Mega Man: The Wily Castle Remix Gauntlet 2013

[timaeus222]

Edit:

...

Composition and Arrangement

-----------

1) Transpose all sources so they don't step on each other.

2) learn chords or notes that sound good together.

A) You can play them all at the same time in the case they are strings (Vertical arrangment)

You can play them in progression if you want to create a melody or transition between sources (Horizontal arrangment)

3) Try to pick instruments that sound good / complement each other (Timbre).

4) Reverse cymbals are good to use in order to transition between parts of your song.

Mixing

------

1) Learn to use EQ with each instrument and cut unwanted frequencies using a narrow band. Think of it as chiseling a sculpture. This one requires a good ear.

A) Low Pass and High Pass filters like EQ affect the frequency range of instruments. These are good for building up the beginning and toning down for the end of songs. Experiment on the percussion and other instruments. In Jake's mix he was able to vary the drums by automating either their attack or using low/high pass filters. Check out 0:34 Stone Cold Rock and listen for it. The composition is unchanged but he applied automation for variation.

2) Compression. Watch some vids on this. Ecto can fill you in as well. This can make instruments seem louder. It can also be used to sidechain other instruments to produce a volume pumping effect. A typical example would be routing a kick to your bass via a compressor using sidechain.

3) If you can go into the synths you might be able to automate wave form changes for your instrument to make it change as your song goes along. For example you could go between a square waves, to triangles to sines.

A) Here's a WIP that illustrates this technique. https://soundcloud.com/darrencsmith/dopplerganger. Listen to the lead.

Composition and Arrangement:

1) Another thing would be to make sure they're in the same "mood". It won't help you if you have the same notes for a while, then suddenly a clash because one source is using a major scale and another is using a Mohammedan scale.

3) To build on that, you should be picking instruments that make your EQing job easier. i.e. Don't pick two supersaw leads that are doing a duet throughout with no panning.

4) Any reverses are good for transitions, but percussive rolls, sweeps, and risers would work too.

Mixing:

1) Building on this, you should be EQing in such a way that your leads come out sufficiently. Don't do isolated (while the instrument is soloed) boosts just to make your instrument sound good if it clashes with the lead, but don't do strictly narrow bands all the time for peaking or notching EQ either. EQ in context.

• They don't just "affect" the frequency range; they shrink it. Low pass filters cut out the high end as you lower the crossover frequency, and high pass filters cut out the low end as you raise the crossover frequency. The crossover frequency should just be wherever the band token currently is.
  

• You can automate these band tokens to do compensation EQ in certain spots if you are going to do something that requires filter work in only that section to resolve inevitable clashing. Remember to reverse the automation by the time you get out of that section if the new section doesn't require it. An example would be to automate a high pass on a bass sound that has good treble content but weak low bass content in order to make room for another bass with little treble content but better low bass content to layer it and make a heavier section. However, "louder bass content" doesn't necessarily mean "better bass content".
  

2) Compression is mainly to tighten and strengthen drums, and to tame wild waveforms on non-percussive instruments such as brass sections and vocals, depending on the settings. Try to do it transparently if it's on non-percussion. Sidechaining is typically done with a limiter which can act as a compressor as well. FL Studio's limiter, for example, is a compressor, noise gater, and limiter.

3) Automating waveform changes is interesting; if your synth works with wavetable synthesis, then they likely have a Wave knob to automate via MIDI CC. It's a rather complex concept though, as not many free synths can do it.

-------------------------

Selecting and writing the "right" lead sound (appealing to as many people as you can):

1. First, think about the mood of the section you're writing. Is it high energy? What drum rhythm are you using?

• If it's Drum & Bass, then fitting leads might include timbre-morphing leads and filter envelope leads (long attack if a negative depth, long decay if a positive depth) with relatively late vibrato.
  
• If it's Half-time (Dubstep, for example), fitting leads might include portamento-abusing leads and leads with really heavy vibrato (assign an LFO to the pitch with a depth of a half step or greater, then lower the mix level as necessary).
  
