Dubstepforum.com

Kes-Es wrote: Also, just because you can't do it, and maybe 99.9% of people can't do it, doesn't mean it can't be done.

+1

Jacob15728 wrote: Wrong. You try making the Skrillex sound on 3x osc and tell me how that goes.

Okay, you try makin a Teknian sound on 3x and tell me how that goes.

teknicyde just fucked you all up with some truth.

hey the skrillex sound is possible using 3xosc but need to use more filters and distortion lmao. also wtf is so good about modern talking over using 3xosc?? this is just a wavetable position.. it doesnt matter about what initial wave your using if u use it properly.. just mess about with automation on nearly every parameter. thts the whole idea of massive aint it lol.

srsly. just like skrillex can't make skrillex sounds using fm8... unless he automates.

Guys, I never said it wasn't possible to make a Skrillex sound in 3x osc. In fact, I actually described a method that could be used to make it. I also said, and I quote, there is a huge difference between the theoretical and practical. HUGE difference. The sounds that producers like Skrillex are making can THEORETICALLY be made by putting together a bunch of sine waves. Are people doing this? No. Most of us are using Massive, or other synths that are similar. This thread is trying to help a beginning producer. A beginning producer (or an advanced producer) would not be able to make the Skrillex growl by putting together sine waves unless they were a true master of sound engineering, and made a shitload of patches that they could cycle between to simulate the modulation.

Whether you like it or not, it DOES matter what synth you're using. Theoretically, you can make any sound with any synth. But in real life, you can't. End of story. It's just too difficult and time-consuming. I don't give a shit what the master sound engineers with a PHD in acoustics are doing. For ordinary people like you and me, it absolutely matters what synth you're using. And if you disagree, I invite you to prove me wrong by making a Skrillex-like growl synth by putting together sine waves.


A few more things. 1. I'm not familiar with Ableton or Operator, so how the fuck am I supposed to know how good it is?

2. Modern talking was just an example. It was a really good example though. You can't make modern talking sounds with 3x osc unless you analyze the waveforms, duplicate them in many, many patches that correspond to different parts of the wavetable and crossfade between them. That would take hours and hours. In massive, you can do it in 20 seconds. It's not just the theoretical possibility of doing something that matters. It DOES make a difference if you're doing something in 10 hours vs. 20 seconds. If you don't think that then you're fucking retarded.

3. I'm perfectly capable of synthesis and making my own sounds. I've made some good patches in 3x osc after resampling, adding lots of effects, etc. but they sound different than Skrillex, modern talking, and many other sounds that can be made in Massive. Not necessarily worse, but different. Therefore, it does make a difference.

i know what you're saying. but it wouldn't be to hard to turn a sine into a skrillex growl with a bunch of effect chains.

Jacob15728 wrote: Wrong. You try making the Skrillex sound on 3x osc and tell me how that goes.

It's not really difficult.
Skrillex bass = Reese
3xosc can b used for reeses pretty easily.

jrisreal wrote:

Jacob15728 wrote: Wrong. You try making the Skrillex sound on 3x osc and tell me how that goes.

It's not really difficult.
Skrillex bass = Reese
3xosc can b used for reeses pretty easily.

Yeah, but just a plain reese sounds nothing like the Skrillex bass. You have to add a ton of external effects and processing to it. I'm just talking about what the synth itself can do.

Jacob15728 wrote:

jrisreal wrote:

Jacob15728 wrote: Wrong. You try making the Skrillex sound on 3x osc and tell me how that goes.

It's not really difficult.
Skrillex bass = Reese
3xosc can b used for reeses pretty easily.

Yeah, but just a plain reese sounds nothing like the Skrillex bass. You have to add a ton of external effects and processing to it. I'm just talking about what the synth itself can do.

Well in that case im pretty sure no synth can create the modulation and processing of the skrillex bass in itself.

^^
Formant + the whirring sound coming from my old ass fridge.

Jacob15728 wrote: Wrong. You try making the Skrillex sound on 3x osc and tell me how that goes.

ive never heard a skrillex track to attempt it man, and also, I never said anything about 3x... Just that additive synthesis/laws of physics dont depend on software. it wasnt even critical of your tutorial, which I didnt watch, it was critical of a post made in the thread.

So calm down a bit. And stop arguing the laws of physics. Just because you cant doesn mean it cant be done.

I know what you're getting at, but you completely missed Teknicyde's point. He was using the pure sine waves as an example, to illustrate the fact that its not necessarily the tools you're using, it's how you're using them. I seriously doubt any modern producers use such techniques but you never know.

