Skream - 2D on SNL?

forensix (mcr) · Post by **forensix (mcr)** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:07 pm

gravious wrote:OH MY GOD THIS IS THE END OF DUBSTEP AS WE KNOW IT LETS ALL JUST KILL OURSELVES NOW AND GO OUT ON A HIGH

CAN I HAVE A COPY OF YOUR SAMPLE CD FIRST?

gravious · Post by **gravious** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:16 pm

forensix (mcr) wrote:
gravious wrote:OH MY GOD THIS IS THE END OF DUBSTEP AS WE KNOW IT LETS ALL JUST KILL OURSELVES NOW AND GO OUT ON A HIGH
CAN I HAVE A COPY OF YOUR SAMPLE CD FIRST?

YES. 50 QUID PLEASE

forensix (mcr) · Post by **forensix (mcr)** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 12:38 pm

WASTEMAN

dubwise_gamgee · Post by **dubwise_gamgee** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:18 pm

interesting and somehow weird discussion.

first of all, it is a bit disappointing that skream used this preset in a very "normal" fashion, not tweaking it too much or so. and it isn't the most creative thing to take some dope sounding preset (even though it is super dope, but somebody else made it that dope u know? not him) and putting fat ass beats and bass beneath.

but, i really dig 2d, like the smashing snare and the polyphonic vibe. i also thought that skream had "composed" that intertwining melody himself, so yeah i am a bit surprised that he used that preset. but if he says it's just a preset then it's cool, because he never intended this to be the most original composition of the 21st century, it's basically a dj tool.

one of the big problems i have with various dubstep tunes is that they sound extremely preset-oriented.

for example, certain skream, coki or digital mystikz tunes with an "organic" vibe ("real" instruments, like flutes, brass etc). it kills me when i hear some cheap imitation of live brass, programmed via midi.. that's god awful. the tune still is dope because of the mix and the vibe of the track in general, but it really pierces my ears when i hear this horrible fake-live instrument sounds. keep it to synthetic or use real live musicians, but not this cheap sounding stuff...

a lot of the great dubstep tunes have amazing ideas and vibes to them but some of the instrumentation either just sounds bad or very uninspired. i don't understand why producers use bad live instrument samples instead of leaving them away alltogether. don't get it.

other example, rusko - cockney thug. that brass hook is big, because it sounds like some bad brass sound from an eighties synthesizer, you hear that it shouldn't try to sound real but rather like that 80ies sound. that fits to the track and adds a nice vibe (at least for me personally because i dig those cheap-but-dope-80ies-synth-brass-sounds)...

in my opinion producers should focus more on all the sounds together, rather than just the dub'n'bassiness of the tune. like kode9, his instrumentation always is fresh and interesting. i just can't buy some of the "classic" dmz tunes because i don't like the sounds (although i'd probably enjoy them with some beer and a party with a big rig).

and that brings me to another point: should dubstep be only focused on this big-rig-with-huge-sub environment or should the tracks also have an aesthetic value that goes beyond the club environment. (e.g. yet again kode9, certain skream tracks with perfect synthesizer sound control). some of the dmz-ish tunes just don't reach me at all when i don't hear them loud... (don't get this wrong, i like the ideas of the tunes and the vibes but not so fond of the instrumental sounds, except the dope drums)...

well, this is getting longer and longer. i'll stop here for the moment... and please, let's have some quality discussion not always this "you don't understand dubstep"-ish...i understand dubstep the way i like it and from what i hear a lot of people hype about tunes that just aren't as fresh as they seem (in my opinion, like certain skream dubs that sound very unfinished and partially quite uninspired, though skream in general has very high quality with his massive output, got to respect that)...

Jubz · Post by **Jubz** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 1:42 pm

dubwise_gamgee wrote:it kills me when i hear some cheap imitation of live brass, programmed via midi.. that's god awful.

Thats what its all about though, that is dubstep. I love the synthesised sound, Skream spoiled Rottan when he added the live flute.

threnody · Post by **threnody** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:04 pm

Jubscarz wrote:Thats what its all about though, that is dubstep.

