is it very productive. But by all means, grind this motherfucker down!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 13:13
|
|
|
Why dont you both just fiddle with knobs till it sounds good instead of talking about it so much. Who gives one about the right/wrong way to do something and what the specific terminology is/how it changes - it's music. Just make what sounds good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 14:47
|
|
|
I do kind of want to get the korg nano series, but more for travel than anything else. Since I'll be doing mos of my musical work on my laptop I can take it to whatever sandy wasteland I happen to get sent to, but I can't really take a full-sized synth or controller so for hat reason it'd be nice to have. But not as a primary, no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 16:00
|
|
|
Stux posted:Uh, a limiter is just a very fast and hard compressor, trying to say that someone is limiting if they use a fast attack on a compressor is kind of weird logic, because limiting IS compressing. They are just compressing it a lot. If I used a compressor with a 1ms attack time and a ratio of 4:1 would you call that a limiter or compressor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limiter posted:In electronics, a limiter is a circuit that allows signals below a specified input power to pass unaffected while attenuating the peaks of stronger signals that exceed this input power. THIS is compression:  It's all about character, and is very reminiscent of a synthesizer's ADSR. RivensBitch fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Sep 26, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 17:41
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:THIS is compression: No seriously a limiter is a very hard compressor. If we're going to quote wikipedia then here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression#Limiting
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 17:49
|
|
|
Exactly my point, when you use fast (hard) attack settings on a compressor, you are limiting. The ratio really doesn't matter if the attack is slow, because then you aren't limiting, you are compressing. Good to see that we agree. RivensBitch fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Sep 26, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 20:52
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:Exactly my point, when you use fast (hard) attack settings on a compressor, you are limiting. The ratio really doesn't matter if the attack is slow, because then you aren't limiting, you are compressing. No, if you are using hard compressing you are compressing something hard. When you are using a limiter that uses a fast attack and large ratio you are compressing something hard. Limiting like this is simply another form of compression, expressing it how you are (hard compressing should just be called limiting) just confuses people and isn't accurate, as there is another type of limiting where the peaks are simply cut off rather than gain adjustment like a compressor. Also, what wandering kid said.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 21:21
|
|
|
Protip: A lot of devices are advertised as "compressor/limiter" for that reason.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 21:22
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:Why dont you both just fiddle with knobs till it sounds good instead of talking about it so much. There isn't a right or wrong way to use it but this is the first time I've ever seen anyone actually encourage people to use a tool without knowing how it works or what is achievable with it. Its not like it takes a great deal of effort or knowledge to figure out how a compressor works. Knowing your stuff helps you to better achieve what you want to do and helps you to get there faster with less trial and error all round (which in my humble experience is a really lovely way to do things). Fiddling is good and you should play around with settings and put the ideas into practise rather than leave it abstract and theoretical. But encouraging people to just fluke it is bad form. quote:You're kinda both right, you know. This debate cant go anywhere, nor is it very productive. We may disagree on alot of things but the above is pretty much true. You can use the terms interchangeably and insisting on rigid definitions when the function of many compressors overlaps with those of a limiter is really pointless. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Sep 26, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 22:56
|
|
|
So I have a question for WanderingKid and Stux. When setting up delay on a vocal send, what's the best value to start with for the pre-delay setting? Do you prefer a hall, or a vocal plate? Or maybe a spring delay? I want a lot of echo, so should I set the diffusion value high or low? Here's a screenshot, please share your thoughts on some good settings for this delay:  Also while we're at it, I was wondering what tunings I should use for this guitar, I'm looking for something along the lines of a James Hetfeild, Dave Mustaine Guitar sound. Do you think this will work? This guitar pictured below? For guitar recordings? 
