Printable View
Amazing plug...
IMHO this is one of the plugs you really have to learn... I've used Ozone, Vintage Warmer, everything... and this is the daddy....
What does everyone else reckon? And what are your fave settings?
Me? The opto and Half inch is the one, then tweak and get your track sounding sweet :)
Man, what a plug... :cheese:
yeah tracks has been a good part of my setup for a couple of years, its a lovely plugin and i sometimes like to use a setting Steve sent over for a basic good vinyl cut and then tweak from there
but that said, i havent used it for my last 2 releases. Not sure why but i just kinda eased off on using it all the time, bit of experimentation going on as it were
top plug though
u reckon it's ok with Steve to share that preset?Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeswithoutaface
yup
That preset would be nice for the folks :)
The setting I gave to Scot was my best effort to emulate my old hardware setup from our old studio. Consisting of a marshal and drawmer compression as part of the chain, along with a really old Stratos valve desk.
The EQ has a low cut and a little high boost, but obviously the EQ needs to be tuned for each tune. But all other settings give a nice presence and fullness to the mix without over cooking it (skranzzze style).
I`ll dig out the preset when I get back to the studio (I am away on work at the mo).
I`ll also be posting up the next part of my production tutorial.
Big Steve`s Big Kicks!!
Which will be a step by step guide for making your own killer kicks from scratch (ie, not from yeuch......samples), with audio file examples and some screen grabs
excellent mate
that sounds cool
i actually abandoned it a while back, ive been using Ozone mostly. i didnt know that they came out with a VST version of it. The standalone was a bit of a nuisance alright. but yea i must mess around with it again.
that preset would be sweet too steve.
That sounds useful, mate. I have done my own kicks with soundforge and have read about 3 tutorials about it. But i reckon yours will shed some light on issues that weren't covered in the other tuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty_bass
This is one of the tutorials (probably the best-known one):
http://infected-mushroom.net/Studio/...m_Tutorial.htm
This from tranceaddict is useful as well:
"TUTORIAL: How to make a kick drum in Adobe Audition
This little tutorial will teach you how to make a boomin kick drum from scratch using AA. Note that this is a synthetic kick style, and not trying to recreate an organic real kick. One other thing you might need is a list of equal-tempered tunings, I will explain this later.
1st Step: Is to decide where you want the kick to sit in the frequency spectrum. At around 120-130hz (A#1-D2) is a good place to start for getting that punchy kick sound which is also warm and appearant on smaller speaker systems. You might find lower than this sounds deep but lacks punch, and higher than this becomes too tonal. Next decide the frequency you want the kick to decay to. The relation between the starting frequency and the decayed frequency is that of depth. The farther from the start it decays, the deeper the sound is. But this can be overdone easily, so don't bring it down too far, in general more than an 17 semitones. Next think about the key of the song. For the most compatibility between the bassline and the kick, decide to start and end on a frequency that is consonant to the key, intervals such as octaves, 5ths, and 4ths (going up or down) work well. So if the key is D, try starting the kick on A1 and having it decay to D1 or E1.
2nd Step: Is to generate the carrier tone that is the base of the kick. I should explain now that there are two ways to start this: either generate the lowest tone of the kick first (the decayed frequency) or the highest tone (the starting frequency). Its just a matter of preference when it comes to the pitch envelope stage. Personally I prefer starting high and enveloping down. Anyway, go to the Generate->Tones menu in AA, lock the final settings to the starting, set the master gain to about -3dB, choose the sine wave (or whatever shape), and input your desired starting frequency for the kick. Now there is a decision here to be made; if you decided to start with the high frequency of the kick, you MUST set the time of the wave shorter than the desired length of the kick, and if you decided to start low, then you must set the time higher than the desired length. That takes some trial and error to find out how long the final kick will be, but luckily its only two undo operations back to fix it. If the wave you generated doesnt end on a zero-crossing, enable snap-to-zeros and delete the incongruent end.
3rd Step: Is to pitch the carrier wave. This is one of the most important steps for deciding the overall sound of the kick. Select the entire wave (Ctrl-A) and go to Effects->Time/Pitch->Pitch Bender. If you started high, start the pitch envelope at 0 semitones and work your way down to the decayed frequency you want, or vise versa if you started low. The slope between the start and the end of the envelope is the most important setting to tweak the sound. Experiment alot with this.
4th step: Is to give this wave some dynamic. Select the entire wave again, and go to Effects->Amplitude->Envelope. There's not alot to say here, just give the drum some shape that sounds good. Usually a peak around the punchy section of the wave, followed by a reduction of -6dB in the boomy part is a winner.
