Berni - Twisted Dub

[Berni]

So the last few tracks I have made have been on a house tip so I wanted to do something different so here is a bit of dark, twisted dub I just finished. Some of you may recognize the pad synth sample but you will get a bonus point if you can tell me what very famous electronic musician first ripped it off! Lots of FX & messing with the stereo field on this one so best enjoyed through headphones after a few bong hits ;) As always a free download & any comments welcome.
Just click the soundcloud link at the bottom.

[MBTC]

Digging the track overall. Good subtle use of wubwubwub without screaming "hey I just learned how to do this".

The libraries of all my synths are of such size that I doubt I will ever be able to say "this sound came from that synth", but the pad reminds me of something I've heard in Omnisphere? Just a shot in the dark on that.

If you tend to use that type of atmospheric pad often, and want to quickly create unique sounds that nobody will be able to rip off, check out Padshop Pro. I think it's only about $80. It's seriously amazing for pads. I have regular Padshop because it was a Cubase pack-in, but I'm thinking of upgrading. The pro version let's you load any sample you want in, whereas the version I have only let's me work with stock samples. However, with the tweakability it is amazing how easy it is to get variations from a single sample that sound completely different from each other. I'd grab the demo and see if it's for you.

[Berni]

Digging the track overall. Good subtle use of wubwubwub without screaming "hey I just learned how to do this".

The libraries of all my synths are of such size that I doubt I will ever be able to say "this sound came from that synth", but the pad reminds me of something I've heard in Omnisphere? Just a shot in the dark on that.

If you tend to use that type of atmospheric pad often, and want to quickly create unique sounds that nobody will be able to rip off, check out Padshop Pro. I think it's only about $80. It's seriously amazing for pads. I have regular Padshop because it was a Cubase pack-in, but I'm thinking of upgrading. The pro version let's you load any sample you want in, whereas the version I have only let's me work with stock samples. However, with the tweakability it is amazing how easy it is to get variations from a single sample that sound completely different from each other. I'd grab the demo and see if it's for you.

Thanks mate, yeah I was making wubba's way before it became fashionable & kinda feel it's like the TB 303 bass line thing a little over used now but in moderation it can still be quite fun.
The pad sample I was refering to was actually just a sample. It's from "Laura Palmers theme" from twin peaks, a tv show from the early nineties directed by David Lynch. It was ripped off years ago by Moby in his hit dance track "Go".
Thanks for the heads up on the padshop but I need another VST synth like I need a hole in my head. It looks cool but compared to Absynth...I really dont think I need it.

[MBTC]

Know what you mean on over abundance of synths and sounds. Now all I need is time to learn in depth all the stuff I have. I will say Padshop is a very different kind of beast from Absynth. But like you said it would mostly be of interest to folks that were planning on using that type of sound often.

Although sometimes I think I'm already well into over-kill, there are a couple of positives to having an insanely rich palette of soft-synths to choose from: (1) acquiring a new software synth is cheap and the newness of it is inspiring. It scratches that "new audio toy" itch without spending lots more on an expensive hardware board that tends to be less flexible, takes up space / creates eronomic/logistics issues, and ends up getting ebay'ed in a few years to make room for something else. Not overspending on hard gear saves me a ton of money. (2) Having lots of tools in the toolbox in theory guarantees a certain level of uniqueness to your tracks. If I owned nother but a Virus, a Prophet, and a Moog, at some point, *without a lot of programming effort* (operative concept), all my music would likely start to sound like it came from those three keyboards. With a crap load of softsynths at my fingertips, that sort of profiling or creature of habit syndrome is never a problem.

Downside is of course the tendancy to not get deep enough into each synth to do it justice. I'd say that's where I am currently, and working to remedy that.

[Berni]

Know what you mean on over abundance of synths and sounds. Now all I need is time to learn in depth all the stuff I have. I will say Padshop is a very different kind of beast from Absynth. But like you said it would mostly be of interest to folks that were planning on using that type of sound often.

