Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - sleepy

Pages: [1]
Finished Tracks / [Electro?] Masai
« on: January 31, 2016, 05:15:05 am »
I know no one's really been adopting my system for feedback, but I still think it's good so I'll keep using it :P

I've left feedback for Cosmic Fugue and Lydian

Here's my track!!!

I started this one last summer because I was angry that I didn't make it past the auditions for a certain contest. Kinda angsty vibe to it I guess.

I'm particularly interested in feedback on my sound design, mixing, the structure and arrangement of the song, the melody/chords, and any emotions you felt while listening. Any other feedback is welcome too :)

Sound Design / The Main Synth in "Not in Love" by Crystal Castles
« on: January 25, 2016, 11:23:06 pm »
Here's the original song, sound comes in at about 0:57.

Here's my remake attempt (not the best tbh).

What's missing, how would you guys approach this sound?

What do you guys know about Ethan's sound design?

edit: I thought I should maybe include a few more details. Here's a comparison between the same sections of each on a spectrum analyzer:

There are some areas in the upper mids (or highs?) that have more harmonic content in the original (right side). What could be the cause of this? Obviously the sound has somewhat of a different character, I'd like to hear what you guys think the sound's quality is based on.

Sound Design / Weird, Unique, Non-Standard Plugins for Sound Design
« on: January 18, 2016, 03:08:54 am »
I'm looking for stuff that specializes in something that isn't super common, or is just a standard Synth or other sound design utility (sampler, effect, etc), with a not-so-standard function that can be really useful.

An example that I've seen mentioned on the forum is PaulStretch, which can stretch a sound up to like 10,000x or some crazy number like that, while still making the sound useable by using spectral smoothing or something weird like that. There are tons of plugins that can stretch sound, but with extreme stretches the sound generally loses its integrity, and I've yet to see another that stretches it for as much as paulstretch.

Things like that.

How does it work?

I know it's only available to read online, but why? Can it be converted to pdf? Does it include videos? How is the book organized?

Mainly doing this for demonstration purposes.

I've left feedback for darkanddarkmusic and pyr_ice.

Here's my track

This is the 1st out of 10 tracks I've commited to finishing before I release anything publicly. I'd like to know what you guys think of my sound design, arrangement, mixing, musicality (aka how does the song make you feel?) and anything else that stands out. Also, I know the saws sound like they're clipping, but does that mean they sound bad?


R&A Graveyard / "Finished Tracks" Section Sucks rn
« on: January 09, 2016, 08:29:00 am »
I already PM'd ninth parallel about this, but I wanna know what you guys think.

Right now the Finished Tracks and WIP sections have the most posts, but least amount of replies. It's pretty much just a bunch of people posting their tracks and waiting for replies. Not super conducive to discussion. Why don't we update the description here to make it so that every person who posts a track has to leave feedback for 2 or 3 others? That way the board doesn't get all saturated with dead posts, and people have an incentive to leave feedback. The person posting the track would link to their feedback as proof on their own post. Posts that don't get deleted. The r/edmproduction feedback threads on Reddit kinda work this way and the outcome is mostly positive.

I think it's a simple fix, as the forum layout stays the same. All that changes is the description on the introduction to that board.
I've seen the same things popping up frequently, so I've decided to update this post to provide a more thorough outline of what I'm suggesting:

Things wrong with the "Finished Tracks" and "WIPs" sections:

  • More people posting tracks for feedback than people posting feedback
  • Therefore, many posts with very little if any responses
  • People posting tracks for review without contributing anywhere else in the forum (post count <10)
  • Some feedback that people leave isn't exactly relevant to the needs of the person posting (e.g. getting feedback for mixing when you're really looking for advice on your sound design or composition)
  • Some feedback isn't of very good quality (e.g. "sick track! I love that snare at 0:30!"), often because other people don't know exactly what to listen for or what to leave feedback on

What I'm suggesting
  • People post feedback to at least 2 tracks before posting their own
  • People link to said feedback on their own tracks
  • On their post, people specify what they would like to receive feedback on
  • The stickies on the "Finished Tracks" and "WIPs" sections be updated with these rules.
  • No one leave feedback to those who don't follow the rules, and maybe report them to the mods so their posts get deleted

Why this could work:
  • Would greatly reduce spam
  • Would increase amount of feedback
  • Could potentially increase quality of feedback

We've already established that there are more people posting music than feedback. We've also established that some people leave crappy feedback. If there are two feedback posts for every song post, then we'd have double the amount feedback than tracks in the section. That's a good thing.

Also, if people are required to leave feedback before asking for feedback, then we'd get way less one-timers who come to the forum to post their track and then leave. They don't contribute anything, and I think it's fair they don't receive feedback.

Now, a person posting a track could just leave shitty feedback on two tracks or not all and just claim they did, but the fact that they're required to link back to this feedback in a way prevents this. I think it makes sense to think that if you're going to ask for reviews and show the reviews you've left, you'd want to be linking to the kind of reviews you'd want to be getting. Kinda like how presenting your resume for getting a good job doesn't require you showing just that you have done something, but that you did that something and you did it well. It's not something I can say for certain, but I think it's a fair assumption.