5th step: Is cleaning up the digitality of this newly made kick. It's a very crude block of sound that needs its digital shell chipped off of it. What I mean is, look at the beginning and ending of the waveform (actually you want to look at this before you apply the volume envelope). You will see the wave comes to a abrupt stop at the end of its period. This is NOT how an analog oscillator releases itself. If we want a smooth sound out of this drum, you need to bandpass filter the beginning and end of the wave. The difference is appearant after you do it, and the sound is much smoother. Bandpass filter the beginning of the wave (a few wave cycles into the start of it) at the frequency the beginning of the wave is at. And then do the same for the end of the wave. The result is some of the cleanest bass you could ask for.
Experimenting: Some things to experiment with are:
Waveshape of carrier
Starting phase of carrier for snappy transient(45 works good)
Pitch Envelope
Volume Envelope
Layering other percussions for a snappy transient
Filtering
Reverb
This is a little long and involved but I've has some decent results with this method, far superior to using softsynths. The main thing here is to experiment, as AA has alot of powerful features if you give it the time."
I have another one but i will need some time to put it up. It emphasizes the importance of the actual note/pitch a kickdrum (or better the bass-wave portion after the initial attack/transient).
check here http://www.ismism.de/home_e.htm for a bass drum plugin, from the site
"If you built your basskicks up to now following the "infected kickdrum tutorial", you can get the same results with BazzIsm in seconds that took hours before."
I tried that plug, but it seemed to me a litlle to much "infected", IMO
There is a MASSIVE thread about this on dogsonacid.com
Seems to quite the in thing now to generate your own kicks (and other drums) in an audio editor... The results are pounding when you get it right too. No dodgy phasing, no softness and no shitty sample sound, just a good solid TUNK! that you can rely on to rock it.
Combined with a sub sine generated in the same way, tracks have a massive low end drive and purity...
@wormjar: i think i linked to that thread here allready.. good one.
http://iterativemusic.com/~dirtybass...ompression.trp
There`s the link to my T-Racks settings
thanks, steve! will have a look asap.
thanks steve...is this for the standalone or the plugin?? i cant seem to load into the plug in one anyway :whoops:
big thanks. I will have to spend more time and play with t-Racks again.
Thanks for the link "Dirty" :)
To be fair, T-Racks is not very good.
It is just another example of a plug-in that promises more than it can deliver...
The summing on it is very obvious and the results are easily bettered by your own efforts with individual (decent) plugins on each channel.
^^^ agreed
Best bet is to do it in your sequencer and use the waves plugins. but of course you need to know what your doing.
T-Racks is nice for the people who dont know and just run things through the presets
Actually T-Racks is really good, if you know how to use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by wormjar
I know of many top end producers who use T-Racks now.
Most agree the tape simulation is amazing.
Sure there are other plugs, but if you are used to older mastering hardware, you should be able to get very good results from T-Racks.
not heard to much negative (if any) stuff about t-racks, either.
it surely has a lot to do with the person that is operating the tool, imo.
the 'waves' plugins. the older ones? because from a technical standpoint they are at least dated. if not just weak. and overpriced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
weak and overpriced. the old ones....err
waves really did a good job on the new stuff, admitedly. and i must say i like/love the way they look/usability. but that's an entirely different matter. i really am getting sick of people advertising waves everywhere. poor workman blames his tools.
and stealing software and then complaining is just sick, imo.
general observation over
got to agree that t racks aint all that either
can make a bad mix sound better
but not to clever on an allready good mix
Really don`t understand these comments at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by FILTERZ
If it`s making the mix sound worse, then you are simply not doing it right.
A good mix needs more subtle mastering, so maybe you are overdoing it.
MAstering is an artform all to itself.
I'd say it's half art, half science.Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty_bass
Perhaps craft is a better term?
It's certainly something that gets better with practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty_bass
Well i can manage ok with other tools , my focusrite mastering processor for instance , i can manage to get a great sound with this or my friends tc finalizer or blue tubes plugs
but t racks aint so great IMHO so there ya go .
I didn`t really want to post negative comments but as a few other people did i thought i might as well chuck in my few penneth so they were not out on their own so to speak .
If it works for you then use it , personally i wouldn`t reccomend it .
Having said all this i have not used it lately and i may be commenting on an old version with less developed algorithms.