RivensBitch fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Sep 26, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 23:44
|
|
|
Yoozer posted:Aw man, that sucks even worse Thanks for the recommendation - I was actually looking at the m-audio midi controllers as well as the korg nano series. Trouble is, size really is an issue, which is why I was opting for the nanoKey. I don't have alot of space in my room, and so I think a 61-key keyboard might be too much. I do actually have an old keyboard in my parents attic - some German brand, can't remember the name. The trouble is, it's huge and bulky. I also had issues with the software and getting it to work on my computer. So I'd rather get a small, USB-connected MIDI controller. I'll definitely consider the M-Audio one, it looks ideal. I'm not that fussed about knobs, etc, at this stage, I just want something that will stop me relying on the mouse to play notes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2008 23:49
|
|
|
 I think you guys broke RivensBitch or at least his superiority organ
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 00:54
|
|
|
cubicle gangster posted:Why dont you both just fiddle with knobs till it sounds good instead of talking about it so much. Without rules, there is no game. Playing pinball without rules would mean that you'd roll a steel orb over an infinite plane, never scoring, never dying. You need bumpers, a plunger, a hole and flippers and a plane at 6.5 degrees to get things moving. It is asked: what are the rules? Is there a setting for the EQ/compressor/reverb/chorus that makes (x) sound good/fat/warm/awesome/jizztastic automatically? The question is misguided, but so is the answer that there are no rules. There's a low-cut switch on microphones - that's a rule poured in hardware. There's a limit to the range of the attack and release on a compressor. Another rule. You can boost or cut a frequency range only so much - another rule. The first thing to understand is that these "rules" are not laws set in stone but practical, sane guidelines. Furthermore, we've had half a century to debug the rules, to find the borders and bumpers and even the big hole where our poor little steel orb would disappear in. In other words, shitloads of work has been done by pioneers to find out what sounds good and what doesn't. You'd be nuts to ignore that legacy. You'd be doomed to reinvent it and waste a lot of time doing so. What's much more interesting is to apply that teaching and then start looking for weak spots. "Convention says to treat x like y, what happens if I do this and boom, a new universe may open, or you may forever be tarred and feathered for introducing the rest of the world to the Cher effect (and getting caught lying about it, too). quote:Who gives one about the right/wrong way to do something and what the specific terminology is/how it changes - it's music. Just make what sounds good. And this is exactly why you need the right and wrong ways. Terminology is just there to save you from typing out "that one thingamajig up there in the left that makes it go like WHEEE only with SHHHH added to the last bit of WHEEEE" and other assorted stream-of-consciousness nonsense. It's effective because it lets everyone know what they mean, pretty much immediately as long as you're not talking about synthesizers (where Roland, Yamaha and Korg do their stinking best to invent their own jargon, each completely loving worthless). wayfinder posted:
It's not broken, it's bent at a weird and rather painful angle  Pickman posted:I'll definitely consider the M-Audio one, it looks ideal. I'm not that fussed about knobs, etc, at this stage, I just want something that will stop me relying on the mouse to play notes. E-mu Xboard 49, another nice one with a small footprint - and knobs! Just again, more expensive. I hope space is a bigger issue for you than cash I think Edirol has a few 37-key keyboard controllers - while 25 keys is really awfully cramped, 37 gives you just a wee bit more space so that it's nearly comfortable.
