Ableton Forum

tried this on a bass tonight *& it sounded awful, well not awful but made some notes louder than others. I used it for hats all the time though, panning one left & one right & delaying one.

yeah, i can see how this was such a hassle, the vicious beat down from the ableton community driving away yet another provider of marvelous tips. sigh.

think of this as a conversation. most times someone puts the words "delay" and "bass" in a sentence, someone's going to say "muddy" or something similar in response. others noted the possiblity of phasing, i noted possibility you muddy sound, no harm, no foul. doesn't mean it can't work for you, doesn't mean people don't flange bass, use chorus, etc. my apologies for having offended you so deeply.

i was just about to say "isnt that kinda of phaser like?", but someone beat me to it. i can imagine (havent tried it yet) that putting this on low frequencies would result in "mud", but also i could imagine, which im about to try after this has been posted, that using this on higher frequencies would spice them up a bit. slightly reminds me of the exciter way, adding gentle distortion on higher frequncies on a sendchannel to spice things up a little.

i wonder why i never thought of this myself. thanks for the tip.

oh, and dont mind all the fkers here, youve got a tip; post it.
if people dislikes it then screw them.
once again, thanks.
now, lets try it out.

i think phasers are actually supposed to be comb filter based, not delay.


yes, i am a dork.



.lm.

anyone....who is more interested in dissing people's tips and tricks is obviously more interested in internet forums than making music....

anyone....who finds a cool trick and shares it... is REALLY NICE AND COOL

PLEASE KEEP POSTING INTERESTING THINGS THAT YOU FIND...


thanks

leisuremuffin wrote:i think phasers are actually supposed to be comb filter based, not delay.


yes, i am a dork.



.lm.

but simulating a phaser based on delay would produce a similar sound, no?
im not to big on dsp, so please do correct me if im wrong.

leisuremuffin wrote:i think phasers are actually supposed to be comb filter based, not delay.


yes, i am a dork.



.lm.

comb filters are delay based are they not??

instead of using a delay you can use the channel delay compensation. It allows you to shift a channel also ahead in time. Depending on the amount (and the source material off course) you can achieve phasing/flanging-effects, delays, pre-delays or also fatten things up.
Another way of doing similar stuff is to have two identical recordings (of a singer/ an instrument/ whatever) on two channels and warp one of them slightly different.
I also heard about people who record a track on cassette-tape and rerecord it into their daw for doubling with slightly-off-effect.

pepezabala wrote:instead of using a delay you can use the channel delay compensation. It allows you to shift a channel also ahead in time. Depending on the amount (and the source material off course) you can achieve phasing/flanging-effects, delays, pre-delays or also fatten things up.
Another way of doing similar stuff is to have two identical recordings (of a singer/ an instrument/ whatever) on two channels and warp one of them slightly different.
I also heard about people who record a track on cassette-tape and rerecord it into their daw for doubling with slightly-off-effect.

wow thats a great tip, hadnt thought about that. Im doing a track with some vocals at the moment & was wished that I had a few takes of the same parts to get some decent doubing effects (its not the same using delays or other fx on vox, two takes of the same peice seems to be the only way, the subtle differences are so important) but this sounds like a great way of doing it.

I did some voice doubling with differently warped clips of the same recording, and also changed the pitch 2 or 3 cents. Repitch mode and different warping should give good results as well.

good tip. thanks.

Alright, I think I've figured out my mistake...

I guess I should have stated that "this technique will not work 100% for every single track you make." Because it won't. It may muddy up your bassline, and then again, it may make it pop. If you think it makes some notes louder than others, that's what compression is for, yes? Now I'm sure I'm going to get comments from the purist snobs, saying "You shouldn't have to compress if your tone was any good in the first place". To which I say, if that's your way and it works for you, then bully for you.

Anyway, to those who took this tip objectively, I'd just like to say that I appreciate that, so thanks.

And just for clarity's sake, again, I took this tip from a book that I enjoy called "The Dance Music Manual" by Rick Snoman (ISBN-13 978-0-240-51915-9). I can't for the life of me figure out how someone could write a book that has become this popular, and who has been in the industry since the 80's and has recorded over 30 professional artists and he be full of shit, but what the hell do I know. Here is a quote directly from the book...

"...As we touched upon in Chapter 3, we cannot perceive individual sounds if they are less than 30 milliseconds apart - which is the principle of granular synthesis. However, if a sound is sent to a delay unit and the delay time is set to less than 30 millisecond and combined with a low feedback setting, the subsequent delays collect together in a short period of time, which we cannot perceive as a delay. The resulting effect is that the delayed timber appears much bigger, wider, and upfront. This technique is often employed on leads or in some cases basses if the track is based around a powerful driving bass line..."

So if those of you who think this causes phasing, then you are doing it wrong. You probably need to reduce the feedback (assuming that your delay time is LESS than 30ms). If you think that some of your notes are "louder" than others, then that is an issue with your mix, and leads me to believe that the technique is actually working, and your perceived volume increase is just a wider frequency response and it is standing more upfront in your mix. If that isn't what you are looking for, then you don't NEED to apply this technique, so don't.

theres no need to get defensive about it. as i said, i use this on hats all the time but i tried it on a bassline i was working on & the notes were louder than others, didnt make the sound that much better FOR ME. And yeah, id rather use other techniques to make a bass fatter if it needs it. the loudness difference wasnt a problem with the mix, it was a problem with the technique, it didnt work for that particular line.

if you share a tip & people dont like it then more fool them surely?

ive used this as a stereo trick rather than a thickening trick so im grateful for the insight.

a couple things:

about combfilters ---> yeah i know that in dsp comb filters are made with delays, but i'm not sure how they are done in an analog ciruit. Matter of fact, i know very little about how all-pass filters work at all, which are the building blocks of the comb filter in a phaser.


also, yeah, a short delay also produces something like a comb filter as some frequencies are reenforced and other canceled by the change in phase relationship introduced.

anyway, whatever, i don't really know too much about all that. I'm sure there are other cats here whose knowledge is far superior.



now, as to why the orig tip would make some bass notes louder that others, yeah, of course it will! it's not about doing it right or wrong, it's about the FACT that depending on the frew of the bass note, the delayed signal may be in phase or out of phase with the orig. If the delayed signal is also positive while the orig is positive, it's going to get louder, if it's negative while the orig is positive it's going to cancel. There isn't a right or wrong way to attempt this technique, but i can assure you that it absolutely will reenforce some freqs while cancelling others.



.lm.

alright, I apologize if I sounded defensive. I think we are all arguing about things we mostly agree upon anyway.