/prod/uction thread

instaud.io/3Z69 opinions on the mix? lots of reverb so certain channels so I wanna know how to tune it. thanks!
>ambient

Non male. Quasi meglio del piccolo Lucio.
Però la prossima volta usa instaud.io.

Sei italiano? Chi è il piccolo Lucio?

Come fai ad essere di/a Napoli e non conoscere il maestro?
youtube.com/watch?v=7WMaDyA8F0A

Ah ti riferivi al mitico, per un momento ho pensato fosse un utente cult di questo posto. Ce n'è di strada da fare per arrivare al suo livello.

La mia più forte ispirazione rimane lui comunque: youtube.com/watch?v=w15oWDh02K4

instaud.io/3Yy0

It's something I'm writing drums for. The other instruments are placeholders. Any feedback is welcomed.

instaud.io/3Z7j
>prog metal

Anyone has any opinions on the mix here? First part of a song I'm working on. Tried out both a new ampsim and new drums and I think it turned out pretty tight compared to how my mixes usually sound. I'm not too sure about the piano in the beginning though and can't seem to get it to sound a way that I really like.

thanks!

Ti invidio... Io non mi sento per niente degno di essere ispirato dal D'ag.
Se non fosse per i suoi bassi che grazie ai suoi discepoli in Fiat Punto continuano a riecheggiare fra le strade non oserei nemmeno insultarlo con le mie ignobili orecchie.
Al momento sono a Gabry Ponte. Forse fra un decennio riuscirò a raggiungere il tuo livello user.

Does anyone know any good tutorials for making chiptune music? I don't really know what I'm doing and some guidance would be nice.
instaud.io/3Z6x

Maybe add dynamics? Particularly at 1:43 and onward, a nice crescendo could go there.
Also, I noticed a few parts where the bass guitar plays a note on the eighth note before a measure while the kick drum plays on the down beat of that measure. Personally, I don't think that's always a bad thing, but I know some say that the rhythm of the kick and the bass should be in sync, so it's something to consider.

clyp.it/0oj12l22

Any tips on how to lead up to outro to make it fit/connect better? It sounds a little random to me but It still feel like it fits the song (just doesn't connect very well)

Also any tips on mixing/sampling would be appreciated (Chaquito Callan, 1972....is the sample)

Attached: Taquito.jpg (480x360, 22K)

It's pretty good. There's no bass to this? Sounds pretty empty in the low end.

Thanks! I made some changes to the section in 1:43
instaud.io/3Zaa

I hear what you mean with the bass sections. It's my sloppy playing and most of the parts are in the off beat. The only sections on beat are the prechorus and chorus sections.

>just discovered dynamic eq
immediately fixed a mix i've been frustrated af by for like 2 months (completely ridiculous)

I like it a lot, I bet the singer will ruin everything

Thanks! I was worried I might have had too much bass, listened to yours and comparing them yeah this seems pretty empty. I'm just worried about mudding it up too much since there's so much going on.

I thought yours sounded great btw. The drums were really nice, didn't notice anything I thought sounded off or bad with them.

Lol I'm dreading the same thing

Thanks man! I think I'm at the point where I can properly track over the bass and guitars since those were just quick recordings I did as placeholders.

Regarding your track, the kick drums have more oomph than the bass guitar in this mix. The piano, I don't mind it and quite like it. There's something that makes it feel unrealistic though, can't quite put my finger on it? But what tone were you going for?

Stupid (but serious) question:
Couldn't you just buy a shitty microphone and EQ it to sound good instead of buying an expensive one?

Attached: (JPEG Image, 225 × 225 pixels).jpg (225x225, 8K)

Keep it simple in terms of timbre. Saw, Square, Tri and noise for percussion. I already heard a few tropes in the music that fit like the arpeggios and square lfo 'on off' sounds. Keep every track monophonic. It would probably be easiest to limit yourself to 4 tracks in the beginning. One bass, two melodies and one for percussion. I think that's how the nes and c64 handled it. Once you got the basic skeleton down you could branch into more complex projects or start ornamenting it. Also look up projects made on trackers. You can study every single thing that's happening. Using a tracker would be my first choice when doing chiptunes. Study the iconic sounds and compositions of the old masters. Portamento is very important.
youtube.com/watch?v=FSv3y98eP_8

extremely shitty question, no eq or effect is capable of fixing a bad recording
something that was recorded well instead will instantly sound good even without effects

The issue with shitty mics isn't that their frequency response is poor, it's that their frequency response at some lower and higher frequencies is non-existent. Can't EQ boost or cut what isn't there.

>extremely shitty question, no eq or effect is capable of fixing a bad recording
Why?
What makes a recording shitty that can't be fixed later on?

>something that was recorded well instead will instantly sound good even without effects
Of course, but if all you have is a shitty recording, is there really no way to make it sound good?

So assuming the microphone can still record all the audible frequencies, it can be fixed?
Assuming there aren't other problems like a ton of noise or mp3 compression or something.

no retard

Why not?

if you truly must know why your question is stupid (self-admitted, btw), google it yourself.

>So assuming the microphone can still record all the audible frequencies, it can be fixed?

If it can pick all of them up it aint all that shitty, but how it picks them up is also a characteristic you need to take into account. Most lower-end mics have varying amounts of sensitivity to frequency depending on their design, so they might have a flat response at high SPL but very poor bass response at low volume levels, and that gets harder to repair in a recording after the fact.

>depending on their mechanical design*

Fixed for clarity - this is an inherent design thing and affects how the mic responds to the sound in the air. not how it transfers it electrically afterwards.

It's absolutely not a stupid question because I simply don't know much about the recording side of music production and I can't possibly know how things work unless I actually go out and learn it, which I'm trying to do now.
By getting so heated up and making so sure to call me a retard over this, all you're doing is saying it to yourself.

I never stated that it can be done (I assume it can't because otherwise everyone would just do that instead of spending a fortune on different mics and whatnot). I just want to understand why.

>google it yourself
That could go for literally every post ITT except feedback. Th point of asking it as a question instead of a search engine query is that I can ask further questions to actually understand the topic instead of just accepting an answer without understanding.

Now please if you don't want to answer the question (or aren't able to), let someone else do it instead of shitting up the discussion and the thread.

>Most lower-end mics have varying amounts of sensitivity to frequency depending on their design, so they might have a flat response at high SPL but very poor bass response at low volume levels
What's the actual result of a poor bass response on a recording?
Lower volume at that area?

What about high-end microphones? Could a producer use just one good microphone and EQ it so it sounds like other types of mics?

>What about high-end microphones? Could a producer use just one good microphone and EQ it so it sounds like other types of mics?

There are systems which aim to do just that, and they tend to use a very flat-response mic (bundled with the system) with good sensitivity. They're not cheap.

