Tutorial on House/Deep/Minimal-sounds?+x

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

Hi.
Iam looking for tutorials about making atmospheric chords, pads and such stuff used in those Minimal-Techno/House trax. How to make them minimal, smooth _and_ interesting?
Iam also looking for tutorials or examples about "glitchcore"-like patches. How to make clicks and glitchy cuts of samples and synths?
I experimented around a bit with both however with no convincing results Neutral

X: Is there a hint to get Buzz almost smoth on WinXP?
On my Win2k-machine, Buzz runs well. The best performance however did it on Win98. On WinXP buzz is spluttering when I load new machines into my patch (while playing) or sometimes (on some patches) machines like Freeverb or 808 start to reach 40-70% CPU-usage when a pattern runs out, what makes buzz starts stuttering as hell. On the other hand, some Synths (Whitenoise's Syn(II), Guru5, M4w and similar) let buzz stumble when a note is played the first time in a track or when I change the OSC's waveform.
All those things did not happen on Win98 or Win2k. I tried some different output-plugs and -settings with no noticeable bettering...
Did someone here experience the same problems and found a solution?
I'am using the BuzzXP-Max-pack on a 2.2 GHz pentium M with 256MB of RAM...

nool · Monk Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 365 Location: ny, usa

here we go again...

http://web.hibo.no/~mva/buzzproblems.php

compat mode :p

why oh why MVA does not put this as a main link on buzzmachines.com main page .. we will never know ...

no one sees it

i think if i had a counter on this, i woudl have pasted it a total of 1234567890 times ?
_________________
http://www.noolmusic.com
ReWorked the Entire Site - Spin Laden !

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

Sorry, I forgot to mention that I already was there. The compatibilitymode does not solve the problem at all Sad

nool · Monk Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 365 Location: ny, usa

did u try to delete
11-midicount (eff)
jeskola karhu.prs

they have been known to cause issues

try removing all 11- machines in fact might work ...
_________________
http://www.noolmusic.com
ReWorked the Entire Site - Spin Laden !

Hamst3r · Pope Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 1121 Location: Los Angeles

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

Well, after some minor performance-optimating things, settings of the outputplugs and turning almost ALL backgroundprocesses of (as possible), I could manage it to stutter less. I didnt notice the stuttering when I play new notes or add new machines (cept Jacinth... those hang anything up, but that happens on my Win2k machine aswell) anymore. However some machines still overstrain the CPU-usage when no sounds come in (for effects) or the pattern runs out (for generators). Buzz still stutter untill I mute the machine with the high CPU-usage...

@Hamst3r:

usr

maybe you should learn about denormalization problems
_________________
.nl chefs go blok blok blok

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

wayfinder

usr

ld0d

RDEskid

I'm not l33t enough to fix your computer, and I don't know that much about minimal stuff or glitch, but I got some suggestions.

Atmospheric stuff:

1. Make a chord using a sawtooth based synth (or whatever you find works best in the end).

2. Trigger it repeatedly at whatever interval you like, maintaining said interval when you change key.

3. Run it through some type of LFO powered filter (ie FSM Wahman Pro, FSM Philthy), maybe a chorus/flanger, and finally through a Jeskola Raverb with the dry out set to 0, the HF set low, and everything else cranked.

4. Adjust to taste.

Glitch (these suggestions are meant for drums, i don't know how well they work otherwise):

1. Whitenoise Looper II - play a loop with it and mess around with the timestretch (can't remember which mode works best)

2. Any delay, preferably with the ability to change the measure from ticks to ticks/256 or ms - mess around with the delay length during playback, or strategically alter it drastically (and incrementally) in a long ass pattern.

3. Put any or all of the following effects onto a side chain (or use the wet out control to apply them as needed) and go nuts:
Dedacode PizzaBuffer2, Tic-TacShutup aBuffer (good luck figuring this one out), Fuzzpilz Lepidopterist, LarsHaKa rIDMa (a personal favorite).

You can use the LD Declicker on clicks mode to isolate clicks, pops, and noise from machines, and amplify/process them as needed, if that's what you're really looking for...a lot of the older machines (Whitenoise Syn comes to mind) and certain VST's will put out a bunch of em, particularly when put through heavy reverb (ie Raverb). Oh, duh, i forgot, there's plugins that generate them! Check out Joachim's Saturn, Zu Tubehead, and Izotope Vinyl VST (it's free with online registration, and very useful IMO).

I don't know if this is what you were looking for, but I hope it at least sends you in the right direction. Good luck!
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/joshbyra

"...I heard inside me such a note, the sweetest sound..."

e-client · Deacon Joined: 30 Aug 2004 Posts: 106 Location: zürich CH

pentium M has no denormal problem as far as i know... i had stuff on the p4 550 3.4ghz model (still), but i did not notice any of those problems on a pM 1.4ghz model.

dunno. i might be totally wrong here, i dont know the specs of the cpus to judge that.

but what i know: Pentium M != Pentium 4
_________________
pimpin' on an elitebook 8730w, iC2D p8700 2.53ghz, 8gb ram, ati mobitilty firegl v5725 @ 1680*1050, 1tb, windows 7 (64b)
rockin' on a custom: hiper anubis, iC2Q q6600 2.4 @ 3.2, 10gb ram, 2x nvr8800gts512 sli, 5tb, windows 7 (64b)

ld0d

Pentium M indeed isn't the same as P4, and it's actually closer to Pentium 3. The denormal problem isn't as bad there but it does exist - including the fact that the Pentium M floating point unit is much slower than the P4 or Athlon (XP) FPU.
_________________
örrör.

e-client · Deacon Joined: 30 Aug 2004 Posts: 106 Location: zürich CH

true there. the pM is not as fast as p4 when it comes to foating point stuff, but for most things, the pM 2.0 is faster than a p4 3.0... i was kinda surprised to see games running faster on a pM2.0 laptop with radeon 9600 m 64mb than on a p4 3.0 radeon 9600 128mb... or maybe thats just my imagination... but it lays down on audio apps... the pM goes up with cpu usage while the p4 is still almost idling on the same file.

indeed, for audio apps the pM is just not the right choice, but still, its a kickass cpu... poke me now... just comparing between the intel ones... amd still wipes the intels fpu's Wink

and yeah, put some more ram in it, wonders will happen... 256 is just not enough for a pM 2.2 to perform as it could and acts as a bad bottleneck! 512 is the hard limit i would say, 1gb would be perfect... =)

myself running p4 3.4 on 2gb ram = flawless ^_^'

i think i got some bit off topic here, but well... i hope this helps anyway...
_________________
pimpin' on an elitebook 8730w, iC2D p8700 2.53ghz, 8gb ram, ati mobitilty firegl v5725 @ 1680*1050, 1tb, windows 7 (64b)
rockin' on a custom: hiper anubis, iC2Q q6600 2.4 @ 3.2, 10gb ram, 2x nvr8800gts512 sli, 5tb, windows 7 (64b)

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

nool · Monk Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 365 Location: ny, usa

wayfinder

mongrove · Believer Joined: 08 Nov 2004 Posts: 10

DocBexter · Altar Boy Joined: 27 Sep 2004 Posts: 28 Location: Berlin

hmm i never experienced denorm probs on my p3 m 866 ... also the p3m does deliever more ops/tick than p4 and has more 2ndlvl cache compared to p3 ...

as far i know Wink