fat sound - like daft punk , roule ....

E

eddlife

Guest
hi I do house music tracks , but I wonder how guys like daft punk, Alan braxe , rawman , DJ Falcon (that's indeed the same crew) do to have that so fat sound , warm , with at same time big kick and big bass: seems like their kick push the bass in front: Is that an effect with the compression ( side chain , bus compression , compression on master ?????)or anything with eq?? sounds like everything would be doubled.
any specific machine or technique to enable this ???
seems that they find the good trick to have that sound .
any help for me
 
I don't know what gear those guys use but I agree that they consistently create some of the largest sounding tracks around. You hit the nail on the head by the way. It is good use of compression. Hard to tell whether its software or hardware but more than anything its skill. Those guys apply liberal amounts of eq and compress the sin out of their kicks/bassess and use great filters. I have been able to get close, but not as full or loud. A useful plug in is Waves MaxxBass. It uses a subharmonic filter that is an additive to your bass WAV. that you are effecting. Simply put, but not technically accurate, it doubles up your sound and allows you to apply a LPF to a specific frequency range and then adding it to the original incoming audio, thus fattening up the low frequencies. A great way to get huge basses and kicks. Then compress it. Instant warm thump.
 
yeah, i'd have to agree on that point. they do get some very rugged sounds. Mmm, i like 'em a lot!

You mentioned side chaining compressors--well, i know a few of my friends use that technique with good results (in most cases anyway). I can't say that i've too much experience with the practice myself, but it does allow the kick to kinda push the bass and vice versa. Essentially the kick is first eq'ed very well as is the bassline and then the kick is routed through a compressor. But the bassline actually triggers the compressor so that it is not working the whole time, only when the bassline and the kick fall at the same time. This allows the kick and bassline to almost breathe in and out in sync with each other.

Also, something i've heard time and time again on this board---and just about everywhere else for that matter--is compression compression compression. Well I've talked with a few "old school" engineers that have been doing this music thing for decades and i've read a good bit as well. What i seem to gather from all this is that compression is used waaaaaaaay too much these days. Even in big hit making studios. I'll try to post a link but an issue of TapeOp (awesome mag that is free and you all should check out) from a few months ago had a great article regarding the ins and outs of compression. Granted, dance or electronic music usually has many different things going on than some older forms of music, but i can't help but feel that a lot of what i here cannot hold a sonic candle to the well engineered records of years ago. Anyhow, I could go on forever about this but i think i'll just try to go find that link.

cheers guys and gals

cc
 
Last edited by a moderator:
do you guys think machine like the dbx 120 xp that produce subharmonic frequencies can be useful to get fatter basses and kicks ???
I know they do layer the kicks , I tried to, but it is very difficult , it does not match exactly , or it is phasing .
anyone knows a good technique ??
 
it's simple, just sample old funk songs and make them the main part of your song, just like they do:

("Cola Bottle Baby" by Edwin Birdsong sampled in Daft Punk's "Harder Better Faster Stronger")


("I Love You More" by George Duke sampled in Daft Punk's "Digital Love")


...just to name a couple.
 
dvyce said:
it's simple, just sample old funk songs and make them the main part of your song, just like they do:

("Cola Bottle Baby" by Edwin Birdsong sampled in Daft Punk's "Harder Better Faster Stronger")


("I Love You More" by George Duke sampled in Daft Punk's "Digital Love")

...just to name a couple.
Click to expand...

You STILL HAVE TO ENGINEER THE SAMPLE! The sound that he is looking for isn't present in the original recordings that you are referring to. It has to be boosted properly, equalized specifically, compressed and mixed the right way. Just using a hook from an old record is only the jump off point. You still have to know how to treat it.
 
BENJ-AMG said:


You STILL HAVE TO ENGINEER THE SAMPLE! The sound that he is looking for isn't present in the original recordings that you are referring to. It has to be boosted properly, equalized specifically, compressed and mixed the right way. Just using a hook from an old record is only the jump off point. You still have to know how to treat it.
Click to expand...


Sure, you must apply dynamics processing, EQ, etc to the sample, but the core of the sound IS THAT SAMPLE... and when somebody asks how to get "that so fat sound , warm , with at same time big kick and big bass", the most important part is the underlying sample that was originally recorded on tape, mixed to tape, using the actual instruments (not modern synth approximations), played by world class players, through real amps with high quality microphones and high end compressors and mixing consoles, etc, etc, etc.

You will spend your whole life trying to get that sound a Triton or whatever recorded into some computer and mixed in your computer. There is a certain sound a track recorded decades ago through vintage equipment sounds that is different from the sound you get today.


I will admit that I was a bit flippant with my answer... of course you must do something to the sample... but I stand by what I say - - that the essence of being able to get "that sound" is that the underlying sample must have the right tonal character and production quality to begin with. After that, with regard to how to treat the sample... you need some nice compressors, EQ's, filters and creativity... but all that equipment will not get you very far without the right sample. I don't care how much EQ'ing, compressing and filtering you do... you will not get your synth keyboard and home computer to sound like vintage George Duke without sampling vintage tracks (even if you get all the same equipment in b the same room with the same players today, it probably will not sound the same).