ERMMMMMMM.....Are you sure??? I didn't realise synthy sounds were dubstep. Surely that is pidgeon holing things a bit. If you have any sound design or 'real' sounds does it cease to be dubstep? I better dust off my copy of reason and load up 'big bass 1', 'cheap flute 2' and 'dub kit 3' and make a move on it....

Got to say i prefer threads like this to 'what type of mum is dubstep?', some intelligent points made.

Skream just produces beats and should not be judged as a revolutionary....leave that to Baz, Sully, Kode 9 and the more experimental strand of dubstep. Some tracks are there to work on the dancefloor and make people move....it is easy to forget that most people raving at FWD won't know a VST from an STD and as long as it makes them happy then who cares?

I think with the reaction it has provoked from people who maybe know a bit more about sound creation than the next man maybe we won't hear the same idea again....after all if the critics found this out and reviewed it badly it will have negative connetations for skream and the genre as a whole (seeing as journalists look at skream as the voice of dubstep quite often(!))....No point being embarrassed about a piece because you know you can do better and it would be just like the media to pick up on a point like this rather than look at the back catalogue. As much as it's wrong, journalists help/hinder record sales.

Jubz · Post by **Jubz** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:09 pm

threnody wrote:
Jubscarz wrote:Thats what its all about though, that is dubstep.
ERMMMMMMM.....Are you sure??? I didn't realise synthy sounds were dubstep.

Well I like that sound. How are they not dubstep?

forensix (mcr) · Post by **forensix (mcr)** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:11 pm

Engineering doesn't make people dance and most people dont give a fuck about presets

Jubz · Post by **Jubz** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:12 pm

I wasnt identifying synthy sounds as THE defining aesthetic of dubstep, but one of many that have come about in its development, one I like particularly. Understand?

threnody · Post by **threnody** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:14 pm

They are! As are other sounds... It isn't about the synth you use but how you use it..... Of course it is down to personal taste. Some like ragga, some like hard, some like deep, some like dark......

It all fits in.....There is no point in defining dubstep otherwise things get messy!!!

Maybe i took you point of '(synth sounds) are what dubstep is all about' out of context. All i was saying was that it isn't ALL about anything like the VST you you.

threnody · Post by **threnody** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:19 pm

Jubscarz wrote:I wasnt identifying synthy sounds as THE defining aesthetic of dubstep, but one of many that have come about in its development, one I like particularly. Understand?

Gotcha

On FoFo's point i reckpn that engineering can make people dance....If you get a great sound then it will stand out on the dancefloor...Horror Show for example. Also the structure of a track will help it flow on the floor. Making music is really all about engineering at base level as if you can't work the software everything will sound a bit 4,33 (without the concept!). Of course you need more than just engineering skills to make a good track....it simple really....The right elements (bass, drums, melody, atmosphere)....Some good sounds and a strong structure and a track will be good.

metalboxproducts · Post by **metalboxproducts** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:30 pm

ASC wrote:

Here's the thing - presets are there for a reason - to be used.

Not strictly true. I would say the reason for presets is to show off the cabability's of the synth.

Any way, whats the difference between using a preset and a sampled riff off a record/film/whatever? None. It's what you do with it.

tronman · Post by **tronman** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:35 pm

dont like the tune one bit

however

there is nothing wrong with presets

i'm pretty sure anti-war dub synth is a malstrom preset, and how sick is that?

thomas · Post by **thomas** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:42 pm

tronman wrote:
i'm pretty sure anti-war dub synth is a malstrom preset, and how sick is that?

I never liked it anyway..

forensix (mcr) · Post by **forensix (mcr)** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:08 pm

threnody wrote:On FoFo's point i reckpn that engineering can make people dance....If you get a great sound then it will stand out on the dancefloor...Horror Show for example. Also the structure of a track will help it flow on the floor. Making music is really all about engineering at base level as if you can't work the software everything will sound a bit 4,33 (without the concept!). Of course you need more than just engineering skills to make a good track....it simple really....The right elements (bass, drums, melody, atmosphere)....Some good sounds and a strong structure and a track will be good.

