Dubstepforum.com

For what purpose?

Badass monologue and bass+badass phrases and rhythm=2x badassery

Could use it as a set opener.

Also I got another related question.

Being a wannabe dubstar and only producing 1 song, is it considered cringe if I release my second double intro song with a normal edit and an extended edit?

In the kindest way possible, nobody cares what you do dude. There are pluses and minuses.

It goes against rule of releasing music 543
section 2
paragraph 6

"Do not release a song what has an intro longer than 56 seconds at 140bpm."

Sorry mate.

dansci wrote:Is this a bad song format?

there is no answer to this

a song can be good or bad regardless of the format

ive got track with three minute beatless intros that are amazing

and short snappy tunes under 3mins in total that are shit

focus less on the format itself

and whether the song itself sounds right

soronery wrote:

dansci wrote:Is this a bad song format?

ive got track with three minute beatless intros that are amazing

Pics or it didn't happen.

intro thing, do what the fuck u want man, not everyone needs to be making tunes with 16 bar intro drop breakdown drop outro

i never like the idea of hearing a tune that's been built as a dj tool, at the end of the day you're making music

;kinda saying this as a listener more than an experienced producer mind

RKM wrote:i never like the idea of hearing a tune that's been built as a dj tool

You can hear literally how many tracks are just made for DJs these days.

Not only in terms of song structure, but also in sounds design and mixing; kicks have shit loads of click to make beatmatching is easier, no variation in first, second or even third drop, because most DJs switch to the next song after the first one. No dynamics between different parts in the song = breakdowns and buildups drops have a lot less impact, but make things a easier for DJs etc.

_Agu_ wrote:

RKM wrote:i never like the idea of hearing a tune that's been built as a dj tool

You can hear literally how many tracks are just made for DJs these days.

Not only in terms of song structure, but also in sounds design and mixing; kicks have shit loads of click to make beatmatching is easier, no variation in first, second or even third drop, because most DJs switch to the next song after the first one. No dynamics between different parts in the song = breakdowns and buildups drops have a lot less impact, but make things a easier for DJs etc.

true dynamics have all but disappeared from computer produced music and i think it's a shame

the ben frost album aurora is the last release i remember using them to great effect i think

trying to layer a snare, so have 2 sounds grouped into a channel with some effects on it, trying to resample this to work on it further/put it in the drum rack, can't seem to choose the grouped channel in the sampler channel to resample... in ableton 9, quite baffled

Are you setting up an audio channel to bounce from the group?

sorted it, was being pretty stupid, nvm all that

edit; was learning how to layer snare sounds last night when posting this ^, found it very rewarding and this video really useful and easy to follow if anyone else is working on same ting, if any more experienced heads got any thing they'd change in this guys technique chime in

RKM wrote:intro thing, do what the fuck u want man, not everyone needs to be making tunes with 16 bar intro drop breakdown drop outro

i never like the idea of hearing a tune that's been built as a dj tool, at the end of the day you're making music

;kinda saying this as a listener more than an experienced producer mind

no man you got it and

RKM wrote:sorted it, was being pretty stupid, nvm all that

edit; was learning how to layer snare sounds last night when posting this ^, found it very rewarding and this video really useful and easy to follow if anyone else is working on same ting, if any more experienced heads got any thing they'd change in this guys technique chime in

another idea... which might seem weird or detrimental... but try doing it with the same sound ... huh... seriously .. if you have like three versions of the same sound and you are careful with using effects that might introduce phasing or delay or similar, you could have one layer that focuses on the attack, one where you focus on the release, one where compression is exaggerated and then glue them together on a bus ... very natural sounding but it can match those multi level vengeanze 200 hz fuck off snares in a mix

that sounds live, would you try and focus on taking different frequencies from each one or are you tripling up,
in that video the guys focusing on getting a bass bit and a hi sound and sticking em together,
and gluing together on a bus, would that work the same as grouping and using glue compressor or does that involve send channels?

sending = bussing

there's differences between daws ofcourse but usually a bus is post send..... whereas a pre -send is almost equal to a seperate channel..


when you combine a highish sound with a bassier sound, its with the understanding that you'd rather build the transient than use the one that is already there because it's easier to tear through the highs with a focused highish sound and then mix the low bassier sound against the midlow of the whole mix.

highs hit you first and then comes the bassier bit etc
(like a cluster bomb)

but it's just not interchangable with the dynamic a genuine natural transient introduces to a mix, because a more natural transient 'sits in it's own spot'

it basically owns that area in the whole mix frequency wise during the time it takes for it to go from attack to decay to the release..
(like an arrow)

I would focus on the gain instead... like go in on wave level and use gain on part of the attack (like the opposite to a volume fadein on the attack on one layer, the opposite to a volume fade-out on the release layer.. )
and only gain because a lot of transient shaper or envelopers actually introduce that delay/mis-timing/phasing between the layers..


having said that...
You can ofcourse just make the bassier part the focus or the main snare and then just add a bit of high (like when a hihat plays at the same time/ ontop of a snare- it doesn't have to ruin the snares attack like we've noticed in that thing called music ) .. but having the low part come in later and having to find the spot where they overlap is not the best practise
the compensation that makes something like that work is usually distorted or noisy..

RKM, didn't watch the whole video, only a few minutes, but i think you've got the general idea of how to create a snare from multiple samples. same concept applies for a kick or any other sound.

one other "trick" (not really a trick but you know what i mean) that i sometimes like to do with snares is if you're making a track that has any sort of swing to it - garage, dnb, "130", even house, and sometimes in dubstep, zoom in and move your snare off the grid a little bit. this creates that really nice swing feeling that is especially present in the 130 stuff and 2-step. for example look at a horsepower or a burial track in a DJ program and zoom in and see where the snare hits with respect to the grid, you'll see what i mean. it can even be done with kicks as well obviously, or any kind of percussion really.

obviously this will be more complicated if you haven't resampled all your snare bits into one sample. maybe you could move one or some of them away from the grid, leave others, it's open-ended obviously, there's not just one way to do it.

The art is definitely in those small spaces off the grid.