In most of your videos, when you are in the process of making sounds other than basic percussion and drums (like leads or pads, chords, et cetera), I sometimes say to myself, “that doesn’t sound like it is going to work well.” Then things happen like tweaks and filters and EQs and it ends up sitting in your mixes really nicely and sounding quite refined, all with relatively easy steps. So, might I ask how you know in the primary stages of sound creation that it IS actually going to work well? The reason I ask is two-fold…
First, there isn’t much explanation as to “why” some sounds are formed in the manner in which you make them, so I’m interested in hearing your thoughts. Second, I start designing sounds and when they sound crappy without much processing, I find I have the habit of just trashing it and starting over, which is obviously a big time waster. For me, the NOTES I want to use are relatively easy to get with regards to chords and melody. It’s the SOUND itself that usually hangs me up. Trying to get an interesting sound that is more dynamic than static within the timbre itself is the tough part. I hear pro tracks and can tell that you never quite hear the same sound repeated within the same measure. One note always has a bit more bite, quicker delay, softer attack (and on and on and on) than the next one you hear in that part.
Both of you seem to use simple wave design, then you filter, and then you EQ, end of sound design…Is that all there is to it? I know you guys probably practice what you are going to do on the videos to save time, which makes it look very easy, but how much time do you actually spend getting your sounds built and working properly before making the videos? I’m hoping you say it takes a while to get the right timbre…
Jamie
I made a really nice plucky sound I was looking for on sylenth yesterday in like 10 min…
that would have taken me ages and ages a while ago but I knew right away what wave forms to used, that they needed detune, ADSR levels I kinda had an idea of off, and filter modulation I had an idea of too as well as reverb and delays etc etc…
I dunno what happend, I think it just kinda clicks one day mate, keep at it and you’ll get it.
You can get this [url=http://www.dancemusicproduction.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=2]http://www.dancemusicproduction.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=2[/url] for £24.99 now, I highly recomend it, helped me a lot.
Thanks go!
Is that pic real? Not sure I want to know…haha!
Don’t forget as well that you can modulate within the clip envelope before you do main automation modulation on the track itself. That way you can get movement within a four/eight bar loop before you modulate a longer section in the arrangement.
Very true jon… I always forget about the clip automation, and when I do remember to use it, I always find the tweaks to be not enough to notice, or they are too obvious. Getting the right amount of dynamic motion without being obvious is really difficult, for me at least…
Bit unrelated… but Jon/Jamie have just mentioned something there that has made me want to share…
I find sticking a tremolo on things is cool. Dont have it going too wild, just subtle - barely doing anything.
When you take it off you really notice it gone. You cant pick it out, but with it gone, it takes away the “realness” of the sound. I like it anyway! 
I use the one in Logic…
Max settings will make it choppy.
Reducing the depth and increasing the smoothing makes it softer. Think the rate is usually slow enough… over a bar, or a few… or whatever sounds good :hehe:
Nice idea, ICN.
I usually pass by the tremolo, simply because there seems to be an overwhelming number of things one can do. I find that a long-range detune does almost the same thing, but not as “pretty” so to speak…
J
First off, good question Jaime. Its also good to see you thinking logically about how sounds come about. This will be of good use to you later as you go down your journey making music.
I think you have to attribute alot of it to them being so experienced and students of music for such a long time, that they just know what goes together. I know when Josh Gabriel and Dave Dresden would make music together, Josh was the genius, however what Dave brought to the table is the ear to know that at this very moment a sound similar to (insert famous song here) should be inserted in here. Its because they are students of music and dont just listen to music for its production value, rather the elements within it.
What ICN said is something you dont even realize (and I dont even think he realizes hes doing it), but hes emulating real instruments. Think of when a violinist plays a note, there is vibrato after the first second of a note being played. Thats what you should bring to your music. Is the expression that a real instrument brings to an orchestra. When you can understand that, you will truly making amazing music.
In your journey, dont forget to read and keep pushing for your thirst of knowledge. Practice till you cant no more, and have fun. Eventually, you will be able to pick out a sound as easily as Phil and Bryan do.
[quote]howiegroove (15/04/2011)[hr]First off, good question Jaime. Its also good to see you thinking logically about how sounds come about. This will be of good use to you later as you go down your journey making music.