• If it's chillout/downtempo, then fitting leads might include mallet instruments, soaring saw leads with subtle morphing timbres, various types of sine waves (pure sine, dual AM sine, quadric sine [not quadratic], etc.), and so on.
  
• If it's something completely unclassifiable (like Drum & Bass in 6/4 shifting to 5/4 but using a modified 4/4 rhythm), just look at the energy and go with that.
  

2. Next, think about the class or purpose of sound you want, narrow down the technique you would use to create them (or just find them somehow), and further craft the tone.

• If it's aggressive, sync leads, supersaws (to an extent), thick leads (vibrato at a really high LFO rate), detuned saw leads, and similar could work rather well.
  
• If it's emotive, moog leads, less aggressive (semi-tame) sync leads, distorted pulse wave leads (think Sytrus's Hyper resonant preset), and detuned saw leads with slightly slow attacks and heavy vibrato (like a mourning lead) should work rather well.
  
• If it's calm, slow low-pass-filter-envelope leads, simple sine wave leads (again, many different types depending on the synth), and maybe moog leads would work here too.
  

3. Now, look at the tone in an objective manner. What do you want to do to perfect it?

• Is it too resonant? If so, find the reason and fix it. Usually it's a resonance knob turned up too high, other times it could be an FM knob turned up too high creating an unwanted thin resonance, and other times it could be excess treble as a result of too much waveshaping and distortion work.
  
• Are the frequencies going to let it fit into the song reasonably well? If it's not quite there, don't EQ with your DAW yet. Try to see if there are internal methods of EQing first. What if the sound is too thin? You can't "add" frequencies that were never there in the first place.
  
• Does it fit the mood at all or is it completely out of place? Use other techniques to create a completely different lead sound if it doesn't seem to fit. As you start out, you might want to ask for someone else's opinion. Eventually you can tell for yourself whether it fits or not.
  
• Is it expressive enough? What can you do to fix that? Portamento/Glide, Vibrato, Reasonably long Filter Envelopes, Wavetable Shifting, Oscillator Sync LFOs, Frequency Modulation Depth (FM Depth), etc. Loads of options.
  

4. How is the lead supposed to sound in terms of phrasing? Think of a lead sound as an organic instrument, and pretend it has a "perfect" way for phrasing, and create that "perfect" way.

• Should it be staccato sometimes and legato other times?
  
• Do you want portamento in some spots to accent those notes?
  
• Does it have a level of glide/portamento that won't sound weird when you do grace notes?
  
• Does it sound "right" playing faster here and slower there?
  
• Do elongated notes work better or should this be a solo?
  
• What is the pitch range, and in what way should the lead move within that range?
  
• Is it legato or retrigger? Most of the time, legato works better, but retrigger could work I guess. You're better off sequencing in legato mode, and then not overlapping notes whenever you want retrigger. It gives more flexibility, but it really depends on how you're modulating your filters; envelopes or LFOs?
  

Selecting bass tones and writing "good" bass parts (appealing to as many people as you can):

1. What mood are you writing for?

• Is it supposed to be ambient? Sustains should work well, but for longer notes the tone should preferentially be slightly evolving, or a pad should be evolving if you don't have access to an evolving bass. That way it draws attention more than just a simple static sustain.
  
• Is it supposed to be funky? Try a 50/50 split or simply a 50% mix level on a wah pedal (or a wah pedal emulation/imitation) on an electric bass sound, or find a clean/relatively unprocessed slap bass sound. Not the only way, though.
  
• Is it supposed to be intense or heavy? You might need basses that use rich, deep-sounding filters. Vintage filters will give you bass tones that can really nail those low notes and not "fail". I've heard bass sounds fail below A3 before, and it sounds pretty bad. You should hear the tone breaking up if it's "failing".
  
• Is it dubstep (super specific here)? How aggressive is it? You probably need incredibly gritty, unforgiving tones if it's aggressive, and if it's not intense, the basic LFO linked to a slightly resonant cutoff on a thick oscillator tone should be fine. Aggressive tones can be accomplished using waveshaping/distortion, FM synthesis, bitcrushing (I showed that earlier), and rarely, granular resynthesis (not synthesis, necessarily).
  

