Winter Local On The 8's *Prog House*

[SonicThHedgog]

http://soundcloud.com/aires/winter

Working title.

Play loud

130 bpm

Giving this ableton set away soon.

[Jared Hudson]

Sounds good. Very Kaskade, slightly Deadmau5. Excellent production. I'm curious as to what you use for mixing and mastering, and what plugins you mainly focus on (compression settings, EQ, anything else). I've heard a few of your tunes on soundcloud. This is a style you excel in. I recommend you push forward in this genre as hard as you can.

By your post, I'm assuming you used Ableton for sequencing and production?

[SonicThHedgog]

Sounds good. Very Kaskade, slightly Deadmau5. Excellent production. I'm curious as to what you use for mixing and mastering, and what plugins you mainly focus on (compression settings, EQ, anything else). I've heard a few of your tunes on soundcloud. This is a style you excel in. I recommend you push forward in this genre as hard as you can.

By your post, I'm assuming you used Ableton for sequencing and production?

Thank you!

I usually use the stock plugins in ableton; I had the "waves" plugin but they use way too much cpu and I only think they are trying to sell the look. I just make sure when im Eqing or mixing/leveling tracks that I get the sound on the right area of frequencies I want that sound to be in so it sound like what I want it to be, it does not conflict with anything else and gives me the opportunity to have the sound as loud or quiet as I want with no problems, but I worry less about those factors when I pan sounds in one direction or in multiple directions because I personally think sounds ccmpete less when they're in diffrent locations (unless that sound happems to be loud).

I do use the Nomad plugins such as the tape saturation and sometimes use the Nomad EQs on live recored tracks but I usually use the Izotop ozone plugin for its multiban and exciter.

for this track (and my other electronic tracks) I just used stock plugins; and on the master im using ozone to boost high end, mid ends and mid-low to low end.

Then im using ozone's multiband imager to slightly widen the mids and high, then the exciter to add a tiny boost to those bands.

After ozone comes another compressor on the master but I forgot why I put it there XD

[Jared Hudson]

Ozone is amazing. I use that as well. Interesting that Ableton has that much power for this genre. The synths are nice. I'm still slightly old school tinkering with Omnisphere and some Kontakt 4 stuff, but may look into plugins like Massive. I may have to take a look at the Nomad plugins. Panning is always a nice trick for spacial fields as you said.

BTW, have you submitted your Chemical Zone remix to OCR? That's a hot track (maybe adjust the outro like a Deadmau5 or Kaskade song, so it can transition well for a DJ, rather than the 80's style fadeout).

[SonicThHedgog]

Ozone is amazing. I use that as well. Interesting that Ableton has that much power for this genre. The synths are nice. I'm still slightly old school tinkering with Omnisphere and some Kontakt 4 stuff, but may look into plugins like Massive. I may have to take a look at the Nomad plugins. Panning is always a nice trick for spacial fields as you said.

BTW, have you submitted your Chemical Zone remix to OCR? That's a hot track (maybe adjust the outro like a Deadmau5 or Kaskade song, so it can transition well for a DJ, rather than the 80's style fadeout).

I submitted it ( still no respond so I think im in the clear!), but I forgot to fix the ending, I knew I was forgeting something; but besides that there are stereo issues with that song that Im to lazy to fix, I just hope they done notice it

I never used Omnisphere, I keep hearing alot about it but I never bother to check it out!

The main synths I use are sylenth 1, Fm8, absynth, and massve (which I have not been using in a while since I'v been using alot of fm8 synths and sampling my massive sounds).

Ableton is a great all around Daw no doubt, I even stopped using cubase for it (altho I save more cpu in cubase for some reason)! Its not only a great user friendly Midi sequencer, its also a lovely program to record with! I still wish ableton had musical notation and surround sound support. Im going to do alot of video stuff soon with this game programming thing im doing and I really dont want to switch to a external daw for surround sound

[AngelCityOutlaw]

It's awesome, but I still stand by my belief that this could use more melody all around. I know house music is a rhythm driven genre, but basically this is mostly side chaining, bass and killer drums. Not a bad thing, but I think it would be 3 times more awesome if there were more catchy melodies to go with it.

[Jared Hudson]

If you REALLY want to amp it up, find yourself a good female singer, run it through Melodyne for pitch mastering, and get some nice harmonized vocals in there. Could be an epic track.

