Dubstepforum.com

Paulie wrote:

baz wrote:what sort of mastering is done to a tune before it's cut to dubplate? is it much like the mastering a tune gets before a "proper" vinyl release?

Depends who/where does it. They certainly don't spend as long as they (in my experience) do for a proper release.

reza wrote:dubplates? all about CDs these days as far as I can make out...

In the real world, you're right.

yeah, I mean there's more 'warmth' on vinyl/acetate as opposed to cd, granted, but there's also a cost issue to consider...

having said that, interesting point above about dubplates as 'A&R' for labels, the decision to cut etc

Yeh I'm not convinced about that A&R thing though. Why put the decisions in the hands of a bunch of clueless DJs, most of whom are just interested in the new Coki beat?

Unfortunately too many labels go down that route.

you not feeling Coki paul?

Coki's heavy! But it's not good when everyone's on one sound.

Paulie wrote:Coki's heavy! But it's not good when everyone's on one sound.

I think its Brilliant! makes for plenty of opportunity.

when 5 dj's are all in on one sound...how can that be a problem?

^^^you are kidding aren't you seckle ???

dubmugga wrote:^^^you are kidding aren't you seckle ???

i'm not. if you and five of your friends have the same dub, then if you had the skills you'd learn how to use that dub wisely. if everyone's into the same sound, and everyone has the same tunes, then the only way you'll stand out is by your skills on the decks. selection is everything.

oh right...

...I thought you meant like say hardhouse where every tune is basically constructed the same way with almost the same sounds at the same tempo using the same beat so any fool can mix them together in any combination and it wouldn't matter to the general public

and the next DJ stepping up would be on that tip as well so you wouldn't get the variety and diversity of sound because the DJ's have limited themselves to only that sound...

..and selection means nothing

dubmugga wrote:oh right...

...I thought you meant like say hardhouse where every tune is basically constructed the same way with almost the same sounds at the same tempo using the same beat so any fool can mix them together in any combination and it wouldn't matter to the general public

and the next DJ stepping up would be on that tip as well so you wouldn't get the variety and diversity of sound because the DJ's have limited themselves to only that sound...

..and selection means nothing

right, well in my mind selection is everything. you can be diverse within one type of sound. teasing, double drops...etc. lot's of ways.

but what of the everlasting dub?

all the satisfaction and sound of vinyl, very little high end loss, mix on any setup, that little bit of extra hardware oomph in mastering on your cd mixes, no needle skipping on fingerprints at inopertune moments and 30 - 40 quids not too bad for four tunes you'll have forever (especially if their yours)

Paulie wrote:

orson wrote:

UFO over easy wrote:

dubmugga wrote: Y: Each to their own but to be honest, it aint even a case of whether you prefer CD or dubplate; it actually sounds better on a dub and that's the bottom line. Dubplate sounds better, someone's mastered it for you more or less, whereas if you play it straight from a CD, it hasn't been touched. The benefit of having a dubplate is that you've got sound through a needle which is totally different to a digital sound and you've got the bonus of a dub being warm. All of them things just piss over CD.

Maybe that'd be true if he started cutting dubs somewhere that doesn't completely kill the top end and make it sound like pillow case music.

yo ufo .. where you get that from ??? .. to me youngstas dubs sound good .. i mean the whole dunbstep allstars mix by him was mixed with dubs .. right .. and they sound great if you compare them to the actual vinyl release's like the d1 or neverland tune

You reckon dubs sound better than finished vinyl?


Sorry, no.


And, yes, badly cut dubs often omit a lot of top end.

nah didnt say that dubs sound better then the finished vinyl .. i was just comparing the sound on the youngsta mix cd to the finished vinyl . seen

and to be honest if you do a good cut .. and play back the master laquer which obviously is the dubplate .. it sounds better then the fabricated vinyl .. as it is a few steps closer to the original .. no galvanisation, stamping etc

i hear both sides of the CD v dubplates argument, but speaking strictly about the sonics, its undenyably true that when DJs like SLT Mob or Plasticman come on at DMZ with CDs...

1. it's about 30% louder
2. the sounds is more mid and hi end focused which reduces the weight and impact of the sub bass

and possibly...

