/bleeproduction/ #25
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
![roland_sh1000_brochure75_fr[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4LGrxH4.jpg "roland_sh1000_brochure75_fr[1].jpg")
Synth Saturday
>>48385138
Anyone making music concrete?
>>48385161
i always wanted to, but i have no recording stuff for the samples
'No one cares no one sympathizes, we just stay home and play synthesizers.'
So I just got Absynth, Sylenth, FM8 and a couple others, the question is: Do people normally use presets or do they make the sounds from scratch?
why can't renoise and other trackers go horizontally
starting out in the FL pattern editor has ruined my life
>>48386596
People only use presets. Why bother making sounds, if someone much more talented than you does a better job. Have you looking into synthesis and music theory? It ridiculous. No one can be expected to waste time on that. If the the presets suck, download another synth.
>>48385161
I do. The world is my samplepack.
>>48386588
INNER CITY PRESSURE
>>48386649
I appreciate your comment, so far I do have an intuitive idea of sound wave types, envelopes (attack, release, etc), some effects (reverb, delay, etc), extremely basic stuff
So yeah, I guess you don't really have to get that much into it and just fuck with presets
After all it's really the composing and mixing that matters mostly
![1405466482465[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/87EzJze.png "1405466482465[1].png")
>>48386748
I think that post was supposed to be a jok
>>48386788
It just sounded like hyperbole to me
After all, why have to make every instrument from scratch? It makes sense to modify sounds to make them fit better into your intention but otherwise composition and mixing is really the thing that you need to do good music
>>48386748
Please don't be a preset babby, learn some synthesis theory. Start with subtractive synthesis.
>>48386845
Because no one will take you seriously if you don't understand how your instruments work, which you'll only learn by spending your time creating your own sounds from scratch.
What happens when you think of a sound you'd like to use and there's no preset that matches it?
How do I become accessible yet not too generic? I'm having a problem finding the right balance.
>>48386852
I understand that you would encourage that, but let's get real, someone who's not experienced already in production doesn't need to get too much into it and may still make good music if he's talented
>>48386888
Guitar players don't actually understand how sound waves work either, they just know their finger techniques. Percussive instruments you can just hit and make a sound. It's intuitive.
>>48386890
What keeps you from being accessible? Just structure your tracks well and try to make them cohesive
>>48386649
what? making your own synths is my favorite part. i think you will find most people make their own sounds, though i'm sure a lot of people use presets as well as. i never do personally.
>>48386984
>making your own synths is my favorite part
There's your problem
>>48386975
I used to never use structure and just recorded as I went. I used to play something that's a mix of post-rock and dream pop. People apparently liked that.
I started doing something electronic music mixed with those other elements. The latest song sounds very generic according to those people. It's around 4 minutes. One person said they lost interest early on.
>>48386946
You sound like you don`t have a clue about music or how instruments work.
>>48387043
Completely different markets with different expectations.
>>48387043
When you structure a song you're using your rational mind, when you do things as you go you're using your intuition. Different ways to go about music.
>>48387088
That may or not be true, but I do know good musicians who just grabbed their instrument and learned how to make music intuitively, they don't actually "know" how their instrument works or any kind of theory
>>48387130
I know that but I see where they're coming from myself. They liked a song I did earlier which was my first when moving towards the electronic genre. It's just that my latest one has been much of a success.
>>48386999
why? that's the most appealing part of making this kind of music for me, being able to create completely new original compositions. following your logic, everyone should just use loops all the time and not even bother with synths. fuck it just sample other peoples songs. because why bother making anything when someone already does it better?
>>48387195
Has or hasn't been much of a success?
>>48387212
How did you get all those conclusions from my post?
>>48387226
Sorry. Hasn't.
>>48387234
>Why bother making sounds, if someone much more talented than you does a better job
>It ridiculous. No one can be expected to waste time on that
>>48387268
But I'm not that guy, and still, it's very different the making and performing of a song than the making of a synth
>>48387195
>>48387240
How big was that sample pool of people who told you it was generic? Do they like the kind of music you're trying to produce now or are they friends/listeners who mostly like stuff closer to your older material?
Not trying to shift the blame, but you might be getting feedback from/trying to please the wrong crowd
>>48387323
A small amount which is the amount of listeners I have anyway. Mostly friends. They liked the first electronic track I did, as did many other people in the chiptune community (it was chiptune mixed with dreampop).
I sent the new track to friends who give good opinions. They said it's okay but it just sounds generic and lacks the charm of my usual stuff. I also posted it on /mu/ and instantly got railed on.
Bass Station II is as beautiful as I expected.
Would a Microbrute be a fitting partner?
>>48387314
but where does that logic end? if you shouldn't bother trying to make your own synths, why bother making your own drum patterns? etc i'm not saying dont use presets but discouraging it and saying it's a waste of time is kind of stupid. it's not like a cool synth sound is always going to be super complex and hard to make.
