timbre

romarr

from some feedback... looking to increase my understanding of timbre and how it applies to dance music

my understanding of timbre is basically that it describes the quality of the sound of the sound (!?) ... how good it sounds, or its character

is it possible to describe what you could be listening out for or ... does an element just sound good when compared to another and thats it ... ? (as in an expensive acoustic instrument sounds better - greater tone, warmth eh... character - than a cheap Chinese knock off)

some sounds grate on my ears = poor timbre ?

apologies if this is a bit of a mad question...

any pointers ?

ta

Neurojazz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbre

Neurojazz

As you can see in that wiki, Timbre isn't so much about quality and more about the type of noise (like brass may share common elements and guitar would have a different timbre)

Sounds 'qualities' in dance music used to be about digital versus analog - that is now becoming defunct. Most VSTi can emulate analogs to appease 99.9% of peoples ears and people use common wordage like 'warm' and harmonically 'rich' to describe sounds... if something is harsh on your ears then use words like '****e' - there are also 'odd harmonics' and 'even harmonics' - i've only been able to check these with one application and odd harmonics were awful and even harmonics were sweet (but lacked balls/guts) - so there could be some relation there - but unsure.

jtsuited

ah crap, I overcomplicated things with the word timbre.

Basically what I meant was, you should maybe change a few of the drum sounds, and the same with some of the synth stuff. Just because there are a few 'dodgy' sounds that are letting down musically great tracks.

Or something like that..

jtsuited

what equipment are you using by the way romarr?

romarr

jtsuited wrote: »

ah crap, I overcomplicated things with the word timbre.

you did ... then I took it and ran with it !

jtsuited wrote: »

what equipment are you using by the way romarr?

nothing fancy, pc laptop, novation sound card, midi controllers - uc33, roland midi keyboard. No monitors as of yet, so headphones and hifi ("there's your problem right there" ...I preemptively hear you say). Like to get ideas together in ableton and mix in cubase

jtsuited

romarr wrote: »

you did ... then I took it and ran with it !



nothing fancy, pc laptop, novation sound card, midi controllers - uc33, roland midi keyboard. No monitors as of yet, so headphones and hifi ("there's your problem right there" ...I preemptively hear you say). Like to get ideas together in ableton and mix in cubase

lack of monitor - there's your problem right there!:D

yeah getting a decent set of monitors i reckon would make the biggest difference to ya. I know it's the biggest cliche ever.

I've tried for years to work with headphones and crap speakers and I can't do it. Everything just sounds dodgy when I do.

What synths/samplers you using?
Lately I've been using Ableton rewired into Logic so pretty much the same DAW setup you use. Best of both worlds imo - jamming the ideas in ableton, Logic for the fancy plugins, mixer, arrangement, editing etc.

But yeah, monitors, well worth the investment!!

you don't need to break the bank - a good few of us are massive fanboys of the yamaha hs50m's.

They're about 300 euro a pair and believe me, and they are unbelievable bang for your buck.

I haven't used my Genelec 8030A's once since the day I've bought them. And they're three times the price (and I've got the genelec woofer and that's another 800 on top).

Not the nicest monitors to listen to, but they are probably the most accurate monitors when placed in a crappy untreated room, so you save yourself a small fortune by not having to treat your room etc.

edit: 290 euro from thomann with free delivery.

romarr

jtsuited wrote: »

What synths/samplers you using?

you don't need to break the bank - a good few of us are massive fanboys of the yamaha hs50m's.

monitors are on the list, interesting to hear hs50 s are are decent in untreated room 'cause that's exactly what i got !

synths - I like rob papen's stuff, predator, blue - predator prob my go to synth. Also use / mess with zebra, FM8, sylenth and the TAL stuff bassline and TAL U no 62 (grand and free!). Sampler - I use ableton's Sampler...

romarr

jt what synths you got in your bag ?

jtsuited

ok completely subjective advice :

i could hear the rob papen/zebra synths a mile off. use any of the arturia stuff or minimonsta/imposcar and you will instantly have a much much better sound.

do a track using only softsynth recreations of old vintage analogues and see what your final result is. Guarantee it'll be a lot warmer, thicker, nicer and less dodgy.

I use the Arturia softsynths the most. The moog modular V tends to be my weapon of choice for everything really, and Minimonsta for anything involving polyphony.

romarr

jtsuited wrote: »

do a track using only softsynth recreations of old vintage analogues and see what your final result is. Guarantee it'll be a lot warmer, thicker, nicer and less dodgy.

I'll have a go, and see what happens ... cheers !

PaulBrewer

romarr wrote: »

hs50 s are are decent in untreated room

An untreated room is an unpredictable place and will all perform differently - to say that a certain set of speakers are 'decent' in an untreated room shows a misunderstanding of how monitors and rooms work.

I've seen quite a few mentions of HS50 on the forum over the last while.

What is it that people like about them ?

From listening to them myself I don't understand the attraction.
Is it because of another internet fallacy that they're a 'replacement' for NS10s?

PaulBrewer

PaulBrewer wrote: »

An untreated room is an unpredictable place and will all perform differently - to say that a certain set of speakers are 'decent' in an untreated room shows a misunderstanding of how monitors and rooms work.
?

Was it just me or was that a bit harsh?..dude, the guy hasn't got a set of monitors yet like..

PaulBrewer

Deleted User wrote: »

Was it just me or was that a bit harsh?..dude, the guy hasn't got a set of monitors yet like..

It's important to start of with correct information. Making decisions based on fallacies may leave one disappointed with the outcome.

Facts is facts!

I, of course, meant no disrespect.

Ah yeah, you're dead right like, but ya can hardly expect him to be au fait with the black art that is room accoustics..and those monitors would be extra nearfields...probably dont have much of a bass range..where most problems would emanate from in said untreated room..

PaulBrewer

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah yeah, you're dead right like, but ya can hardly expect him to be au fait with the black art that is room accoustics..and those monitors would be extra nearfields...probably dont have much of a bass range..where most problems would emanate from in said untreated room..

I agree about the likelihood of expertise in the area, and that's my point.
From the comment made, I took it that the implication was that some types of speaker are 'designed' for untreated rooms, which isn't the case.



As I said I meant no offense.

jtsuited

paul i advise you to take me off your ignore list in the interest of context. otherwise you are going to misinterpret things that are said in reply to my posts.

jtsuited

nevermind

jtsuited

nevermind

ha..

romarr

ha ha ...

jtsuited

CQD, your sig is awesome btw! love a bit o' bertrand i do.