offsetting notes

[LITHE]

I just completed a remix and I think Im just about ready to submit. but before I do I would like to offset the notes so it doesnt sound mechanical. is there a way I can automaticly, offset the timming of each note randomly in fl studio?

[OverCoat]

is there a way I can automaticly, offset the timming of each note randomly in fl studio?

BEST IDEA EVER

Yes, I believe FL Studio has a "humanize" function though I have never had to use it. I believe it randomizes the note velocities as well as offsetting notes just a tad, though it could make little difference OR it could make too much of a difference. Stay balanced :3

[Zephyr]

Haha, my recommendation for that feel is to record all or most of the parts by hand with a midi keyboard then skip quantization, but yes there are some humanize functions, however I have no clue how to use them, perhaps you can just quantize it to a different tempo with really weak settings one bit at a time, that way it'll slightly throw it off. Or you could create you're own quantization preset which would be just a little off and quantize it to that.

Good luck

[DarkeSword]

I just completed a remix and I think Im just about ready to submit. but before I do I would like to offset the notes so it doesnt sound mechanical. is there a way I can automaticly, offset the timming of each note randomly in fl studio?

I'd recommend against that. You'd be better served going through your mix and adjusting velocities and timings properly.

Aside: IMHO, a mechanical sound has less to do with timing and more to do with note velocities. Think about how upbeats and downbeats need to be accented in relation to each other. Four 16th notes in a row are never going to be played at the exact same velocity; some are going to be slightly stronger than others.

[Lunahorum]

yes random does not equal human.

For a starter's solution in 4/4 time, use this guide.

Bold = loudest

underline = louder

: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and

certainly not set in stone

[Kanthos]

yes random does not equal human.

For a starter's solution in 4/4 time, use this guide.

Bold = loudest

underline = louder

: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and

certainly not set in stone

Ignore this guide. It's only useful if you're a) Playing in 4/4 time, only playing quarter notes, c) not playing the emphasis the "standard" classical way (which is STRONG weak Medium weak, not STRONG Medium STRONG Medium) and d) want to make something incredibly boring. Humanizing a piece is done somewhat well by humanizing algorithms in DAWs, and what they do is surely more complicated than this guide. The poster means well, but if you follow it, you'll probably end up with something worse than what you had originally.

The emphasis of your beats is dependent on the style you're writing in, the direction of the melody, the rhythmic groove of the piece, and even the particular instrument that's playing (try accenting every instrument in a piece the same way; you'll find that some sound natural and some do not). The way you emphasize can also change as the piece progresses. Basically, do what's best for a given phrase or section. Your ears are your best friend here.

[Mia]

yes random does not equal human.

For a starter's solution in 4/4 time, use this guide.

Bold = loudest

underline = louder

: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and

certainly not set in stone

Ignore this guide.

You don't have to make the guy before you sound so dumb. Sure he was brief and simple, but it very well may be helpful to an amateur.

The rest of your post makes perfect sense to me and I'm in total agreement, but I also noticed that there was nothing in it that would actually help someone who doesn't already know what he's doing. You basically said, 'for each different thing, you have to do completely different stuff, and it's really complicated.' That doesn't really help a newbie.

Your ears are your best friend, we all know that. But obviously some people's ears haven't already solved all their problems. At least this guy's post gives the OP what we call direction. What this means is, at the very least, instead of a timid beginner listening to a pattern of flat, even hi hats over and over again, trying to figure out which note's velocity to change first and where, they can make the alternate ones a little quieter, take in -that- effect, and edit as they see fit from there.

I'll translate his post for people who don't need his help though:

yes random does not equal human.

There is some method to the madness.

For a starter's solution in 4/4 time, use this guide.

Until you develop an advanced feel for making your music more human, know that-

Bold = loudest

underline = louder

: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and

A) In basic 4/4 time pieces, outside of moments of intended syncopation or variation, the first and third beats are generally more stressed than the 2nd and 4th, and A strong weak strong weak alternating pattern is fairly common, and may be useful to apply very subtly to strings of notes where you intend them to be considered roughly equal loudness, but don't want it to sound mechanical.

certainly not set in stone

But take this all with a grain of salt, as it is meant as a simplified cheat sheet for a beginner. Do not simply always apply this exact pattern with no randomness. I strongly encourage you to focus on experimenting with all sorts of different stress patterns, and only consider the previously described information as needed.

[Kanthos]

You don't have to make the guy before you sound so dumb. Sure he was brief and simple, but it very well may be helpful to an amateur.

The rest of your post makes perfect sense to me and I'm in total agreement, but I also noticed that there was nothing in it that would actually help someone who doesn't already know what he's doing.

Wasn't trying to make anyone sound dumb. I just saw things playing out a different way than you and wanted to prevent it from happening. Namely, that the OP followed the guide without thinking about whether or not it applied exactly to the piece he's working on, simply because someone gave him a guide.

The goal of my post was to help him avoid doing so. If the OP has a decent enough musical background, he won't need such a guide (I suspect his problems came from the fact that he's used to playing an instrument but not arranging on a computer); he'll be able to figure things out for himself once he knows which parameter to change. If the OP isn't as strong a musician, hopefully my post would cause him to say, "Well, I'm doing a song in genre X, here's a WIP; what pattern of accents would you suggest I use?" I was trying to prompt the OP to ask the right question and get the right answer, rather than come up with a general and probably useless answer (I could talk about accents competently in jazz but not in anything electronic, for example).

@ the OP: If you're still stuck on what to do, why not tell us what you're trying to accomplish and what genre your piece is in, and preferably post a WIP, so someone can help you more directly?

[LITHE]

so you guys are telling me that I shouldnt offset? but there is no way somebody can play perfectly on beat. the remix Im making is a rock song using guitar samples (prominy lpc). when I play sweeps and each note is perfectly timed it sounds too perfect. it sounds like its being played by a machine. I want to show you guys two examples from my music myspace. (add me if you want too!)

CLICK HERE for my music page

first listen to "PowerSlide". about half way through the song is the sweeping part. the whole song is perfectly timed. to me it sounds mechanical.

then lisen to "optimistic perspective". everything in the background is perfectly timed but the guitars and bass are offset. it also has a sweeping part about half way through.

which guitars sound more realistic? powerside or optimistic perspective? (note that optimistic perspective has two lead guitas and powerslide only has one lead)

remember that Im only talking about the guitars...