I'm aware of those, but I'm talking about buying one non-flat microphone and making it flat (or giving it another "sound") with an EQ.
Why exactly isn't this done instead of buying several microphones?

>What's the actual result of a poor bass response on a recording?
>Lower volume at that area?

Missed that bit - yeah less bass, but also changing proportions of bass depending on how loud the instrument was being played, as I mentioned, harder to fix.

>but also changing proportions of bass depending on how loud the instrument was being played
Could you potentially use "modern" tools like dynamic EQs or multiband compressors (perhaps sidechained to the full pre-compressor signal so each band would respond differently based on how loud the overall recording gets)?

phaser stop

Because EQ doesn't cleanly affect sound.

What do you mean?
Would they have an audible effect?

Yeah I'm trying to make some moves to the bass and general low end now and see if I can get it better. I think one problem with the piano is that I probably slapped too much reverb on it which I feel gives it a fake "watery" sound. I might also have to work a bit on the midi of it to give it a more human feel. I didn't really have anything specific in mind sound-wise when I made it but now that I think about it I'd probably want something in the style of this (it's a bit inspired by this part too): youtube.com/watch?v=ijFuvNz7ukk

Justicefag here. I'm thinking about trying to get a setup so I can record vinyl. Is it worth it, or would I be fine with 320kbps mp3 files?

Yes, normal EQ's use phase relations to make boosts or cuts. Try stacking a bunch of bands/eqs on a transient rich stuff like drums to see how the transients smear and lose their punch. Vocal transients are also going to be lost

Even if you use linear phase (or transparent enough) EQs?

That's what the mic modelling systems use - in addition to impulse responses they use it with a flat-response mic with predictable sensitivity at all sound pressure levels. Those guys *will* have tried to use it with shitty mics to see if they could get it to work, and if they're not selling it as a miracle tool (still at a high price of course) then it's because they couldn't get it to work.

Trying not to be harsh here so forgive me if it comes across as such, but I also thought that EQ could do everything when I just started out, and with dynamic EQ and multiband compressors that would seem like an even more likely proposition now if I hadn't heard the results of most people's attempts to fix things in the mix instead of getting a good capture in the first place.

But let's face it - you're dead-set on trying anyway, so just go do it.

Also (i needed to google this to make sure but..) even linear phase EQ's wouldn't work. Not just because there would be insane cpu load from the amount of EQ you'd need (assuming all frequencies are there) to emulate the frequency response of a particular mic but also pic relates.

You'd need to make so many tiny alterations that your sound is going to get fucked no matter what

Attached: Screenshot_20190722-234049.jpg (1080x1920, 633K)

before doing that have you ever thought of using multitracks instead? there are plenty ripped from guitar hero and the likes and the more recent ones have good quality too, you can even get legit stems sometimes from remix contest or other sources like URM academy

then you'll run into pre-ringing issues and aggravating the latency problem

Ah got ya. I normally use the random velocity midi function in cubase for my piano stuff and automate the sustain pedal. Piano midi parts sound robotic and unnatural without the sustain pedal being used.

>But let's face it - you're dead-set on trying anyway, so just go do it.

Weren't you curious to know why it wouldn't work as well? You couldn't give him a straight answer so didn't you feel like there was something to learn there?

It might be possible with two very similar microphones tho, maybe you could get 50-100 dollars value that way

>But let's face it - you're dead-set on trying anyway, so just go do it.
I don't have any microphone and don't have anything to record.
I just want to understand exactly what makes it nonviable (which I know it isn't).

>Trying not to be harsh here so forgive me if it comes across as such, but I also thought that EQ could do everything when I just started out, and with dynamic EQ and multiband compressors that would seem like an even more likely proposition now if I hadn't heard the results of most people's attempts to fix things in the mix instead of getting a good capture in the first place.
I understand fixing things in post doesn't yield as good results as you'd get from doing it right in the first place, but I want to know why.
What's different between a $100 mic and a $10k one exactly that can't be emulated?

Assuming I have an extremely powerful computer that can run as many linear phase EQs as I need, and latency isn't a problem (since it's postproduction and not real time, plus I can just use minimum phase while working on it and switch to linear phase when rendering), all is left is pre-ringing, right?
I tried many times to recreate this pre-ringing thing but I never could. In fact, if I put a linear phase EQ on a white noise recording and set it to bell with max resonance and gain, I can invert its polarity and all I hear is that single frequency being boosted.
I can then invert that against the original to get the recording minus that single frequency, and if I add these two parts together they cancel out perfectly with the original full recording, meaning that nothing else is beign added or removed or changed.
How can I hear this pre-ringing? Because it really seems like an imperceptible thing to me.

What do you mean?

>a shitty microphone and EQ it to sound
No.
And, there are good mics that don't cost a lot. Do some research. EQ can't replace good components, and the parts of a performance that aren't there because the shitty mic didn't capture it.

>EQ can't replace good components
Yes, but why?

>and the parts of a performance that aren't there because the shitty mic didn't capture it
What do you mean exactly?
Please elaborate.

>Could a producer use just one good microphone and EQ it so it sounds like other types of mics?
There's no "one size fits all" mic. There are different types, that are designed for different purposes.

Did you try the eq on drums like i asked you to?

That's not what I meant.
I'm talking about getting a "whatever type" good mic and based on its characteristics apply EQing and other effects to make it sound like another microphone.

Where? In this post [] where you were talking about minimum/non-linear phase EQs smearing the transients?
I already know it does.
I'm gonna do it anyway with a linear phase one and report back.

read the pic here again
it's something that happens before the actual sound plays and it affects mostly low frequencies so you should notice it on drums and percussive bass elements

>>EQ can't replace good components
>Yes, but why?

If this were photography, you'd be asking if you could make a small, grainy photo off a cheap cell phone from 10 years ago look as good as a shot off a $7k DSLR from this year, by fixing it in Photoshop.
You have to think of an audio file, as data. If the data is poorly captured, or missing parts of the performance, you can't EQ what's not there, or recorded the wrong way.

Ok, I am wondering how it would sound too.
I guess in the end it comes down to how clean lin phase eq is. But even if it turns out 100 percent transparent you'd still need to figure out how to map the changes youd need to make.

Not to mention that mics don't just differ in amplitude of captured material. Each mic would capture differently

>I'm talking about getting a "whatever type" good mic and based on its characteristics apply EQing and other effects to make it sound like another microphone.
You can try, but you'll only get so far, honestly. You're not the only person to go down this rabbit hole, I've seen this discussed in the past on other music forums.

>Weren't you curious to know why it wouldn't work as well?

No, I mentioned earlier that shitty mics won't capture all of the frequencies and you can't process what isn't there - what the crew *may* have tried is to add those missing frequencies artificially with exciters and then shape them using impulse responses and the EQ and multiband tools they use with their flat-response mic, and again if that worked well as a way to mimic other mics from any crappy source mic they'd be selling it to us now.

