TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- superior vs mediocre sounds

superior vs mediocre sounds

Not sure there is much anyone can do to help me here but need to ask away anyways... when I create sounds I'll play with everything my synth, sampler or arranger can give me... Usually will cook something up in the VSTi and use fx processing and audio editing to thicken the timbre and give it some life.

I'm trying to make minimal/tech here so it seems important the individual sounds be able to sound excellent on their own or during sections with only a few layers. It seems relatively easy to make a lush, chorded pad/lead for a trance project and have it sound gorgeous with minimal editing. I could loop it over and over again and it will sound lovely every time

A lot of my tech/minimal stabs sound too lifeless in comparison. And even though I beat the hell out of it in editing I can never get it to seem as interesting as I'd like it.

So I figure, (A) minimal/tech production is supposed to be like this and you just need to fight through it until you complete the arrangement and you can have a mastering engineer take look, (B) I'm too tired and/or being overcritical.

Advice?

either its B and youre too critical with yourself.. or, you're missing something like the right compression, the proper EQ.

I find that pads and atmospheric layers are quite easy to mix, you hardly need any compression, just cut off the lowest end to avoid clashes with the bass and thats it. On the other hand short stabs and hits are a lot harder to make IMO, because accuracy becomes very important... accuracy in filter envelopes, in FX, in EQ, in making it punch nice through the mix without clashing too much with other stuff. If you are seeking perfection, you might also want to tweak some other parameters (volume, filter, FX parameters etc) with modulation envelopes.

then its all about finding ways to make your parts non lifeless.remember the genre you make is one of the hardiest to do i know i make techno and ive learned its all down to knowing what you want from the track then how to program the parts you need ect.

also its best to work on different types of projects ie work on ya techno for a bit then on some trance or what ever this way its keeps things fresh and less frustrating.

Forcing yourself to make something is not a good way to work.

Just like sitting down and saying to yourself "I'm going to make a top 10 beatport track today" is not going to work.

quote:

Originally posted by coroknight Forcing yourself to make something is not a good way to work. Just like sitting down and saying to yourself "I'm going to make a top 10 beatport track today" is not going to work.

this to

Re: superior vs mediocre sounds

quote:

Originally posted by ClearWater sound too lifeless

heh, I know what you mean. It's basically like that with everything I do.

Re: Re: superior vs mediocre sounds

quote:

Originally posted by floyd741 heh, I know what you mean. It's basically like that with everything I do.

eh why dude?

quote:

Originally posted by coroknight Just like sitting down and saying to yourself "I'm going to make a top 10 beatport track today" is not going to work.

Well you can try lol

Btw when it comes to sound it varies between different poeple. So basically what synth sounds are superior is highly debatable. If there was superior sound everyone would be making it or it u can start to call it a trend.

You may want to have a look at timing rather than timbre, swing can help give a bit more life to your tracks, as can getting some good poly rhythms.

It really depends on what sort of techno we're talking about here. Can you post some samples of what you want and what you already have, and give us some sort of idea what your talking about in terms of BPM and style? Techno might mean anything from minimal luciano type stuff to banging electroish bodzin sounds to rolling jeff mills type tunes.

www.producerloops.com

Nothing should ever sound good on it's own but rather it should sound good within the arrangement. You can always duplicate a track and redo the processing differently for the different sections, only if you feel that will solve your problem, usually it's just the EQ & reverb that needs tweaking for different parts.

Some who are trying to produce minimal get frustrated only because the way minimal works, there isn't any place to hide any mistakes, compared to a other busy dance tunes. Every music needs good EQing, good compression, good arrangement and so on but in minimal you ought to do your best and nail everything right in the head. It's so easy to make boring tracks since there is not much going on at one time.

It's true they say minimal is the easiest of the dance music just to start out and get something going, but in reality it's one of the hardest to get everything just right.

IMHO, it's the lack of programming skills & creativity that results boring tracks.

quote:

Originally posted by DjStephenWiley www.producerloops.com

Usually the last thing you need is more looops.

quote:

Originally posted by spolitta Nothing should ever sound good on it's own but rather it should sound good within the arrangement. You can always duplicate a track and redo the processing differently for the different sections, only if you feel that will solve your problem, usually it's just the EQ & reverb that needs tweaking for different parts. Some who are trying to produce minimal get frustrated only because the way minimal works, there isn't any place to hide any mistakes, compared to a other busy dance tunes. Every music needs good EQing, good compression, good arrangement and so on but in minimal you ought to do your best and nail everything right in the head. It's so easy to make boring tracks since there is not much going on at one time. It's true they say minimal is the easiest of the dance music just to start out and get something going, but in reality it's one of the hardest to get everything just right. IMHO, it's the lack of programming skills & creativity that results boring tracks.

This seems to sound most like what I'm trying to describe...

Layered, busy mixes usually sound great but cover up a lot of the weaknesses of the original timbres. In trying to make minimal tracks, I find my individual "micro"-plucked leads don't sound as good as they should compared to other minimal tracks...

Stuff accessed from samples from drum kits usually sound better, I'm sure by virtue of the source material's preprocessing.

Making plucks, glitches, from raw synth waveforms isn't always perfect. When I compare mine to professional, mine feel pretty weak.

The options I have to play with on reverb (in this case Cubase 5) are intial delay, reverb decay time, room size, diffusion, width, bass and treble EQ/boost. Playing with these I know that smaller rooms with the treble taken down a bit and the bass boosted gives all sounds a bit more body, like the timbre is actually there and not in outer space somewhere. Still not close to what the pro's offer.

Maybe, if with the tools I have its just plain impossible unless I had access to a superior reverb/mastering plugin

There are no magic plugins, you can only use the best that are out there to help you, but it still comes down to the mixing and sound selection.
I cant speak for the Cubase reverb but there are some very good software reverbs on the market for not too much cash if you dont think you are getting the results from the cubase verb

quote:

Originally posted by coroknight Forcing yourself to make something is not a good way to work. Just like sitting down and saying to yourself "I'm going to make a top 10 beatport track today" is not going to work.

Tell that to the mau5.


lol.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.