>>48387351
Your friends opinions are worthless. Might as well show it your mom. /mu/ is probably more honest, because they don`t like you.
>>48387400
The sarcasm just went over your head. Just let it go.
There is zero wrong with using presets.
>>48387356
I'd get something with polyphony
>>48387043
goes to show how hard it is to make good electronic music that doesn't end up sounding generic
>>48387625
Yeah, fuck. I used to be one of those "guitar rock is the only way to go" and "hurr durr analog production takes talent". I think my problem is finding my niche and trying to come up with good material based on that.
>>48386588
haha, this pretty much sums me up. i've been house sitting for the last 5 days, been on a huge weed binge, just staying inside and making the dumbest/weirdest synth noises. it's great.
>>48386600
just play a bunch of guitar hero to warm up.
![Yamaha%20DX100[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QOvqu2z.jpg "Yamaha%20DX100[1].jpg")
kawaii synth bump
ayyyy lmao
![Kawai-K3-Synthesizer[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TLZEmzZ.jpg "Kawai-K3-Synthesizer[1].jpg")
>>48388326
>not posting an actual kawai synth
>>48387479
Unless you want to be a money making faggot like Avicii. Fuck that guy. He just uses presets and samples from his real producer friends.
There's nothing wrong with using presets for inspiration. Sometimes I'll have an idea in my head and flip through a bunch of presets til I find something close. From there you just fuck with some settings *I'd recommend knowing a little bit how synths work before going nuts* but always be sure to make that sound yours. You can easily do it with effects/filters/a few tweaks of the preset. Hope that helps
![sx240[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/WxMxzth.jpg "sx240[1].jpg")
>>48388421
>not posting the superior kawai synth
>you people and your plastic toys
>>48387356
If you already know your shit about synthesis, yes, they contrast each other nicely.
But >>48387479
has a point, if you don't have anything polyphonic, get something. It doesn't need to be a polysynth either. I got pic related, and it's great for jams.
>>48388499
That picture can be found on google.
>>48388455
Who cares if he uses presets? It's not like using an premade timbre composes the track for you. Avicii, despite being pleb, clearly can do that by himself.
>From there you just fuck with some settings *I'd recommend knowing a little bit how synths work before going nuts* but always be sure to make that sound yours. You can easily do it with effects/filters/a few tweaks of the preset. Hope that helps
Sure, you can do that if you want something different from, but close to, the preset. But fucking with something you already like just because of preset stigma is retarded. No need to reinvent the wheel, you know.
![SANC_4192[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/eJWj2qc.jpg "SANC_4192[1].jpg")
>>48388499
*pushes the panels*
>>48388515
I literally took that picture
literally
>>48388499
Honestly I think that thing would ultimately be more of a toy in the way that it's probably better for having fun than actually making music. Having to fuck around with all the cables and then remembering how all the knobs were and what was plugged where for a certain sound wouldn't be condusive to a good workflow.
>>48388534
I still doubt that you used it.
>>48388546
You just set it and record the track. Why would you need to remember everything? You sound like you don't know much about actual studio workflow, just bedroom workflow.
>>48388546
>toy
bait
That aside, why is it such a bad thing to learn how sound works? Does it frighten you to have to learn new things about music?
>>48388572
>Why would you need to remember everything?
If you're working on something over the course of several sessions, obviously.
>>48388572
>You sound like you don't know much about actual studio workflow, just bedroom workflow.
And you sound like a condescending prick. Sure if you're doing the final recording in a studio then you only need to set it once, but when you're actually writing there's a good chance you're going to do it in bursts, which would be a pain if you wanted to use it for several different sounds.
>>48388594
>not being able to read
Nowhere did I say anything that indicated I'm scared of it. I clearly stated that it looks like it would lead to a slow workflow for writing. Nice b8 tho.
>>48387706
Analog or digital, hardware or software?
I was hoping I'd get my microbrute on friday, but it turns out it won't arrive until wednesday so I'm pretty bummed. I'm really interested in just spending a good 4-5 hours straight with my headphones on making as many wicked strange sounds as I can. I'm also interested in just how fat and warm I can make the bass sound, but sound effects are really fun too and it's going to be so fun getting out of the box and working with one-knob-per-function hardware for a change.
Fun being the key word. We need to use it more. People need to stop taking music so super seriously, if you're not having fun you're doing it wrong.
>>48388521
If you like it, why change it? You're right there. Don't change your sound just because of a stigma. What I meant is if you're only using it for inspiration it can be very helpful. If you lay down a melody and flip through presets, the sound changes quite a bit and something might grab your attention more than another and I'll work from there. This could be because I work inside ableton using their presets which are pretty EDM-ish imo
>>48388603
You realize it was always intended as a studio tool? It's not meant to be taken to a stage.
>and you sound like a condescending prick
I was making an observation, you're just hurling insults
>>48388611
>Nice b8 tho.
Well, at least you didn't deny it.