But, believable deepfaked audio will happen, so why not use that tech to model acoustic properties to a better level than we can do with impulse responses?

>If this were photography, you'd be asking if you could make a small, grainy photo off a cheap cell phone from 10 years ago look as good as a shot off a $7k DSLR from this year, by fixing it in Photoshop.
I know how raster images and photoshop work so I can understand why.
I don't know how microphones work, so I'm asking why.

You're trying to convince me that it can't be done, which I was already convinced of before asking my first question.
All I want is to understand why.

>You have to think of an audio file, as data. If the data is poorly captured, or missing parts of the performance, you can't EQ what's not there
I understand, an I'm not talking about microphones that can't record certain frequencies. I'm talking about a microphone that can record everything but doesn't sound as good as an expensive one.

>or recorded the wrong way.
Outside the scope of this discussion.

Ok, I dialed in some extreme settings on "transient-y" drums and now I hear it.
But in a normal situation, say, on vocals and with less extreme settings, it wouldn't be very audible, and you'd still use EQs on them for mixing anyway so it's not like these shortcomings of EQs only affect you if you try to do this "microphone augmentation" thing.

>But even if it turns out 100 percent transparent you'd still need to figure out how to map the changes youd need to make.
If you need to sound precisely like another EQ, sure it's gonna be har, but if you only need a good recording you don't need to be that precise, no?
Just listen to the problems of the bad microphone and do that's needed to fix them until it sounds good.

>Not to mention that mics don't just differ in amplitude of captured material. Each mic would capture differently
What exactly are these differences?

>You can try, but you'll only get so far, honestly
Is that because it's very hard and my skills are limited or because it's completely impossible?

Just downloaded a vinyl RIP of Justice's Cross. Can't tell much of a difference except that it's a lot quieter, but I don't have good headphones. I'm going to do an experiment. The old version of my sampled song is at 196kbps. I downloaded a high quality version of the Jackson 5 sample at 320kbps so I'll post it and see if we can hear a difference.

But I wasn't talking about mics that don't record certain frequencies, obviously.
I'm only talking about mics that CAN record them but don't sound as good as expensive ones.

>it's not like these shortcomings of EQs only affect you if you try to do this "microphone augmentation" thing.
exactly, it's not specific to this situation but it's something that you should always take it in consideration if you're using linear phase eqs

That's true.

>Is that because it's very hard and my skills are limited or because it's completely impossible?

I think it's more this:
>I don't know how microphones work

Go find out. Find out what makes a SM58 different from an MD421. I think you'll get a lot of answers for yourself, when you learn how mics are constructed, and the design behind each type.

>I think it's more this:
>>I don't know how microphones work
So you're saying that only I won't go very far because I don't understand microphones, but an experienced top-level producer could?

>Go find out. Find out what makes a SM58 different from an MD421. I think you'll get a lot of answers for yourself, when you learn how mics are constructed, and the design behind each type.
I'm tempted, but if it's a super deep rabbit hole, I can probably spend my time in more productive ways than to gain all this knowledge for something I was merely wondering about and that has no practical utility in my life/work.

is cheapmicfag the new meme?

When making drone, is it better to start off with samples or synths?

you can make drone with either? there is no real answer to that question...

If you're going to play one note, you better make it interesting

>So you're saying that only I won't go very far because I don't understand microphones, but an experienced top-level producer could?
Top level producers...er...more top level engineers. And yes, they could get more done, because of their experience and knowledge of all of the tech they're operating. Hopefully. But a top level dude wouldn't need to do this, other than as an experiment, or helping to create impulses, as they would have a decent collection of physical microphones.
>I'm tempted, but if it's a super deep rabbit hole,
It is. If this is all just 'is it possible?", then...sort of. And you need to go down that rabbit hole to understand why.

>And you need to go down that rabbit hole to understand why
I don't want an in-depth understanding, as I'm probably never going to need such knowledge.
I just want a basic gestalt of how a decent microphone (shouldn't have said "shitty" earlier, as that includes unusable stuff too) differs from a top end one on the same type (ribbon, cardioid, etc.) and why you can't just alter the recording of one to make it sound as good as the other (but not necessarily make it sound exactly the same).
If you do understand it, can you give me a surface-level explanation please?

320kbps

instaud.io/3Zk5

196kbps

instaud.io/3ZjV

I can hear a big difference, but I think I'll stick with 320kbps mp3s due to file size and cost of vinyl, as well as the fact that I couldn't find a fucking Jackson 5 album in flac. -.- What do you guys think? Would getting a vinyl setup be worth it?

I sample from master tapes

instaud.io/3YId

Girl singing. She's not much of a singer.
Whatcha think? Of the mix and all that jazz.

they have them on rutracker

and soulseek too (I just checked)

I looked for Joyful Jukebox Music with this trackmon it and couldn't find it

it's on soulseek
username disordered

Why is the OP always a pic of those black guys in a room?

Attached: 1563559610220.jpg (250x234, 8K)

instaud.io/3Zlw

Would love feedback on this, making it sound better, how to mix it and what sounds bad / good. Also arrangement... do any parts feel like they end too soon or last too long? I want this to just be driving "epic" music, simple and to the point I don't want to bog it down trying to be too melodic. But I do want it to feel "right" like when the next part comes in it feels like "that's what's supposed to happen next." So if it doesn't it feels like you missed a step on a staircase. I want to avoid that.

Meme of the day.

Attached: what yeti... i don't see any here....png (1074x642, 1.37M)

9/10

please make more video memes

clyp.it/sq3eq5pn

feedback please. I feel like I fucked up the mixing.

I've got a few ideas but they'll require a few skills I don't currently have so you'll have to wait a bit.

feel like buyin sum genelec 8030s. stop me bros

>clyp.it/sq3eq5pn
is that a fucking bass?
it desperately needs low end

>stop me bros
why?
i would if i could bro

>5 inch speaker
there we go that wasn't really hard

it's an impatient buy.
i can pick up used 8030b's for like £450
new 8030c's run like £800 but used a77x's come in at a grand.

best just keep my money and dump it on a pair of 8040s or those a77x's in a year or so.

plus . i don't care what their specs say, i refuse to believe they'll have good sub reproduction

It's sounding better than ever. I EQ'd the sides of the sample to make the guitar stand out more. It overall sounds bigger and clearer.

instaud.io/3Zoc

I've decided I'm going to use 320kbps mp3 files. Flac files are too large and I have a download limit.

or you could just act like a normal, rational human being, buy a pair of hs8s and be done with it

>buy a pair of hs8s
i already have a pair lel

if you want to get a shit mic to sound expensive just run it through this baby.
On a different note I have an actual question. I've been double micing for a while for guitar. I put a dynamic on my amp grill about halfway from the center of the cone, and I have one compressor about 2 feet back. I level those 2 tracks as sort of a light/dark thing to taste in the mix. Is this a stupid thing to get in the habit of doing? I think I like it better than either separately but idk if I could be compensating for poor technique somewhere along the line. I feel kind of silly having 4 guitar tracks for just rhythm and lead. (I use no post effects at all for guitar currently)

Attached: 1563540457928.jpg (720x634, 210K)

or you can just buy a Shure sm57

lol I actually use an sm57 and an AT2035.

did you change the pitch of the sample?
it sounds different

Drum samples.

