Yea, i am a little plain and basic lol.



Those are some slick fucking rooms though dude.


I see your point in how the environment will shape your vibe, and that is very important aspect to consider.


Idk man, if you try to get some where along the lines of those rooms i'd say go for it. They seem to be a really good source to consider when designing your room.


PS; i never really got the whole concept of home furniture stuff or w/e

I definitely think I'm creating complexities for complex sake. I've only recently learn that less is more with production and I guess that could be applied to sound design. I really love interesting sound design and I really love sound design in general given that its not making me frustrated.

There is a production school in my city but I'm not sure if I'll be able to afford a lesson on recording and stuff. Maybe someday I'll go there to learn some stuff. I'm pretty good at teaching myself stuff though. I've taught myself like 3 programming languages and I've been teaching myself how to produce music.

And can I ask what are the basic elements of a lead sound. Like what makes a synth a lead synth? Maybe if I grasp a better understanding of what a lead is I should be able to make them better.

Thanks for all the help as well man, hope those mechanical engineering question wont too hard aha.

All of those MCHE questions suck. But w/e, it's fun.

The basic elements of a lead sound come from the octave range that the synth is playing. If you're thinking of a synth that's super high pitch, you only got a portion of the picture.

I feel that's where it best define's it's purpose for it's description. If you go so low, it'd be classified as a bass.

If you look at the orchestral instrumentation frequency chart, i am sure you'll recognize the varying ranges in which the components of an orchestra operate in. The differences of the instruments give you different effects and feeling when playing a certain piece of music because of this.  If you consider how a composer makes the music for that particular situation, you'll have a better understanding of how your music can mix itself, before you start to apply any other more modern "mixing" tools.

And this circles back to basics in understanding frequency content of the sound you're working with and designing. There's natural tendencies that occur over a range in octave position, that you need to account for. Every thing else is secondary and used to "enhance" what is already there;enhancement is good or bad given the context of what you're goals are.

You just need to understand your reference point when you're making the music and understand how the sound can best fit it's role.

Also, you don't necessarily need to go to mixing school or w/e to get this information, it'll help, but it depends on what you want out of it. Not to mention, if you have to be really invested as a student if you want all the good details. I'd still suggest a cheaper alternative if you're not going to commit to being a student....

There's tons of stuff online, and if you have the capacity to teach programming languages, then you have the capacity to figure out what you're doing wrong. The only difference is that your self guided attempts will probably elongate the time at which you can gain applicable knowledge.



TL;DR

Go over frequency chart, consider the context of an orchestra, consider how you can apply that concept to your music, keep it simple, work your way up from simple decisions.

Complexity is the illusion masters have over the student. Often times the master seeks a simple and elegant solution, given the amount of understanding they have. You foundation is the most important part of your way, Strengthen your foundation and understanding so that if you do have a problem like this again, you'll have a better time processing it.

I listen to my music constantly after i am done making it, because i have to go through the masters and make sure that there's no things i've missed.

But yea, i get sick and tired of it when they pass the critical listening test.

I do go back over my tunes from time to time after a few months of release or years, depending on when it's was actually finalized and no other work is being done on it.

It's a good way to consider a fresh perspective for yourself if you're analyzing yourself. It works in the same way why you listen to other people.

You get a reference point based on others, and you can get a reference point based on yourself.

1.Use EQ to shape and taper the frequency content of your instruments. If you're having trouble with to much, take away.

2. Detuning doesn't make the sound less harsh man, you're making the harsh sound more processed......Learn better technical skills to achieve a result that's coherent to the result that you want.

3. Look at a frequency spectrum chart of instrumentation, and understand the range at which instruments operate. This should give you some idea as to better understand and utilize the sounds that make the most sense for any tune. Orchestral instrumentation.

4. Chill out and keep doing it, I had a hard time doing stuff and putting things together when I first started. Six years later, I can literally make a whole tune in four hours.


I'd also suggest to be more simplistic in your approach, adding more layers on top of stuff doesn't really make sense if you're unsatisfied with one particular instance of the sound.......It's like adding roses to a big pile of shit in hopes that the big pile of shit will smell differently...... It's easier to just start off with one rose and smell it for all it's worth.

I prefer to bounce a track dry.. or as dry as possible. I almost always feel the need to tweak it at some point. If you find yourself bouncing a lot to save cpu, try to develop a habit of using return/fx tracks so that when you do bounce something it isn't completely permanent. It leaves room for tweaking among other benefits in processing the effects on certain chains or instruments.

