Dubstepforum.com

Doesn't mean you can't experiment?
Listen to some of Distance's track, there's distorted guitars in there. Possibly the OP mean brutal as in just a heavier sound rather then the obvious mid-range thing you have at mind. As for mainstream, everything goes mainstream but doesn't mean we've don't have some real pioneers leading the way.

But yes, no screamo for me. I prefer to repress hormonal angst rather than listen to others complain about their latest Apple products failing and them ranting in a mic.

jaimelee wrote:Doesn't mean you can't experiment?
Listen to some of Distance's track, there's distorted guitars in there. Possibly the OP mean brutal as in just a heavier sound rather then the obvious mid-range thing you have at mind. As for mainstream, everything goes mainstream but doesn't mean we've don't have some real pioneers leading the way.

But yes, no screamo for me. I prefer to repress hormonal angst rather than listen to others complain about their latest Apple products failing and them ranting in a mic.

I totally agree with you on experimenting, but think of it like this; having a country-metal song. those two genres just don't go together. metal and dubstep are the same way. they just don't sound good together. as you said with guitars, that's fine. I've even been trying to find ways to throw them into my tracks, but I was referring to the vocals and drums of metal/screamo. imo those just don't fit with dubstep at all.

and btw, I respect you for still having hope in dubstep even though I think it's going downhill fast with all these "kids trying to out filth eachother. - datsik"

I've no hope for the genre at all, I enjoy making music is all.

Just going to continue creating my own idea of music and it might be classed as this or that genre but it's just music to me.
Also going to continue listening and searching for music I like aswell. Think that's the best idea for now.

jaimelee wrote:I've no hope for the genre at all, I enjoy making music is all.

Just going to continue creating my own idea of music and it might be classed as this or that genre but it's just music to me.
Also going to continue listening and searching for music I like aswell. Think that's the best idea for now.

word. more power to ya my man

Synths = Dimension Expander (but not too much) in Massive and mess around with the envelope.
Plugins = Camelphat, boost mecha slightly to 5%
Drums = transient shaper, occasional slight camelphat mecha, adaptive limiter

I don't get camelphat, well I understand it well enough, just don't get why people are so fond of it. And transient shapers don't make much of a difference to me either

raige wrote:...

id have to disagree tho...

first of, a genres essence doesn't necessarily lie in the most obvious aspects of its aesthetic... i can think of millions of examples of cross-genre songs... that don't necessarily imply a crude clash between say, a jazz lick and an acid bassline...

a rock song could be mixed like a hip hop record.. a house album could develop itself like a classical symphony... and an r&b record could include elements from heavy metal...

now, who will argue that there is no link between the sudden popularity of brostep amongst wasp middle class kids from the us and the music their parents/big brothers/sisters used to listen to? (namely hard rock) things are way more linked then we seem to think... anyways.. most of mainstream musical forms of our era are subgenres of the blues, to me at least.. there has to be some type of link between them...

secondly, dub is not old school dubstep.

just needed to regulate, no hatred intended.

zerbaman wrote:I don't get camelphat, well I understand it well enough, just don't get why people are so fond of it. And transient shapers don't make much of a difference to me either

I use cAmelphat more for leads,pads,vocals etc Camel crushe is better for drums. Yes I know phat is crusher just with more options, but crusher sounds better to me for some reason

zerbaman wrote:And transient shapers don't make much of a difference to me either

Like I said above its all about the signal chain..

Try this on a drum bus...

Compressor : use it at around a medium ratio of compression - bring down bad transients.
Exciter : Make your highs a bit brighter.
Limiter : Use one with saturation if not crank it untill it starts sounding bad (then bring it back a little)
Transient Shaper : To bring back some of the life from drum bus but with more control.
EQ : if needed.

It'll make much more sense.

Filled out and thick is what you're after...and the guys have already suggested things-but brutal...can be defined in many ways...some of them not good.

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

Medik wrote:

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

they muddy up the sound, and in the end, just do not sound as good as if you had done it manually by panning (in my experience). sometimes an expander you can yield good results, but tube dist, chorus/phaser/flanger, reverb, filter movement, different layers panned slightly off center... it just works so much better.

oh, and the obvious. once you bounce a track with that stereo plug, it's stuck like that forever. and if you resample, it could be annoying and lead to extra work - when compared to panning, which you can change at any time during your resampling process.

bassinine wrote:

Medik wrote:

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

they muddy up the sound, and in the end, just do not sound as good as if you had done it manually by panning (in my experience). sometimes an expander you can yield good results, but tube dist, chorus/phaser/flanger, reverb, filter movement, different layers panned slightly off center... it just works so much better.

I normally make frequencies below about 250hz mono, does this mean I'd have to frequency split things doing it this way?

only if you're putting it on a master or resampling midrange. but i generally only put stereo effects on tracks that are already highpassed around there.

Medik wrote:

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

Phase correlation in mono.

Basic A wrote:

Medik wrote:

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

Phase correlation in mono.

+ a pretty blurry, unfocused and non optimal stereo image / false impression of width...

Ldizzy wrote:

Basic A wrote:

Medik wrote:

legend4ry wrote: Stereo width plugins are shit - i'm sorry but they are, if a sound has more than one layer, bounce them individually and pan them to different sides slightly, maybe automate the pan on your DAW - I find you'll always run into problems with bloating everything with stereo width plugins.

May I ask why they're shit? I thought they just did that panning without you having to actually bounce and individually pan.
What problems do you run into? At the moment I'm using a stereo width plugin on pretty much everything, that's why I ask.

Phase correlation in mono.

+ a pretty blurry, unfocused and non optimal stereo image / false impression of width...

Ok cheers guys. When double tracking and panning the same sound will I need to invert the phase of one of them for it to work?

if i got u right... exactly the opposite...

hardpanning two sounds and inverting the phase of one, then summing to mono, would result in no sound at all.

Better sound design, better sample choice, wiser EQing, full atmosphere, Wiser use of reverb. Pretty much if you want your track to be better, you have to practice and be creative.

legend4ry wrote:

zerbaman wrote:And transient shapers don't make much of a difference to me either

Like I said above its all about the signal chain..

Try this on a drum bus...

Compressor : use it at around a medium ratio of compression - bring down bad transients.
Exciter : Make your highs a bit brighter.
Limiter : Use one with saturation if not crank it untill it starts sounding bad (then bring it back a little)
Transient Shaper : To bring back some of the life from drum bus but with more control.
EQ : if needed.

It'll make much more sense.

No, I get how they work and what they're for, but I think I could do just as well with out really. But I follow all of those processes (I get the same results, but in a different way), like EQ for brightening, when making drum&bass, I just use a high-passed break with some reverb on it.
I've only used transient shapers on individual hits though, like when I send all my kicks or snares to one mixer track, use it there, before routing to the final drum bus.