Originally posted by DaveBegic
thanks man. you're the only one who's really had any real negative feedback lately so i'd like to hear it. but it sounds like you want me to re-arrange alot.
thats not true, i think its shit and u know why
BECAUSE I HATE YOU, WITH YOUR POOP MOUTH, ALL THE POOP COMIN OUT OF YOUR MOUTH
___________________
Nov-08-2005 01:55
Aesthetic
- ---(ps3.addicted)--- -
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere between the melody and the pads
I'm sorry, I don't speak Spanish. What did you say?
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: back in Melbourne, Australia
sounds good dave, only thing I might suggest is the little four-note trill that first appears two seconds in - once you start cranking the delay return up a bit (prob at :26 is where it becomes noticeable, and moreso on the subsequent ones) you can hear that the delay time is slightly off. assuming the delay times are set in milliseconds, just divide 60,000 by the bpm and that's the length of your quarter note in ms (sounds like a straight quarter note delay to me), so at your 133bpm that would make a quarter note 451.1ms. Doing this should also let you do some fun feedback loop stuff perfectly in sync, either off the tail end of the trill during the beginning as you come into the break, or even reversed and put in as a build up out of the breakdown (very Andy Moor).
If the delay time is supposed to be auto-calculated from the BPM, it doesn't appear to be reading the bpm properly, so chuck it into manual mode (if your delay supports delay time being input in ms - if not try to use one that does) and plug in 451.1ms and see how much fun the feedback becomes - even better if you can insert an eq or highpass filter into the delay's feedback loop as then you can re-emphasise a particular frequency band with each delay, like a tuned tape delay. Or, cut instead of boost the eq in the delay's feedback loop, so that subsequent echoes fade away by losing more and more off the bottom end (or maybe roll a bit off the top, too, so it appears to get more distant), instead of just fading away in amplitude. If you're after that kind of effect of course - might be a bit dubby.
Originally posted by DJ_Ballistic
nah i dont think thats it
sif you know anything about canadians
___________________
i like you
Nov-10-2005 11:27
Aesthetic
- ---(ps3.addicted)--- -
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere between the melody and the pads
hey man, have to say thanks for giving me some pointers on the delay. i'd have to say im pretty sure at the moment it is synching with the host tempo so i'll give it a stab manually like you've suggested. actually finishing the tune this weekend so i'll have that done asap.
thanks again.
ps, lol nath.
quote:
Originally posted by Nyquist_Theorem
sounds good dave, only thing I might suggest is the little four-note trill that first appears two seconds in - once you start cranking the delay return up a bit (prob at :26 is where it becomes noticeable, and moreso on the subsequent ones) you can hear that the delay time is slightly off. assuming the delay times are set in milliseconds, just divide 60,000 by the bpm and that's the length of your quarter note in ms (sounds like a straight quarter note delay to me), so at your 133bpm that would make a quarter note 451.1ms. Doing this should also let you do some fun feedback loop stuff perfectly in sync, either off the tail end of the trill during the beginning as you come into the break, or even reversed and put in as a build up out of the breakdown (very Andy Moor).
If the delay time is supposed to be auto-calculated from the BPM, it doesn't appear to be reading the bpm properly, so chuck it into manual mode (if your delay supports delay time being input in ms - if not try to use one that does) and plug in 451.1ms and see how much fun the feedback becomes - even better if you can insert an eq or highpass filter into the delay's feedback loop as then you can re-emphasise a particular frequency band with each delay, like a tuned tape delay. Or, cut instead of boost the eq in the delay's feedback loop, so that subsequent echoes fade away by losing more and more off the bottom end (or maybe roll a bit off the top, too, so it appears to get more distant), instead of just fading away in amplitude. If you're after that kind of effect of course - might be a bit dubby.
I like it, i think like pkcRAISTLIN said a bit more 'oomph' in the peaks would be good (could be the quality of the clip making it sound not 100% true i dont know).
Any way good track, keep up uthe good work, Look foward to hearing the completed version.
What did you use to make it ????
Nov-13-2005 05:27
Aesthetic
- ---(ps3.addicted)--- -
Registered: Jul 2002
Location: somewhere between the melody and the pads
Hi there mate, thanks for the comments. I've updated it since that clip and taken that one down due to some outside interest. Hopefully the final will be what you're after.
I used FL Studio v5, and a bunch of vst's for that.
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: back in Melbourne, Australia
quote:
Originally posted by DaveBegic
hey man, have to say thanks for giving me some pointers on the delay. i'd have to say im pretty sure at the moment it is synching with the host tempo so i'll give it a stab manually like you've suggested. actually finishing the tune this weekend so i'll have that done asap.
thanks again.
any time at all, dude, sounds like you're well on the right path already - can't wait to hear the final product!