I have a hard time finding good drum samples and there's such abundance on the internet i have a hard time navigating. I got classic drum machine samples, addictive drums and the 9th wonder kit samples.

I'm looking for like a standard, solid sound you often hear in jazzy hip hop. Acoustic sounds: Kicks, claps, hi-hats, snares etc. with some power to them. Like a trick-of-all-trade buy one HQ sample pack and never think about it again kinda thing. Do you have any recommendations? What do you guys use?

Attached: tumblr_nlx5z6khab1qk95sxo1_1280.jpg (1200x796, 301K)

what do you mean

>9th wonder kit
That + "ultimate boom bap" kit is all you need for lo-fi jazzy boom bap old school whatever the fuck hip hop

thing is with that one is that it's huge af and has duds, but if you'd have a reallllly nice selection if you went through those two and pick out a handful to use over and over

pretty much all of the kits you see uploaded to reddit, and even splice, are just from that pack with maybe extra distortion or whatever the fuck.... kind of annoying but u kno how it is

there really aren't a lot of decent raw (actually) acoustic kits around.... most is super polished bullshit or in the for of a vst made for rock- i googled "metal drum samples" or something like that and downloaded a fuck load of packs from metal forums lol.... 99% were ass but i saved like 20~ snares and some cymbals i guess.... iirc there were like 2 big shares that are easy to find, not toooo much digging involved

>2 feet
yeah that's kind of weird, idk what your room sounds like though
i've seen 2 right up on the grill with one off axis and blended pretty often...
personally i only do the 2nd room mic like 10~+ feet back. it's not stupid at all, sounds more natural than straight reverb and can add depth... it's not always necessary though of course

Yeah cool thanks for advice. You absolutely get it right with these acoustic kit for rock music. That shitty tight tuned snares and flappy sounding kicks my god. Anyways thanks m8. I don't produce lo-fi or hip hop, but that style of drums (boom bap used to sample old soul breaks and drums from the 70's and 80's and layer) just sounds fantastic.

sounds nice. I would prefer the kick on the percussion to be a bit louder personally. Depending on how heavy you go with it, you may have to sidechain the bass synth.

Nothing really sounds wrong about it to me. Could use some panning sounds though.

I think the guitar sounds worse than the girl.
Maybe roll off the highs a little on the guitar, the vocals could use something too, maybe another layer for reverb

sounds neat. I like the automation and everything fits well. I think there still space for musical ideas. The bass ostinato is a bit tedious.

the solo guitar sounds good, but the comp guitar is out of tune and time. Why is there now low end

I don't have a second mic stand so I just loop my XLR cable on a guitar stand and hang the mic upside down. It's pretty ghetto but I'm not rolling in dough so I can only buy absolute essentials for the moment. My room sounds like shit probably. I'm using the living room/kitchen of my 1 bedroom apartment in the middle of a city. Sometimes I pick up ambulances and shit in takes. People put compressor mics up on the grill? I have a lot more reading to do. I've been recording for a year and I still feel like I'm always learning about critical mistakes I'm making. Anyway, thanks for the reply.

that's how artists are born

what is it and how to use it

You fucked up, bruh.

>compressor mics
.... condenser? yeah, sometimes, generally that's a room mic, but generaallllly people go dynamic or ribbon for electric guitars

kind of like a multiband compressor; the eq (or that band) only kicks in when the frequencies it affects go above a certain threshold

a very aggressive growly bass was completely fucking my mix but toning down the timbre neutered it and multiband compression was too much/non-transparent. dynamic eq toned down some highs at the "top" of the growl i was macro'ing very subtly while keeping the dynamics

another common case use would be a drum loop has some cymbals that are harsh as shit and you want a low shelf to only activate on the cymbal hits.... well you know what to do :p

tdr nova is free, i really like it so far (:
limiter no 6 is top tier as well fuck ozone js

No. I just used a 320kbps source. I had the bass and kick too overpowering in that one. Sounds better here. Learning to make music sound right is frustrating. Especially getting the kick drum to sound right. I don't understand how Justice got their drums to not muddy up the mix. I almost don't hear any ducking on Cross. I'll figure it out. Might be a different setting on Nightshine

clyp.it/m3jv32ow

Should I quiet it down?
Any stretches where you think some melody would fit or where it gets a bit repetitive? I like what I have so far, it's not perfect I'm just scared to add more and suddenly "realize" I ruined it. I guess that's what extra copies are for. I have this thing I have to wait like a month or more before I go back to piece and "realize" everything that's wrong with it.
Thanks for the feedback though.

Can someone recommend a tutorial on how to build a song from a melody? Like, say I have the idea for a melody, how do I then construct the song around that? Complete beginner here

I don't know of any tutorial, but I would start by creating a bass line. Just use some of the notes from the melody. Then from there structure upwards to the midrange

Take your melody and sound it out on a keyboard so you know what the notes are and have them recorded in midi. Then find out the key of your melody by hearing which note sounds best for all the notes so you know the key of the song. Then, assuming your song is in a major or minor key, play the notes associated with that key's major or minor (aeolian) scale and any notes put together will technically work as chords.

Or you could try youtube.

Removed some of the sidechain effect from nightshine and remixed it a little. Sounds somehow less like Justice and more boring. Why do I not hear any ducking on Cross though?

clyp.it/j4lndrp2

Fuck it I'm sticking with these settings.

clyp.it/efa5hq0g

Why does the 275hz range sound bad in dance music?

thanks!

what do you do when you have a prod identity crisis? I have no idea what kind of music I even want to make anymore. or why I'm making it

i curl into a ball and cry until the tears stop
make the kind of music you like to listen to
the "why" could be that you want to express yourself, or impress others, or make money, or have fun, or whatever

Let's come up with our own style of EDM.

I try not to think too hard and just make more music anyway in spite of my doubts.

EDM is such a dirty name, reeks of corporate stench and corpses of the rave scene.

Meh, whatever

I'm getting better at mixing. I picked up on the harsh highs that came with the improved sample. So I fixed it. Someone has to like French house and wants to make something in the ballpark :(

A new kind of French house. Come on... there has to be somebody. I don't really care much what the syle is as long as the tempo is 117-124ish , we microsample the album to give it a warm timeless quality since I don't have access to analog synths, and we use the French house technique of ducking. We could build practically anything around those parameters. I just want to get started with someone with the sole aim to make a good timeless electronic (yet not necessarily dance-focused) album.