>>48387706
that is literally all I want to do from now till I die.
getting high playing synthesizers
>pic related
>>48388546
That's not really the hard part. There's certain ways to notate what you're doing so you can re-do it (pic related)
The hard part is that synths that old drift like +/- a quarter tone every couple minutes, so they have to be continually adjusted
>>48388630
>It's not meant to be taken to a stage.
I never said anything about the stage. I'm talking writing the actual songs. They do have to be written before you can record them after all.
>I was making an observation
An unfounded observation.
>>48388641
nice shitposting :^)
I feel like this thread will turn into something akin of an anti-theory circlejerk.
>>48387140
>>48386946
Even if guitar players don't know the technical terms for things, they still understand how sound waves work and music theory, even if just on an intuitive level. Just like how you could have a hardware synth and just play with the knob for a few years and never learn the technical aspects of it, but figure out how to make all sorts of sounds by ear and experimentation.
It's like how a football player or martial artist might not understand the technical aspects of the Physics involved, but they still know how to punch or kick or throw in just the right way, or how to tackle somebody or throw the football with spin and at a certain angle so it lands in the right place for someone to catch it.
In a similar sense: I know many people (myself included) who take presets and then tweak them to death to create entirely new sounds, and use them as a starting point. The point of that other anon's original joke was that you shouldn't JUST use presets, as-is. They're usually flat and boring, and anyone can use them so they often wind up sounding unoriginal.
They can certainly make good starting points, though.
anyway, I made this quicky with that Modular Moog plus a wee bit of fuckery in Audacity (since it was just one mono track)
https://soundcloud.com/amphiscian/modular-disgust
>>48388697
This post so fucking much.
I modify presets, but I still know how to make sounds the way I want them to using whichever type of synth I'm using.
dream FX?
>>48386888
>What happens when you think of a sound you'd like to use and there's no preset that matches it?
And also this is important to consider, too. With greater understand of sound synthesis, it becomes far easier to create interesting new sounds that you like. But you could theoretically start with a variety of presets and tweak them and shape them into what you need, which might end up sounding nothing like the original preset btw.
It's like how a person who has an indepth understanding of music theory can probably write a more complex and interesting orchestral piece than someone who knows nothing. Thinking otherwise is like thinking a person who has never picked up a hammer and chisel before in his life could create a work of art as well as Donatello. I mean, I suppose it's possible, but extremely unlikely unless that person is an autistic savant or something, and even then I'm sure they'd need to get used to handling the tools and practice a good deal to get a feel for how to sculpt the stone (just like we need to do with sculpting sounds).
You aren't just gonna hit a rock and have the luck of all of the pieces suddenly falling off in such a way as to create a masterpiece, know what I mean?
>>48386946
>but let's get real, someone who's not experienced already in production doesn't need to get too much into it and may still make good music if he's talented
Thanks, I've been wanting to post this comic again for a while now.
>>48388742
I wish I had an external spring reverb, just a simple one
>>48388753
I don't think anyone is saying that knowing how to construct sounds is useful, they're just saying that at the same time there's nothing wrong with presets.
>>48388742
The words on the dials make me happy :)
>Ey Keven, how much 'verb do we need on this track?
>SOUP'S UP, BILINDA!
>>48388820
the labels are certainly accurate
>>48388742
Not a moisturizer, if I could have any Knas, it wouldn't be the moisturizer. It's neat, but it's basically an open reverb tank, a filter, and an LFO. Which I already have.
I'd get the Polygamist.
To answer the question of dream FX....either a Synthi Hi-Fli, a Mu-Tron Bi-Phase, or a Dimension D.
>>48388721
If yr going to post thousands of dollars of gear on /mu/ you've got to timestamp the photos. Don't be like gearspammer was.
Hey guys, I know these threads are more just analog gear threads than general production threads now but I was wondering if you could help on a more general production topic...
Are there ways of determining a poor mix / master without listening to it? I.e. could one look at a waveform of a track and decide that it was badly mastered or from a spectrogram / spectrum, or from that stereo field thingy in Ozone?
Thanks
>>48388807
Really depends on which preset we're talking about here. The reason why everyone berates them is that they're all, for the most part, shit.
To each his own, though. Kinda kills the creative process imo, though. Making new sounds no one has thought of before is a big part of the process to me. You just aren't going to get that with presets since they're available from the get-go for anyone who owns the software.
>>48388865
no. always listen.
>>48388865
Clipping ya dingus, there's tools to identify in every major DAW I can think of.
>>48388551
It's at his university
>>48388844
yeah I don't have access to it anymore
It was at my university. They had a room in the corner of the music school rarely ever used, with maybe $2,000,000 worth of classic synths. I was the only person in the whole goddamn school who could make that Moog work.
Pic related, more of the stuff
>>48388865
>Are there ways of determining a poor mix / master without listening to it?
No. Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about, because even if you use a reference track, it will have different elements with different frequency ranges and levels. It's not a one-size-fits-all kind of thing.