2. Think about the class or purpose of sound you want. Narrow down the technique you need to use to create them, then work on it.

• Ambient basses could be rich FM basses, low pad drones, etc. Something soft to go with the calm atmosphere.
  
• Funk basses could be wah fingered electric bass, slap bass, Yamaha CS-80 squelchy basses, Roland Juno pitch envelope basses, etc. Anything oldschool could work very well.
  
• Intense basses could be vintage filter basses, heavily waveshaped/distorted would-have-been-a-dubstep-wobble basses (without the LFO, basically), etc. Very detailed work is recommended.
  
• Dubstep basses could be FM basses ("eeyeah", vocaloid, etc.), bitcrushed basses ("yah"), basic LFO-to-cutoff-on-slightly-resonant-filter basses, etc. Very detailed work is recommended.
  

3. Now, look at the tone in an objective manner. What do you want to do to perfect it?

• Is it failing at the lower notes? If so, just find another filter model to use that can handle lower notes better. Vintage filters can, for example. Sometimes you're just playing way too low in general. Anything lower than C3 is difficult to make work unless it's a sine wave or a patch that is tuned really high already.
  
• Is it too resonant if it's a dubstep bass? If so, lower the resonance.
  
• Is it terribly weak and too forgiving? Try more waveshaping and distortion; more detuning; put filters in parallel to louden them. Increase the volume reasonably. That should help things.
  
• Is it too thin but still accomplishing the filter work you wanted? Thicken it with some detuning, external chorus, etc. More voices helps too. One voice can't detune effectively, obviously.
  

4. How is the bass supposed to sound in terms of phrasing? Think of a bass sound as an organic instrument, and pretend it has a "perfect" way for phrasing, and create that "perfect" way.

• Is it supposed to be playing fast notes or slow notes? Write accordingly.
  
• Is it emulating a real bass? Sequence or keyboard it in realistically and reasonably.
  
• Is it in retrigger mode or legato mode? Retrigger works well if the filter doesn't change much, and sounds terrible if the filter does change significantly. If the filter changes over the course of a long time, retrigger won't let that shine. Legato mode works decently if it's "true legato" rather than glide/portamento legato. i.e. Some sample libraries have "true legato" for their bass patches which crossfades two notes sometimes, and other times it fades out the first note, fades in a real hammer-on/pull-off sample, fades that out, then fades in the second note, all in a short time frame. The Shreddage II manual talks about this.
  
• Note range? Is it outside the range of a bass, or is it emulating the
  which is more than just a bass?
  

I speak from experience, and I'm not simply spouting nonsense or misleading material. I'm just saying what I learned. There is NOT 100% subjectivity in this, nor 100% objectivity in this. These are things I advise, not "rules". I do things this way and I get results I love. That's all. Good day all!

Edited August 25, 2013 by timaeus222

[Shadix]

Fun Post

Hey Timaeus, I appreciate you trying to offer advice, however I've noticed this several times in this thread but in your attempts to help you often say things that are flat out not true and\or bad habits.

If you are going to conduct yourself like an expert you should take the responsibility to fact check your practices or at the very least make it clear to people that your method is just that, your method and is not a defacto wrong\right way of doing things. People are actively reading these forums even in this competition for advice, and if you lack understanding on certain aspects of the craft it can be misleading to fresher blood trying to learn good production habits. If it isn't a black or white issue and is a subjective production choice you make, you should at the very least make it clear when you give advice that your approach is how you do things and isn't a definitive wrong\right way.

I only bring this up because when I started coming to OCR back in 07-08 I picked up a ton of horrible habits from people doing exactly this that I had to basically completely unlearn at university.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Shadix

[Phonetic Hero]

Please don't compress brass... pls

Edited August 23, 2013 by Phonetic Hero

[Garpocalypse]

Hey Timaeus, I appreciate you trying to offer advice, however I've noticed this several times in this thread but in your attempts to help you often say things that are flat out not true and\or bad habits.