Usually go for the wavez tools myself, using the tried and tested chain of EQ->multiband compression->EQ->multiband limiting
Tried t-racks but didn't really know what to do with it. Same with ozone - get put off by all the presets. Very distracting.
Personally feel more comfortable with a seperate tool for each stage.
It`s all horses for courses, but really, like anything, you need to get to know it to use it properly, ESPECIALLY with any mastering hardware or software.Quote:
Originally Posted by FILTERZ
Anyone expecting quick results will simply be disapointed.
I used to use pure vintage hardware for mastering, then moved into plugins for ease, and don`t really commit to any in particular.
Different plug ins are good for different reasons.
I find the waves stuff too plastic to get a nice warm mix personally, however, their limiting is great for transparency.
Vintage warmer is great, also the sonalksis EQ and Compression is particularly nice for warmth and presence.
URS EQ`s are really nice, as is the voxengo compression.
I think people are too succeptable to the waves marketing though, as I really don`t think they deserve the rep they get.
Maybe it`s cause I learned my trade in an old analog studio.
as said before the OLD waves stuff isn't that fresh anymore. gui-wise they are great, though, imo. i have heard a lot of nice stuff about the new ones, though. the ssl things...
some people say URS are blinders...not as good as they look (esp for the price). i don't know.
i have never been to an analogue studio myself (i think) but i am pretty sure today we are spoilt for choices actually. i truely think you could put out excellent productions using freeware alone. but maybe that's just me.
There is some very good freeware, but not really in the mastering field, unless you could educate me.Quote:
Originally Posted by loopdon
Posifopit is an exceptionally nice EQ however, and Endorphin is a nice warm compressor, but there don`t seem to be enough decent free mastering plugs.
You might be onto something there, Steve.
I must investigate further. I know some but i want to present the best stuff in the freeware league. At least i can offer another excellent eq to start with, that most definetely can be used over a full mix and as a track insert as well. It is
Eliosound AirEQ
http://www.eliosound.com/images/aire...qinterface.jpg
"Mixing, mastering, tracking - whatever your sampling frequency is - AirEQ always brings you the same high quality equalization in the entire audio range. And you can use it on every track, without overloading your CPU. Its quality, ergonomics and efficiency will make AirEQ an essential musical tool when excellent analog-like equalization, ease of use and low CPU usage are required."
http://www.eliosound.com/aireq
This might remind you of the analogue days. At least i have heard similar opinions.
I am talking about the (very generous, imo) demo of this plugin, which doesn't expire and has no volume drops etc. So it is very usable and offers the same sound quality as the full (and pretty expensive) version:
Limited AirEQ demo version features :
* Same sound quality than the full version
* No time limitation
* No preset creation, edition or save
* Parameters not saved in host, that's mean that equalization parameters are reset on each AirEQ launch
* No automation support
* No "Class Bands by Frequency Order" option
* No A/B Comparison
* Render is deactivated (this is not true; render DOES work, tested just yesterday)
http://www.eliosound.com/download/aireqwindemo
tried it out and it`s a really nice eq.
Settings not saved in host though.:(
Waves were just an example. Any high quality plugins would work the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by loopdon
What i meant was that you'll get much better results using a combination of high quality dedicated plugins for each process (EQ, Compression, Limiters and so on)
Rather than using a all in one program like T-racks
andy: i know what you mean in a way. but can't you switch of certain modules in t-racks? and on the other hand, ok, but it all depends on who uses it (knowledge factor) and for what.. i reckon bob katz (insert favorite other name here) could out-eq/compress whatever a big part of the techno-community with basic tools and other's could be given the best stuff on earth and ruin stuff.
can't we agree on: try a variety of stuff, see what YOU like and then learn that/those tools thorougly?
i know. but wasn't it exactly like that until TOTAL RECALL came?Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty_bass
or am i way off?
Nyquist eq came to my mind as well:
http://magnus.smartelectronix.com/im...uisteq_mid.png
Parametric graphic equalizer with excellent response all the way up to Nyquist. It never clicks, and it handles deep bass well too. The Nyquist frequency is the highest representable frequency for a given sample rate. The trebliest of the treble. Most other digital eqs have great problems producing a natural sound here.
- 2005-04-09: It now displays properly in Cubase SX on Mac OS X.
- Now has 5 bands instead of 3 due to popular demand. The old 3 band version can be downloaded here (Windows VST).
- The song loading bug has now been fixed.
http://magnus.smartelectronix.com/#effects
http://www.smartelectronix.com/refer...2004-11-10.zip