The sound he is looking for actually IS in present in the original recordings I mentioned (you can't go by the sound of the crappy low quality MP3's, of course)... Just like you said, "It has to be boosted properly, equalized specifically, compressed and mixed the right way" BUT it is that original recording that you are boosting, equalizing, compressing and mixing.


By the way, I am not saying Daft Punk is not talented. They are very talented. I actually like them very much. All I am saying is that to get that vintage old school warm fat analogue sound with a modern edge, they, in the examples I listed, they took a vintage old school warm fat analogue track and applied some modern production techniques to it... and that does take talent and skill.

:)
 
afaik those guys use loads of analog gear, real analog filters like the moogerfooger and be sure the have some hardware urei, neve or whatever highest hi-end compressors and equalizers.
i read about the use of tapemachines (tape saturation = soft clipping = warmth + pressure)and preferrably emu samplers.

had the pleasure to see/hear a djfalcon set and it seemed he was using final scratch (notebook involved)and the set was killer.
 
and what you say about compression… better a little less than more… but in the case of daft punk… it's more like a trade mark :p they compressed the hell out of it… and that's a part of the typical daft punk sound… of course… their use of vocoders and lead sounds… is also something that is used a lot in all kind of ways… but don't be too fixed on compression and all that stuff… if it sounds really good to you when you put your sound through four different compressors than just do it… experiment… I know there are certain rules about this and that… but don't get too fixated on it… like whatch out whith eq blabla… no offense, in a certain way they're right, but it all depends on the kind of music… the sound, what part of it… drums, snares, lead sounds whatever etc… anyway, I like daft punk :-)
 
I know they do compress a lot , but when I do it too, my mix is getting too tightened, where their mixes are so soft and fat .
concerning dvyce I do not agree , because they already made tracks with no samples and it sounded the same: THICK.
the point is here they achieve to have each sound (especially bass and kicks ) thick.
I tried zlso recording on tape machine , but did not get the same result .
I am searching....searching
 
don´t let them fool you-
they both play a bunch of instruments themselves and i know they play their stuff on top of the sampled craze.
nevertheless they know their sh!t xtremly well.
but as i stated before: use the right equipment and use it right...

only as example, there´s an allen & heath dj mixer charging something about 2000 euro.

there IS a reson why these gadgets cost.
and there´s a reason why audio engeneer exist as profession.

my 2cents
 
eddlife said:
I know they do compress a lot , but when I do it too, my mix is getting too tightened, where their mixes are so soft and fat .
concerning dvyce I do not agree , because they already made tracks with no samples and it sounded the same: THICK.
the point is here they achieve to have each sound (especially bass and kicks ) thick.
I tried zlso recording on tape machine , but did not get the same result .
I am searching....searching
Click to expand...


like I said in my previous post - - my comments were related to 2 particular songs that I mentioned. Also, even if you play instruments on top of the sampled background (like somebody else mentioned), you are still getting the huge sound quality/character benefit of the foundation of the sample.

Anything they do play live on their tracks, I will bet you that it is going through a very high quality audio chain (i.e., recording through great high end preamps, eq's, compressor's, etc.) That is one of the most important things to make your tracks sound fat. That is the main thing that makes the difference between a professional quality recording and a demo.


...and when I talk about things being recorded to tape, I am talking about multitracking to 2-inch tape and mixing down to 1/2-inch tape... not recording stuff on a cassette.
 
IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE USING A SAMPLE OR NOT. WHAT MATTERS IS HOW YOU ENGINEER YOUR SOUNDS! I don't understand how you can be so hung up on this concept of the sample being the reason behind the sound. I can make a MIDI loop that I designed, with proper EQ,compression,and effecting, sound just as large as a Crusaders sample. Eddlife, just eperiment with careful doses of each of the recommendations I mentioned above and you'll be fine. It just takes some trial and error.
 
the point of my last post was not the part regarding samples... that was just a response to somebody saying they play instruments on top of their samples. It was also point out that I just was talking about those 2 particular songs with regard to samples.

[by the way, I am not saying samples are the reason for their sound... I am saying that when there is a sample in any track by any artist, you can't forget that as an essential part of the sound style of that particular song. Just like, for example, how live drum loops sound different than programmed loops (even if they are programmed from individual live drum samples) and is an important part of a songs sound.]

The essence of my last post was this part-- the part that has nothing to do with samples:


dvyce said:

Anything they do play live on their tracks, I will bet you that it is going through a very high quality audio chain (i.e., recording through great high end preamps, eq's, compressor's, etc.) That is one of the most important things to make your tracks sound fat. That is the main thing that makes the difference between a professional quality recording and a demo.
Click to expand...


the other thing that is really important is mastering.