Sigh

Attached: Art+of+Dreaming.jpg (1500x1000, 130K)

I think I've been over EQing the main sample. I was looking and I lowered the bass frequencies but then I boosted the mids right after. Probably an old habit from my noob days. It gave it a bad sound warbly sound I think.

clyp.it/ghc1u2r1

G2g to sleep. G'night love u all

Oops I posted the wrong one. Now g'night

clyp.it/4n3dincy

is MAT ZO a genius or a retard?

hs7s are naff for everything except mid range... cmon everyone knows this

as long as you are getting the phase correct who cares what you do, if it sounds good it sounds good.

>there has to be somebody
there is but you've been too annoying dude

>naff
good word

>everyone knows this
nobody wants to hear it because most people use them lol, it's like talking shit about scarletts

hs7s are great for referencing the mid range, but fuck me i'd never wanna do it all on them, that would be hell

He's both, as well as somewhere in the middle.

Then you're not somebody.

I like it better this way but some elements have to be sidechained because it gets too messy otherwise

Do you have discord?

While I was trying to get to sleep earlier (I failed) I had the thought ofmincreasing the release on the compressor, so I fiddled with it and got ducking without obvious uh ducking. Let me know what you think.

clyp.it/zczjrfu5

Dylan02211992

3620

i added u

Woah...

instaud.io/3Zye

bump

clyp.it/tultyhyy

any feedback

garbage

so you related to it?

vocalists do you make diy vocal booths? set up some shit yesterday in a wardrobe with towels, duvets and bedsheets lining the walls, recording was way better than the open room shit i normally do. are you meant to put acoustic 'treatment' behind the mic or behind you?

there's no real answer to that question, depends on the shape of the room.. google something called comb filtering. if your room is a perfect square then all around you helps to stop reflections.. if the room is many different angles you're more in luck but still you have to figure out which way is best that you will get minimal amount of reflections.. overall though, just put them all around you and see if it works.. if it sounds dead then try taking some off until you personally feel the vocal sounds okay.

it's hard to answer that question without a layout of the space and i can't hear the recording

Has anyone of you ever tried to clean audio book type stuff?
I'm trying to enhanced a cassette rip of Neuromancer read by the author (I can share it later if anyone is interested). I was able to deal with most of the background noise with EQs and multiband gates but I still have some hissing coming from the tape around 8 kHz and I can't get rid of it without impacting the narator's voice. Any ideas? (I'm a noob at it, I don't even know the standard procedure).

would work for a vlog or something, change the drum samples to something calmer iMO, or mix them better.

sounds like that shit london half grime crap

torrent Izotope RX7. and watch a few vids on how it works. that'll do that fine.

fixmyaudio.wordpress.com/

OOps ayy lmao i meant to link this fixaudio.net/index.html

I'm a buyfag and already own iZotope shit (I did the clean up with Neutron), so I guess I can't install a cracked RX7.
What does it do? Is there any way to replicate it with regular mixing plugins?

OK, I'll give it a try, but is it good?

>OK, I'll give it a try, but is it good?
I think so, I use it often to clean up my own recordings.

Remember to read through the settings. Don't expect it to be magic though I guess.

>Is there any way to replicate it with regular mixing plugins?
maybe.. but that would be so much effort, im not really sure. it essentially shows the full spectrum of sound (like iris does if you've used it) and you can use it to pinpoint the sound you want to remove.. like I watched a video on the guy who records audio for deadliest catch, and he uses it to remove the hum of the boats engines.. actually quite interesting.

If I have a very siney bass sample and i want to add more harmonics to it, what is best to use if I dont want to make it sound distorted? Is that possible?

slight saturation, just don't overdo it.. some saturators are better than others

sorry for the time gap, I'm on my monitors now i think this is the better version but overall I noticed lack of stereo field in all the versions except for one part of the sample panned left wich sounds annoying after a while
grab something to check the stereo field if you can't hear it and use a plugin capable of isolating the side
something like this
>izotope.com/en/products/master-and-deliver/ozone/ozone-imager.html
good visual feedback and useful for creating stereo field from mono or simply tweaking the existing stereo
>plugin-alliance.com/en/products/bx_solo.html
this one in particular let you listen the side summed to mono wich i find useful because otherwise I get distracted by the weirdness of hearing only the stereo part
>voxengo.com/product/msed/
somewhere between the two, it's not multiband like the izotope and doesn't sum to mono but does the other tasks in one package

I've noticed this already, but I reduced the sample's width to sound more like you guessed it. I did EQ the sample's side and that's what you're hearing. I'll give the sample more width and check it again.

instaud.io/3ZHu

Added some more transition sound effects and tweaked most everything a bit and I'm pretty content with it now. Until someone points out something wrong with it again of course. Unfortunately I only have a pair of cheap headphones and dogshit pc speakers so I have no idea how the mix would sound on decent monitors. Sounds plenty punchy and dynamic to me though.
Also, I always find it funny that when I make music it ends up not even close to the stuff I normally listen to myself.

Attached: 1497441612952.png (249x220, 10K)

Alright, check it out

clyp.it/jkyvreba

Now I must go to sleep. Also, I can't EQ out what I know you want EQ'd out. It covers the entire spectrum. Maybe I could change the sample, but again, I don't think Cross uses this wide a stereo field. Maybe I'm wrong.

Very cool

Meme of the day.

Attached: JUST FUCK MY SHELTER UP.png (1068x835, 936K)

One last thing before sleepy time. The Newjack sample was butchered too, because it has a lot of clutter at high compression. I'm sure they EQ'd out a lot of the sides. Maybe I could tame the sides with EQ and then increase the width of it. Fuck it, I'll try it now. I really need to go to sleep. I've been up 24 hours now kek

Why is protools supposedly the best daw for mixing and mastering? Does it have particular plugins or something else that makes it stand out? Or just that it's been industry standard for a while

Idk I'm out of ideas. I'll have to change the sample on that part.

pretty new to this, would appreciate some feedback

instaud.io/3ZKr

that should be your max wideness, I think you can tame it a bit now so you don't lose too much punch and play with automations later, i noticed they move things in the stereo field a lot but for now get some rest dude, you tweaked enough for today

Hey user I would love to give you any specific feedback but I don't want to type out a massive post at the moment that may or may not be off base. Can you tell me what you specifically want some advice/feedback on?