If you are going to conduct yourself like an expert you should take the responsibility to fact check your practices or at the very least make it clear to people that your method is just that, your method and is not a defacto wrong\right way of doing things. People are actively reading these forums even in this competition for advice, and if you lack understanding on certain aspects of the craft it can be misleading to fresher blood trying to learn good production habits. If it isn't a black or white issue and is a subjective production choice you make, you should at the very least make it clear when you give advice that your approach is how you do things and isn't a definitive wrong\right way.

I only bring this up because when I started coming to OCR back in 07-08 I picked up a ton of horrible habits from people doing exactly this that I had to basically completely unlearn at university.

I don't think enough can be said about these kinds of things. I have books, seen videos, and i'm still interested in what every single person does and how they got what they ended up with.

Take it with a grain of salt and learn what you can with the opportunity that was given.

[shadow24]

I only bring this up because when I started coming to OCR back in 07-08 I picked up a ton of horrible habits from people doing exactly this that I had to basically completely unlearn at university.

I'd like to hear from anyone who's willing to share how they do things. If you can point out some of these pitfalls then that would be great. I fall in enough holes as it is

[timaeus222]

Hey Timaeus, I appreciate you trying to offer advice, however I've noticed this several times in this thread but in your attempts to help you often say things that are flat out not true and\or bad habits.

If you are going to conduct yourself like an expert you should take the responsibility to fact check your practices or at the very least make it clear to people that your method is just that, your method and is not a defacto wrong\right way of doing things. People are actively reading these forums even in this competition for advice, and if you lack understanding on certain aspects of the craft it can be misleading to fresher blood trying to learn good production habits. If it isn't a black or white issue and is a subjective production choice you make, you should at the very least make it clear when you give advice that your approach is how you do things and isn't a definitive wrong\right way.

I only bring this up because when I started coming to OCR back in 07-08 I picked up a ton of horrible habits from people doing exactly this that I had to basically completely unlearn at university.

Hey, I'm not trying to teach bad habits. And it's fine to compress brass or vocals if it's transparently done. I just don't recommend it heartily. With the assumption that you're a complete master at compression, if you hear literally no difference after compression (i.e. no transients have been ruined) but you see the difference you want to see in a spectral analyzer, then it isn't detrimental to a significant enough extent to worry about it. How else would you process vocals with a completely wacky dynamic range, then? Nobody sings with a perfect, relatively flat dynamic range, not even Jillian Aversa...

I'm giving advice that I believe is truly accurate. I'm not trying to mislead anyone. I'm not going to say anything that is blatantly wrong and off-base. What I said was NOT 100% subjective. I wouldn't have said all that if I wasn't truly confident in what I currently know, and I'm not aiming to brag or act arrogant. If you don't believe I'm qualified to give advice, just look at some examples on my website and decide for yourself.

Besides, many people were still learning and at their early stages of experience in 2007-08. You can't expect everyone to be masters then.

I'm pretty tired of people thinking I don't know anything simply because I'm giving advice. I wouldn't be giving advice if I thought it was wrong outright. You've heard my remixes, you know what I can do. Believe me if you want, but I'm trying to be a nice, helpful guy. Just roll with it.

If you're going to criticize me or dispute me, at least use careful and nice wording.

Edited August 23, 2013 by timaeus222

[KingTiger]

While I agree that things should be taken with a grain of salt, and perhaps Timaeus can come off a bit "pushy" at times, what did he say that was wrong?Everything he said made sense to me and seemed correct to me, so I'm wondering what was wrong, so perhaps we can all learn? (Besides the brass compression thing, I get the point there.)

[Brandon Strader]

Not to mention killer studio chops

[timaeus222]

While I agree that things should be taken with a grain of salt, and perhaps Timaeus can come off a bit "pushy" at times, what did he say that was wrong?Everything he said made sense to me and seemed correct to me, so I'm wondering what was wrong, so perhaps we can all learn? (Besides the brass compression thing, I get the point there.)

Yep. You don't have to necessarily agree with me, but all I'm doing is sharing how I do things. I like my results, and I want other people to share in the enjoyment and get results they like too, however they want to do it.