Laserjet 4P fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Sep 27, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 00:58
|
|
|
WanderingKid posted:Fiddling is good and you should play around with settings and put the ideas into practise rather than leave it abstract and theoretical. But encouraging people to just fluke it is bad form. I wasnt encouraging you to fluke it, because you both clearly know your poo poo. I was encouraging you both to shut the gently caress up about it. What it's called doesnt matter. i love your paragraph about what constitues 'good', by the way. Good is what you enjoy. It was not a philisophical question. cubicle gangster fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Sep 27, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 03:36
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:So I have a question for WanderingKid and Stux. When setting up delay on a vocal send, what's the best value to start with for the pre-delay setting? Do you prefer a hall, or a vocal plate? Or maybe a spring delay? I want a lot of echo, so should I set the diffusion value high or low? I think in both cases what you need to do is get a compressor and set it up like this:  That should get you the sounds you are looking for!!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 09:57
|
|
|
I am after a fairly decent (but cheap) midi controller just to muck around with at home and to start getting a bit more serious when working with stuff like Live. My background is more post-production and radio/voice work primarily using pro tools but this will be something for my spare time. I found one of these http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Axiom61.html on ebay for about AUS$100 atm and its look pretty good. Anything i should know or steer clear of? Its really for any kind of music. I do a lot of ambient stuff or trance or IDM and my budget is no higher than about $150.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 10:24
|
|
|
Yoozer posted:It is said: there are no rules. Yoozer! Thank you, sir. I couldn't agree more with there being rules on everything. I used to wander around in the dark twisting this knob on the EQ and changing the compressor to a a setting where it wasn't triggered because the threshold was set up wrong and the auto-gain was on. There definitely are rules (or guidelines as one may put it more appropriately). The whole thing about genres is sticking to a certain set of rules. Sure you may add a few new elements etc., but generally you have to stay within the genre's rules for the track to be recognized as that genre. And look at music theory. There's very little music put out by The Big Three that doesn't follow music theory. When using instruments, there's rules to what notes they can play (tessitura) to make them sound good, etc. I definitely agree with you that there are rules. I also think people should experiment without thinking about the rules, but at the end of the day, you need to know what the rules are and WHY they are used, to get the big picture to gel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 12:44
|
|
|
The Fog posted:Yoozer! Thank you, sir. I love how people go like "yeah i dont use theory at all", listen to their tracks, and its "yeah, you do, you just dont know it"
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 13:02
|
|
|
RivensBitch posted:So I have a question for WanderingKid and Stux. When setting up delay on a vocal send, what's the best value to start with for the pre-delay setting? Do you prefer a hall, or a vocal plate? Or maybe a spring delay? I want a lot of echo, so should I set the diffusion value high or low? That would really depend on what kind of sound you want. Pre delay is used to simulate the delayed reflection of projecting a sound in a really large enclosed space. If you stand in a really big hall and clap your hands loudly, you will hear the first reflection later than if you did the same thing in a small room. I sort of think about it in this order: 1) Pre delay (the time it takes between you clapping your hands, the sound wave, hitting a surface and rebounding). Dont set this too high unless you want a deliberately unnatural sounding effect. Even in massive concert halls the delay is in milliseconds. 2) Difussion (the frequency of early reflections). Occurs immediately after the pre delay phase. High diffusion is meant to simulate very small enclosed spaces which cause sound to bounce around alot. Low diffusion is meant to simulate large enclosed spaces where the frequency of rebounds is much lower so that each one is perceived as an individual echo (i.e. HELLO-hello-ello-lo-lo) Unless you want your vocals and drums to sound like they were recorded in a massive cave then you probably want to experiment with lower diffusion values. High diffusion will make short sharp sounds very blurry and indistinct and it can slur speech if its high enough. Conversely, if you want individual echoes on background vocals (to give the illusion that there are people chanting in the background at the entrance to Lechuguilla) then you want to experiment with higher diffusion values. High amplitude sounds really 'excite' a reverb. 