"rain is the rhythm of the sky" la la la

shit like that. Could be HOT

For the style of vocals, check out the artist Haley. She has her own record, but has done lots of recording with Kaskade.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

If you REALLY want to amp it up, find yourself a good female singer

Agreed with this

run it through Melodyne for pitch mastering

No...just no. If you require Melodyne on the voice for any reason, you do not have a good singer. The fact that stuff like that exists is why legitimately good singers are fading

[Jared Hudson]

Agreed with this

No...just no. If you require Melodyne on the voice for any reason, you do not have a good singer. The fact that stuff like that exists is why legitimately good singers are fading

False, it's mastering. I do agree that SOME people use these plugins as a crutch for talent. However, if you're putting out an album, sometimes you still need to use it for 5%-10% for perfection. That one flat or sharp note can really break a song. There are good singers, and GREAT singers. I don't see him getting Alicia Keys for this. I see this as a mastering tool, nothing more, nothing less.

[SonicThHedgog]

Singer sounds like a great Idea! any more melodies and the song will lose alot of energy (cheese)

I sometime (usually) run singers (and some analog synths) through antres auto tune to keep the song together( no not on Tpain settings lol but its tempting XD); Jared Hudson makes a great point, one nasty note can bring a entire song to its knees unless I get a girl who can really sing or does over 500 takes on one bar .

there I nothing wrong with tunners and vocoders at all, making your vox a lead synth is all good. The thing that makes a song shine with its vocals is the music. plus daft punk made alot of this stuff popular XD.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Singer sounds like a great Idea! any more melodies and the song will lose alot of energy (cheese)

I sometime (usually) run singers (and some analog synths) through antres auto tune to keep the song together( no not on Tpain settings lol but its tempting XD); Jared Hudson makes a great point, one nasty note can bring a entire song to its knees unless I get a girl who can really sing or does over 500 takes on one bar .

there I nothing wrong with tunners and vocoders at all, making your vox a lead synth is all good. The thing that makes a song shine with its vocals is the music. plus daft punk made alot of this stuff popular XD.

So more melody would some how ruin it's energy yet a singer would make it better. The singer is supposed to make it better, but the singer sings melodies. Paradox.

If your singer can not hit every damn note you need a better singer. One who has taken lessons and practices hard. If you have one nasty note that brings the song to it's knees, it's because you don't know what you're doing and/or not skilled enough with the instrument. Also, most pitches are naturally very slightly sharp or flat, but not necessarily noticeable separately. When you play your guitar, how hard you press the string down can and does ever so slightly alter pitch. Another example is that when you have a string section "in tune" they are not completely, "in tune". There are very minor differences, maybe only micro-tones, but it is still important.

The extremely minor differences in pitch are an important part of what makes it real. If you use auto-tune, you kill that. I understand that this is often desirable in electronica; to make the voice sound like a synth.

but back in the day, there were many people who could sing without "500 takes per bar", vocal tuners did not exist and they could still "keep the song together" just fine.

End rant.

[Jared Hudson]

So more melody would some how ruin it's energy yet a singer would make it better. The singer is supposed to make it better, but the singer sings melodies. Paradox.

If your singer can not hit every damn note you need a better singer. One who has taken lessons and practices hard. If you have one nasty note that brings the song to it's knees, it's because you don't know what you're doing and/or not skilled enough with the instrument. Also, most pitches are naturally very slightly sharp or flat, but not necessarily noticeable separately. When you play your guitar, how hard you press the string down can and does ever so slightly alter pitch. Another example is that when you have a string section "in tune" they are not completely, "in tune". There are very minor differences, maybe only micro-tones, but it is still important.

The extremely minor differences in pitch are an important part of what makes it real. If you use auto-tune, you kill that. I understand that this is often desirable in electronica; to make the voice sound like a synth.

but back in the day, there were many people who could sing without "500 takes per bar", vocal tuners did not exist and they could still "keep the song together" just fine.

End rant.

I agree with this, thinking of the days of Whitney Houston and Mariah Carey, with no need of a vocoder or auto-tune bullshit. We can thank Cher for setting the new trend.

The conditions you speak of are ideal recording scenarios. If he has no money to PAY a talented singer, or can only find a "really good one", that should be fine, especially if the singer he finds is the style he needs. Unless you're a professional recording artist in the field, the shopping list for professionals isn't as big, or even there on no budget.