"I ask because i've heard taking the delays and reverbs off may keep it cleaner and less messy, and the synth reverb won't class with your bus reverb."

In many ways this is true; especially when dealing with effects that don't have much eq offerings, or something you'd like to make a tweak on that you can't within the VST itself. This is a minor thing though and if you are still new to things can be more complicated than you need to make it.

This sounds so douchey but it is just something that starts to click at some point and you eventually will discover when it will benefit you more than just placing an effect on the main track. It's a per application thing.

You can still have a per instrument effect if you organize your group properly. You can get a much more rich sound than if you were to just limit yourself to the mixer busses.

Then you can render out that entire group and you have "your sound", and can mix it. If you need to adjust something you can always rerender if you find that the effect balance is to much or to little.

http://www.classicalmusicguide.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=39706


Consider this forum topic.


I find that a lot of the problems associated with musicians and music producers (electronic namely) is that they might not considering the point at which they want to be, rather than where they are now. It's a tough pill to swallow and understand a current state, because that's mundane and you're doing it. so to alleviate that you think ahead of yourself and that might get you down.

what type of character and techniques you're putting into your music will have that sort of projection. If you automate the shit out of your project, quantize every little thing, tempo synch rhythmic effects and synth parameters, then yea you're going to have a pretty robotic sound with out a whole lot of wiggle room.

It can be good or warranted in some cased, but you really have to decide how you like things in terms of sonic/musical content, and understand how you need to get there.

That's a more poetic answer, based on what you've described and hinted towards.

if you're worried about maintaining energy in your tune, then that's an arrangement problem.

If you don't like what you've made, then that might be a confidence issue.

and to be honest, you wouldn't be worried about the "momentum" of the song, once you understand arrangement.

with the computer music and lack of live performance at hand, you're not actually working on maintaining energy while you're playing. So the energy is kept and maintain in different aspects with in the song and as the live performance shifts to a much different perspective.

Since you're not having to maintain the energy with a live instrument, the song/arrangement (maybe mix or w/e), carries much more weight in a live setting.

aside from what you posted, it's tough to decipher exactly what you mean and are having problems with because the question and topic at hand is very vague. It almost seems cherry picked from buzzwords and then assigned to what ever issue you're having.




You also have to understand the type of music you're dealing with, and understand the type of music you want to make. Then you will have to consider the tools you'll need (or some alternatives in the digital realm;made easy by computers) to get to the point that you can generate your own style with out having to deal with these small doubts (it manifests in lack of confidence, technical ability, practice, or physical ability if you're not of age to actually be able to perform the piece of music [think of small children learning to play]).

But in the case of momentum when it comes electronic production, it's seems to me that it's associated with arrangement. If you get tired after a certain point, stop that part and go into something else.

You also, could need to find a stopping point for the project. after you've listen to the same thing over and over again, you get fucking tired of it. Don't let that bias sit with you for very long.




TL;DR

this might be a arrangement issue or it's a time management issue that forces you to believe/think that this song isn't working the way it should.

it also might manifest it's self in the way you chosen to create the song via automation of effect and synth parameters, quantize, and lack of dynamics of individual notes and arrangement.

Consider all of the different angles of your problem, and see if they tie into one another. Then form a solution to help you over come these problems in the future.

remember the fundamentals you set for yourself in regards to your creative process, and you won't have problems like this exist (they'll still be there, but you'd have eliminated them quick enough for them to not manifest itself in the form of this particular forum post).

Why not make a single cut of its layers of super saw arriving only 14800 Hz and white noise, add it from the 15000 hz up to 16000 hz which is the audible range, apply a compressor multiband to white noise and adjust volume to ensure its place in the mix of all the remaining synths 
I hope that my friend works for you, try it can be the difference

You're reaching the upper limits of hearing to some people if you're low cutting your white noise at that level.

And it won't really add that much.

You can get a nice blend between the two if you give the white noise less of a low cut and the super saws more of a high cut.

the unwanted and wanted frequencies will blend in better, especially if you're adjusting the volume of the layers appropriately (bias towards what's important to give you a better sum from the sources).

If you're to controlling in your approach, you don't really have a whole lot of nuanced character that often times makes up the sound.

But, that's a tricky subject to consider with EQ and popular EDM genres, because it certain things do sound controlled and tight to get that visceral feeling and clarity.

make sure you're using the right tape...but idk if that has any thing to do with it..

Good luck.