>>48388836
I know, they make me happy to see a company with that subtle humor. Like res going from None to "Ouch", lmao.
What's the name of that unit, btw? Is it any good, worth whatever it's price is?
>>48388742
why don't they make more effects pedals like this? i feel like they would sell really well
by 'like this' i mean with a bunch of synth-style knobs with their real function written on them- ideal for anyone that owns a guitar and enjoys tinkering.
>>48388865
If the amplitude of the whole track looks like a sausage, it's bad.
>>48388865
If the waveform looks something like this, it's fucked up
>>48388900
ive started my internet pilgrimage into finding that out, so far ive concluded that it sounds great and i want one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nIMKzU5Dko
>>48388865
>>48388888 yeah, nice point. clipping, in or out of Ozone/your respective plugins, typically means your mix has issues
>>48388900
http://www.schneidersladen.de/en/knas-ekdahl-moisturizer-spring-reverb.html
>>48388903
IIRC Malekko makes some nice spring reverb pedals...
>>48388903
There's the Moogerfooger line, there's also the Koma Elektronik pedals.
>>48388875
>that they're all, for the most part, shit.
Disagree here. I've found that most big name VSTs come with at least a handfull of useful sounds. Especially basic things like simple pads and leads.
>Making new sounds no one has thought of before is a big part of the process to me
This, I guess, is just a difference of opinion. I'd rather write a solid song than spend a bunch of time on trying to be different for its own sake.
>>48388895
Good lord that Arp 2500 expander cabinet looks amazing. I've never seen anything like it.
That Buchla looks pretty lame for a Buchla though. Probably the lack of touch plates.
>>48388959
>I'd rather write a solid song than spend a bunch of time on trying to be different for its own sake.
That's not what it is about. It's about making the sound the way you want it to. It's not trying to be different.
>>48388721
This sound like dungeon synth.
>>48388961
the buchla was definitely the redheaded stepchild of the studio.
>Arp 2500 expander cabinet
are you talking about the red thing next to it? That's a modular synth my professor hand-built by himself
>>48388978
I guess. I was just referring to the "making sounds no one has ever heard before" thing. I just find that there's only so different you can get while still being very usable. Not that there's anything wrong with out there sounds by themselves.
>>48389010
Shit, from the look of the panels, you're correct. It has the same noisy ass slider matrices as the ARPs though.
>>48388895
>millions of dollars of musical equipment
>ancient Mac with a tiny monitor
>>48388865
It's still a production thread, though. Talking about synths is important because they wind up being the basis of your sound.
Also a lot of people ask really dumb or general/vague questions like "durr how do i make good music /mu/ p.s. i've never played an instrument in my life".
Anyone is free to ask production questions at any time, but you gotta be specific. The more detailed the question, the more likely you are to get a helpful response.
>>48389034
I think the thing is that altering patches is part of the mixing/mastering process.
No one is saying you can't use presets, but you're gonna have to do SOMETHING to them to make them sound good. Whether fx or otherwise. If you just start playing a preset and that's it, it'll probably sound like ass no matter how good the composition.
But hey feel free to post some of your preset songs. Again, really depends on the individual preset.
>>48388895
>mfw Korg wavestation sits in there with all of that amazing ass gears
>>48389086
I don't think the problem is the preset itself in a void, but how it sits in a mix. A lot of them sound very polished, for lack of a better term, and stick out a lot compared to user patches or whatever else you might be doing. Then there's the problem of using several presets from different sound designers, etc. Basically I think the sounding like ass bit is because of a lack of cohesiveness with the rest of the track.
>>48389054
All the money they got for the studio went to keeping the synths in working order and on batshit software like Max/MSP and Metasynth
They didn't give two shits about DAWs
>>48389038
the matricies aren't that bad if you just keep everything spread out. Also this is the back of it
>>48388802
They're like 50 bucks. Google Accutronics spring reverb. They sound great but keep in mind if you want a different decay time you need a different unit.
>>48388613
>microbrute
>fat and warm
Sorry dude, you're going to be disappointed...
>>48389199
Interesting, what's that PCB in the middle with all of the ICs? Power distribution?
>>48389282
Just keep the mixer levels low, and the brute factor off.
>>48389308
I'd say keep resonance low, cutoff fairly low and use at least a little brute factor.
The problem is the 12dB filter and that the most interesting feature (metallizer) is fairly harsh and rich in upper harmonics.
>>48389282
i was literally just about to post this
>>48389403
You dont need to use metallizer for bass, though it kind of gets that DX7 bass when you do.
As for the 12dB filter, it's still a filter, it's just not as sharp as a slope.
>>48389282
>>48389404
Should have got a Mono Lancet...
>>48389486
It just seems like a shame to ignore the most interesting feature of the synth.
The filter is indeed a filter, 12dB is just less than ideal for fat and warm, as is the metallizer.
>>48389541
You're missing the second half of that sentence. It still gets a good bass sound with it, but it's not going to be a "warm" bass. More features shouldn't always mean better for every sound.