Although sometimes I think I'm already well into over-kill, there are a couple of positives to having an insanely rich palette of soft-synths to choose from: (1) acquiring a new software synth is cheap and the newness of it is inspiring. It scratches that "new audio toy" itch without spending lots more on an expensive hardware board that tends to be less flexible, takes up space / creates eronomic/logistics issues, and ends up getting ebay'ed in a few years to make room for something else. Not overspending on hard gear saves me a ton of money. (2) Having lots of tools in the toolbox in theory guarantees a certain level of uniqueness to your tracks. If I owned nother but a Virus, a Prophet, and a Moog, at some point, *without a lot of programming effort* (operative concept), all my music would likely start to sound like it came from those three keyboards. With a crap load of softsynths at my fingertips, that sort of profiling or creature of habit syndrome is never a problem.

Downside is of course the tendancy to not get deep enough into each synth to do it justice. I'd say that's where I am currently, and working to remedy that.

The trouble is you can get too bogged down into things & never make any music. I'm more of a sampler guy than a synth guy because with sampling there aren't really very many limits anymore. I can get just as inspired by a 2 bar phrase from some old vinyl I just bought from the salvation army store for a dollar than I can get from a very over priced hardware synth ;)
The main theme for this track for instance was ripped from an MP3 I got off amazon for 99c. You really dont need virus's, moog's, prophets etc. if you are only composing. Playing live then you need to show some rack & have the stability but in the studio, not so much. Just my 2c :)

[MBTC]

Understand what you mean -- different folks have different musical goals. I often get inspiration from existing material, although I rarely sample phrases. Even if I use someone else's drum loop I feel guilty or like the track is not 100% mine. What I will sometimes do is take part of an existing track I like, and start trying to reproduce it. Long before I get to a point where it is authentically reproduced, it starts to morph into something entirely different. But then again as a hobbyist only, I have the luxury of not needing to worry about quantity or quality of my output. If I spend half a day making something that I decide sucks, I can toss it and no harm done. But yes, like you said with synthesis it is very easy to get addicted to the technical aspects and if finishing tracks is important to paying the bills in anyway, it's best not to get too deep into them and just have a nice library of existing patches or samples.

One last thought though on the subject of samples vs synths -- Padshop can be thought of as more of a sample player than a synth. It's just that the flexibility of what you can do with the sample is something I haven't really seen elsewhere. Harmor let's you do a lot with samples but for making pads I think Padshop takes the title. It's one of those tools that fast tracks you from point A to B rather than require you to get into a lot of fiddly detail and lose productivity. By comparison I see Absynth as one of those "deep" synths that will consume your afternoon.

[TweakHead]

I think you can get more creative with instruments you know inside out then you would with a vast collection of instruments you don't know so well. Also, having a limited set of options many times helps. Only after a while you begin to feel the "soul" of the instrument revealing itself. If you pick something like the recent emulations of the famous (and wonderful) Roland 101 out there, and you start playing with it you'll often find yourself getting sounds like Hallucinogen (that's Simon Postford btw) did back in the 90's (and still today) and you'll see that having a limited set of features on a machine with all parameters at hand will make you focus on the interactions between parameters a lot more - and that plays a big part in designing unique sounding patches and more lively sounds. Same thing for Fat Boy Slim, for example, I thought of him with Berni here saying he gets inspired by samples: think of how much music was made with the Akai samplers and a few synthesizers... The main difference was that you used to have to invest the money on hardware to get you going and nowadays you easily have access to lots of instruments with different approaches to synthesis - but each and everyone of them, specially the more complex ones like Absynth has a very steep learning curve...

Software is getting there more and more. But you can get a lot more character from hardware devices still today. Simply running some audio through the amp stage of an analogue device gives you instant warmth you'd hardly get from a plug-in!

So, I'm just questioning the "uniqueness of sound" coming from the huge collection of instruments, here. I don't think so. Used to be easier as any studio would have very different tools: even the mixers had their own sound, you see. And you wouldn't get the same EQs everywhere. All that combined contributed to very different sounding music in the beginnings while today, if you're using the packed stuff from Ableton - for example - you're using tools that are used everywhere by everyone. Not saying they are bad, as most digital plug-ins don't even add any sort of coloration or character into the sound. They do when they simulate some kind of analogue circuitry - and that's come a long way recently for sure! But you see my point!

