timaeus222   Members

This is pretty good, actually. Drum programming aside, the only glaring problem I see is that the drum loops are arranged in a repetitive way, and it seems like you're reusing 3~6 drum loops as the basis of your drums.

Well, you certainly have a lil dubstep to look forward to on Apex 2014! *nudge* ;D

I had gathered all the free piano soundfonts I considered good one day. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/devwt08nbfh82p2/ukKERWCHNY

This sounds awesome man.

Not bad for a first attempt, actually. I'm assuming this is just a little way of practicing it, rather than a serious mix? Nice harmonies though. The drum programming is an important aspect of dubstep, but that aside for now, the wobble seems to be buried before 0:26. After 0:26, the wobble is very basic-sounding; it's a saw wave with an LFO on the cutoff, as generic as you can get. The stereo image of it is great and its volume is fine, but the timbre is pretty flat. From here I think you can start experimenting on getting a good wobble sound that fits your own style. Maybe I made a while ago might help.As for the drums, the kick volume seems fine, but the timbre of it makes it blend in a little too well. The snare has a nice timbre, but you may hear how its tail is bleeding into the soundscape at 0:13, for one. The other oddness is that it seems to be kind of wide, and snares are usually mixed to be mono. The hi hats are OK in this context, even if they are a little mechanical in their velocities, and are white-noise-like.

Happy Birthday Will! Thanks for being the beginning of Impact Soundworks!

I do try to do something musical every day, but it doesn't have to be much. Just some sort of productive thing, like EQing, sound design, or even something as simple as favoriting synth patches in my giant collection.

Offering mixing, mastering, and drum programming for this album.

I call this track.

When is it starting? For the last few weeks I keep missing it and then noticing that it started after it gets posted. I like being able to ask questions and get a reply that I can see. EDIT: Nvm, I got it. Home page, not Videos page.

Oh yeah, I like that sound. 0:23? I haven't been able to figure out specifically how to make it yet, but it's basically a white or pink noise generator, whichever sounds closer, on arpeggiator mode (no actual tremolo involved), with a slow LFO routed to a low pass filter and possibly a short envelope linked to the pitch for that strong hit on each note. You might be able to modify HS Percolator on Zebra2 since it has that similar percolating feel on one of the oscillator lanes if you isolate and find that layer/column.

Alright, cool! I'll outline something tonight and compile a reasonable structure for the video.

I may do a "10 tricks you may find useful in FL Studio 11 and above" video if I have the time. And I mean truly useful, so it's not like "oh, you can do Make Unique to clone this pattern quickly" or "Press F4 to make a new pattern on the fly", because those get to be second nature at some point anyways. It would go into detail with tricks that ultimately improve workflow and production intuition in the end---methods that I don't think most people would think of trying (because it's obscure, not because they don't practice enough). The only drawback is that it's only FL, but eh, at least 50% of the people here use FL anyways (HoboKa, Esperado, Chernabogue... and I didn't even go deeper into the compo thread yet), so it'll at least hit a large target audience.

Oh, I figured out how to fix the brush tool, btw. Hold Shift to use the old functionality (it works when you see red notes).

Hm? Why don't you just write them out partially on project files and archive those, rather than trying to remember them? Or is that what you meant?

It could be, but I think it was just quickly sampled and compiled into a simple soundfont (one sample for every C and G per octave, perhaps, but whatever the case, it has almost no unique velocity layer samples).

Sure you can have fun, but if you don't take it all that seriously, how will you improve?

Random nitpicks: 1) Hm... Something's off at 0:14. Not sure what. It's not sounding that "big", and it's kind of cluttered, but only because of the levels, not the number of instruments (because something like this is doable). At 0:16 though, it'd be pretty funny if you put a brass hit. 2) 0:18 - snare is very quiet, kick is buried 3) 0:40 and other similar spots - cymbal is buried 4) 0:50 - the chiptune lead sounds oddly upfront and loud, especially after the quieter previous section. 5) 1:07 - piano sounds a bit mechanical in its timing and velocities. 6) 1:51, 2:11 - sounds pretty piercing, especially on that high note. Dunno why the piano is doubling up with some sort of high synth lead in unison. Maybe the synth lead there could be sent backwards with some reverb and slightly lowering the dry mix? Additionally you may want to fade it out with some automation and then bring the volume back up later, maybe. 7) 1:56 sounds like a chance for you to create a cool chord progression and give a sense of a new section coming up. This is essentially chiptune jazz, so I'd expect jazzy harmonies. 2:16 - piano here sounds especially upfront and exposed, and it sounds a bit dry and a little bit mechanical. Sounds like what Byproduct may be hearing. In general I'd consider points 5 and 8 the most beneficial to work towards fixing, followed by 1-4, then 7, then 6. 0:50 sounds okay to me in terms of arrangement, though a connecting sound may help tie it together with the previous section. It does go from a pretty full section to a very sparse section. Overall, this is pretty cool, man. Tighten up the production some more, and let's polish this up!

Synthetic as in... well... synthesized. i.e. not a drum sample or a recorded drum sound. It's not referring to whether or not it's "supposed" to sound fake, because that's not the point. Either way, the way it functions like a snare but doesn't quite sound like a snare means it's playing a drum part that could fittingly be played with a real snare drum, but it sounds tom-like in timbre. Besides, there are some people who say toms are kind of like pitched snares anyways.

It's synthetic. It's not really a snare per se, but it's functioning like one while having a timbre similar to that of a tom.

Oh, okay. I assumed you were using Zebra.

Actually, when I say internal EQ module, I assume you knew I meant VCF-Notch, VCF-Peaking, etc. Those don't actually act as statically positioned EQs. They edit the harmonics of the sound, so wherever those resonances move, whether it's an LFO, pitch shift, or a different note, the same edit will be done at that/those particular targeted harmonic(s). At least, that's what I've found when I started using those more. Low cutoffs on VCF-Peaking or high cutoffs on VCF-Notch with low band widths should reduce the resonant harmonic without runing the character of the sound.

I personally think halc's had better tracks, but this is still really awesome.

1) Learn the ins and outs of a few synths you think you may like, but not too many so that you can get as good with each one as possible. This will help you think about what sounds fit best together in your own opinion (and objectively to anyone) and what aspects of the sound design of a particular sound needs improvement in your own opinion (and objectively to anyone). 2) Familiarize yourself with DAW shortcut commands so that your workflow isn't hindering your learning speed as much as if you didn't know any DAW shortcut commands. 3) Do A/B comparisons of EQ changes, compression edits, reverb tweaks, etc. until you realize which one you subjectively like better and which one objectively sounds less detrimental to the sound. Make sure you can say that you subjectively like better the one that objectively sounds better. That way you aren't teaching yourself backwards, and you can tell (without explicitly comparing to another similar sound/atmosphere) whether or not your edit will be more universally well-received. This is a form of ear training. Having good audio equipment in the first place will help. 4) Actively listen to tracks you admire the production of, and try to analyze why something works well or why something doesn't work well (subjectively to you or objectively to anyone). 5) Learn at least basic music theory. i.e. What key are you in, is it major or minor, what's the tonic / root note, and what sounds harmonically reasonable.