...Here is some more practical info:

with EQ'ing, cut more than you boost. Have each instrument occupy it's own space in the frequency spectrum, listen to the sounds to determine what those frequencies should be. This technique will give all your sounds their own space and will keep your tracks from sounding muddy. There is no set rule as to how you should EQ, just listen to the sounds while adjusting the EQ... cut unnecessary frequencies.

with compressing, make sure your attack and release amounts are appropriate for the sound. For example, sharper sounds like a tight snare can have a faster attack. Sounds like a bass can have a slower attack. Work with your compressors and EQ's to see how the different parameters affect the sound.

There are no rules... trust your ears.

But remember, the sound you get out is only as good as the sound you put in. Make sure your sounds are recorded properly to begin with.
 
Eh, Daft Punk are very into compressors. Read their interviews they love them. You can hear all the pumping of the compressor in a LOT of their tracks.
 
I know this is going to sound cocky - I can't think of any other way to put it. I am no master or anything, but I really think if you work at it, you can get a fat, warm, thumping, pumping sound on any piece of gear. You can do it in Reason if you know your stuff. You can do it in Cubase, Logic or a hardware sequencer. You can do it with a virtual analog synth, a virtual synth, and of course, an old school analog. Anyone that ever tells you you need a special piece of expensive gear in order to get a particular sound is either crazy or a rich kid.

There is tons of totally banging hip hop that is made entirely on an MPC, two turntables and a microphone in somebody's basement.

Also, the whole idea that you need to sample the same sources that Daft Punk samples in order to reproduce the warmth of their sound is also midguided. The idea that these sampled songs were played in the 70's by world-class musicians into "superior" analog equipment MAY be true, but I don't know...

Sure, the TECHNIQUES they use can be very helpful to learn, but these techniques can be duplicated on anything. Sidechaining, proper compression, EQing. In the end it isn't a black art, it's something that can be learned by trial and error. Just use your ears. For so long I was stuck on the notion that there was some "magic formula" to how to EQ a bass sound, or a Kick, or a snare. But it's really just what sound good to your ears. Some dude'll tell you to cut 150MHZ on a snare. Someone else'll tell you to leave it alone, someone else will tell you to boost. The only way these guys came up with these bits of advice is they tried it and it worked for them; may not work for you.
 
tonepoem said:
I know this is going to sound cocky - I can't think of any other way to put it. I am no master or anything, but I really think if you work at it, you can get a fat, warm, thumping, pumping sound on any piece of gear. You can do it in Reason if you know your stuff. You can do it in Cubase, Logic or a hardware sequencer. You can do it with a virtual analog synth, a virtual synth, and of course, an old school analog. Anyone that ever tells you you need a special piece of expensive gear in order to get a particular sound is either crazy or a rich kid.

There is tons of totally banging hip hop that is made entirely on an MPC, two turntables and a microphone in somebody's basement.

Also, the whole idea that you need to sample the same sources that Daft Punk samples in order to reproduce the warmth of their sound is also midguided. The idea that these sampled songs were played in the 70's by world-class musicians into "superior" analog equipment MAY be true, but I don't know...

Sure, the TECHNIQUES they use can be very helpful to learn, but these techniques can be duplicated on anything. Sidechaining, proper compression, EQing. In the end it isn't a black art, it's something that can be learned by trial and error. Just use your ears. For so long I was stuck on the notion that there was some "magic formula" to how to EQ a bass sound, or a Kick, or a snare. But it's really just what sound good to your ears. Some dude'll tell you to cut 150MHZ on a snare. Someone else'll tell you to leave it alone, someone else will tell you to boost. The only way these guys came up with these bits of advice is they tried it and it worked for them; may not work for you.
Click to expand...



You seem to be misunderstanding some things here.

The issue is not whether you can get a "fat, warm, thumping, pumping sound on any piece of gear." You CAN. but that is not the point at all.

The point is that if you are trying to copy the productiuon style of a track where the main part of it is sampled off an old record, you will not get that kind of sound trying to recreate it with the synths in Reason (or any other way other than sampling an old record). Sampling beats has a very different sound than programming beats.

I never said you need some "special piece of expensive gear in order to get a particular sound"... all you need is a record to sample from and some production skills.


This works the other way around, too. If you are trying to get the sound of some tight Neptunes style programmed beat, you dont want to use a James Brown sampled drum loop or sampled Amen beat.... if you want the sound of aJames Brown or Amen drum loop sampled off the record, then don't use a live drummer.

Also, if you are trying to get the sound of a track that uses a bunch of virtual analog softsynths, you don't want to use a bunch of vintage real analog synths... they all sound different... not necessarily better or worse... but they do sound different and their own uses in their own situations.

I would not use all vintage analog synths if I was trying to produce in the style a modern electronic track that was produced entirely on a laptop using all vitrual sonfsynths...

It is naive to think that you can do anything with anything. If you want a guitar, then use a guitar - - not your triton guitar patch... it won't sound the same... I am not saying it will not sound good, but it will sound different... the same goes if you want a synth guitar sound, then don't use a real guitar...

...blah, blah, blah... you get the idea.

You can make great tracks with any piece of gear... but you can't (usually) make apples out of oranges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top