Besides, I was constantly telling myself to write "might work" or "could work" instead of "should work", "works well" instead of "works best", "rather well" instead of "really well", etc. Anything to make myself come across reasonably non-biased.

[MindWanderer]

If you're going to disagree with someone, please try to phrase it as something like, "Those are some good points, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on point X. Here's how I see it," rather than, "You are giving bad advice, please stop it."

On the other hand, if it's possible to disagree on something based on your perception and/or opinion, then yeah, it's subjective. And when it comes to music, I think there are very, very few things you could say that aren't "100%" subjective (and I'm not sure how it's possible for a statement to be partially subjective). No matter how amazing something might be, whether it's a technique or a piece of music, someone will hate it, and no matter how crappy something may be, there could be someone who likes it (as all the terrible free soundfonts out there demonstrate).

I particularly found Timaeus's ideas about designing good synth sounds to be helpful. I've been looking for exactly that kind of tip for months. It'll be fun to try to apply those tips in REAPER, where you can automate pretty much anything.

Edited August 23, 2013 by MindWanderer

[timaeus222]

On the other hand, if it's possible to disagree on something based on your perception and/or opinion, then yeah, it's subjective. And when it comes to music, I think there are very, very few things you could say that aren't "100%" subjective (and I'm not sure how it's possible for a statement to be partially subjective). No matter how amazing something might be, whether it's a technique or a piece of music, someone will hate it, and no matter how crappy something may be, there could be someone who likes it (as all the terrible free soundfonts out there demonstrate).

That's the important thing to consider.

There are loads of technical aspects to composition and production that some people can describe as purely technical, and some things that can be understood via opinion, but I've seen many people meld those two ideas together and assume that it's just all subjective all the time. For example, very bright, annoying thin resonances that bug people's ears is not purely opinion. You can't say "It doesn't hurt my ears at all" unless you can't hear it at all (or you've heard it all through your life 24/7 for some apparent reason and got used to it), in which case it doesn't apply to you. It's a technical detail that really holds true for anyone who can hear resonances of that nature. Gario goes into some detail with this in his fourth paragraph.

More examples:

• Saying something is too loud. If you say the whole song is too loud, it could just have really tight compression, like
  . If you call that song too loud while you listen to mostly quiet music, it's subjective because it's new to you and you aren't accustomed to loudness like that. If you say the whole song is too loud, and you're somebody like DarkeSword who knows what bad loudness truly is, then it's mostly objective with a hint of subjective.
  
• If you say a lead sound is too loud and upfront in a mix and it's actually dry and unprocessed, it's objective.
  
• If you say there's too much bass at 64Hz, it's objective because you pinpointed where it was.
  

It's all about your experience and when you can say with accuracy whether you like or don't like something because of your opinion or because of technical details.

Edited August 23, 2013 by timaeus222

[Brandon Strader]

I've also seen timaeus22222222 or however many 2's give some inaccurate advice on the workshop and it always kinda bothered me but I never really said anything. I think you can share advice for stuff you do 100% know, but shy away from other things, like suggesting that compression on brass or vocals is bad. I compress brass and vocals hard. Brass is the part of the orchestra that conveys strength, almost flippin' heavy guitar-esque strength, and as a result it's not bad to compress brass. Without compressing vocals pretty hard, they sound inconsistent -- and don't even get me started on growls, without compression they'd be turd. You should not be saying "this is 100% true", you should be saying "I've done it -this way- once and it worked out, but depending on your song, there are several ways you could accomplish this goal." One of those ways may be to put a considerable compression send on the brass and vocals. In fact the only occasion I can think of when I'd have the compressor on them lighter is if the song is very very sparse or needs the big difference between volumes (quiet vs. loud notes) but even then I'd put the compressor on lightly. I'd never just leave it off. But that's me, and I'd only consider it done 'wrong' if it sounded bad in the end, or half of it isn't hearable due to being too quiet.

Don't take what Shadix said as an insult, take it as constructive criticism and try to work towards not doing those things, because it can be very damaging to the learning community.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Brandon Strader

[DjjD]

I think you guys take this way too seriously.

