Jump to content

Tweakem

DMP Member
  • Content count

    1,034
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    100

Tweakem last won the day on January 17

Tweakem had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

524 Excellent

1 Follower

About Tweakem

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • O.S
    Mac
  • DAW
    Logic X
  • DMM
    Yes
  1. Forum Up Date

    I'm also sad to see this go. I have a fb account, but i haven't made a post for a few years now, and i'm not sure that it's about to change any time soon. It's just not my thing. That said, I'll always be supportive of whatever DMP decide to do and i do understand that it makes sense from a business perspective to do the move to fb in terms of the numbers. I'm sure there will be many more people who stay in the loop with DMP via fb than they do on here. However, i'm not yet convinced that the quality of interaction will be the same on fb. Forums encourage long, deep, and thoughtful interactions. When i look at fb posts, most are short and sweet in comparison, and do not go as deep. I think partly because the text window on fb is much more narrow and smaller, so it becomes difficult to read and interpret long texts. And i'm not yet convinced it will be as easy to navigate through in terms of searching for topics. But maybe i'm not the best person to be receiving feedback from because i'm not so active on fb i'm not really a fan to begin with. Anyway, give it a trial and see, i may be completely wrong For me personally, i don't expect to be anywhere near as active on fb as i am on here, if at all. Sorry guys. For me it's the whole privacy issue with fb. On the forum, other than the information i've provided (basically just where i live), my privacy is completely maintained. On fb, any posts are linked to my picture, name and friends. And any posts i make, to my understanding, are broadcast not just to the group but also to my friends as it is a public group. The barrier between public and private space is just too thin on fb for my liking. In saying that, i continue to wish the company success and will still be following along with the tutorials. Maybe i will soften up a little and start posting eventually. But i don't think it won't happen just yet. Thanks for hosting an amazing platform over many years, and particularly for the past 7 or so years which i've been a member. I've really got a lot out of it and have really enjoyed it. Hopefully we'll catch up again soon. All the best.
  2. Forum Up Date

    Ah i just worked out the problem. It was a browser issue. Was using safari, then switched to firefox, and i can now see the post bar. Not the first time safari has done something weird like that...
  3. Forum Up Date

    Do i need to be added to a group within the group to make posts and see others' posts? I don't really use facebook, so maybe i'm out of the loop with the latest updates, but i'm on the DMP fb page and all i can see are posts from DMP and comments underneath, but can't see anywhere where i can post or see others' posts... (apart from reviews in the reviews tab) https://www.facebook.com/DanceMusicProduction/
  4. Minimal Techno

    Yes, the partial release thing is a feature of the subclub. But that's why DMP offer both subscription and non-subscription services (i.e. the traditional pay per tutorial method). If you don't like the subscription then you can still continue to pay per download just as you always have done. All standard full length tutorials released via subscription will be released in the shop but only after the final part has been released on the sub club service. It takes a lot of time for a full length tutorial to be produced and then uploaded onto a server for download. Before the sub club, we were getting about 2 tutorials a year if i remember correctly. So i don't think you are being offered pay per download tutorials at any less of a rate than before. Just pretend that subclub is not there, purchase the tutorials when they become available, and then you can continue to enjoy the same original service that you've always enjoyed
  5. Daw > internet

    If you have a good reason for not connecting to the internet on your DAW computer then do it. But i can't think of any reason why i would want to keep my studio separate to the internet. What's the reasoning behind it?
  6. Yes it's a square wave because it sounds hollow but you can also hear a raspy/brassy quality to the sound, which suggests a saw wave is also mixed in. So it's just a square plus saw, and the filter cutoff has been modulated with an LFO which varies according to another source, most probably a mod wheel. Assign your mod wheel to the LFO speed and you can change the speed of the LFO as the track progresses, as is done in the track. It doesn't matter what synth you use. Just use any subtractive synth. They can all make a sound similar to this. It could very well be a live bass, but I still think it's entirely possible to be a synth. And even if it is a live bass, you could achieve a very similar result with a synth if u dialled in the right parameters.
  7. i don't think it's a real bass plus a synth on top. If it is a real bass, which it could be, it sounds like it has been bit crushed. I think that's the effect you're hearing. A real bass may have been sampled from a record into an old 12 bit sampler. (to get the bit crushed effect). Otherwise, the producer could have inserted a bit crushing plugin to get the effect. If a synth was used, it's probably a saw mixed in with a square. Sounds a bit hollow meaning need a square. Or perhaps its just a saw but then bit crushed to get the hollowness. Try that too.
  8. Soundcard needed

    The short answer is, probably not very good. You'll probably want to spend at least a few hundred if you want something decent. I've heard a cheap one around that price and it sounded really grainy. I haven't heard that one specifically, but at that price i can only imagine that it will be similar. But something to consider - it's not just your sound card, but also your monitors, headphones and room acoustics that all add up to produce your final sound. So if you want to hear a good sound, you need to have it good in all these areas too.
  9. The artist has definitely worked with samples of strings because you can hear it loop over and over with a slight off time jolt before it loops. But whether the artist made the samples him or herself, or used a sample from a sample pack, or sampled them from another track (illegally) is difficult to know. If i was to guess, i'd say much of it is a sampled passage played out by real strings, which has been chopped up and re-ordered into new melodies and looped in various ways. Regarding a sample pack to find it from, i'd say you'd find it difficult to recognise if you were to browse through a sample packs. It sounds like the artist has significantly changed the melodies and motifs from the original sample by rearranging it and looping it in original ways.
  10. fucksamplecds

