Dubstepforum.com

tripwire22 wrote:http://www.sendspace.com/file/szmrc0

this is what i got?

Basic A wrote: The noise randomness to the original form your trying to replicate... the fine imperfection, Ive only seen that come out of 2 things, hardware, or greasetube ... might help you get closer...

HALP wrote:

Basic A wrote:and greasetube i dont know what that is really

HALP wrote:read its a compressor/saturator, and cant find a download
not too interested in that kinda stuff anyway, i have all i need in ableton

nowaysj wrote:

collective wrote: you can get old moogs for fairly cheap if you just want a couple beefy osc.

mg-1, rogue, liberation .... check em

HALP wrote:mweslee played one at lowriders a couple of weeks ago, sick sound, i'd like one

relik wrote:

collective wrote: you can get old moogs for fairly cheap if you just want a couple beefy osc.

mg-1, rogue, liberation .... check em

i got a mint mg-1 for free off some dude. nice little synth. it's a radioshack synth licensed by and built by moog. sick deep bass. i have yet to sample and incorporate into some tracks.

relik wrote:

collective wrote:i have yet to sample and incorporate into some tracks.

killahbeez wrote:

nowaysj wrote:
Funny you should ask, as a result of both of these threads, I did just that. And yes dood, it's not that complex. Save a single cycle, load it into 3xosc, and now you have the synth. You can check the output of the synth, the exact same waveform. A few things, audio apps like audacity will fuck up a bit when looping a very short selection. If you like that sound, just sample that. If you work with fruity, you should be doing this in edison, their wave editor. If you are unfamiliar, learn it. Audacity is a toaster to edison's thermonuclear detonation. In this example, you can just select a single cycle and drag it into 3xosc, don't have to save the sample or anything. If you are a newb, and something doesn't work, it's not the something's fault, it's your fault, look at the situation and correct your mistake. When looping a single cycle from a sound that you like, you have to remember, you're taking a single cycle; synths and other sound sources evolve over time, even if it is short amounts of time. That evolution of sound will not be captured in a single cycle. I captured that slug cycle, and 3xosc sounds like the slug hit, but it is static, it doesn't have all that natural sweepy goodness about it.

And check that lazer bass thread in 2 minutes, am getting pretty close synthesizing slug's sound.

I look forward to hearing the 3x0sc reproduction. But for the record... are you making this "sound"/waveform you've been showing us in this other thread by :
1) sampling slugabeds waveform, 2) putting it in 3x0sc, and editing it from there?
..I'm sure you're working hard at it - but as I'm sure you'll admit - your waveform looks alot less (dynamic) than slugabeds. This is what I feel I may be experiencing - with the wav played through a sampler the sound is phat/dirty... with the same wav played through 3x0sc - it sounds muffled - barely the same (I will look into the waveforms to see how similar/dissimilar they are when I have time).
Oh - and if you're not using the process above (1,2,3) and are using another synth etc. - your process is irrelevant to this 3x0sc discussion.

I guess the simplest, most straight forward question I can ask you is - is the RESULT different, for you, when you place the slugabed wave in a SAMPLER as compared to the 3x0sc? Or is it IDENTICAL? If it is IDENTICAL, then you're right - its my fault, I must be doing something wrong.

as for all the talk about synths "evolving" over time.... do u think my looped sample in audacity is evolving over time? It's not. I'm just looking to as closely replicate that looped sound, in synth form, as possible.

nowaysj wrote: SIN. I think that is a sign that you should donate it to the nowaysj charity for analog deprived producers.