i vary my decay and attack. even though it's quantized, there's still a little bit of timing that won't match up precisely.

midi that is quantized for me, just serves as a trigger. you can adjust the feel of the instrumentation by the various settings you have available to you.

plus the different attack times help layer your sounds. this is helps eliminate building up transients in one area.

people can dance with out drums.

drums are there just to characterize the rhythm and makes it easier to dance to.

you can have instruments that carry the rhythm in certain ways. It just might not have the same impact as a kick and snare would.

Music production encompasses many aspects of the musical realm.

If you aren't well versed in at least one or many of the sides of music,  you'll going to have to grind through a ton of stuff to get the idea of one thing.

it's taken me six year and a few gear upgrades to fully undrestand and learn the technical side of music production.

So keep that in mind.

Seven months ain't a pimple on the ass of the life time spent in the journey of this art form.

take it slow, compartmentalize your problems, and work on things as they come. take notes and be diligent.

i also suggest you consider an academic route and self learning if you plan on making this a career.

Yes.

an interface allows you to record, given you have enough pre amps to go with those inputs.

an amplifier just sends power to your headphones or w/e. and in that case, the interface does that as well.

I am unsure of the sonic properties of an amplifier, but it seems that it might be colored given certain features and components of the amp itself (ie, if it has eq or w/e).

Get an interface dude, unless you just want to be an audiophile.

From the way he describes it, the EQ is on the sound being sidechained, not the sounds (kick and snare) triggering the sidechain.

I didn't quite see that with the given examples.

Thank you for clarifying.

If the EQ is on the sound that's being side chained, the only effect it will bring would be as if you just threw an EQ and started altering that effect.



That leads me to believe that the side chain compressor location is what might alter your sound in a way that i've described in the previous post. But that's dependent upon certain processing of effects and what not.

The only difference in the above statement would be how drastic effects are being played out given where the side chain is located in the signal chain. and this is an extremely subtle effect.

Consider your effects chain and what you're actually trying to achieve.

i'll explain this with distortion and reverb.

The differences between a distorted reverb and a distortion that's being reverb hold different properties and are much different.


If you want to get reverb that has the characteristics of some kind of distortion, lets say tape. Then you'd apply a reverb unit then the tape distortion in order to get a reverb that has been recorded on to tape or is being distorted by tape.

The other way around, a distortion unit that has reverb being applied to it, is slightly different. In this case, it's as if you're taking a distorted signal and adding reverb to it.



Back to the topic.

It depends on what you want to do with your signal and how you want it to effect the processing, as i've stated before. So do you want to have a pre-eq effect, where as your EQ would shape the frequency content that the side chain is being effected? or do you want to process the signal after the channel is side chained?

in this case, you must look to your side chain channel and ask yourself if you want to effect that particular signal in a PRE or POST effect fashion.

the PRE and POST settings are also useful for sends/return, auxiliary, and buss effects (just to throw out as many names for them as possible).


Go do some research on PRE and POST signal processing and apply it to your question that you have. when you apply and experiment, you will have a better understanding.

Quote from: Mussar on July 05, 2016, 06:31:53 am

Except we don't live in a "creative space", we live in reality. My art is inspired by the world around me, and the world around me contains unfortunate levels of disparity due to systematic factors. My "creative space" is designed by the truth, and I don't shy away from it. While I'm writing this right now, I can see a man outside my window sleeping on the street. Are you really trying to tell me that he's there because he "failed to apply himself"? Are you really trying to get me to buy that because you're "aggravated" by the truth, that you somehow get to dismiss the indisputable facts of the world at large?

Child, please.

I don't care about your inspiration. It seems your reality only serves your own insecurities about success, so if you fail you can blame it on "disparity" and the "truth" of how the world works.

And yes, that man (barring medical limitations) is on the street because he failed to provide for himself. Doesn't take any amount of intelligence to figure that out. Are you implying he got there by accident? That he was born on the street and never thought to take care of himself? There are a lot of homeless people in my city, and you know what? The vast majority I've spoken to say they chose to be homeless because they enjoy the freedom. 

Everyone has the same opportunity to make a life for themselves. Whether we get there or not is completely based on the choices we make. It seems you believe the system's rigged, anyone who isn't raised with privilege has next to zero opportunity, and that somehow by pointing out the struggles of those people-which you can in no way sympathize with behind your macbook at a Starbucks-you're on their side. By giving credence to the notion that inequality plays any sort of significant factor in success, you continue to give power to that same thing you claim to be so passionately against.

If every one has a choice, then that means they have as much power over you as you have of yourself.

so then your argument is nullified by the fact of the individual's choice.

"Good" is subjective, technically proficient is objective.

Technically proficient can be objectively analyzed - utilizing music theory or a synthesizer in a way that could not be achieved by a novice, an understanding of the proper use of EQ and compression, or possessing the ability to play an instrument or sing well. We can compare scientific details, like a lack of unwanted phasing or noise, a higher perceived degree of loudness without a loss in clarity or dynamics, or a "clean" mix with no undesired masking of frequencies. All you need is another song that has a better metric in the category you're looking for.

Good is entirely based on your taste and your perception. Whether your mixdown is cleanly divided like a well crafted prackage or blending together like the ingredients in a cake to end up warm and delicious; whether your sounds are heavily distorted or pure and clean; whether that melody should be quantized to the grid or left a little sloppy. These are questions you'll have to ask yourself, and this is where you need to start looking into yourself and looking into your past. What do your inspirations sound like? What sort of music did you listen to as a child, and how did that sound? What were the sounds of the city or town you lived in? What were the sounds of your school? Of your friends, or family?

All in all, the goal is to remember that you do not exist inside of a vacuum, and that other people are your reference point.

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuk


you transcendental space goat.