Oh, and by the way, you're all going down this Sunday. Cuz compression. I'm lowering all your thresholds. Beat that ratio.

With a kick drum.

P.S. I'm totally serious. (not really)

P.S.S. But I totally am.

P.S.S.H. Good luck everybody.

[timaeus222]

I've also seen timaeus22222222 or however many 2's give some inaccurate advice on the workshop and it always kinda bothered me but I never really said anything. I think you can share advice for stuff you do 100% know, but shy away from other things, like suggesting that compression on brass or vocals is bad. I compress brass and vocals hard. Brass is the part of the orchestra that conveys strength, almost flippin' heavy guitar-esque strength, and as a result it's not bad to compress brass. Without compressing vocals pretty hard, they sound inconsistent -- and don't even get me started on growls, without compression they'd be turd. You should not be saying "this is 100% true", you should be saying "I've done it -this way- once and it worked out, but depending on your song, there are several ways you could accomplish this goal." One of those ways may be to put a considerable compression send on the brass and vocals. In fact the only occasion I can think of when I'd have the compressor on them lighter is if the song is very very sparse or needs the big difference between volumes (quiet vs. loud notes) but even then I'd put the compressor on lightly. I'd never just leave it off. But that's me, and I'd only consider it done 'wrong' if it sounded bad in the end, or half of it isn't hearable due to being too quiet.

Don't take what Shadix said as an insult, take it as constructive criticism and try to work towards not doing those things, because it can be very damaging to the learning community.

Thanks. That's pretty much what I was intending to convey with regard to the brass/vocal compression. Those waveforms tend to be very wonky. When you first start out with compression, though, it's not a good idea to "just do it" on brass and/or vocals "just because". Know why, and know when it's good or bad. Also, yay, you spelled my non-numerical name right.

And yeah, these days I try to give as accurate advice as I can. If I don't know it 100%, I might say "-esque" or "you could try this and see how it goes" or something. It would be rather noticeable. I am rather glad I don't say "This is 100% true, and you can't deny it" unless it's totally, completely, undeniably true (like majorly heavy reverb on a blasting kick drum playing 32nd notes creating ridiculously blatant mud).

And uh... What is "P.S.S.H"? xD

Edited August 23, 2013 by timaeus222

[Brandon Strader]

you heard mah mix you know i'm winnin and you are powerless to compete

HOW DOES IT FEEL

Oh, and by the way, you're all going down this Sunday.

[ectogemia]

Just thought I'd pop in and agree with those of you who think timaeus needs to think more before he posts, especially when offering critiques. It's not that he doesn't know what he's doing -- his mixes usually sound pretty good -- it's that he comes across as a know-it-all, and that looks baaaaad for him when he's offering overtly wrong advice/criticism at the same time. By all means, keep offering critiques, but do so more tactfully and only do so when you're sure there's actually an error and when you're sure how to fix it. If someone disagrees with one of your critiques, just deal with it.

OCR family therapy 2013.

Edited August 23, 2013 by ectogemia

[Garpocalypse]

Timaeus is throwing his two cents in and keeping the forum alive by doing so. I've had to go to other production forums to get more aggressive critiquing and I think it has helped immensely. Even though I'm thinking roughly half the people didn't know what they were talking about.

A little opposition from time to time is great for staying motivated and increasing the amount of enjoyment from your own work. At the very least even slightly off advice is good for breaking a few molds and experimenting in different ways.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Garpocalypse

[Phonetic Hero]

Brass is something that I personally would rather automate volumes and frequencies myself, rather than have a compressor squash the waveforms. I find that with most organic instrumentation, it's a lot more natural sounding to tame wild waveforms with this method rather than squashing everything. If you listen to an orchestra recording (a lot of which are mixed and mastered after the fact now) you wouldn't be impressed by how *flat* sounding they were... talking about how flat someone plays or sings conveys terrible musicianship. It's something that I feel needs to be dynamic, even if it's implied. The overall volumes can be brought up in the mastering process, but "taming" is something I like to take care of in a context that I have more control over what's going on

