hi , i want to make my vsti sounds better ( JunoX2,Beast...etc ) so..what effect must i use ? an EQ or an compressor or something? maybe i can add some swing or something :) with a phaser or a flanger or something??
i,m not very good in this...i,m just a n00b i think :cry:
thanks....
cheerzz
always depends on what you want to achieve ;)
i mostly use EQs do give them more bass
compressors should be even better for that, but i'm obviously too stupid to use them correctly :lol:
....a chorus might also do a good job
thanks for taking the time to post :wink:
i gonna try it ,
maybe just tweak with the compressor ? till you got the sound you want... :D
thanks...
cheerzz
http://www.uv.es/~ruizcan/p_vst.htm
theres a vst on there called x-cita, really nice and simple compressor
Quote from: "HarD-TeX"thanks for taking the time to post :wink:
i gonna try it ,
maybe just tweak with the compressor ? till you got the sound you want... :D
thanks...
cheerzz
I always first apply an EQ (having a good EQ is half the job, really) and then apply a compressor over it to make it sound phat.
Quote from: "HarD-TeX"hi , i want to make my vsti sounds better ( JunoX2,Beast...etc ) so..what effect must i use ? an EQ or an compressor or something?
Compressing a digitaly created signal is futile as it will only change the volume.
Quote from: "XAVT"Compressing a digitaly created signal is futile as it will only change the volume.
No it won't.
Compression makes the sound more dense. It doesn't affect just volume, but also affects the spectrum and RMS. It can do harm as well as please your ears depending on the input signal and parameters.
Here's my mastering suite in its order:
1. An EQ for each kind of instruments (e.g. eq for bassdrums, eq for hihats, eq for synth bass, eq for strings, etc.).
2. Then I link some of them to FX plugins such as filters, phasers, etc.
3. Then everything is put together into one mastering plugin, harmonics exciter or stereo imaging for example. I use iZotope Ozone at this stage.
4. Then I compress the entire master signal with a compressor plugin. If having troubles with params, I recommend using BetaBugs SimpleSqueeze (http://www.betabugsaudio.com/dl.php?id=1). There's just only one knob in it! And you don't need even to move it because standard value gives enough level of compression.
5. Then I give the master signal it's final shape with master EQ.
6. And finally I link the master EQ to the limiter. It makes your sound even more dense and it prevents from mastering clips. I highly recommend using W1 Limiter (http://www.betabugsaudio.com/dl.php?id=9) at this stage together with SimpleSqueeze at stage 4.
7. That's not all. I link the limiter to the Inspector to see the resulting spectrum. But this one is for monitoring only, it doesn't affect the stream.
I can't give you an example link to a track which has passed all these stages as I've recently remastered my OpenMPT tracks but I haven't put them to my musicpage yet.
You're making a mistake in your chain. (one that Atlantis told me about too)
You're applying an EQ after a compressor. With this, the EQ will undo the compressor.
Not really, depending on what you do in your final EQ. Although it is recommended to do EQ before compression (and I do it too), I sometimes remove hyperlow frequencies (<20 Hz) and increase heights even after the compression. But it is for very particular cases only, otherwise, as you say, it spoils the compression. In fact it is very song-depending and plugin-depending. For example, I usually do master EQ in iZ Ozone at stage 3 together with stereo imaging and harmonics exciting and at stage 5 I only remove hyperlow feqs.
One more tip when trying to produce denser sound in OpenMPT: switch automatic gain control off in your player settings and try to keep volume balance in your song using instrument settings, mixer settings and realtime effects.
Quote from: "LPChip"You're making a mistake in your chain. (one that Atlantis told me about too)
You're applying an EQ after a compressor. With this, the EQ will undo the compressor.
There's no rule that states that you have to put the eq before a compressor,both ways are equally valid depending on what you want to achieve.
The best way to decide what is best for a particular job,is to try both methods.
Experiment! :P
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"Quote from: "XAVT"Compressing a digitaly created signal is futile as it will only change the volume.
No it won't.
I wont claim to have supirior knowledge of the subject but isn`t a digitaly created signal already compressed?
Quote from: "XAVT"Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"Quote from: "XAVT"Compressing a digitaly created signal is futile as it will only change the volume.
No it won't.
I wont claim to have supirior knowledge of the subject but isn`t a digitaly created signal already compressed?
If it's a perfect square wave or the bit depth is 1 bit, then compression is pretty much useless. Those cases are rare tho.
Then again, I might misunderstand you completely.
Quote from: "XAVT"I wont claim to have supirior knowledge of the subject but isn`t a digitaly created signal already compressed?
I don't understand this statement.. afaik dynamic compression is essentially changing the amplitude of the signal depending on the amplitude of the signal (and a few other parameters with most compressors). Therefore, even if a signal (digital or otherwise) has already been through a compressor, you could transform it further by compressing it again. Also, I don't understand what properties of a digital signal could suggest they have already been compressed, except for the fact that they must clip at a given maximal amplitude (but then perhaps limiting would be a more appropriate term..?). Getting a signal's dynamic compression right seems to be a very personal thing and a bit of a dark art.