Thanks user. Any thoughts on the mix/sounds i used? I'm thinking I could use some better drum samples maybe

It had a huge head-start on the market. This first-mover advantage as it’s called led to Avid becoming a company with a board and a $300m+ valuation (at one time)

>Why is protools supposedly the best daw for mixing and mastering?
because boomers refuse to move on

>Does it have particular plugins or something else that makes it stand out?
nothing that any other DAW doesn't have

>Or just that it's been industry standard for a while
once again its industry standard because boomers refuse to move on.

pro tools is a meme that needs to die and it will once boomers realise they are getting ripped off.

>nothing that any other DAW doesn't have
okay i agree about the boomers thing but you're talking out your ass dude

name one thing that pro-tools has that other daw's don't?

upload it bro

>tfw can't *feel* music unless I inject 3 marijuanas

ive never done a weeds in my life and im 28 did i do wrong?

instaud.io/3ZOH
heres a thing I'm workin on let me know if u feelin it

Attached: D9XNcYrWwAA-Okt.png (550x771, 820K)

>name one thing that pro-tools has that other daw's don't?
the lowest latency out of all DAWs due to dedicated hardware
multitrack editing
also being the industry standard is an advantage in itself

aside from all the effects etc? playlist is the big one that i know of (i'm not a put user i'm all ableton)

if you want to be all "oh other daws do this similiar thing!" about it you could say it's like an ableton group of audio tracks that you can switch between more quickly and not look as cluttered

yes yes, i think the pt standard needs to die and all but but shittalking a daw without knowing anything makes you look like a dumbass bro

honestly screams computer generated, specifically the lower ascending and descending scale thing lol. pretty tho i guess

>instaud.io/3ZOH
no idea what its meant to be but,

too many harsh high frequencies noises compared to low frequencies

most of all idk what you are going for

that shit is expensive though like 10k

and you say im talking out of my ass.

>also being the industry standard is an advantage in itself
is this a joke?

yea dude
all the pros use weed and other drugs

Not him but, is it not?

>aside from all the effects etc?
because other DAW's don't have the same or better effects ok..
>playlist is the big one that i know of (i'm not a put user i'm all ableton) if you want to be all "oh other daws do this similiar thing!" about it you could say it's like an ableton group of audio tracks that you can switch between more quickly and not look as cluttered
that's just a workflow thing, you can do the same on any other DAW, anyway reaper does that shit for 60$ pro tools does it yearly for triple that.

>but shittalking a daw without knowing anything makes you look like a dumbass bro
you haven't really come up with any argument yet you say im shit talking a DAW i know nothing about? nigger Ive used pro tools for 11 years in a studio, now I used reaper because once again its 60$ compared to avid's stupid pricing

That's not wrong. But you can probably not conceive the difference in creativity when high compared to sober without having experienced such an expanded state of mind before. You don't know what you're missing out on and if you get by just fine, no worries.
But once I crossed the line (I was 25 and did no drugs before that) I found that it calmed my thoughts down and really let creativity have its way. Also allowed me to listen 10x more attentively, discerning nuances in music I had before not even a concept of in my head.
But since I started smoking up time has gone by stupidly fast, and I look back and realized I was absolutely not productive.

Was it worth it? I dunno. I appreciate the expanded state of mind and being made aware of things I had never been aware of before.

Attached: 1479649797742.jpg (800x650, 315K)

why would something being an industry standard automatically mean its a better DAW? its the industry standard because of what I have already talked about, boomers refusing to move on. Avid have offered nothing new for absolutely years and completely shit on their user base.

just going for the feeling of floating out on the ocean In a paddle boat. i plan on eqing out the high fresh, cause it is kinda pingy
was going to add more vocals which may help that as well as mixing, part of this is me playing piano into fl and part of it is sequencing notes, tried to mix odd meter regular meter and free playing to make a wall of sound

Lets start with drums first, you established a vibe with your intro and synth choices but I think the drums stand out a little too much for where you were going stylistically. Easy fix, the samples themselves are fine and you shouldn't worry too much about that because it will put you into a thought loop about things that are not the music and songwriting. Try to bring down the overall level of the drum bus (or tracks) by about 2db, then grab an eq and gently cut away at some of lows with a shelf around 80 then check 200-500 for a overly boomy tone and with a gentle q take away 1-2db. Shelve the high end if necessary. Add a compressor with medium attack and lowish release settings and compress to taste, then you can add saturation to drum track(s) and it will get you close to the sound I think you want. The hats are a touch too loud but you could also try a slower halftime rhythm to keep the vibe strong.
I like your choices in synths but I think you could drop the whole song 2 semitones and it'll give you more room to saturate your synths to bring out harmonics. Try it out, and see if it gives you some other ideas at the very least. More bass. Something droney and sustained might fit well.

>why would something being an industry standard automatically mean its a better DAW?
He just said it's an advantage, not that it makes the DAW itself better.
In other words, it only makes THE CHOICE of Pro Tools over something else better, not the product itself.

>its the industry standard because of what I have already talked about, boomers refusing to move on.
Regardles of whose fault it is, at the end of the day Pro Tools is still the standard and we still have to adapt.
Maybe in the future this will change but for not blaming boomers is fruitless and pointless.

>Avid have offered nothing new for absolutely years and completely shit on their user base.
True.
Still in many situations using their product is still a better choice than using other ones.

>Still in many situations using their product is still a better choice than using other ones.
or just use reaper, which can do it.. for 60$......

>He just said it's an advantage, not that it makes the DAW itself better.
In other words, it only makes THE CHOICE of Pro Tools over something else better, not the product itself.
the question was, what makes pro tools the best DAW for mixing and mastering. being the industry standard doesn't make it the best daw for mixing and mastering?

>Maybe in the future this will change but for not blaming boomers is fruitless and pointless.
im not arguing or even really care what they do with their money, im just putting the point across that if it wasn't for boomers that refuse to move on, avid would be bankrupt.

Pro-tools is the best example of boomer marketing, the etymology itself is groan inducing.

I'm sorry, I hought I could have an actual conversation with a mentally healthy adult here.
I apologize for wasting your time.

you've put forward no arguments at all. in fact you've basically not read anything and just gone off on some pointless drivel

Thanks bro appreciate the advice. I'm gonna play about with all that tomorrow!

Literally what I thought about your post, hence my dismissive response.
Have a nice day Anti-Pro-Tools user.

>if it wasn't for boomers that refuse to move on, avid would be bankrupt.
You are half right. The pricing is designed to make the boomer feel special about their purchase so you have to have constant non-updates and price gouging or else boomers will feel like they are being cheated (LOL the irony). PT is objectively the most superior DAW for editing and mixing, but anything else is almost unusable. Big think alert, avid purposely do not implement features because they know it will cause different unwanted demographics to join in PT, this actually upsets boomers as well. Also opening up those features will increase incentive for constant cracks and more attention from THAT crowd.
PT is literally the "shake his hand firmly, look him in the eyes and ask for a job" DAW.

i wanted someone to prove to me that pro tools can do something that other daw's can't and nobody has.