>>48389505
Or get a Dark Energy, and not have to spend extra on a modular dock.
>>48389577
We were talking about warm and fat bass and I was saying the filter wasn't ideal.
I have the mini and I like it for bass sounds but they're definitely better on the aggressive side.
>>48389600
Dark Energies are only single VCOs and pretty weak on bass.
Why does modular have to be such a rip off?
>>48389619
Yes, which is why I was wondering why you need to have the metallizer on for bass.
I agree that it's more aggressive, but saying that he'd be disappointed is a little much.
>>48389658
I think modular stuff is pretty reasonably priced, it's just the extras like getting a decent case etc
>>48389658
>rip off
It isn't
>expensive
Because they require a high build quality standard to work well in a system. Plus they're made in very small quantities.
How to use .nki files?
>>48389686
I was just saying it was the most interesting feature and it wasn't gonna help him for what he wanted.
It really is one of the last synths I'd get for fat and warm and I stand by that.
FACT: best synth ever made
>>48389852
Step aside, superior synth coming through
>>48389403
You can use it to make faux snares over sequences. Example patch included. Works better with a sequence >>48389787
Agree.
![casio_pt-1_02[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/cAltvI1.jpg "casio_pt-1_02[1].jpg")
>>48389852
>>48389900
skrubs
>>48389918
Also recorded it with my phone so you guys get an idea. Obviously bad quality
http://clyp.it/macj5aeh
Does anyone know anything good to read? I've read synth secrets. I'd like something that takes it a bit further, general production or even something about acoustics without going straight into equations and shit. Preferably without a focus on dance music either but whatever really.
>>48389852
I know you're joking, but mine shipped and I'm really excited do do resampling through that filter.
>>48390055
It's not too impressive. No VC, no midi control, definately no keyboard tracking. Also no discrete pitch control.
>>48390075
I'm actually thinking about learning how to mod so I can add keyboard tracking to it.
Keyboard track my sack
>>48389058
Ok, how about things that might be worth avoiding (in most cases) if one wants a pro-sounding finished result.
For electronic / dance music (v. broad, I know), what kind of dynamic ranges are we talking, roughly? Would a middle section of a track that's -17dB quieter than the ending section be something a pro studio would do? What dynamic range is too small, too?
How about overall shape of the spectrogram? A downward slope from left to right or flat?
Stereo width on synths? Is totally flat mono with no variance something a pro studio would do or would they likely just narrow the stereo image rather than go full mono?
What about synths with overtones that extend past 20khz? And hi-hats that go that high too? Advisable or not?
who patch editor here?
i've got it for my roland jx-3p with kiwi 3p expansion.
what are the best compatible synths?
challenge starts tomorrow,
hype hype hype
How do I into FM-synthesis? The most complex thing I can manage to create before it degenerates into noise is a bell
>>48390272
What is this?
>>48390204
No it wouldn't be. But a pro studio is not always the pinnacle of art. The loudness war continues.
>>48390319
Keep amplitudes low
>>48390319
U did it :)
>>48390319
learn how it works and start simple.
reverse engineer the presets
>>48390319
What kind of sounds are you trying to create? I'd say the volume level and ratio of your operators and their envelopes are the main things to play with. As soon as you start detuning things will get messy very quickly.
>>48390407
I've been trying to create "paddish leads" like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCZ1AnkaNb4
>>48390509
Are you playing chords with some vibrato and reverb?
>>48390333
No it wouldn't what?
These threads are useless - change the title to /synth/ general
I was thinking of picking up a MicroBrute for a cheap analog synth, but I'd also really like to get a polyphonic one instead. Anyone have any recommendations for a cheap (under $500) polyphonic synth? Doesn't have to be analog, but I'd prefer it
>>48390695
>These threads are useless - change the title to /synth/ general
Are you the same guy who comes in here every day to complain about this?
>>48390708
Thanks to hipsters, you won't see prices like that for analog polys anymore. Blofeld is good for that.
>>48390711
I'm not actually, until now I haven't been in a production thread since about number 7 or 8. Funny that someone comes in every day to say that though.
>>48390729
>implying this thread isn't 100% analog synth hipsters making prices go up
you're like someone in a traffic jam complaining about the traffic and not realising that they are the traffic.
>>48390708
roland jx-3p or jx-8p. they're highly underrated because of their digital era inspired knob interfaces, but underneath are strong analog synths, and with a programmer like the kiwi patch editor you can't go wrong.
>>48390732
Not every day, but there's usually the assinine comment, like "can any of you actually play keyboard" or "why aren't there enough soundclouds in here" when it's obviously not a soundcloud thread.
>>48390753
I'm more like the guy taking a detour home because I've been driving the same route every day for years, and know how to avoid the traffic. I was "ahead of the curve" and didn't have to pay the stupid prices you see these days.