    Yes I agree with Alex. We are all here to learn from each other, not attack each other. Even though i'm often disagreeing with what you say, my replies aren't intended to insult you or anyone else. I take the time to reply because i feel it helps me learn more about the situation and hopefully helps others. By hearing your reply, i gain more insight into the other side of the argument, which helps me make more informed decisions about my music in the future. So i also value your opinion to. And i also come here in peace I'm also fascinated to learn about how different your approach is to ours and am also very interested to hear the results. It will help us to learn. And remember, you're in this to make music for the masses, so this is your opportunity to do just that, by sharing it with more people I've got no problem sharing my music if anyone ever asks. Feel free to ask me to if you want. I'm proud of the music i've made and you should be too. But at the end of the day, if anyone wants to hear something of mine and you like it then that's great, but if not, it makes no difference to me because i've already achieved my goal: producing tracks which i enjoy listening to. The same should apply to you right? Although the only difference is your goal is different: making money. But since you've already achieved that then other people's opinions of your music shouldn't matter to you anyway. Be proud of what you've achieved, regardless of how you achieved it. You've obviously put a lot of work into your music so far. None of us have accused you personally of cheating or making crap music, and we're not about to. All we've argued is that a different approach to production may be more optimal in the long run.
  11. fucksamplecds

    Absolutely, and i do. Of the last 5 tracks that I’ve finished, I think 4 of them are good quality. I listen to them all the time and get a lot of satisfaction and enjoyment out of them. And the fifth is ok, just not my best. So this still gets listen but less often. The one I didn’t like as much was the one i spent the least time making. That said, I spend I lot more time on my tracks than u do. And I only spend a few hours a week on average on my music, and I’m not always writing (sometimes reading or practising). Plus I work with vocalists which slows down the process even more as i need to wait until we are both available to record. So I may take several months to finish a track. But that’s ok with me because I’m in no hurry, and I almost always end up with a quality track that I’m satisfied with. I don’t make any money from my music, nor do I ever have any intentions of doing so in the foreseeable future. My motivation to write music is purely intrinsic, not extrinsic. Does that make my voice in the argument any less valuable? Also, not once in this thread have I ever given anyone advice on how to make money with music. All I’ve done is offer an opinion on how to get the most out of your time while writing music, whether your intention is to make money or not. Yes my analogy involved an example making money, but that was just to highlight that more input doesn’t necessarily mean more output. It was not intended to be advice on how to succeed making money. The only knowledge i have about music and making money is that it requires work, and a lot of it. And I’m sure we can all agree on that I first started buying and using production equipment about 15 years ago, but did not take a serious approach to really learning how to produce until about 6 or 7 years ago, thanks to DMP which made that possible. So I feel I have at least some experience to make arguments about how to get the most out of your time writing music, which is what we’re debating about here, aren’t we?
  12. fucksamplecds

    I put this down to a lack of skill, rather than someone who is too focussed on quality. It's something that i've had to learn not to do myself. Although i'm an advocate for quality, i don't recommend doing this either. It's just second guessing yourself. Spend time making the track, but once it's done, it's done. In my experience, going back to re-write it will make little difference to the quality, but costs a lot of time. it's not good time management practice.
  13. fucksamplecds

    This isn't really an accurate analogy. The student who made just one plate in three months did not make any attempts to put aside time to practise and learn the art. We're not saying that if you sit there and re-write the same song, that you will be better off. I don't think that will achieve much either. We are saying that if you take time out from your writing to practise and learn the technique without shortcut, as well as write music, then you will be better off in the long run. To use the analogy approach.... suppose two guys work in retail and both would like to make lots of money and then spend it. The first guy doesn't like thinking much. He just wants to get money as fast as possible so he can buy things asap. So he works overtime to make more money fast. The more i work, the more money i can make he says. The second guy however, decides he will take time out to learn how to make money in a smarter way. So he works his normal full time hours but no overtime, and studies with the rest of his free time. He learns that most rich people don't just have a job, but also invest in property, shares or run a successful business (which is fact by the way). He decides he will become a property investor. But obviously, you need money for that. So he spends years saving (but not spending). Meanwhile, the first guy feels he is making mega bucks working overtime at double time. he loves that he can buy more than the average bloke working in retail. He's happy because he can get it all now. So he keeps doing more and more overtime because hey, it clearly makes more money in a shorter time. So of course this is the best way forward he says. Several years later, the second guy, who is earning and spending money more slowly, now has enough money to start investing and buys his first property. But, he has to continue spending extra hours managing and developing his investment (and is still not making much money yet). Meanwhile, the first guy is starting to tire out and hates his life because all he does it work. He's had so much "practice" making money, but in the end, it hasn't got him very far because he hasn't practised the most optimal technique. 10 years later, the second guy, through his investments, is making much more money than the first because he put the time into learning how to do so. But, he is working less hours than the first, and achieving more. 20 years later, the guy who progressed more slowly at the beginning, only needs to work part time now because he has all this money coming in from investments. Meanwhile, the first guy who did not care to learn how to make a lot of money is still working round the clock, but is achieving no more now than he did 20 years ago. Slow and steady wins the race. And once again, this example shows that more input does not necessarily mean more output.
  14. fucksamplecds

