Dubstepforum.com

goosebumps every time

the reese in this is amazing. so fuckingy wet Soundcloud

not even sure if actually made from reeces but

but i am a little disappointed that bad company didnt use rides in their tune

These three tracks give me the shivers.

Soundcloud

Soundcloud

Soundcloud

the comment blocks on those noisa tunes are ridiculous. I can barely see the waveform.

There is no where near as many comments as Skrillex's tracks. The waveforms on those are completely bocked.

is it just me, or are most of these "reeses" just white noise thrown in a granular synth?

1:08 - that mid.

1:08


1:06


1:27


every spor tune

bassinine wrote:is it just me, or are most of these "reeses" just white noise thrown in a granular synth?

i doubt its white noise, it could very well be a l long sustained reese though.

Italus wrote:Soundcloud

How the fuck do you make the noise at 1:59. And then again at 2:13.

I used to be obsessed with these sounds when I was a nipper

Fauster wrote:

Italus wrote:Soundcloud

How the fuck do you make the noise at 1:59. And then again at 2:13.

Noisia reeses are just magic or something. Apparently they resample like hell, but I got something similar just by using a saw wave in massive. Then I have 2 macros, 1 for the growly part which is connected to the wt-position, intensity, phasing, RM, the dry/wet and pitch in the sample and hold insert and then the dry/wet in sine shaper. Then Macro 2 is for the resonancy part. It is connected to the cutoff in filter 1 which is a double notch filter, and it is also connected to the cutoff in filter 2 which is a bandreject. Automate those to macros then add camelphat3, pump up the distortion, also automate the highpass filter in camelphat as well. Also maybe slap on an EQ with a vowel filter and automate that. Basically the more things you automate the better it gets.

Italus wrote:

Fauster wrote:

Italus wrote:Soundcloud

How the fuck do you make the noise at 1:59. And then again at 2:13.

Noisia reeses are just magic or something. Apparently they resample like hell, but I got something similar just by using a saw wave in massive. Then I have 2 macros, 1 for the growly part which is connected to the wt-position, intensity, phasing, RM, the dry/wet and pitch in the sample and hold insert and then the dry/wet in sine shaper. Then Macro 2 is for the resonancy part. It is connected to the cutoff in filter 1 which is a double notch filter, and it is also connected to the cutoff in filter 2 which is a bandreject. Automate those to macros then add camelphat3, pump up the distortion, also automate the highpass filter in camelphat as well. Also maybe slap on an EQ with a vowel filter and automate that. Basically the more things you automate the better it gets.

hmm. kinda close.

i would do something more along the lines of getting a really nice big reese. then you'll want a comb filter than opens up slowly as a lowpass filter is synced to like 1/12 like any other fast bass.

then re-sampling - which with noisa generally consists of a ton of distortion.

also, if you want to make noisa sounds in general, you NEED white noise, comb filters, and tons of distortion.

My question is how the hell do they keep the bassline sounding so clean after all that distortion? Because you start losing the actual harmonics of the bass when you distort it so much.

Italus wrote:My question is how the hell do they keep the bassline sounding so clean after all that distortion? Because you start losing the actual harmonics of the bass when you distort it so much.

filters (lots of low-pass automation i think) and eq in between (also try doubling them up, with slightly different effects - this will sometimes phase the signal and actually clean it up a bit - other times it makes it worse). also, don't distort it too much with each step. +5-10 db is plenty. also, they tend to use analog emu saturation, which basically adds white noise to the sound once you start to push it.