3. the sound is warmer.

tho the latter is more marginal.

orson wrote:

Paulie wrote:

orson wrote:

UFO over easy wrote:

dubmugga wrote: Y: Each to their own but to be honest, it aint even a case of whether you prefer CD or dubplate; it actually sounds better on a dub and that's the bottom line. Dubplate sounds better, someone's mastered it for you more or less, whereas if you play it straight from a CD, it hasn't been touched. The benefit of having a dubplate is that you've got sound through a needle which is totally different to a digital sound and you've got the bonus of a dub being warm. All of them things just piss over CD.

Maybe that'd be true if he started cutting dubs somewhere that doesn't completely kill the top end and make it sound like pillow case music.

yo ufo .. where you get that from ??? .. to me youngstas dubs sound good .. i mean the whole dunbstep allstars mix by him was mixed with dubs .. right .. and they sound great if you compare them to the actual vinyl release's like the d1 or neverland tune

You reckon dubs sound better than finished vinyl?


Sorry, no.


And, yes, badly cut dubs often omit a lot of top end.

nah didnt say that dubs sound better then the finished vinyl .. i was just comparing the sound on the youngsta mix cd to the finished vinyl . seen

and to be honest if you do a good cut .. and play back the master laquer which obviously is the dubplate .. it sounds better then the fabricated vinyl .. as it is a few steps closer to the original .. no galvanisation, stamping etc

...for the first few plays, maybe. And they don't generally spend as long mastering... Anyway.........

and mr shitmat's comment on dubplates:
http://guerrilla.pl/gf/dubplate_business.mp3

r33lc4sh wrote:and mr shitmat's comment on dubplates:
http://guerrilla.pl/gf/dubplate_business.mp3

Great track... Great Album... bring on the Shitmat...

Blackdown wrote:i hear both sides of the CD v dubplates argument, but speaking strictly about the sonics, its undenyably true that when DJs like SLT Mob or Plasticman come on at DMZ with CDs...

1. it's about 30% louder
2. the sounds is more mid and hi end focused which reduces the weight and impact of the sub bass

and possibly...

3. the sound is warmer.

tho the latter is more marginal.

CDs warmer than vinyl? That's the first time i've ever heard that. The nature of analog (tape, vinyl, valve) is to introduce harmonic distortion to the audio. People invariably describe this harmonic distortion as making the music sound "warmer". There are complicated reasons for this to do with harmonics, unsurprisingly, which i would need the assistance of a text book to explain. long.

CDs work by making staggered digital estimations of the waveform, the result being a step like waveform rather than a inflinitely smooth analog waveform (as produced by nature, vinyl, tape etc). The stepped waveform is then digitally smoothed off. Because of this process, huge amount of audio information is discarded in the coding of real audio into 16bit 44.1 khz CD quality digital audio, and he reuslt is a colder, shallower sound than tape or vinyl.

but 99% of people dont notice hear the difference.

the main reason why CDs sometimes sound weak when DJs play them is because the tune hasnt been mastered, or even limited. When you cut a dub at transition, the guy puts a thousands of pounds of mastering equipment (manley eqs, compressors, limiters) and years of practice into making it sound heavy as possible. This has far more effect on the sound than the vinyl itself. Anyone can d/l the plug ins to do a decent job of it themsleves tho, with a bit of practice.

at this moment in time, i use both cd and dubplate. i like the sound and aesthetic of vinyl more than cd, but dubplates are expensive and impracticle. And knackered dubs sound worse than MP3.

vxd1 - any advice for outboard when playing digital live? Obviously I don't really want to hulk a huge valve compressor around, but the terrible digital hi end I get is pissing me off, never mind the trainspotters in the sound box! any specific plugins you can recommend?

Other than doing a better mix down, if you want a quick fix and are playing live (and have a laptop to run from / through), this is pretty good at giving a more 'analogue' sound - and it's free -

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/vinyl/

andythetwig wrote:vxd1 - any advice for outboard when playing digital live? Obviously I don't really want to hulk a huge valve compressor around, but the terrible digital hi end I get is pissing me off, never mind the trainspotters in the sound box! any specific plugins you can recommend?

if you're playing your own productions than the best place to start is with by doing a good mixdown on a decent pair of moniters. If you have no outbaord at your home studio, then analog-modelling plug ins like PSP or the Universal Audio plugs can help massively, as does using decent EQ, such as Waves Renaissance, or logic channel eq. Shitty eqs (fruity loops, old cubase) make for horrible top end.

But if you can get the promotor to sort u out with a decent CDJ and even better, a decent desk, that will help