One Synth Challenge #104 - Zebralette by u-he (Photonic Wins!)

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
Zebralette

Post

@Taron: Sure I don't need to vote in one go. I downloaded all songs, made decent mp3's (where necessary) out of them and put them on a cd and on my phone to make sure to listen to them any time I want to. After two or three rounds of listening I had an overview and made my voting. Hard enough, but for me it's impossible to sit in front of my pc and listen to the tracks online. :wink:

@ontrackp: I share your sight of view. Composing is creativity. Without this creativity there won't be any! So my main focus is on this. The technical belongings are very important, too, but since the majority of the participants here is not a professional composer, one can IMHO easily judge the creativity because there is no (or less) compositional craftmanship, just talent. I don't want to offend anybody! I think you all are very talented people with deep skills of sounddesign, mixing/mastering/production and, of course, composition. :hail:
I just wantet to make clear, that I can see the difference between profs and amateurs (or anything in between).
The skills in mixing/production can be learned, which I hope for myself. After listening to all these tracks here in round #104 (and I follow the OSC for at least 5 years!) I can say there is much to learn from you.

And to answer your question: I would rather prefer a better quality of composition/creativity than of mixing producing. For I have much more fun listening to good music instead of only good sounding music.
I also like very much constructive criticism in my work. You never stop learning!

Just my 2 cents
If you don't fail - you didn't even try

Post

mmGhost wrote:~Some (mixing) tips for the OSC~
  • Master Limiter - I know people like it loud. I do too. But please, do not get loudness with the master limiter and sacrifice a clean mix-down. If your mix is good and loud, if you are having to push the master limiter beyond 3 dB gain reduction to get the track as loud as you want, you really need to go back to the mix.

    Low-Mids - I've noticed on many tracks the low-mids tend to get in the way. This is the 200-500 Hz region (depending on who you are talking to). This area causes things to get muddy if you don't tame it. Especially on Kicks and Bass. Cutting too much here can leave elements in the mix lifeless, so be careful. But its good to A/B your more bassy elements with a cut in this region to see if it tightens the mix a bit.

    Pads - I've also noticed a tendency to over-mix the pads in a lot of tracks. Pads (as you know) are often sustained sounds. If they are mixed in at a high volume they totally overwhelm the listener and it can be a little tiring to listen to, especially if they have little to no modulation on them. I kept asking myself if this is just a style thing but I don't think so. 9 times out of 10 I think a mix-down can be improved by taming the pads a bit and letting the percs and melodies pop through more.

    Composition (not mixing) - i think the tracks that score the best take the listener on a journey. I went back and had a listen to a few of the past month's winners, and this seems to be a consistent thread. Listen to Taron's stuff, Meakaale, etc. All of these tracks crescendo and intensify, and have a feeling of release at times. Not just an onslaught of sound for 4 minutes. Always bringing in new elements that renew interest in the theme. Photonic wrote a piece that was almost like one long crescendo. Peter H's Stukas track kept me wondering when i'd hear "that vocal" again. Listen to the master, Bach, everything he wrote builds tension and release.
In any case, just some comments that may be helpful to some, hope to see you guys next month.
:tu:
:clap:
If you don't fail - you didn't even try

