Dubstepforum.com

I use vocoders with 0 automation and no carrier just because of how they alter the sound. Gives a lot of character to the low end if done right.

I hope this helps someone
Formant synthesis technique
rather dry but quite informantive

i made this loop and the growl bass in class yesterday. for being on iphone headphones and in class im not too ashamed of it. the first initial growl and yeah's are made from zebra 2 using fm syntesis. 1 modulator is modulating 2 oscilattors. and then i just have an evelope set to the fm amt to get that intial growl.

the datsiky/robotish sound is made in malstrom using a sine shaper as the main catalyst of the sound.

Soundcloud

edit: sorry double post.... internet was being stupid

edit: sorry double post.... internet was being stupid

edit: sorry double post.... internet was being stupid

Soundcloud

Cooked this up earlier, no idea how to process/EQ growl basses so this just raw massive with some random EQing and fx automation.

blu2 wrote:I hope this helps someone
[url=http://cnx.org/content/m15459/latest/su ... e.html[url]
rather dry but quite informantive

looks interesting

Crysist wrote: Will explain if people want

no you won't.

hasezwei wrote:

Crysist wrote: Will explain if people want

no you won't.

^this

Entire thread of ego strokers.

One view of this sound is that it is the fourth sound in a series.

1. Synth bass (eg supersaw, reece) - turn the pitch down, set up some oscillators, detune, etc.
2. Wub bass - LFO the lopass cutoff
3. Yoy/talking bass - send into bitcrusher or sample and hold
4. Growl bass - distort

Maybe the fifth step is the vowel/formant bass, which has the automated EQ.

Electric_Head wrote:

hasezwei wrote:

Crysist wrote: Will explain if people want

no you won't.

^this

Entire thread of ego strokers.

Haha why wouldn't I?
The full track is up on Moombahton.net for exclusive DL here : http://soundcloud.com/moombahton/aceton ... bahton-net
I'll get home and put up the massive patch if needed too.
This has a wow filter set to vowel, and band reject mode, sweeping between the Ä and the ü settings.
Has a phaser on it that is automated to go from full dry to full wet right at the end of the sound.
Has a fab filter with big boosts around the 100, 300, 500, 900, and then I think the 1100 range as well.
Then has a really small bit crush on it.
Then a freq shifter turned down about 10-20, (very slight)
Then a fab filter with a band pass filter sweeping the lows, and another sweeping the highs to really accentuate the vowel sound.
Then I have a fab filter to surgically remove all unwanted frequencies and clear up some head room in the mix.
Then limiting and compression to bring it down and quash the frequencies so they are even throughout.
The tonality also come from the massive patch because I have shifter the freq down on that as well, but I'm not at home atm so can't remember the patch.
Just wanted to reply and let the keyboard warriors settle down because I always intended on helping if anyone ever wanted some.

Awesome explanation.

twilitez wrote:Awesome explanation.

What are you being sarcastic?

nah he's not (i suppose), it's cool. you're very specific but also explain why you've applied certain fx.

>exclusive DL
Chads bass was pretty gnarly

hookjunior wrote:

shinra wrote:think people are overthinking things, 90% of the sound at least should come from the synth. a bad patch with a lot of fx is still a bad patch, but a strong patch touched up with one or two effects sounds amazing.

this is what ive been trying to say. please listen to this guy

I get what your saying about the importance of a good patch, but the 90% from a synth thing can't be true.

Massive has some great filters and FX, but there is nothing wrong with running out a couple dry wavetables into a proper FX chain in your DAW.

hasezwei wrote:nah he's not (i suppose), it's cool. you're very specific but also explain why you've applied certain fx.

This, sorry if i came off oddly, its not every day you see someone be that specific about their process.

twilitez wrote:

hasezwei wrote:nah he's not (i suppose), it's cool. you're very specific but also explain why you've applied certain fx.

This, sorry if i came off oddly, its not every day you see someone be that specific about their process.

Haha no worries at all.
Sorry if I came across like a dick
Any other questions feel free to ask. Just couldn't think of anything else to write

Ocelots Revolver wrote:

hookjunior wrote:

shinra wrote:think people are overthinking things, 90% of the sound at least should come from the synth. a bad patch with a lot of fx is still a bad patch, but a strong patch touched up with one or two effects sounds amazing.

this is what ive been trying to say. please listen to this guy

I get what your saying about the importance of a good patch, but the 90% from a synth thing can't be true.

Massive has some great filters and FX, but there is nothing wrong with running out a couple dry wavetables into a proper FX chain in your DAW.

i'm not saying you couldn't use 3rd party filters to do the same thing but if you can do it in massive then why not? seems more coherent. very rarely will i need to use more than massive, a limiter, and an imager maybe.