    It’s very easy for us to mistake input for output. Said differently, more work does not necessarily mean that we achieve more. It’s about working smarter not harder. re the gym: in my experience, going to the gym every day working hard by “practising lifting weights” while taking shortcut supplements (analogous to our situation here) turned out to be less effective than doing the research first, and then working out less with better techniques. I used to train 5-6 days a week and take all the protein powders and the other “shortcut” supplement rubbish that the industry sells. I was constantly told that if I didn’t have a post workout shake or if I didn’t take in session amino acids, I would not see results, and that I needed to keep training 5 days to get results. I did this and of course, just like you’re seeing now with your music, I got instant results. I put on weight and gained muscle. My best result was about 3kg in one month. But then I couldn’t maintain it. The gym took over my life because all I could think about was having the next shortcut protein shake and I would not eat normal meals at the time everyone else ate. And I always thought about eating when everyone else was full. In the end it had a negative effect. I also started going broke. I was literally spending hundreds on shortcut supplements. And I also had less time for friends because I had to make sure I was at the gym each day Sometime later, months after I stopped bothering with all this gym work and spending money, I decided to do some research and learn the science. I read academic articles and spoke with experienced researchers in the area, all of which had different opinions to the companies marketing the shortcut supplements (unsurprisingly). Instead of training 6 days, I trained 3 days a week, and at a lower intensity but with better technique. I then stopped taking shortcut supplements and just ate wholefoods to obtain my nutrition. In 1 month of working smarter (not harder) I put on 4.2kg of muscle. About 1 kg more than I ever achieved training twice as hard and taking shortcut supplements. So after putting in some effort to learn the science, I was actually able to achieve a better quality workout and I could do it in half the time with less effort. The moral of the story: yes you will achieve more in the short term with shortcuts, but in the long term you will be worse off. If you put in the effort to learn the science and art now, yes it may slow you down initially, but I guarantee you that you will eventually end up producing more tracks in a shorter time that are of a better quality, than you ever will sticking to shortcuts. So instead of needing to produce 10 tracks a month in order to obtain 1 or 2 tracks that are good quality, you may only need to produce 3 tracks a month to obtain 1 or 2 tracks that are good quality each month. The same principle applies to any art. And this has invariably been my experience in any area of life.
  15. fucksamplecds

    The benefit is that you can make tracks faster, which is what you want? I think what you're doing here is fine and i don't see this as cheating. It sounds like you've put in a lot of work and spent time learning the software in order to set all this up, which is great. But it's not really the point i was trying to make. I wasn't referring to making your own shortcuts with templates etc or using presets. I guess the point i was trying to make, and i think rick also if i read it correctly, is that buying shortcuts from manufacturers to make production quicker and easier may make it quicker for us in the short term, but i think over the longer term it will actually make it harder for us and the music quality will suffer, because our skill set would not develop as far as it would otherwise. If a producer buys the shortcut software first, before learning the skill, i think he or she is likely to unconsciously think that there is no need to learn how an eq or compressor etc really works now, because we now have a one knob eq compressor plugin to do it for us. So why put in the time to learn how it's done? Similarly, novice producers may buy something like sonar works reference before training their ear, and then be mislead into believing that they no longer need to train the ear because they now hear a flat sound. Or alternatively, will put far less effort into training their ear, because mixing seems that little be easier now and don't need to put in much more effort. Now, i'm not saying that you or Tommy have no skill, or that you don't bother to learn the skills, nor am i saying that you buy shortcuts before learning the skill. But i think that if producers in general buy the shortcut before learning the skill, then their music will only suffer in the long run. I believe that you are much more likely to make good quality original music when you have a thorough understanding of the tools you are working with. If you buy the shortcut (e.g. SW reference), but then also learn ear training at the same time, then i think there's nothing wrong with buying SW reference and it's probably a good idea if you have the money. So if you both spend significant amounts of time training your ears while using the software, then you've both probably made the right choice buying the software (assuming you could afford it). But i don't believe the majority of producers will think like that. I know i didn't. I think most will just buy reference and not bother with ear training thinking that it has solved their problems. But it couldn't be further from the truth. Again, i'm not claiming that either of you think like that, but i think many producers with less experience will. That's why i have the view that i do with shortcut software. This is exactly how i thought for years (i thought if only i had this or had that, then i will be able to make great music - but i now know that's not true). Then in the end, it will be exactly as rick said earlier....
×