Another issue is not knowing what to leave feedback on. There are so many qualities of a track to comment on, leaving feedback might be discouraging because of this. Having the person posting a track specify what they want to receive feedback on makes it a lot easier to leave good feedback. If a person wants feedback on their sound design and says so, then you know what to look out for. This doesn't necessarily mean that you could only leave feedback on their sound design, any feedback helps. It's just a whole lot easier to leave good feedback when you know what to look for.

Some other things that have come up:

Point Systems
I maintain that point systems are a bad idea. If something is automated it can be easily abused. For example, if we need 3 points to post a track of our own and get a point for every feedback post we make on that section, then we could easily rack up as many points as we want by leaving a bunch of "sick drop bro" types of feedback, that don't really contribute anything. Like I said before, having to link back to the feedback you left may encourage better feedback.

Also, I think that if we want to encourage the idea of community and mutual helpfulness that this forum was based on, then we should rely more on the community to uphold its values rather some fancy coding, no? That's why I'm trying my best to base to this suggestion around everyone helping each other and not a cold, automated system that can be easily abused.

But I don't know a whole lot about music or its technicalities, how can I leave good feedback?
I mentioned before that you don't have to stick to what the person is asking for when leaving feedback (though it helps). I've also said that:

In the last track I posted I asked the forum to get feedback on my sound design and arrangement, as well as how the track made them feel. If you don't have whole lot of experience with music, then at the very least you're a human with emotions. Emotional feedback is probably just as important as any technical feedback. As long as you're sincere and openly show that you're trying to give quality feedback, I don't think there should be a problem.

Hopefully I've explained myself thoroughly enough. I acknowledge that this system isn't perfect, but so far it's the best I've seen. I encourage criticism, but if you're going to say that something's bad, don't just leave it at that. Provide an alternative and explain why it's better. You're not contributing by just saying "oh that wouldn't work" and leaving it at that.

Here's an example of what an ideal post would look like.

Thanks :P

Sound Design / The Sound Design Symposium! 2016
« on: January 07, 2016, 09:27:51 pm »

So every forum that deals with production generally has it's own dedicated "Official Growl Bass Thread!" or "Post Your Bass Sounds Here!" thread, and recently we got one here too. And though it's definitely fun to share cool sounds and get praised for it, it's not really useful nor practical. Oftentimes a user posts their sound, waits for feedback, then leaves. In the best of cases, users post a sound and explain how they arrived at it, which is good. In either case, after enough time has passed, the user either deletes the sound off of wherever they posted it, the link to the file expires, or something along those lines. What you're left with is several pages of people talking about sounds that don't even exist anymore. This kind of stuff isn't really helpful.

To solve this problem, I was thinking that we should have a thread (this one) where we all post cool sounds to the same place, and explain how the sounds were made in an organized, standard format. Every post that links to a sound should have the following:

-Type of Sound (Bass, Pad, etc)
-Plugins used, preferably in order, and any re-sampling steps.
-Explanation of the processing behind the sound

So, for example, if someone were to post a growl bass they made in Sytrus and resampled twice, it'd go something like this:

"Growl Bass using Sytrus
-Fruity Waveshaper > WOW2
-Fruity Parametric EQ 2 > WOW2 > Fruity Waveshaper > Maximus
-Loaded into Harmor > Maximus"

Then the person posting would detail the process, and, if they know enough about it, talk about where certain qualities of the sound come from. For example, how the sound gets it's vocal formant character from it being made using FM and the types of filter provided in WOW2, or where certain movement in the sound comes from. Obviously not every post needs to have this, just the ones sharing sounds. Feel free to discuss the sounds beyond the original post.

At the end of the year we'd compile all of the sounds and explanations into one big folder, organized by sound type, and share it so people could learn better.

Just an idea, this could be either really good or just not happen at all, but I think it'd be a refreshing change from the dead links found in a lot of other popular forums. is a newish website for sharing sounds. Upload amount is unlimited and you could make your sounds private, so I think it would be ideal for this kind of thing. I wouldn't use SoundCloud because it has a limit to how much you could upload. Make sure the sound is downloadable! Patches and project files are optional, I'd much prefer to hear the process behind something and working it out on my own than having something handed to me.

Mixing/Mastering / Elements of Mastering?
« on: January 07, 2016, 01:56:39 am »
So Mat says that mastering isn't just throwing a couple of effects on the master channel. Now I'm asking, why not?  If mastering is just the final step in the process of getting a track to sound club/radio ready by processing a render of that track, why can't that just be done in the master bus of that track's project file?

I want to know what makes mastering an entire process in itself and not just slapping Maximus on the master bus. I still maintain that I could get something sounding nice and loud by just loading effects onto the master, but what would those effects be? What are things to take into consideration? What are the steps in what would be a considered a professional mastering job?

Pages: [1]