Again, citing Operator, you said Massive is way better than DAW stock synths. I used that to illustrate the point that there is nothing wrong with DAW synths, they are all powerful in the right hands. If you can't get good sounds out of it, you haven't spent enough time learning it. How can you expect instant results if you've never used something before?

Jacob15728 wrote:For ordinary people like you and me.

You speak for yourself there buddy. You have the same brain as everyone else right? Then you can figure it out, why limit yourself?

Sparxy wrote:I know what you're getting at, but you completely missed Teknicyde's point. He was using the pure sine waves as an example, to illustrate the fact that its not necessarily the tools you're using, it's how you're using them. I seriously doubt any modern producers use such techniques but you never know.

i was using them because ALL sounds ar emade up of series of them haha... and to illustrate the it doesnt matter what you use point.

Teknicyde wrote:
ALL sounds ar emade up of series of them

Hey man, I agree with you all sounds are lots of sine waves. I think the big argument in this thread happens to be the wording.

All sounds can be represented as an infinite series of sine waves.

This doen't mean that all sounds are made from sine waves though. Btw, I'm not trying to sound like a dick or split hairs, just end the silly arguing.

ShapeSHIFT wrote:

Teknicyde wrote:
ALL sounds ar emade up of series of them

Hey man, I agree with you all sounds are lots of sine waves. I think the big argument in this thread happens to be the wording.

All sounds can be represented as an infinite series of sine waves.

This doen't mean that all sounds are made from sine waves though. Btw, I'm not trying to sound like a dick or split hairs, just end the silly arguing.

Its a bunch of workflow debate.

Welcome to dsf.

Its like... which daw is best?!

Speaking of...

lulz

Sparxy wrote:I know what you're getting at, but you completely missed Teknicyde's point. He was using the pure sine waves as an example, to illustrate the fact that its not necessarily the tools you're using, it's how you're using them. I seriously doubt any modern producers use such techniques but you never know.

Again, citing Operator, you said Massive is way better than DAW stock synths. I used that to illustrate the point that there is nothing wrong with DAW synths, they are all powerful in the right hands. If you can't get good sounds out of it, you haven't spent enough time learning it. How can you expect instant results if you've never used something before?

Jacob15728 wrote:For ordinary people like you and me.

You speak for yourself there buddy. You have the same brain as everyone else right? Then you can figure it out, why limit yourself?

I don't get what you're saying. Are you saying that you make complex sounds by layering sine waves? Are you saying that I should do that instead of using Massive? I really think I'm speaking for everybody because I'll bet you any amount of money that there are no established dubstep producers who make complex, heavy bass sounds by layering sine waves.

But I do agree. Stock DAW synths can be good, I'm just not familiar with Operator. Sytrus is a great FM synth though, that's just one example. I still think that in general, high-end shareware synths have more features than stock DAW synths (you can interpret that to mean whatever you want, it's a matter of opinion whether that makes them better)

Jacob15728 wrote:

Sparxy wrote:I know what you're getting at, but you completely missed Teknicyde's point. He was using the pure sine waves as an example, to illustrate the fact that its not necessarily the tools you're using, it's how you're using them. I seriously doubt any modern producers use such techniques but you never know.

Again, citing Operator, you said Massive is way better than DAW stock synths. I used that to illustrate the point that there is nothing wrong with DAW synths, they are all powerful in the right hands. If you can't get good sounds out of it, you haven't spent enough time learning it. How can you expect instant results if you've never used something before?

Jacob15728 wrote:For ordinary people like you and me.

You speak for yourself there buddy. You have the same brain as everyone else right? Then you can figure it out, why limit yourself?

I don't get what you're saying. Are you saying that you make complex sounds by layering sine waves? Are you saying that I should do that instead of using Massive? I really think I'm speaking for everybody because I'll bet you any amount of money that there are no established dubstep producers who make complex, heavy bass sounds by layering sine waves.

But I do agree. Stock DAW synths can be good, I'm just not familiar with Operator. Sytrus is a great FM synth though, that's just one example. I still think that in general, high-end shareware synths have more features than stock DAW synths (you can interpret that to mean whatever you want, it's a matter of opinion whether that makes them better)

Anybody that uses additive synthesis as their main synthesis method is stacking sines to get more complex sounds.

jrisreal wrote: Anybody that uses additive synthesis as their main synthesis method is stacking sines to get more complex sounds.

True, but I meant layering each individual sine wave manually