Jump to content

Super Metroid - Lower Norfair - Dubstep


jordanrooben
 Share

Recommended Posts

Whether or not I like dubstep, and I do, this is more or less electro house because of the rhythmic choices made. Dubstep is generally half-time, like at 0:00 - 0:22. Anyways:

The pitch envelope kick at 0:15 was cool at first, but to me it got old eventually. Don't be afraid to use new drums every once in a while throughout a single track. Also, that kick sounds messier in faster sequencing than slower sequencing due to its envelope decay being quite long and presently audible (it's basically a fast bass drop).

That said, I generally like the atmosphere here. The intro was actually pretty good, though I thought the orch hits were a bit cheesy playing fast triplets like that. :P I imagine if you had actual string samples, you'd have chosen to use them instead. At 0:30 - 0:59, the pacing was generally the same all the way through. The kick drum at 1:00 - 1:28 was very good. :) At 1:58, things get rather muddy with the lower orch hits.

Overall, some textures are rather abrasive/resonant (e.g. 1:29 - 1:43, 2:27 - 2:54, 2:57 - 3:01, 3:04 - 3:08, 3:11 - 3:16) in their frequencies, even though it's dubsteppish. The pacing of this as a whole is generally the same throughout, so it gets kind of plodding at times. You have a general idea of dubstep so far. Maybe

can serve as a good example. Edited by timaeus222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not I like dubstep, and I do, this is more or less electro house because of the rhythmic choices made. Dubstep is generally half-time, like at 0:00 - 0:22. Anyways:

The pitch envelope kick at 0:15 was cool at first, but to me it got old eventually. Don't be afraid to use new drums every once in a while throughout a single track. Also, that kick sounds messier in faster sequencing than slower sequencing due to its envelope decay being quite long and presently audible (it's basically a fast bass drop).

That said, I generally like the atmosphere here. The intro was actually pretty good, though I thought the orch hits were a bit cheesy playing fast triplets like that. :P I imagine if you had actual string samples, you'd have chosen to use them instead. At 0:30 - 0:59, the pacing was generally the same all the way through. The kick drum at 1:00 - 1:28 was very good. :) At 1:58, things get rather muddy with the lower orch hits.

Overall, some textures are rather abrasive/resonant (e.g. 1:29 - 1:43, 2:27 - 2:54, 2:57 - 3:01, 3:04 - 3:08, 3:11 - 3:16) in their frequencies, even though it's dubsteppish. The pacing of this as a whole is generally the same throughout, so it gets kind of plodding at times. You have a general idea of dubstep so far. Maybe

can serve as a good example.

Hey, thanks for the advice!

I mean, yeah. It's not traditional dubstep, but I wasn't going for pure dubstep. Then again, I don't know that I'd say Ashes to Ashes is either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, thanks for the advice!

I mean, yeah. It's not traditional dubstep, but I wasn't going for pure dubstep. Then again, I don't know that I'd say Ashes to Ashes is either.

I dunno, it has plenty of dubstep elements, like the bass wobbles and the halftime drums, and it integrates other elements in there from granular, chiptune, organic, and cinematic contexts. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno, it has plenty of dubstep elements, like the bass wobbles and the halftime drums, and it integrates other elements in there from granular, chiptune, organic, and cinematic contexts. ;)

True, but house has both bass wobbles, and halftime drums. They're more like accents, but still. That song has far more depth of atmosphere than most dubstep songs have, and it's more reserved in terms of both the drums, and the bass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds more like industrial to me. What I notice is the arrangement is kinda sparse. Texturally there should be some more layers.

I agree. The wobble is there, yeah, but it isn't taking front-seat. And the second point is true as well. It needs atleast two extra layers, as it is a little bit bland at times. For example at 2:20, there's the main Norfair theme, but not much else. You wait with a layer until 2:30, when you add another segment... but practically leave the Norfair theme out of it. It's almost as if the song is chopped up in little pieces: start, begin segment, insert a small fade of one segment into the other, and then repeat without the segments forming one solid track.

It's got some interesting things going on, but this is very much a WIP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. The wobble is there, yeah, but it isn't taking front-seat. And the second point is true as well. It needs atleast two extra layers, as it is a little bit bland at times. For example at 2:20, there's the main Norfair theme, but not much else. You wait with a layer until 2:30, when you add another segment... but practically leave the Norfair theme out of it. It's almost as if the song is chopped up in little pieces: start, begin segment, insert a small fade of one segment into the other, and then repeat without the segments forming one solid track.

It's got some interesting things going on, but this is very much a WIP.

I think Argle is saying pretty much exactly what he means.

When the arrangement is sparse, he's saying that not only are the textures sparse, but the coherence, flow, and simplicity of the parts as well. The key change at 1:28 didn't have a transition to lead into it. Yes, the previous note was the same note as the first note in the new key, but that doesn't make it natural to shift into the new key. There are particular ways to change keys that work well, and it's up to you to learn what ways there are, how they can work in your own mix, and how you can implement them cleanly.

If you really listen hard, you can hear that this is a rather straightforward interpretation of this source tune (no offense of course). It uses the same 20 notes (the new keys within the same source are still the same 20 notes, shifted into the new key, in my interpretation of pitches) with an interpretation that can be polished more in general. This is not jordan's fault though, because this is a difficult source to re-interpret. This is hard because the source itself is already sparse in its notes and repetitive nature, so remixers have to really add their own original content in a cohesive, creative way to elevate it well.

With a source like this, feel free to change the tempo and use some notes from the new tempo (just don't, I dunno, slow it down 400% and use 4 notes from that, unless they're very distinguishable notes, so that it's not too liberal). Here is a fantastic example of a source tune and

that are recognizable as related but have substantial interpretation of source. Yeah, I can't find the source tune anywhere on youtube, but see if you can notice that the same notes are being re-purposed at different tempos and in different genre segments in the same remix. The notes from the source are everywhere, but almost 100% the same notes the whole time. Edited by timaeus222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Jordan, dude, these are some badass sounds. :D Wasn't it just last month or so that you were working with really thin and dull sounds? Then you show up with this.

Some small changes to the writing and some more work on the mixing and you could have a badass remix here. Just so you know, you're making progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...