I dont want to see producers getting overly obsessed with engineering (neuro step anyone

); of course i dont want to hear badly produced tunes but one of the reasons i got into dubstep was it's raw sound.

bagelator · Post by **bagelator** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:25 pm

bagelator · Post by **bagelator** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:25 pm

bagelator wrote:
forensix (mcr) wrote: one of the reasons i got into dubstep was the raw bumlove i get when i'm twiddling knobs

errr

made me laugh anyway

dubwise_gamgee · Post by **dubwise_gamgee** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:34 pm

this is not solely about "engineering" (but it is a major reason for tracks that work on the dancefloor, if you compare bad ass skream tracks to any other "smaller" dubstep producer who doesn't mix and tweak that sick).

i'm not against the use of these live-sample-sounds (like horns, brass, etc) in dubstep. i think everybody should use everything, no formula, no nothing. i just wonder that a lot of tracks sound half-finished. for example, a certain brass lead line will sound dope on the dancefloor because it's loud, there's a massive beat and bass below it and nobody really gives a fuck as long as it rocks. still, it could be produced in a fashion where everything fits together. a lot of these "live"-sample sounds really just stand out from the overall vibe of the beat and bass.

coki - mood dub: this trumpet line sounds funny in a way, and might be cool in a dance, as a joke-ish use of melody, but it still sounds shit (in my personal opinion). the rest of the tune is heavy and that melody would be way better if replaced by either a live musician brass line or some tweaked synth melody. those weird live-not-live-sample-cd-instrument sounds really turn me off certain dubstep tunes (that otherwise would be heavyyyy)....

dmz - anti war dub: biiiig track. nothing to criticize, except... that muted trumpet line. i don't get it, the melody fits perfect to the mood but that sounds just kiilllls everything for me... why not get any trumpet player, pay him 50 euros for playing that with a realy muted trumpet. that track would be perfect by any means if that trumpet were real. sorry for criticizin one of the "holy" (hehe) tracks of dubstep but basically it just disappoints me that this part of the tune just messes it up (but only at the moment when the trumpet starts, the rest is pure heaviness)....

raw sound: well, there is a different between the "raw use of vsts and sample live instruments" and "raw madlib/dilla style beat programming and sampling".... everyone defines raw for himself, but some of these strange unfinished sounding dubstep tunes with funny use of live instrument samples don't sound "raw" at all... they sound waaayyyy to clean.
that's why "bad live instruments sounds from old 70ies/80ies synths" sound way rawer than these clean sample sounds. and those old sounds are really cool.
it's like producing a reggae or funky song with the computer, using only sampled instrument sounds (drums, bass, keys, brass, percussion). a really dope producer would use excellet sample cd's and program and mix so hard that you wouldn't realize it's purely digital when you hear it the first time (or maybe you'll never notice it).

weak production (from my point of view) is when you hear, almost instantly, that the producer has used some random and cheap sample cd-sound.
in the digital music world i believe that it's pretty much all about concealing the "true" identity of the sounds you use (especially when using vinyl samples or non-live programmed natural instruments). this is not always the case (e.g. an obviously cheap "piano" keyboard sound can sound excellent in a deep house, but it always depends on the vibe, the genre, the mix, etc etc)... hardly anybody can afford having live musicians play all the stuff for you so of course you'll use digital means to reproduce that. but, this last point varies all the time, i like analog, natural, organic sound, and of course also the new digital, clean, spaced out synth/effected computer sound... it just depends on how and when you use what.

pk- · Post by **pk-** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 4:47 pm

i like tunes, and i don't care how they're made. one of the things that sucked the joy out of dnb for me was the overanalysis of the production side of things, leading to a torrent of intricately produced but ultimately soulless music.

raw 'cheap' sounds have an attraction of their own, it's a bit presumptuous to assume they're used out of laziness

slothrop · Post by **slothrop** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 5:08 pm

I'd be pretty chuffed if I could write a tune as good as 2D with or without presets. A good producer uses whatever is available to them that'll make a good tune.

By the by, Sleng Teng wins it on the blatant use of presets front and is pretty much unfuckwithable.

Skream - 2D on SNL?

Who is online