I think you have to attribute alot of it to them being so experienced and students of music for such a long time, that they just know what goes together. I know when Josh Gabriel and Dave Dresden would make music together, Josh was the genius, however what Dave brought to the table is the ear to know that at this very moment a sound similar to (insert famous song here) should be inserted in here. Its because they are students of music and dont just listen to music for its production value, rather the elements within it.
What ICN said is something you dont even realize (and I dont even think he realizes hes doing it), but hes emulating real instruments. Think of when a violinist plays a note, there is vibrato after the first second of a note being played. Thats what you should bring to your music. Is the expression that a real instrument brings to an orchestra. When you can understand that, you will truly making amazing music.
In your journey, dont forget to read and keep pushing for your thirst of knowledge. Practice till you cant no more, and have fun. Eventually, you will be able to pick out a sound as easily as Phil and Bryan do.[/quote]
Will you be my daddy?
[quote]Subject 1 (15/04/2011)[hr][quote]howiegroove (15/04/2011)[hr]First off, good question Jaime. Its also good to see you thinking logically about how sounds come about. This will be of good use to you later as you go down your journey making music.
I think you have to attribute alot of it to them being so experienced and students of music for such a long time, that they just know what goes together. I know when Josh Gabriel and Dave Dresden would make music together, Josh was the genius, however what Dave brought to the table is the ear to know that at this very moment a sound similar to (insert famous song here) should be inserted in here. Its because they are students of music and dont just listen to music for its production value, rather the elements within it.
What ICN said is something you dont even realize (and I dont even think he realizes hes doing it), but hes emulating real instruments. Think of when a violinist plays a note, there is vibrato after the first second of a note being played. Thats what you should bring to your music. Is the expression that a real instrument brings to an orchestra. When you can understand that, you will truly making amazing music.
In your journey, dont forget to read and keep pushing for your thirst of knowledge. Practice till you cant no more, and have fun. Eventually, you will be able to pick out a sound as easily as Phil and Bryan do.[/quote]
Will you be my daddy?[/quote]
Your daddy is already in your avatar, right? Maybe thats your boyfriend… I get them confused! 
Thanks Howie,
The thing with any instrument in the orchestra, and even a more solo-oriented instrument like the piano (which I’ve been playing over 30 years now and teach at the college level) is the fact that a human is playing it, and there is simply no way a computer can inject the human vibe without a tremendous amount of programming and tweaking, just for one sound…
I understand the use of physical manipulation techniques one might use to get a certain kind of staccato, lift, disconnection, and other “imperfect” effects one would have in a live setting on an acoustic, which is probably why Logic and Ableton have spent a lot of time with “humanize” commands to get that squareness of computer accuracy out of the picture with the click of a mouse. Add to that the overwhelming complexity of swing algorithms they have designed! After studying jazz AND classical for quite some time, it still doesn’t compare to a really good old copy of some Louis Armstrong or perhaps even some Coltrane before he went avant-garde.
I think what I’m getting at is not what music “is” so to speak, because quite frankly, there isn’t one thing in my study of music over the last 15-20 years as a professional that I don’t already understand or couldn’t learn quickly from a musical theory standpoint. In fact, I built an entire ableton set with about 100 different modal, jazz and modern scale structures that one might use in a tune ready to go. (If anyone wants it, send me a PM and I’ll send a link to the file online) I’m just curious as to how the guys know from an early stage that a particular sound is actually going to “work.”
As far as the tremolo thing, that has always been a manner of “coloring” the sound in a way that prevents the sound from becoming too static or “boring” for lack of a better term. The technique really hasn’t even been around for that long regarding string, brass, woodwind, and vocal techniques. Of course, keyboardists were able to use this technique way back pre-Baroque when the clavichord was in use. A “tangent” on the end of the key would hit the string and maintain contact with it, allowing the player to alter pressure on the key and create a slight vibrato, called “bebung.” Unfortunately pianists can’t do this today!
Anyway, what I was getting at before veering off on my “tangent” is that the timbre of the violin, voice, brass, whatever is still the same recognizable timbre that “fits” well in the orchestra, similar to the sounds the guys use to arrive at a nicely shaped dubstep or deep house track. I respect ICN’s comment about the tremolo, but what I’m after is not the “coloring” effects one might use to help a sound sit in a mix nicely. Heck…just put a phaser on pretty much any sound and it already sits much better in any mix! No, what I’m after is more of the “base” sound-creation technique. Also, what about the thought process tells them that, “OK, this sound will work later on even though it sounds not-so-good right now…” See what I’m saying?
Jamie