>>48390798
So you were into synths before they were cool? hahaha
>>48390814
I wasn't saying that at all, just that I managed to not have to pay high prices. Why are you so focused on calling me a hipster, and dance around the point?
>>48390601
Yes, but either it ends up too harsh or too undefined
>>48390814
are you underaged? it's only in the past 12 or so years that analogue synths have skyrocketed in price
hipsters and collectors competing and paying ridiculous prices on shit sites like ebay makes everyone thing their half-broken casiotone is worth a grand
>>48390898
Why don't you post a short vocaroo clip so we can evaluate
>>48390923
>everyone thing their half-broken casiotone is worth a grand
Obligatory
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/hnp/msg/4557428508.html
>>48390923
>implying that 12 years ago wan't half a lifetime ago for 99% of this thread
you might be 30+ but w/e m8
>>48390695
You're useless ;).
I meant the whole thing. Nothing you said would be something a pro studio would do. Huge gaps in volume, useless frequencies on things that will just complicate mixing and conversion to non lossless formats.
In down to talk about production but you could have answered those questions with Google.
Besides, a well written track produces itself.
>>48390963
For non-Minnesotans, Uptown happens to be the "hipster" part of Minneapolis. I've also seen Minimoog Voyagers being sold in the area for bad prices.
>>48390963
>As seen/heard in early Beach House recordings
>>48390898
Turn down the volume of the modulator(s).
>>48391011
I thought I'd leave that bit for you to discover.
>>48390980
Also yes synths are often close to mono and most spectrographs for well produces songs carry a downward slope.
Our hearing peaks around 500-2k hz so the bass is loudest to hear it balanced
Happy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHtc67hDPLo
I almost creamed myself when he played that funky riff. Any other synths under $500 I need in my life?
>>48391061
I'll add on to this. Polys are usually in stereo, monos in...well mono, unless there's a stereo effect applied.
>>48391081
Every other one but that one.
>>48391081
I hate to say this, but just imagine that riff on a better synth. It totally lacks the low end that riff deserves.
>>48391134
such as?
>>48391150
volca bass
>>48391150
Bass Station 2
>>48391150
I dunno, anything really? There were a few mentioned like the mono lancet, dark time. Others like the minituar, bass station 2, and the MS-20 mini come to mind.
why is the korg thing so bad?
Drum machines for the darker / heavier side of techno pls?
>>48391308
4 voices, but it's digital. Better synths can be had for the same price. Not particularly good sounding compared to the other options.
I'd rather have a cheap DX series synth, because they're good at what they can do, plus voices. Though they won't get the same cheesy strings and arpeggiated lines, it's just more worthwhile.
>>48391308
there's just better bang for your buck. Korg is a brand name too, so with names like Korg and Moog you're often paying for more than just the hardware. Although I like Moog better than Korg..
If someone offered me a microkorg for 100 bucks, I would buy it no problem. but I already have everything I need on that level of synthesis so it'd just be a toy. It's also not that great for learning about synthesis
>>48391377
>It's also not that great for learning about synthesis
This. I know a fellow whose depth of synth knowledge goes as far as "tweaking the cutoff and resonance to get sick sounds"
>>48391377
Korg doesn't have even half as much of a brand tax as Moog does, though. Moog gear is straight overpriced, especially for how boring their synths sound (to me at least)
>>48391308
Alesis Micron sounds better
>>48391417
Just try an old Moog. Please.
>>48391417
I feel like Korg is a much bigger company, and is willing to pour out a lot more consumer level products. I like the sound of moogs, although I could probably see you might think it's boring I like to think of it as "classic". I also like the mom and pop feel that Moog has to them, but that's another thing that we pay for, lol!
>>48391449
I've heard tons of demos of them and they just don't sound interesting to me. Not bad, just not inspiring. Maybe half of the appeal is in the hands on, but I just don't get the praise for them based on the sound alone.
>>48391510
Korg is definitely bigger, but most of their products are priced alright, even if not all of them are exceptional. Their customer support is also super good in my experience.
anyone know some good vsts, packs and other plugins to download?
i wanna make some dirty swag music
>>48391614
vst4free.com
>>48391605
I never mentioned demos. They often do poor justice to the full range of the synth.
>>48391614
TR808 is all you need.
Best VST synths btw guys?
>>48391659
Sure, but it's not super realistic for me to get my hands on one myself. Regardless, physically touching it won't make it sound better. Maybe the people who demo it just aren't doing it justice, but I'm not sure how feasible every single one of them getting it wrong is. Happen to have any videos that you think show it well? It's pretty unlikely I'll be able to try one in the near future.
>>48391614
Audioz.eu
It's like
>>48391650
except that they're "free" as opposed to actually free.
>>48391759
>Happen to have any videos that you think show it well?
Again, I don't think any justice can be done by posting videos. They're too bandlimiting. I'm talking straight synth output to headphones or a powered speaker of some sort.