Take a look at Simon Postford's studio video on youtube. Also, check plug-in guru's videos on absynth. Insane stuff but it takes a lot of interface diving eheh

[Berni]

I think you can get more creative with instruments you know inside out then you would with a vast collection of instruments you don't know so well. Also, having a limited set of options many times helps. Only after a while you begin to feel the "soul" of the instrument revealing itself. If you pick something like the recent emulations of the famous (and wonderful) Roland 101 out there, and you start playing with it you'll often find yourself getting sounds like Hallucinogen (that's Simon Postford btw) did back in the 90's (and still today) and you'll see that having a limited set of features on a machine with all parameters at hand will make you focus on the interactions between parameters a lot more - and that plays a big part in designing unique sounding patches and more lively sounds. Same thing for Fat Boy Slim, for example, I thought of him with Berni here saying he gets inspired by samples: think of how much music was made with the Akai samplers and a few synthesizers... The main difference was that you used to have to invest the money on hardware to get you going and nowadays you easily have access to lots of instruments with different approaches to synthesis - but each and everyone of them, specially the more complex ones like Absynth has a very steep learning curve...

Software is getting there more and more. But you can get a lot more character from hardware devices still today. Simply running some audio through the amp stage of an analogue device gives you instant warmth you'd hardly get from a plug-in!

So, I'm just questioning the "uniqueness of sound" coming from the huge collection of instruments, here. I don't think so. Used to be easier as any studio would have very different tools: even the mixers had their own sound, you see. And you wouldn't get the same EQs everywhere. All that combined contributed to very different sounding music in the beginnings while today, if you're using the packed stuff from Ableton - for example - you're using tools that are used everywhere by everyone. Not saying they are bad, as most digital plug-ins don't even add any sort of coloration or character into the sound. They do when they simulate some kind of analogue circuitry - and that's come a long way recently for sure! But you see my point!

Take a look at Simon Postford's studio video on youtube. Also, check plug-in guru's videos on absynth. Insane stuff but it takes a lot of interface diving eheh

yeah despite having a bunch of soft samplers I still use my old Akai most of the time just because I like the sound, filters & know it like the back of my hand.
I thought it was funny on the Simon Postford's video when he was showing how the panning knob worked & said if you are watching on a mono TV you wouldn't get the stereo effect...the video is not recorded in stereo! Too much acid can do that to your brain Lol.

[namnibor]

So the last few tracks I have made have been on a house tip so I wanted to do something different so here is a bit of dark, twisted dub I just finished. Some of you may recognize the pad synth sample but you will get a bonus point if you can tell me what very famous electronic musician first ripped it off! Lots of FX & messing with the stereo field on this one so best enjoyed through headphones after a few bong hits ;) As always a free download & any comments welcome.
Just click the soundcloud link at the bottom.

Berni: I totally got the "Twin Peaks" sound thing before reading further posts as I own those David Lynch CD's and he is one man I would love to do coffee with and to set the mood, have Mr. Stephen King serving the coffee and "brownies", HA!!
Nice atmospheric work and sounds here!!! Right up my alley, however am not so much into sampling other's work for my own stuff slowly working on. I think I would have added some breaking/smashing glass sounds in places with tons of reverb...but that's my "A Clockwork Orange" personality coming out...:p

[Berni]

Berni: I totally got the "Twin Peaks" sound thing before reading further posts as I own those David Lynch CD's and he is one man I would love to do coffee with and to set the mood, have Mr. Stephen King serving the coffee and "brownies", HA!!
Nice atmospheric work and sounds here!!! Right up my alley, however am not so much into sampling other's work for my own stuff slowly working on. I think I would have added some breaking/smashing glass sounds in places with tons of reverb...but that's my "A Clockwork Orange" personality coming out...:p

thanks for the listen man. Moby was the first artitst to rip this off in one of his very first hits "Go" & has made a ton of money ripping off other people ever since. Being a DJ & huge samplist I have no problem using other people's stuff for my own evil intentions & this synth part fit the bill perfectly (add evil Vincent Price cackle here) :twisted:

