Dubstepforum.com

so i have really gotten use to frequency spiting my bass and effecting it but i always have a really low frequency mixer track that hits at the 25 to 80hz range
so i guess i am wondering why i would then add a sub bass when the tune already hits those frequency's

does it compare to a sine wave bassline or is it a bit weaker?
that's the question and answer
you're dealing with feeling vibration freqs not audible as much

the tune in my sig is one i just did yesterday with the same setting that i am talking about tell me if you think it sounds weak

controlling it as a completely different instrument
that's my main reason

Yeah the bass does sound really weak, I'm working on a shit tune that uses a seperate sine for the bass and it's just easier to get it sounding right because you can control the levels a lot better when it's a seperate element.

DJ Crackle wrote:controlling it as a completely different instrument
that's my main reason

This, but not a different instrument, more a different patch.

So, like for 3xOsc I'll have 4 instances;

1) Low freq (generic Wub_reese patch)
2) Mid freq (generic Wub_reese patch)
3) High freq (generic Wub_reese patch)
4) Sub Bass (generic Wub_subbass patch)

All of these are controller via a Layer, with each individual channel running into it's own channel on the mixer, effects added as required, then pumped into a Bass Bus which is the output.

The Wub_subbass patch is basically 2 sine wave generating oscs with a bit of movement to give it some feel.

^ Seems a lot cleaner/safer than freq splitting spectrally rich content. Freq splitting requires some rational forethought if you want to maximize headroom and clarity.

i think the sub bass freqs from your main bass would not be clear as a separate sub bass. The lfo modulation and effects you apply to the other frequencies do affect the lower freqs/sub regardless of you separating them with eq. YOu can hear that when you solo the sub bass track.

ok i see well on a simaler note i just messing around a few min ago and made this it is a right nasty sub bass patch for flstudio beep map any one want it super sub.fst - 0.33MB

A pure sine wav will always rattle the subs more than a harmonically complex bass. It's basic physics - subs move much more easily with a pure sine than anything else so the reproduction will always be more true. This is why it's generally better to cut the sub bass from your sample/synth and reproduce the bass freqs with a pure sub bass. But as stated and restated, I don't care if you have to turn the knob around backwards, if it sounds good, it is good

Where are people cutting their frequencies off at, out of interest? I can normally get a pretty nice lows/mids but the highs always seem to turn into shrill noise regardless of weather I use any distortion on the initial patch...

JemGrover wrote:Where are people cutting their frequencies off at, out of interest? I can normally get a pretty nice lows/mids but the highs always seem to turn into shrill noise regardless of weather I use any distortion on the initial patch...

Approximately;

Low - 1 filter, low pass @ 150-200hz

Mid - 1 filter, high pass @ 150-200hz, 1 filter low pass @ 3.5khz

High - 1 filter, high pass @ 4.2khz

Sub (if required) - same as Low


Then running to different channels, efx, EQ, bus, blah blah blah.


[The above values are rough approximations and subject to change depending on the bass sound]

I'm telling you mate - try using a pure sub if you havnt before. It'll make you XD

decklyn wrote:A pure sine wav will always rattle the subs more than a harmonically complex bass. It's basic physics - subs move much more easily with a pure sine than anything else so the reproduction will always be more true. This is why it's generally better to cut the sub bass from your sample/synth and reproduce the bass freqs with a pure sub bass. But as stated and restated, I don't care if you have to turn the knob around backwards, if it sounds good, it is good

Wait, are you saying that pure sines are always more powerful than bass with harmonics?

decklyn wrote:A pure sine wav will always rattle the subs more than a harmonically complex bass. It's basic physics - subs move much more easily with a pure sine than anything else so the reproduction will always be more true. This is why it's generally better to cut the sub bass from your sample/synth and reproduce the bass freqs with a pure sub bass. But as stated and restated, I don't care if you have to turn the knob around backwards, if it sounds good, it is good

ill say it depends on the sound but i mostly use a separate channel for my subbass underneither everything else, seems to hit harder in the lowend and also helps me organize my workflow.

was fucking with different waveforms for subbass last night, triangle under my midrange was rumbling the fucking walls.

wub wrote:

JemGrover wrote:Where are people cutting their frequencies off at, out of interest? I can normally get a pretty nice lows/mids but the highs always seem to turn into shrill noise regardless of weather I use any distortion on the initial patch...

Approximately;

Low - 1 filter, low pass @ 150-200hz

Mid - 1 filter, high pass @ 150-200hz, 1 filter low pass @ 3.5khz

High - 1 filter, high pass @ 4.2khz

Sub (if required) - same as Low


Then running to different channels, efx, EQ, bus, blah blah blah.


[The above values are rough approximations and subject to change depending on the bass sound]

phasing

people who use different waveforms for sub bass don't really understand how it works. by using a different waveform all your doing is introducing higher frequency harmonics, it won't add to the sub bass at all, and if you play it through a low passed subwoofer the harmonics will just be filtered out again anyway.

DJ Crackle wrote:controlling it as a completely different instrument
that's my main reason

I do both but this is the reason I would have a separate one sometimes. Say you've got a nice reese with all its effects and modulations and then you throw it through a low-pass filter to give it its main shape, then you'll more then likely have the point of resonance of that filter flying all over the shop, where as with my sub I like to have a little resonance around the 50 Hz area to get everything shaking. So thats why I'd use two separate ones

VirtualMark wrote:people who use different waveforms for sub bass don't really understand how it works. by using a different waveform all your doing is introducing higher frequency harmonics, it won't add to the sub bass at all, and if you play it through a low passed subwoofer the harmonics will just be filtered out again anyway.

since thats aimed at me ill say that i fully understand how it works boss

back2onett wrote: Wait, are you saying that pure sines are always more powerful than bass with harmonics?

decklyn wrote: if it sounds good, it is good

Hes right about the physics of subs, you have to realize your speakers are an oscillating object. Imaging if everytime your car pistons went to the top of the cylinder, they had to bounce up and down a bit before they came back down to rest. Yeah things will be more interesting I guess but shitll still run funny.

In the end though, I almost never use PURE sines, I tint everything, so Im none to talk, Im just backing his physics, pure sines vs. warm ones, fuck em, do what feels good n makes shit rumble... that use your ears... stop saying that with subs... use your chest.