All I'm saying is in the realistic perspective, if he can find a GOOD singer in the proper style, and only needs minor Melodyne adjustments, then it's totally worth it. If the singer can hit the notes 90% of the time, the digital transformation will be barely audible, if at all, even to the trained ear. I'm thinking purely production value at the moment. However, I do appreciate, as much as anyone, pure talent, and without the need of software to make them sell records.

[SonicThHedgog]

So more melody would some how ruin it's energy yet a singer would make it better. The singer is supposed to make it better, but the singer sings melodies. Paradox.

If your singer can not hit every damn note you need a better singer. One who has taken lessons and practices hard. If you have one nasty note that brings the song to it's knees, it's because you don't know what you're doing and/or not skilled enough with the instrument. Also, most pitches are naturally very slightly sharp or flat, but not necessarily noticeable separately. When you play your guitar, how hard you press the string down can and does ever so slightly alter pitch. Another example is that when you have a string section "in tune" they are not completely, "in tune". There are very minor differences, maybe only micro-tones, but it is still important.

The extremely minor differences in pitch are an important part of what makes it real. If you use auto-tune, you kill that. I understand that this is often desirable in electronica; to make the voice sound like a synth.

but back in the day, there were many people who could sing without "500 takes per bar", vocal tuners did not exist and they could still "keep the song together" just fine.

End rant.

No paradox, singers are in a whole different demention as another lead synth, or any type of instrument sound factor. (also that some singers dont necessarily have to be singing some melody.

I hate to brake it to you again, but 90% of the great singers you hear are on auto tune, not even the most trained singer let alone 500 takes cannot always escape correction on autotune, especially if you put the great vocalist of the 80's on 20% auto tune, they cant escape the tiny imperfection changes; Though the changes will be so tiny and unaudible to human ears. You have a good point about singers though, if they cant sing then find someones else but the problem is alot of singers cant hold a note steady enough for no auto correction .

The fact that a instrument have sharp pitch or fuctuates in pitch (and vocals) is the key point of auto tune. I'v rented moog and doopfer synths alot of times and if you love analog synths as much as I do you would know that they change pitch ALOT even when the synth is not detuned with other voices, and its very tough to hear that fluctuation when its not detuned with other voices and when its not in a mix because thats really tough to hear; and if you think im nuts deadmau5 said the same thing I said too... just in more profane words.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

No paradox, singers are in a whole different demention as another lead synth, or any type of instrument sound factor. (also that some singers dont necessarily have to be singing some melody.

I hate to brake it to you again, but 90% of the great singers you hear are on auto tune, not even the most trained singer let alone 500 takes cannot always escape correction on autotune, especially if you put the great vocalist of the 80's on 20% auto tune, they cant escape the tiny imperfection changes; Though the changes will be so tiny and unaudible to human ears. You have a good point about singers though, if they cant sing then find someones else but the problem is alot of singers cant hold a note steady enough for no auto correction .

The fact that a instrument have sharp pitch or fuctuates in pitch (and vocals) is the key point of auto tune. I'v rented moog and doopfer synths alot of times and if you love analog synths as much as I do you would know that they change pitch ALOT even when the synth is not detuned with other voices, and its very tough to hear that fluctuation when its not detuned with other voices and when its not in a mix because thats really tough to hear; and if you think im nuts deadmau5 said the same thing I said too... just in more profane words.

I hate to see a thread for constructive criticism of music degraded to an argument, and I think this is the first time you and I have just flat out disagreed, but I still feel it needs to be said.

First, that IS a paradox. Any time you have a linear succession of pitch and rhythm that is perceived as a single entity, you have melody. Unless your singer is just talking or something....you have melody.

90% of the great singers I listen to are either people who have been singing long before pitch correction existed and/or are professionally trained. I have friends and family that are professionally trained (some are even opera) singers and at no point do they require pitch correction to sound amazing and to keep it together. Are they always 100% perfectly spot on? No there's minor, often un-noticeable slip ups, but even your Jun Senoue is not 100% on with his guitar all the time. Nobody is.

I actually met these guys in person and heard them sing and they were great.

here's another example

Live example

The first two songs were made before Auto-Tune was invented, and the last guy doesn't use it. He's been singing with his own voice since the 70s and 80s.

Not too mention that singers like Christine Aguilera have widely spoke out against the use of it.