Post

Allow me to add some of my finding...I have gone thru a long journey and learning
mmGhost wrote:~Some (mixing) tips for the OSC~
  • Master Limiter - I know people like it loud. I do too. But please, do not get loudness with the master limiter and sacrifice a clean mix-down. If your mix is good and loud, if you are having to push the master limiter beyond 3 dB gain reduction to get the track as loud as you want, you really need to go back to the mix.
I've learnt to start low on volume. In the begining all my faders start at -6 dB. Most of the tracks have a EQ->compressor->Limiter chain to handle volume per track and very much dependend on what the instrument needs. Then I do groups with Sidechain-Compression and last stage is sum mastering. Only here I go for "max volume overall".
mmGhost wrote: Low-Mids - I've noticed on many tracks the low-mids tend to get in the way. This is the 200-500 Hz region (depending on who you are talking to). This area causes things to get muddy if you don't tame it. Especially on Kicks and Bass. Cutting too much here can leave elements in the mix lifeless, so be careful. But its good to A/B your more bassy elements with a cut in this region to see if it tightens the mix a bit.
So true. Frequency mud was my problem. It was so eye opening to use tools that show you frequenciy collisions. There was one free Multi-Channel Analyzer for up to 4 channels available. Use this to detect frequency maskings. You can correct this by static EQ, MultiBandCompression, or dynamic EQs. I'm completely in love with dynamic EQs because they allow you to sidechain and duck frequencies if necessary but otherwise let your bdr or bass come thru with all the frequencies it should have. Use TDR Nova for this. The clean up frequency collisions lead to a nice secondary effect - Before I just turned up loudness when I felt that one track masks the other. And this leads to turning up volumes more and more, but the root cause was not loudness but freq masking.
Update: Damn, the free version seems to be gone, https://schulz.audio/products/spectrum/ Has anybody a "backup" of an older version?
mmGhost wrote: Pads - I've also noticed a tendency to over-mix the pads in a lot of tracks. Pads (as you know) are often sustained sounds. If they are mixed in at a high volume they totally overwhelm the listener and it can be a little tiring to listen to, especially if they have little to no modulation on them. I kept asking myself if this is just a style thing but I don't think so. 9 times out of 10 I think a mix-down can be improved by taming the pads a bit and letting the percs and melodies pop through more.
Pads are very often just my background "bed" and I have them Sidechain Compressed by my drums and M/S mixed, and hm, I do weird stuff with reverbs as I usually have reverb for left and right channel and my sends are pan controlled to...oh my, reverbs...use EQ and compressor and ducking on them too...May be I'm completely weird ;-)
mmGhost wrote: Composition (not mixing) - i think the tracks that score the best take the listener on a journey. I went back and had a listen to a few of the past month's winners, and this seems to be a consistent thread. Listen to Taron's stuff, Meakaale, etc. All of these tracks crescendo and intensify, and have a feeling of release at times. Not just an onslaught of sound for 4 minutes. Always bringing in new elements that renew interest in the theme. Photonic wrote a piece that was almost like one long crescendo. Peter H's Stukas track kept me wondering when i'd hear "that vocal" again. Listen to the master, Bach, everything he wrote builds tension and release.
In any case, just some comments that may be helpful to some, hope to see you guys next month.
Admittedly my greates deficit as an autodidact musican who never learnt to play an real instrument. But as I have learnt only the complete package counts...Composition is my goal for the next few OSCs. Thanks for the reminder mmGhost.

And by the way - You should get paid for this! Great advices and tipps. Made me rethink my approach again and sort my thoughts about this. And I love your videos...
Last edited by ] Peter:H [ on Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post

Dare I say a weird thing?! One of my favorite OSC thread "discussions", yet. I'm really excited to read through everything and find wonderfully supportive spirit. Should check the stars, hahaha, they must be in good positions! :)

Really solid, fundamental tips, mmGhost! Many years ago, when the OSC made me look deeper into mixing again, I stumbled upon an EQ tutorial that was very well crafted. It would mention exactly the area around 400Hz as source of muddiness. After making experiments with it, I realized that it was almost by default a powerful thing to take those frequencies down in reverbs or any effect tails, being a first measure to ensure enough air in the mix, if it needed reverbs or effect delays. I wanted to add that as a little tip to the tip, haha. :shrug:

As for your wonderful paragraph on composition, I'd like to add that there's a place for everything, but the OSC rather comes along like the charts. While some House style songs, for example, are actually absolutely fantastic by themselves, they can get under in the collection of "hit-chasers". Every track that pursues one specific type of state, which asks you to come in and let yourself drift into it, is up for a much greater challenge than songs that grab you and take you along, no matter what.
Tiny anecdote, I once forgot an SC tab in my browser for several days, when I went on it, it was at the end of some song and continued to play some "random" song as SC likes to do. And I was very impressed about that one. Thought it was a damn cool house track (hence the house example). And, sure enough, it was an OSC track. During voting and listening to dozens of songs, you just adjust to a certain kind of sound and songs have such a hard time to stand out, if they're not musically leading you. And sometimes the voting doesn't reflect how much more awesome a track is compared to great many other songs out there, outside of the OSC!

Guess, what I'm saying is that you artists make fantastic music, regardless to where it ends up in the results. And I believe it has a lot to do with how we lift each other up to higher and higher standards! Something to be very happy about and well proud of. 8)

Post

Taron wrote:And sometimes the voting doesn't reflect how much more awesome a track is compared to great many other songs out there, outside of the OSC!
My favorite radio is Radio OSC!!! :D Indeed, most of the outcome of every OSC are really decent tracks I like to listen again and again. They are in my playlists and in my background music routine in Spotify :phones:
YT | SC | FB | IG | earror :ud: KO :ud:

Post

Generally speaking do you compress before or after eq? Something i cannot make up my mind about.
Image
I had another round of listening to iron out my vote, but the winner stays.

Post

Daru925 wrote:Generally speaking do you compress before or after eq? Something i cannot make up my mind about.
Image
I had another round of listening to iron out my vote, but the winner stays.
Typically EQ first, then the compressor reacts to the elements in the sound I want it to. But for sound design it just depends.

Post

Well, if you EQ anything after the compression, you certainly alter the level, no matter what. That's why it's very common practice to EQ before it, for sure! :shrug:

Why is that a problem?
- For example when you play a melody, but you lift a part of the spectrum with the EQ, through which the melody goes, these parts then will be louder. With the compression you want to level it out, bring everything closer together in volume. If you EQ before, all will be well, the compression will respond to the louder notes and bring them down. If you EQ after, the nicely compressed signal will get lifted outside of its desired dynamics.

