Author Topic: Remaking synths  (Read 4597 times)

MACH

  • Guest
Remaking synths
« on: September 08, 2016, 01:56:59 am »
Do you guys recommend it as a tool to getting better at sound design, or does it "accustoms" the ear too much?

I've been slowly noticing that my sound design is pretty awful hahahaha, alongside with my poor songwriting skills, and I really want to fix that, so I wanna focus first on the sound design part, and I guessed the best way to do that was by remaking sounds on songs I liked. I took Madeon's Technicolor and tried to remake the intro pad, I got close but not close enough, I'm going to try it again at another time, but meanwhile, I wanted to know what you guys think about remaking synths.

attila

  • Sub Bass
  • *
  • Posts: 118
  • Honor: 28
    • lyonnmusic
    • lyonntweets
    • View Profile
    • My band
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2016, 02:17:42 am »
Yes it's helpful. Especially when you're working on something more cerebral and technical like sound design. If you have your reference already, you can focus 100% on improving. Otherwise you're jumping between writing and sound design and never really engaging fully in either.

At least that's how my brain works. 

MACH

  • Guest
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2016, 02:24:04 am »
Yeah. If by reference you means what kind of sound design I want to improve, I really want to learn how to make good pads, leads and vocals. I know that those come off as easy to some people, but I noticed a lot of my favorite song rely fully on these thre elements, and frankly, I'm not good at any.

vinceasot

  • Low Mid
  • **
  • Posts: 344
  • Honor: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2016, 12:46:45 am »
yes of course, copying presets is one of the best ways to learn sound design



Marrow Machines

  • Mid
  • ***
  • Posts: 788
  • Honor: 101
  • Electronic Music
    • marrow-machines
    • MarrowMachines
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2016, 01:08:27 am »
Yeah. If by reference you means what kind of sound design I want to improve, I really want to learn how to make good pads, leads and vocals. I know that those come off as easy to some people, but I noticed a lot of my favorite song rely fully on these thre elements, and frankly, I'm not good at any.
Here's some consideration on how i craft sounds:


the problem with sound design and the under lining context behind it, is not so much on the sound coming out of the synthesizer, but what sort and how you place effects on the synth or sound source for that matter.

What i think you should consider, is the process in which you apply effects to ANY given sound. this idea gives rise to how you're layering your mix with effects and controlling a particular element on an individual and group basis (either grouping to make one sound, or grouping of different individual sounds).

depending on your DAW, as it will vary in order to have more modular control over your signal chain, you can do some pretty cool stuff before you actually start hitting the main mixer channel buss effects (sends returns, aux, busses).


And that last statement is where i think a lot of where the magic happens in sound design.




Quite honestly, i was having the hardest time making stuff in general, until i realized a more technical approach with buss effects from the big perspective, and eventually applied it to a smaller scale towards my individual sounds.

most noteworthy are the DAWS ableton and reason. They have two particular components that add to the modular approach of this idea; effects rack and combinator, for the respective DAWS.

Another plugin, that is available for PC only i think, is the imagine line patcher.

The only other option is to understand signal processing and using the shit out of busses (lydian on the forum uses logic, and i've seen the amount of channels he has for buss effects).

all that being said, you can sculpt quite a bit of sound by using buss effects and layering in effects towards an already established "pad synthesizer sound". Because, you should at least know what makes up the padded sound in terms of programming the envelop. And that's really the only distinction that causes a pad to be a pad.

Long attack slow release, and w/e the hell else in the middle you want.

The creative use of buss effects will help you get more variation to the signal source as well as provide more to the overall sound.



at the end of it, you should have a pretty efficient sound in terms of organization and actual source material.



TL;DR

envelop programming=pad synth

layer buss effects that contribute towards that one pad synth, or sound source, to get a richer individual sound.

send that entire sound to a mixer buss and get ready to drop the bass.

be organized and get creative with your signal chain, and sound source processing.



EDIT: i know i excluded oscillators, but w/e, that's still a signal source you will have to come to terms with on your own, as it's a taste.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 01:12:59 am by Marrow Machines »
Josh Huval: Honestly, the guys who are making good art are spending their time making it.

vinceasot

  • Low Mid
  • **
  • Posts: 344
  • Honor: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2016, 01:40:21 am »
Yeah. If by reference you means what kind of sound design I want to improve, I really want to learn how to make good pads, leads and vocals. I know that those come off as easy to some people, but I noticed a lot of my favorite song rely fully on these thre elements, and frankly, I'm not good at any.
Here's some consideration on how i craft sounds:


the problem with sound design and the under lining context behind it, is not so much on the sound coming out of the synthesizer, but what sort and how you place effects on the synth or sound source for that matter.

What i think you should consider, is the process in which you apply effects to ANY given sound. this idea gives rise to how you're layering your mix with effects and controlling a particular element on an individual and group basis (either grouping to make one sound, or grouping of different individual sounds).

depending on your DAW, as it will vary in order to have more modular control over your signal chain, you can do some pretty cool stuff before you actually start hitting the main mixer channel buss effects (sends returns, aux, busses).


And that last statement is where i think a lot of where the magic happens in sound design.




Quite honestly, i was having the hardest time making stuff in general, until i realized a more technical approach with buss effects from the big perspective, and eventually applied it to a smaller scale towards my individual sounds.

most noteworthy are the DAWS ableton and reason. They have two particular components that add to the modular approach of this idea; effects rack and combinator, for the respective DAWS.

Another plugin, that is available for PC only i think, is the imagine line patcher.

The only other option is to understand signal processing and using the shit out of busses (lydian on the forum uses logic, and i've seen the amount of channels he has for buss effects).

all that being said, you can sculpt quite a bit of sound by using buss effects and layering in effects towards an already established "pad synthesizer sound". Because, you should at least know what makes up the padded sound in terms of programming the envelop. And that's really the only distinction that causes a pad to be a pad.