See, this is why I am not a fan of all this music tech. It has changed people's perception of music and not for the better.

Bottom line, if you want to use Melodyne or Auto Tune for budget reasons for the song and you get a vocalist who can do it, that's fine. What I do not like however, is that fact that it you make the argument that "90%" of singers I hear are a bunch of fakes.

[SonicThHedgog]

I hate to see a thread for constructive criticism of music degraded to an argument, and I think this is the first time you and I have just flat out disagreed, but I still feel it needs to be said.

First, that IS a paradox. Any time you have a linear succession of pitch and rhythm that is perceived as a single entity, you have melody. Unless your singer is just talking or something....you have melody.

90% of the great singers I listen to are either people who have been singing long before pitch correction existed and/or are professionally trained. I have friends and family that are professionally trained (some are even opera) singers and at no point do they require pitch correction to sound amazing and to keep it together. Are they always 100% perfectly spot on? No there's minor, often un-noticeable slip ups, but even your Jun Senoue is not 100% on with his guitar all the time. Nobody is.

I actually met these guys in person and heard them sing and they were great.

here's another example

Live example

The first two songs were made before Auto-Tune was invented, and the last guy doesn't use it. He's been singing with his own voice since the 70s and 80s.

Not too mention that singers like Christine Aguilera have widely spoke out against the use of it.

See, this is why I am not a fan of all this music tech. It has changed people's perception of music and not for the better.

Bottom line, if you want to use Melodyne or Auto Tune for budget reasons for the song and you get a vocalist who can do it, that's fine. What I do not like however, is that fact that it you make the argument that "90%" of singers I hear are a bunch of fakes.

Again No paradox because those rules dont (always) apply to singing; a singer does not have to necessarily sing a melody to add dimention to a song. The factor that the singer or vocals is saying actual words!

the genre of electronica as you stated before, its not very(or not always) melodic nor musical , very repetitiv though just like Faxing berlin by mau5, but if the chords happen to be weaker, then I would consider adding arps and tiny melodies, but it would still be repetitive like brazil by mau5 or a better exaple would be Eric Pryda - melo since he's been doning this longer then mau5 (and a whole lot of other people but those examples are good enough).

Your second pharagraph completly proved why autotune is used which me and Jared Hudson are saying the entire time, what is it? IMPERFECTION.we can stick to the past on production wise no matter how talented. Singers in the 70s-80s made audible mistakes yes they still sound great un corrected especially to people. we know. Would it always sound like it fits in to the song at mainly extremly unnoticable times? No. And If a person cant sing then we would know off the bat. but if they have a beautiful voice and make some natural imperfection/tiny little mistakes thats hard to hear, then that does not mean we find another singer (espectially if your not currently on a $700,000 budget or dont want to take a ridiculously long time for a singer to help you sing on a track you made, unless you want). If you stick and work with that singer who you know can excel with a few recording sessions then she can sound so lovely in a song that even alicia keys will start posting dis videos on youtube (ok I'll stop). After that would I use autotune on a already great voice? chances are no but I would use it for VERY minimal purpose of cleaning up things that I cant hear that may seem nasty to the software LIGHTLY.

Instrument really has nothing to do with auto tune unless what your playing has ALOT of sustain. forexaple I bet you did not know that I use autotune to hold the violin recordings together, same as the bassline in this song, while they really did not do much, it did enough and what I wanted it to do. Guitar wise cant really count because I know people who literally play like 2 power chords per recording and make the song sound intense as fuck. jun senoue? he make a loads of tiny mistakes when I see him play live, but nobody knows how he records..

We are not saying the singer you hear on the radio are fake. its all geared towared production with the use of it, not talent. auto tune does not have to make your voice (or any sound) sound robotic (it can if you want it to, but you might as well use a vocoder cause it sounds cooler), auto tune effects have actual settings that can be adjusted.

Again we are not saying auto tune is a magic singing effect because its not and im not sure why people give an effect uneeded hate because its a tool.. Singing is a talent that some people naturally have with no lesson or music background or the other way around; its like your hand righting, when your used to writing in a type of mannor for years then (unless you take a LONG time to write diffrently) you will not beable to change you hand writting for a extremly long time. lots of singers dont need auto tune, and im not talking about great singers, I mean decent singers too because some singers mistakes make a track sound golden; but as a production tool TINY use of it is fine/ok, but not in all situations because in some situations it becomes redundant.