But, as mentioned, I suppose transparent compression and parallel compression are other methods that could work in certain contexts, people just need to be careful where they're using it and make sure they know what they're doing when they do it. That's not to say "if you don't know what you're doing, DON'T DO IT" because then nobody would ever learn. But we also need to be careful of saying "this works, so do it" when talking about certain methods (there are TONS of ways to do things in the production world). Just pay attention to how things sound and look for contexts that whatever sound you're experimenting with would be a good fit in

Edited August 23, 2013 by Phonetic Hero

[Brandon Strader]

Yeah. Hey, what kind of money are you spending that you have brass samples with volume modulation? xD Or did you mean that you do it manually? in FL Studio?

[Phonetic Hero]

Yeah. Hey, what kind of money are you spending that you have brass samples with volume modulation? xD Or did you mean that you do it manually? in FL Studio?

I have an assy brass ensemble sample (from Komplete Elements 6, when N-I was still selling it), which is why I take such care to make it sound decent. I do volume and EQ automation manually

Komplete Elements 6 was about $120 for a ton of shit. Actually ended up being quite a good purchase... it's too bad they don't offer that specific package anymore, and KE sucks now

[Brandon Strader]

I have an assy brass ensemble sample (from Komplete Elements 6, when N-I was still selling it), which is why I take such care to make it sound decent. I do volume and EQ automation manually

Komplete Elements 6 was about $120 for a ton of shit. Actually ended up being quite a good purchase... it's too bad they don't offer that specific package anymore, and KE sucks now

Yeah see, I'll use the EWQL brass that comes with symphony orchestra, they've got modulation that will let you switch between staccato notes and held out notes. Slap a compressor on that hard, and just go to town... like in my Skyrim mixes... I suppose if you were going to a more subtle performance, you'd need to automate volume, it really depends on the context. Actually, I really really want some better brass samples, some that I could do swells and hard stabs with, not sure where to turn.

[Phonetic Hero]

Yeah see, I'll use the EWQL brass that comes with symphony orchestra, they've got modulation that will let you switch between staccato notes and held out notes. Slap a compressor on that hard, and just go to town... like in my Skyrim mixes... I suppose if you were going to a more subtle performance, you'd need to automate volume, it really depends on the context. Actually, I really really want some better brass samples, some that I could do swells and hard stabs with, not sure where to turn.

Haha, mine does too, just the actual sound is kinda balls. If you want to spend more money than EWQL, look at Cinesamples (maybe 8Dio or Soundiron, not really sure what either have on the brass front though), I guess... their stuff is really, really pricey, but damn does it sound good

EDIT: Looks like Soundiron doesn't have any brass, but they've got some other good stuff

DOUBLE: I guess 8Dio doesn't either. Maybe brass is hard to sample, who knew

Edited August 23, 2013 by Phonetic Hero

[KingTiger]

Okay one thing I'm confused about what it means: You guys keeps talking about adding effects in parallel, and I'm not at all sure what that means.

[Brandon Strader]

What, you mean parallel compression?

You set up a compressor, kinda strong like -30 threshold and ratio of 6 or so, and set the release to around 50

Then you make a "Group" and send all your drums to that group.

Then you set the compressor you just set up to that group as a SEND, and set it to maybe -9 or so, judge for yourself by listening.

What this'll do is add a bit of a snap to your drums, it'll liven them up a bit. I do it on literally every song I do with drums now.

This does NOT replace individual compression for each drum piece (kick, snare, etc)

[Phonetic Hero]

What, you mean parallel compression?

You set up a compressor, kinda strong like -30 threshold and ratio of 6 or so, and set the release to around 50

Then you make a "Group" and send all your drums to that group.

Then you set the compressor you just set up to that group as a SEND, and set it to maybe -9 or so, judge for yourself by listening.

What this'll do is add a bit of a snap to your drums, it'll liven them up a bit. I do it on literally every song I do with drums now.

This does NOT replace individual compression for each drum piece (kick, snare, etc)

You're essentially getting the dry signal and the compressed signal in "parallel", so you're getting the dry transients of the unaffected signal and backing it up with the compressed for a bit of extra meat