>tfw I'll never be able to afford modular synths since stuff like filters can be as expensive as £100
>tfw I'll never have a huge rack
>tfw I'll be stuck using cracked VSTs for the rest of my life unless I make it big
>tfw the chances of that are 1 in a million.
>>48391789
Eh, not sure I buy that. Sure Youtube does fuck with audio a bit, but a good sounding synth should sound good regardless. Again, not saying it's necessarily bad, but I just don't hear the hype.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRlLUMFwtHw
I think I'm in love.
>>48391955
I'm not saying that you need to like them either. I'm just saying that you need to actually use one to really judge how it sounds, and I don't really care how much you try to justify youtube compression, because it doesn't change how poor a video captures the sound.
>>48391934
>i'll never have a huge rack
>>48391934
Honestly, getting a rack full of respectable gear isn't too expensive. I've got a pretty sizable amount of rack gear, and I've spent around $900 on it. It has two power amps, a mixer, a vocoder, a sampler, what is essentially 6 DX7s, and two FX racks.
Don't focus on "making it", just get a job, and with some extra dosh you have from not buying pot all of the time can be saved for good gear.
>>48391994
>need to actually use one to really judge how it sounds
This is kind of a silly argument. So you can't have any opinion on anything that you've never personally used before? No, that's kind of retarded. I'm open to believing that they feel satisfying to play, but I just don't think they sound great. Maybe you can suggest a track or something that used one so I can hear it in an audio quality you deem acceptable?
>because it doesn't change how poor a video captures the sound.
Problem is that there are a good deal of reviews for other instruments that sound pretty great to me even with the compression.
>>48391934
>>48392002
>tfw gf has huge rack
it almost makes up for me not having enough synths
almost
>>48392136
haha who needs a gf when you have ALL THESE SYNTHS hahah ahHAHA!!hahah!H!111hahahah.. hahoh god fuck me
>>48391934
people can't tell the diff between good vsts and analog gear so just make it using cracked software until you can afford gear
>>48392092
But you're talking about an instrument with a ton of low frequencies. You'd need good DACs and speakers to play them back, let alone a good ADC to record it. The issue is that it's much harder to reproduce low harmonics because they require so much energy to play.
Once again, I don't care how much you want a video or an audio clip. Just play one, and you'll realize where the hype comes from. Until then, stay hating, idc.
>>48392136
Now you have to post her, otherwise I don't believe you.
>>48392153
>>48392156
So now you're claiming that no recorded audio will ever do it justice? What good is an instrument that you can't even use to make music? This is probably another reason I'm just no into Moog stuff: because its fans act like it's a religious thing that exists outside the bounds of science or rationality. It's just audio, not magic.
>stay hating, idc.
I will. Stay delusional with your moog mysticism or whatever.
>>48392180
*tips VCO*
>>48392225
The point I'm trying to make is that you aren't willing to give it a try. You'd rather just sit at home and listen to a youtube video and judge it by that. You don't want to actually try the instrument. If you're not willing to do that, then what's the point of trying to convince you?
I'm not worshipping Moog endlessly. I'm just saying that you're going to condemn the synth because of a video, you're doing it for all of the wrong reasons.
>>48392156
>>48392225
Alright boys, you're probably not get to an agreement. Hug it out and share samples.
>>48392225
>stay delusional
>Moog mysticism
you should really find a new thread to hang out in
>>48392274
>The point I'm trying to make is that you aren't willing to give it a try.
Never said that. But I definitely don't know anyone willing to lend me theirs. I'd love to try one. Can you even read? I said nothing I've heard from it sounds worth the praise to me, that's all I said.
>>48392295
>oh no, he disagrees with me!
Pls go.
Welp, seems like this thread has entered its "unnecessary discussion" phase now
>>48392363
>Can you even read? I said nothing I've heard from it sounds worth the praise to me, that's all I said.
Then what was everything past >>48391759
>>48392363
>disagrees
Not at all man, you just don't seem to understand the atmosphere of these threads. We try to avoid petty shit slinging.
>>48392383
It's stopped been about production a long time ago tbf and turned into /muh opinions on analog synths are better than yours/ general
>>48392446
Something more specific, perhaps? And don't act autistic about it, I mean that nothing I've heard sounds great to me is the general message I conveyed, not that it's literally verbatim all I said.
>>48392483
why are you still here?
>>48392465
>you just don't seem to understand the atmosphere of these threads. We try to avoid petty shit slinging.
Lel, no. These threads always devolve to this. Don't ignore the other guys shittiness, though. Can't single only one person out.
>>48392497
I've just got here lol
I'm off to watch this guy from The Bob Moog Foundation's AskVideo tutorial, hope things are better later. He seems like a hack, but I'm not going to judge until I'm at least 30 min in.
>>48392549
oh, well.. Welcome!!!
>>48392484
I meant that you kept asking for demos even though I said I don't think they will do them justice, and how you went on to generalize that Moog fans act like it's a religious thing. And your need to justify Youtube compression when the general consensus it that it's pretty bad.