And I never claimed it could, but you responded as if I did.

It runs AAX ;-)

>boomers die
>avid goes under

What should I do to improve this?
I'm having a very hard time here.
instaud.io/3ZQq

Attached: 3e60c0f9e965b09a793ce9da9d1ef1a0a89de865b2104351611f049e2f20e558.jpg (502x397, 40K)

>PT is objectively the most superior DAW for editing and mixing
editing MAYBE, but I could do the same on ableton if i bothered to learn it. I don't feel there's even any argument for mixing, you can mix on any daw and it doesn't change the outcome.
once again though Im still going to say, you can edit and mix just the same on reaper (if not easier) for 60$.

yay.................................................................... just what I always wanted.

im not anti-pro tools, im anti avid and their shitty business practices. if they didn't charge $125 a year I'd probably use it.

I'm sorry user. Maybe one day you'll be able to cure your sour grapes syndrome, as well as your analphabetism.

your mom is gay

Yeah she is actually.

Not bad kind of has a Minecraft feeling to it, very calming.....the higher frequencies sound a little harsh to me though, is all I can really say...its good overall

>Here's something I made:

clyp.it/0oj12l22
I'd like some tips on how to connect the outro a bit better and any tips on mixing would be appreciated....any feedback at all would be awesome thanks

a bit grim

Nah, I caught her tribbing with her GF once and it was hot as fuck.
I tried recording their "sessions" by hiding my Zoom H1 under their bed, but the files were always unusable.
I only managed to make a Serum wavetable out of them.

But enough talking about my personal life. This should be a music forum.

youtu.be/o3WdLtpWM_c

I just want to point out this was nominated for a Grammy this year for Dance Recording. I can't wrap my head around how this level of mediocrity can be hyped so hard. It literally sounds like a sample pack preview.

>This should be a music forum.

urr we are talking about sounds of your mother and her gf and turning them into wavetable patches.. i think it's fine.

also post

yeah but everyone knows the grammy's are a joke and you pay to win.
the song isn't half bad but i imagine there are songs way more deserving out there.

I can confirm that Reaper can do everything PT can mix wise, the busing and routing functions better though. Also for better or worse PT has a specific sound, its subtle.

user I NEED that wavetable right fucking now

who were the other nominations?

“Northern Soul” — Above & Beyond Featuring Richard Bedford

“Ultimatum” — Disclosure (Featuring Fatoumata Diawara)

“Losing It” — Fisher

WINNER: “Electricity” — Silk City & Dua Lipa Featuring Diplo & Mark Ronson

“Ghost Voices” — Virtual Self

>Also for better or worse PT has a specific sound, its subtle
genuinely curious, anywhere i could find any info on that?

>WINNER: “Electricity” — Silk City & Dua Lipa Featuring Diplo & Mark Ronson
not surprising.

why are they all just "house" though? why do no other genres of dance music get any recognition, or is it just for normies idk

>Best Dance/Electronic Album
>Woman Worldwide – Justice < winner
>Singularity – Jon Hopkins
>Treehouse – Sofi Tukker
>Oil of Every Pearl's Un-Insides – SOPHIE
>Lune Rouge – TOKiMONSTA

WHO THE FUCK DID THEY PAY? holy shit the jon hopkins album was so much better

Every DAW has its own summing engine and gain architecture, notice the terminology, summing. As in when you actually start making mixes of many elements coming together. Try to run the same exact stems in 2 different DAWs and make the same mixing choices of plugins, fader movements and automation. Export each and see the results for yourself. I hate when people render out a sine wave from 2 daws and then pretend like they are geniuses for discovering they are the same. The "sound" is not a specific frequency thing.

I don't have the wavetable anymore, but this is how the whole patch sounded like:
instaud.io/3ZRC

This is the sample I used to make it:
instaud.io/3ZRK
unfortunately recorded with an iPhone from behind a wall (they never did it while the recorder was ihidden in their room), so it needed some heavy processing to become usable.

>it wasn't bullshit
the patch link won't play for me tho

like 2 months ago pool.... water filter thing or some shit broke and sounded like a rock was stuck in a pipe vibrating. from inside i thought some nine inch nails song i hadn't heard was getting blasted.... got excited when i kept going and went to record it with muh iphone. phone broke before i bothered making it a wavetable, i'm still pissed man, shit sounded sick af

huh i figured you were talking shit, crazy.. is your mom hot?

this mix has been an absolute bitch to do
........closing in on where i think it should be tho
instaud.io/3ZS7

BE MEAN

Attached: dd1f5ecb.jpg (320x320, 14K)

please never post here again

>the patch link won't play for me tho
Does this work?
instaud.io/3ZSe

>like 2 months ago pool.... water filter thing or some shit broke and sounded like a rock was stuck in a pipe vibrating. from inside i thought some nine inch nails song i hadn't heard was getting blasted.... got excited when i kept going and went to record it with muh iphone. phone broke before i bothered making it a wavetable, i'm still pissed man, shit sounded sick af
A true modern day tragedy user. Hope you managed to cope.

>is your mom hot?
She's normal looking.

By the way, I managed to make the project work and exported the wavetables from Serum.
They aren't much, but I guess it's a neat little novelty.
we DOT tl/t-f3ViTckpKo

what the fuck is that jesus turn it down

guys...
dont just ignore me...
heres where i posted

Attached: 1549163907502.gif (320x180, 2.16M)

be mean about the song!

i might, but that's sort of the reaction i want lawl

>Does this work?
yes but tbqh i was expecting something cooler or memier

>instaud.io/3ZQq
it just sounds like you're using stock fl studio sounds and mashed something together.

my pointers are
>get better sounds
>get better drums
>learn to mix
>learn to arrange a track
>remove the weird 808

unironically youtube has all of the answers :)

>yes but tbqh i was expecting something cooler or memier
Real life is never as exciting as we wish it to be.

SOPHIE deserved the grammy

>started lungaposting years ago
>it's still alive
I love you /prod/

Attached: vintage memery.jpg (380x285, 13K)

who are you?

Speaking of SOPHIE...
The remix album for Oil of every... just came out but as far as I understand you can only buy one of 100 exclusive copies that are sold in bundle with a retarded handbag with SOPHIE's likeness printed on, for $285.
Hopefully one of the jackasses that will buy that will share it with SLSK or something.

you asked for feedback and you got it

Give us a quick rundown on the Lunga meme.

clyp.it/psctv4s2

How can I improve this shit (besides better vocals)?