Long attack slow release, and w/e the hell else in the middle you want.

The creative use of buss effects will help you get more variation to the signal source as well as provide more to the overall sound.



at the end of it, you should have a pretty efficient sound in terms of organization and actual source material.



TL;DR

envelop programming=pad synth

layer buss effects that contribute towards that one pad synth, or sound source, to get a richer individual sound.

send that entire sound to a mixer buss and get ready to drop the bass.

be organized and get creative with your signal chain, and sound source processing.



EDIT: i know i excluded oscillators, but w/e, that's still a signal source you will have to come to terms with on your own, as it's a taste.

yes i agree, the sound first starts with the oscillators, then through a filter, ADSR, LFOs and then effects, then this becomes an art and good taste

Marrow Machines

  • Mid
  • ***
  • Posts: 788
  • Honor: 101
  • Electronic Music
    • marrow-machines
    • MarrowMachines
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2016, 01:46:07 am »
yes i agree, the sound first starts with the oscillators, then through a filter, ADSR and then effects, then this becomes an art and good taste


I'll be quite honest though, i usually skip past the oscillator section because those sounds usually don't really do much for me. it's really defining how i want the sound to be played out in terms of envelops, filters, and other post synthesizer processing.

I give just enough though to the oscillator and the balance to give me a decent reference point, because i know i can sculpt that based on the waveform being generated.





I have spent enough time sort of scrutinizing extreme detail that's associated with sound design, and it gets rather tiring and only applicable when you can start to be satisfied with what you're hearing given a technical understanding of your daw's and synthesizer's processes.


there's just so much damn shit you can do it's rather tough to say what would constitute good sound design. and I am more than willing to take it further, and suggest that good design stems from understanding the fundamentals of the components that you're using with the given tools and resources available.


some times the problem isn't "what" but "how" it's being done.


EDIT: i think understanding the how could lead you to remaking certain sounds, but i for sure know that it can lead you to more of a exploitative route or "finding your self's sound.

but you gotta decided where you wanna base your reference point off of in research and application, and take it as far as you want it.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 01:49:56 am by Marrow Machines »
Josh Huval: Honestly, the guys who are making good art are spending their time making it.

vinceasot

  • Low Mid
  • **
  • Posts: 344
  • Honor: 32
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2016, 02:53:52 am »
yes i agree, the sound first starts with the oscillators, then through a filter, ADSR and then effects, then this becomes an art and good taste


I'll be quite honest though, i usually skip past the oscillator section because those sounds usually don't really do much for me. it's really defining how i want the sound to be played out in terms of envelops, filters, and other post synthesizer processing.

I give just enough though to the oscillator and the balance to give me a decent reference point, because i know i can sculpt that based on the waveform being generated.





I have spent enough time sort of scrutinizing extreme detail that's associated with sound design, and it gets rather tiring and only applicable when you can start to be satisfied with what you're hearing given a technical understanding of your daw's and synthesizer's processes.


there's just so much damn shit you can do it's rather tough to say what would constitute good sound design. and I am more than willing to take it further, and suggest that good design stems from understanding the fundamentals of the components that you're using with the given tools and resources available.


some times the problem isn't "what" but "how" it's being done.


EDIT: i think understanding the how could lead you to remaking certain sounds, but i for sure know that it can lead you to more of a exploitative route or "finding your self's sound.

but you gotta decided where you wanna base your reference point off of in research and application, and take it as far as you want it.

nah man I dont skip the sound waves first, the oscillator is where the sound is first generated, get the best combinations of sine or FM, or saw sounds you want

no effects or processing will fix it if you have a crap sound at the start, its like mastering a track that is bad and crap mix down

i dunno marrow, whatever suits you best is what works

MACH

  • Guest
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2016, 03:30:10 am »

Quite honestly, i was having the hardest time making stuff in general, until i realized a more technical approach with buss effects from the big perspective, and eventually applied it to a smaller scale towards my individual sounds.

most noteworthy are the DAWS ableton and reason. They have two particular components that add to the modular approach of this idea; effects rack and combinator, for the respective DAWS.

Another plugin, that is available for PC only i think, is the imagine line patcher.


That's a noteworthy advice, I've kinda grown used to just enveloping and filtering the sound directly in the plugin and doing everything else in the mixer, and never noticed how bad it is. Thanks for the help.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 03:45:20 am by MACH »

Marrow Machines

  • Mid
  • ***
  • Posts: 788
  • Honor: 101
  • Electronic Music
    • marrow-machines
    • MarrowMachines
    • View Profile
Re: Remaking synths
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2016, 03:54:25 am »
That's a noteworthy advice, I've kinda grown used to just enveloping and filtering the sound directly in the plugin and doing everything else in the mixer, and never noticed how bad it is. Thanks for the help.


it's not bad to have a synth go straight into plugins, but you just get a much more rich effect if you run things through busses, or have a way to buss things inside of that one instance of a channel (ie combinator, most definitely because i can use as many mixer boards as i want; and i think rack extensions can get you there as well, but not as versed; and image line patcher can do the same effect as the combinator, but it's a bit more graphical------you should also know your signal chain really well too)


Music production came out of the world of technology, science, and inventors. So to neglect the technological understanding and processes of systems really hinders your entire pictures as a sound engineering in modern EDM production.




making computer music is a great art form, but it comes with a heavy balance of technicality of the machine itself, software, and hard ware as well as creativity of the music and use of tools.....


consider all the different angles, write them down, and start plucking away at it. the history of recording also helped me in sound design as well.

Josh Huval: Honestly, the guys who are making good art are spending their time making it.