That was well beyond "I don't like it"
favorite production related videos or movies?
>>48392510
He was only trying to assert his point, not tossing shitty insults.
>>48392606
This might make people mad but
>I Dream of Wires
>>48392590
>kept asking for demos
You seemed pretty intent on trying to change my mind, figured I'd give you a chance.
> I said I don't think they will do them justice
>youtube compression
I even offered for you to suggest a track I could download in FLAC or something, nothing hostile there or against what I said there.
> generalize that Moog fans act like it's a religious thing
Only because of your shitty
>Just play one, and you'll realize where the hype comes from. Until then, stay hating, idc.
You absolutely made it out to be an unexplainable religious experience.
What are some must-have Kontakt libraries?
>>48392609
No he wasn't. Especially at the end. He was trying to weasel his way out of putting anything forward to his point, which is whatever, but ending it with "keep hating idc" is just acting like a prick. There was no real hostility until that.
>>48392645
2nd this
>>48392659
I was trying to say it's something you should really try out. I even listed technical reasons.
You're the one who brought up religious mysticism.
>>48392700
>You're the one who brought up religious mysticism.
Because you were acting like it.
>I was trying to say it's something you should really try out.
More like you were making it out to be an experience that could only be felt in person. A simple "maybe you just don't like it" would have made more sense than acting like it's like meeting Jesus or something.
>>48392794
My only point was to say that you shouldn't condemn it without actually trying it first. A simple "I suppose I could postpone judging Moog until then" would have made more sense than acting like every last person who has a Moog is religious about it.
>>48392850
I had clearly stated that I had only heard them and not tried, so it's not like I was unconditionally saying they were shite. I even said that I could see that people enjoy them for reasons that can't be heard, like the hands on and visceral feel or whatever. I can positively make a judgement on the sound of something that I've only heard, though. Or do you not make judgements about bands until you've seen them live? Your whole point about not being able to have on opinion on something, especially something that is used to make (recordable) noise, until you've held it in your hands is just silly.
>>48392922
I never said that you can't have an opinion. My point was to not condemn it as all hype and brand naming because you haven't actually given it a try yourself. How hard is this to understand?
Is the person making the demo using a crappy ADC? Are they even playing patches you would like to make? Do you have a good DAC? I can't be the one to judge any of this considering I'm not you. Therefore, my best recommendation to you before just saying that you don't like moog synths is to try them out before passing over them entirely.
>>48391326
anyone??
>>48393102
Check out Korg Electribes, good workhorses for basically any genre, really. Especially the sampling model
>>48393010
>I never said that you can't have an opinion.
You certainly acted like it.
>My point was to not condemn it as all hype and brand naming
I didn't until you pulled the whole "you have to be there" thing
And again, I posit that you a good synth should sound good even under less than pristine recording conditions. Pretty sure it's just not for me as far as I can tell.
>>48393119
cheers gay
>>48393232
>And again, I posit that you a good synth should sound good even under less than pristine recording conditions.
Even then, I have no idea what kind of synth sounds you want, nor do I have a catalog of what Moog videos sound good, and which sound bad.
>>48393278
Which is fine and well. What's less fine and well is insisting that I must just be missing something for nonsense reasons. As Fantano would say
>you know this is all just my opinion
>tfw your computer's RAM is too fucked up to even make music on your DAW
kill me now
>>48393463
>tfw yr pc randomly crashes and ableton's recovery feature is only so good
Computers were always my big hurdle, if it's not one problem, it's another. For some reason, it's easier for me to make music on an ipad than it is for me with a computer and a powerful DAW.
>>48385138
Has anyone got experience with recording electronic music to tape and then back to wav? I'm trying to get a more lofi sound for my music even with tape hiss and noise over a tune it just sounds tacked on
Lmao nerds. This thread has inspired me to get out the Mini. Anyone want to come up with a patch and I'll record it.
>>48393747
What, has the battle of the plebs scared everyone cool off?
>>48393942
Christ what a tough crowd today.
What is everyone's favorite compressors?
>>48394185
ableton
>>48394193
Compressor, not company
>>48394211
nvm, I get it, they just didn't name their compressor beyond what it is
Sorry, I was being facetious. Since I'm a poorfag with no hardware I'm not sure I can add much to this thread but I have recently been enjoying this compressor:
http://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/effects/vc-160/
>>48394351
The only compressors I use are also software, though I intend to pick up a distressor at some point.
My personal favorite is bomb factory
>>48393747
MODULATION MIX: OSC 3 - 3
OSC1 RANGE 32'
OSC 1 WAVEFORM - second left
OSC 2 RANGE - LO
MID KNOBS - idk, lol
and for the rest of the knobs, turn them all to MAX value, except ext in and noise volume
>>48388462
that synth is the fucking shit I'd swap my sq 80 for it
>>48395034
I would, too. I mean, swap your SQ80 for it. >:D
Too bad the kawai is unobtanium