Attached: two-hundred-and-eighty-five us fucking dollars.jpg (948x510, 81K)

you are very peculiar

The vocals are great, it’s perfect don’t change a thing

Why?

the ":)" came off as sarcastic
overall it seemed ornery

>$285
that's insane, but I have no doubt someone will leak it
even those crazy expensive Giegling vinyls hit private trackers only a few days after being released

Genuinely put the smiley face because I felt I was being helpful idk. It genuinely didn’t mean anything though haha

There's not much to it. My dad was a radio DJ and owned one of south africa's first "independant" recording studios. When I was young I would spend hours looking through his records. I distinctly recalled the "feel good" vibe of the lunga album cover whenever me and my friends had fun making music. I spent like a month making the new /prod/ threads with variants of it because bringing good feels to Yea Forums. That was like 3 or 4 years ago. Literally a forced meme. Glad it's still a thing.

Attached: lunga bk.jpg (885x885, 215K)

>repeating genuinely and including haha
you are facetious

Are you also the guy who brought the Lunga meme to the Discord?

Thanks, man, that really means a lot!

No, I don't use Discord. I hate how generals die because of it and they become a namefag circlejerk.
Glad lunga trascended the website tho.

You're a piece of /prod/ history.
Godspeed Lungafag.

I was giving you advice. Sorry for the smiley face I will not do it again

i know its shit but i have no idea on what to add with it so this is all i have
instaud.io/3ZTy

>instaud.io/3ZTy
More sections, reverb and panning, and make the main synth less "digital"
Use an analog synth emulator or something

If you know it’s shit then leave it, start something else and come back to it

ill try that thanks actually
do you have any good analog synth emulators in mind?

fair, i started it so i want it to have some resemblance of a track before i abandon it

Dexed and Synth1 come to mind
They’re both free and there are lots of great patches going around
With a few effects on top of them, they can sound pretty analog

Just like gibson

>get logic
>has the best stock plugins and audio clip management of any daw
>no vst support

reeeeeeeee

you could try vst to au converters I never used a mac though so I don't know if they will work well

why type of tracks should i add to this to make it less boring / more interesting? also hows the mix sounding?

instaud.io/3ZX3

how do i get the bass sound at 3:30 at the fourth verse?
youtube.com/watch?v=kRAWwdzNL6c
i got as far putting an lfo changing the pitch of a sawtooth wave but it still dosent sound quite right
any ideas?

>putting an lfo changing the pitch
i know who u

you lazy fuck, you have to do it manually. they probably played it in with a pitch wheel. detune oscillators, slight low pass, literally it.

instaud.io/3ZXo

I'd like some feedback thanks

the sound cuts are awkward
i think it's because they dont compliment the melody of the guitar
also i think the guitar is a bit too weak in the mix

you should add a lead and a bassline
this also needs a bassline
a nice pad with the filter being swept would sound cool, too
now then, can i get feedback on this?
instaud.io/3ZXs

Attached: 1549087408893.jpg (2279x2267, 434K)

imo your ambient type pad is too quiet and the piano lead is weak.

thank you

Dexed is literally an emulation of a digital synth.

how does synth1 compare to sylenth1

Sylenth is very very dated sounding at this point. Take into consideration that it never had the timeless sound to it even when everyone was jizzing over it almost 10 years ago now. Synth1 is freeware but it is very capable especially when layered. My point is that sylenth shouldn’t be a benchmark anymore.

it's a reminder not to take everything you read here with a grain of salt i guess

r u srs

synth1 is overrated as fuck and still coasting on a very old repuation... i mean it's got a few weird sounds it's capable of but it's not a "serious" synth in any way.... still worth trying out i guess.

sylenth1 is a really nice subtrative synth... it really depends on what kind of music you make- synthwave or pop or some shit where you don't need fm and wavetables and shit you're perfectly fine, it sounds great. if you want to get more sound designy it's not going to cut it.
had a copy on an old laptop, i still miss that fucking filter man lol

half agree. i wouldn't say it *sounds* dated in the sense that you can still hear that shit all over the radio and in the pop sphere, but it's dated in the sense that it really shouldn't be on anybody's radar who's in the market for a synth now a days lol. like $200 is fucking ridiculous when you can get serum for that price

what's the current benchmark in subtractive synthesis vsts?

>subtractive synthesis
nobody gives a fuck about them anymore, everything that's got wavetables does what exclusively subtractive synths did and more

diva is still up there for analog junkies tho

I hate lazy fucks who think feedback is “it sounds weak”. If you don’t have the vocabulary to help someone then go be a brainlet somewhere else. I don’t have time to help everyone sadly.

Attached: 1548990149982.jpg (400x400, 30K)

uhe hive has wavetable now

I wouldn’t say there is a benchmark so much as people very quickly get used to commercially available synths faster than before. Subtractive in itself isnt dated but the iteration developed by lennar is. Current synth meme since 2016 is serum for everything or just wavetable in general.

I already own serum, I'm strictly looking for something that sounds analogue
I tried the arturia VSTs but they are fucking awful and cpu-heavy
Is diva really that good?

Great meme, it only proves my point. I highly recommend expanding your vocabulary or learn how to give actual technical advice.

>I already own serum
bro then wtf are you doing lol
like it's got the fucking ladder filters and old wavetables stock just program your shit to drift and be slightly velocity sensitive it's not that hard

>came into the thread just to argue
great, i'm glad you put effort into your feedback but you're still a net negative for /prod/ acting like that user

diva is pretty good its more like you can mix and match the filters and oscillators instead of it being one emulation

conceited, much?

dont care bro but have a (u)

"Weak" is a completely legitimate criticism of music, I don't really see the problem. It means something is too quiet or lacks impact. Comments like "the melody sounds cheesy" or "that synth is obnoxious," while not technical vocabulary, do a good enough job of expressing criticism.

The true bane of intellectual feedback is stuff like "bro this sounds like garbage" or "I really dig this."

Hahahaha producerlets getting butthurt that I call out their shit advice.

(you)

The word itself means nothing because it lacks objectivity. Saying something is “weak” is lazy and doesn’t actually address any issues. Saying something is weak then explaining how to fix that is the proper response. Without any context as to what is actually wrong is an intellectually dishonest form of feedback.

People that give vague advice don’t want you to improve because they see it as a threat to them.

That's a childish belief. There is no "nambah wan" in music. People should be excited to see others improve and use that excitement as inspiration and motivation to improve themselves as well. We can all be winners.

Most of the GOOD vsts have an au support though, what plugins are you using?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

Attached: 1548990085820.jpg (225x225, 9K)

Its funny who you think you're replying to.

Attached: 1563771166215.png (116x116, 22K)

I don't even understand why you're replying with images you saved from here. How does it disprove the information in the wiki article?

u mad bro

Attached: 1550059672692.gif (360x263, 623K)

Why would I be mad? You think some ebin meme is happening right now or something? All I did was reply with something relevant to the post. Wot.

dunnig kruger effect

I think you've been in front of a screen too long.

have sex

new thread