Post

Taron wrote:Well, if you EQ anything after the compression, you certainly alter the level, no matter what. That's why it's very common practice to EQ before it, for sure! :shrug:

Why is that a problem?
- For example when you play a melody, but you lift a part of the spectrum with the EQ, through which the melody goes, these parts then will be louder. With the compression you want to level it out, bring everything closer together in volume. If you EQ before, all will be well, the compression will respond to the louder notes and bring them down. If you EQ after, the nicely compressed signal will get lifted outside of its desired dynamics.
For sure it is the general rule to EQ before compression>> but there are also creative uses to EQ after compression..
and Taron, we can also cut frequencies as well as add... :wink:
Also, with the new breed of dynamic EQ the game changes. With things like Nova_GE edition, ToneBoosters FIX and as I am just discovering in MAutoDynamicEQ.. OFC none of these can be used in OSC
but as sound engineers, we have never had is so good )))))

Post

In fact, you should rather cut frequencies than adding them, but I wanted to make a more drastic example. I apologize, if that was misleading in any way?! :ud:
And there was this question:
Daru925 wrote:Generally speaking do you compress before or after eq? Something i cannot make up my mind about.
GENERALLY SPEAKING one compresses after the EQ. Creative uses are not "generally", you know! ;)

Post

Taron wrote:In fact, you should rather cut frequencies than adding them, but I wanted to make a more drastic example. I apologize, if that was misleading in any way?! :ud:
And there was this question:
Daru925 wrote:Generally speaking do you compress before or after eq? Something i cannot make up my mind about.
GENERALLY SPEAKING one compresses after the EQ. Creative uses are not "generally", you know! ;)
hahaha>>Got you! :lol: :hug:
"Creative uses are not "generally", you know!".. They are in my tool kit
But as I have said, I am more a sound engineer than musician or composer...
so I try any trick in the book.. even the book that has not yet been written!
Last edited by toonertik on Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post

And that makes you a treasure to have here! :hug:

Post

Taron wrote:And that makes you a treasure to have here! :hug:
Awww Flattery.. flattery..
Do I remember the expression "Flattery will get you everywhere " or similar..
see I don't remember!

But seriously.. I do try to create my sounds within the synth... but there are times when we need all the superb EQs and Technics to sculpt THAT sound to fit into the jigsaw.

Post

OH, YES, we're in the #104 thread, wonderful...we can just chat! :hyper:
Yes, when I want to isolate a lead, for example, or some specific elements, I keep having to experiment with compositional arrangement (octave shifts, chord inversions or revoicings, simplifications), but also mixing tricks like carefully noodling EQs to ensure space for those specific elements. Lately I have really fallen in love with the mid/side balance, because it's so easy to push parts into the background that way, for example. I do, however, really understand why EQ has to be dealt with very consciously. For all those, who are tempted to think that the composition doesn't have to change to clean up a mix, but some heavy EQing may do the trick. It really doesn't.
There's so much to learn and so much left to gather from experience. But so often, when it comes to music, I really just want to let myself go and play, compose, design, just enjoying the process and letting it happen. It's tough as long as mixing still wants to be an after-thought. It has already shifted a bit for me. I have already many aspects of the mix in mind, when I create a sound and consider where it should play what. But it still is a volatile process and the pull of carelessness keeps tucking away at me. I do sometimes wonder, if it wouldn't be more awesome and liberating to make music with somebody, who would love to keep an eye on the arrangement and all that, hehehe... :shrug: :)

Post

What a cool and thoughtful chat that is, wow.
I would love to add something about a.) Organisation of a Channel Strip, i.e. organization of Processing tools and b.) about EQing M/S

a.) Channel Strip - I followed the dicussion and thought, okay, I buy all what has been said, but at the same time I thought, how are DAWs or Mixing Consoles organizing the tools?
Took a screen shot of the Cubase Channel Strip which differs in the order of EQ and COMP...don't know why that is. Hm? I need to find that out myself too. By the way this channel strip section is between "inserts" and "sends".
ChannelStrip Cubase.png
b.) Mid/Side. Next picture is my EQ for the PAD in "Stukas Attack". The Pad is only a fill up, a bit of a secondary, but yet importand element which is placed in the background: I've cut bass, I've cut 1 Khz which is a frequency where Lead should be dominant and I cut highs MID only. After all the cuts I've increased highs but only SIDE to make it shine through. And by the way: There's mostly allways channels that go exactly oposite - I mean it's just somehow "logically for me" that when I have created room in one place, that there's channels that "actively" occupy that room. In case of the 1Khz ducking of the Pad the "opposite" channel are the "Chord stabs"
Stukas Pad Mid-Side.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”