3) Decay (the time it takes for the early reflection to lose energy). Should be roughly proportional to the amplitude of the input. For example, if you clap really loud, the soundwave produced has alot of energy and it takes longer to decay. If you clap softly, the soundwave produced doesn't have alot of energy and decays quickly. Try using higher decays on high velocity, transient sounds like claps or snares to get a lush sounding wash effect. It can sound great in sparse mixes or on solo performances but high decays rarely sound good when theres alot going on in the mix because it bleeds into everything else. When theres alot of dry sounds going on then having one instrument with a huge decay makes it sound unnatural because it is obvious that the sound is not only coming from a different room but a completely different part of the planet. 5) Damping (how much high frequency energy is lost when reflecting off surfaces). High damping is used to roughly simulate some of the absorption of various materials that the room is made of. For example, a room made entirely out of wood can be simulated with higher damping values. A room made entirely out of sheet metal is easier to simulate with zero damping. 6) Room size. You need to adjust this with Decay and Pre Delay. It will be a sort of balancing act but just think it through logically and try to imagine the sort of room you want your singer to sing in or whatever. Long pre delays + high decays + very small room size can sound weird and unnatural but you may want that effect. Theres a reason why cluttered mixes are often alot more dry sounding than sparse mixes. It is harder to control reflections and decays when theres alot going on and it might work on some instruments and gently caress up others. Really large room reverbs with huge decays sound really lush on solo instruments and audio demos for synths but when you put it in the mix you start to feel like everything else has to have more reverb so its more homogenous. More like all the instruments are coming from roughly the same place. But if you do that then the mix will sound like its playing in a cave so use restraint. Sparse mixes can get away with this more. The first thing I try to do is visual a sort of place that I want to be playing my guitar or playing my synth. Use your imagination. Then I roughly think about the dimensions of that space - how big it is, whether there are lots of flat surfaces or whether its got alot of irregular surfaces. I think about what sort of material it might be made of and imagine how that might sound. Then I set up my reverb accordingly. If you use convolution reverbs you can even layer impulses to create really unique effects or better yet, use short impulses to simulate micing a amp and then route the output of that convolution channel into another one with a large concert hall reverb to simulate than amp being in a concert hall. Reverb is really cool because its not that abstract and you can visualise what you want to achieve quite easily. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Sep 27, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 13:10
|
|
|
The Fog posted:I definitely agree with you that there are rules. I also think people should experiment without thinking about the rules, but at the end of the day, you need to know what the rules are and WHY they are used, to get the big picture to gel. Yes. I broadly agree that we are building structures and they are subject to certain laws of physics with regards to how sound is produced and how it interacts with other sounds and the environment it is sounding in. At the same time, there is no reason why you cannot break those rules but the important thing is that you need to know what those rules are before you are in a good position to go about systematically breaking them to create interesting effects. I personally do not like to think about music in terms of laws and rules and I don't like listening to music which sounds to me like it is a textbook of rote learned production tricks and math. I like hearing different takes on a familiar concept and people bending established concepts to create something I haven't really experienced before. But there is a logic underlying it and a method to doing this. It isn't fluke. I only ever used music theory to train my hands to hit the 'right' notes. After a while, it becomes reflexive and you don't think about the theory anymore or even what notes you are playing because you just do it on feel instead. Your hands get comfortable hitting the 'right' notes. So when you want to play something deliberately wrong or deliberately hit the wrong note it feels awkward (as it should do). And if you feel it enough it comes through in the peformance. I'm not there yet with my guitar but its a great place to be because then you can really start conveying sensation through your instrument. You can concentrate on the feeling or sensation and you don't have to reason or rationalise how to achieve it using your instrument anymore - your hands just do it and you feel it. I am interested in hearing music from people that feel everything they are doing but I have no doubt that they know what they are doing. So well they don't even have to think about it anymore. WanderingKid fucked around with this message at 13:32 on Sep 27, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 13:29
|
|
|
hahahahaha talk about owned well played rivensbitch
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 15:23
|
|
|
Seriously, what is the point of you even being in this thread?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 15:50
|
|
|
Well im here to debate, discuss, learn, teach and share about a subject I am very passionate about, what about you? No need to get bitchy and defensive. Unless you take yourself very seriously, that is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2008 16:00
|
|
|
I think wanderingkid has stumped me with his post, I am at a loss for words...