[namnibor]

thanks for the listen man. Moby was the first artitst to rip this off in one of his very first hits "Go" & has made a ton of money ripping off other people ever since. Being a DJ & huge samplist I have no problem using other people's stuff for my own evil intentions & this synth part fit the bill perfectly (add evil Vincent Price cackle here) :twisted:

Funny! May I ask how people such as Moby side-step copy write infringements with say David Lynch when blatantly swiping original samples? Are they limited to how many bars used? Is the original simply augmented/diminished or key signature change to carefully side step? In a DJ setting, (which I did a side job while stationed in Iceland...way too many free shots:rolleyes: ), I can understand the DJ would have A LOT more creative freedom but when someone such as Moby crosses the DJ to recording fartist (did I say that:D ), just how is this done without worrying about a litigiously ruinous situation?
Understand I am not faulting anyone, these are serious questions. (and please do not tell me David Lynch does not give a frack)

[Berni]

Funny! May I ask how people such as Moby side-step copy write infringements with say David Lynch when blatantly swiping original samples? Are they limited to how many bars used? Is the original simply augmented/diminished or key signature change to carefully side step? In a DJ setting, (which I did a side job while stationed in Iceland...way too many free shots:rolleyes: ), I can understand the DJ would have A LOT more creative freedom but when someone such as Moby crosses the DJ to recording fartist (did I say that:D ), just how is this done without worrying about a litigiously ruinous situation?
Understand I am not faulting anyone, these are serious questions. (and please do not tell me David Lynch does not give a frack)

You can quite legally use a sample from anyone's work IF you obtain permission & license it properly. This is when both party's agree on a small percentage of the sales of the record to be given to the original copyright owner of the track & of course the record company usually takes a cut. You would be surprised at how many people will let you use a sample of there music for a small fee...it's all gravy for them as it gives old tracks new life & usually boost sales of long forgotten tunes. There are thousands of old tracks that have re-emerged because they have been used in other peoples music, commercials etc.
There is a very short time limit however as far as sampling is concerned where you dont have to pay ANYBODY. Go onto somewhere like Beatport & see how many 2 bar samples you can spot from old house, jazz & disco tunes that are called something else entirely. Theft is virile at the moment.

[Berni]

So as this track seemed to be quite popular I thought I would make a video for it. It's quite trippy & dark in the spirit of the Twin Peaks theme. You can check it out here...
http://youtu.be/8OP6z-GCj1I
Any comments welcome!

[namnibor]

Lovely! Images from "Twin Peaks" and animation just work, seamlessly! David Lynch's college thesis movie project, "Eraserhead", is another total mind warp to watch and listen to and my brain still is yet to wrap totally around "Mulholland Drive"....a true master at modern surrealism, whom you have given great justice and honor to!!
Did you know that David Lynch's film version of book, "Dune", he actually commissioned "Toto", yes, the 'synthy band' from that era? THAT would also make for some awesome sampling and give it your Berni twist....hint, hint!!
Those images, combined with music really made my low-moment of a night, reach a peak high! Thanks! (it's hot as hell here and living in central air):cool:

[Berni]

Lovely! Images from "Twin Peaks" and animation just work, seamlessly! David Lynch's college thesis movie project, "Eraserhead", is another total mind warp to watch and listen to and my brain still is yet to wrap totally around "Mulholland Drive"....a true master at modern surrealism, whom you have given great justice and honor to!!
Did you know that David Lynch's film version of book, "Dune", he actually commissioned "Toto", yes, the 'synthy band' from that era? THAT would also make for some awesome sampling and give it your Berni twist....hint, hint!!
Those images, combined with music really made my low-moment of a night, reach a peak high! Thanks! (it's hot as hell here and living in central air):cool:

Thanks mate, glad you enjoyed. Up to this point I have been using iMovie for my vids which is OK but not very pro. I noticed on Apples site that you could get a 1 month free trial of Final cut pro X so I thought what the hey & grabbed it. It's kind of like iMovie on steroids with a lot more features, FX etc. Only had it since Monday evening & already managed to crank out this vid with it. Still a lot to learn with it but having a blast doing so.