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2008 20:28
|
|
|
Quincy Smallvoice posted:whoa guys chill Loved that song! What are you using to give the drums that NIN/Aphex Twin glitch sound too it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 05:00
|
|
|
I took a completely different approach to mastering with this song, did some things I've never done before and I'm pretty drat happy with the results considering I have no idea what I'm doing. http://www.zshare.net/audio/19613736863c0046/ Anyone care to comment?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 05:15
|
|
|
I Dig Gardening posted:I took a completely different approach to mastering with this song, did some things I've never done before and I'm pretty drat happy with the results considering I have no idea what I'm doing. woooo heard this on my walk today and it got me bouncing like mad! You have some issues in the mix. The pad takes up way too much space, and sure, textured pads are nice. But at what cost? It takes up space from the rest of the elements, so they all suffer for the pad to sound good. Is it worth it? So I suggest a really really wide cut in the pad, and let the rest of the mix sit on top of it. Pads are normally used as a sort of glue in the mix anyway, sitting below everyting else in the mix. Secondly both the snare and the vocals dont cut through enough. For this I suggest a slight boost in the 5000hz area on the vocals, as well as a cut in the same on the lead and pad, well, everything really. (not much though, just enough) Some distortion (or some more? it sounds alittle distorted) might also give it alittle more bite. The vocals on this are really really good so they deserve to be the centre piece/focal point. Otherwise the arrangement, drums, fills and transitions are all top notch, and you made one hell of a track here. After hearing this and Alaskan thunderfuck, you got yourself a new fan right here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 16:05
|
|
|
I Dig Gardening posted:I took a completely different approach to mastering with this song, did some things I've never done before and I'm pretty drat happy with the results considering I have no idea what I'm doing. sounds to me like the vocals and the song are not in the same key, pretty dissonant sounding, but it could just be me...decent song tho, nice indy dance feel to it
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 17:19
|
|
|
Quincy you never answered! In that song, how did you achieve those crazy glitchy drums? Even if it was a separate program, what were the steps used to get there? Truly, truly badass.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 20:41
|
|
|
sh1fty posted:Quincy you never answered! what part do you mean? i used different methods. if all you want is glitching dblueglitch is a free plugin that will do the job. otherwise the scissor tool can help as well. I honestly couldnt tell you what exactly I did to create the track, it grew to 50 audiotracks, 4gb of audio, and all told, considering how many times I bounced poo poo and reapplied effects, im probably using like 10 Ghz of raw processing power on it. Meaning, theres alot of poo poo goin down. quote:sounds to me like the vocals and the song are not in the same key, pretty dissonant sounding sounds fine to me Quincy Smallvoice fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Sep 29, 2008 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2008 22:03
|
|
|
oredun posted:sounds to me like the vocals and the song are not in the same key, pretty dissonant sounding, but it could just be me...decent song tho, nice indy dance feel to it Definitely in the same key. The key is Eb minor and the main melody goes Eb, Gb, Ab. Its a little "bitey" on purpose, just wanted to cause a little bit of grit  To Quincy - The vocals are straight from the stems I was given. Meaning the acapella is set to 0db with no effects whatsoever around it. I didn't want to EQ it or give it any crazy reverb cus I thought it sounded so good in the original that I could just work with that. The vocals mostly run through the 500-1,000 frequency range, so the lead and all four pads have a huge dip in that area. I can see how you'd think the vocals are a bit hidden but I'm gonna have to disagree, after listening to this mix on so many different soundsystems it sounds generally good on all of them, and isn't that the point of a master? Also I know it's loving weird and it has some weird mixing to it, but I just wanted to do something different and maybe something not so "clean"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2008 03:38
|
|
|
How do you guys make you high hats flow better? I'm trying to avoid making it too much like a 909 thing and giving it less bite, but I'm not sure how much I should take out. I'm working on this edit (the transitions are pretty drat rough, I'm really mangling Ratatat's work). Should I make the hats lower in the mix? Cut out some treble?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2008 04:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Quincy Smallvoice posted:what part do you mean? i used different methods. if all you want is glitching dblueglitch is a free plugin that will do the job. That just blew my mind. That sucks though since I use a mac. Anything close to dbule for mac? I'd prefer not to have it run in parallels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2008 05:36
|
|