Tutorial: Epic EDM Lead!

[avensa]

I did a tutorial a while back on making a cool EDM synth for chords or leads!

Watch it here;
https://youtu.be/oIQgQN6_MvY

Hope this tutorial helps! Let me know what you would like to see in the future!

[Benedict]

Well well that was interesting. You did quite a few things that seemed odd (or possibly redundant) but the final sound was indeed fitting and juicy. I learned a thing or two.

Thanks for that.

[Scoobyman II]

I miss read it, and expected on learning the theory of EDM chords. I know there are a lot of suspensions in them. I enjoyed your tutorial anyway. Classic Reason workout. That's a cool chord progression as well.

[avensa]

I miss read it, and expected on learning the theory of EDM chords. I know there are a lot of suspensions in them. I enjoyed your tutorial anyway. Classic Reason workout. That's a cool chord progression as well.

Sorry about the misleading title, will change now! Glad you liked it!

[selig]

I've mentioned this to you before, but I'd like to see you say WHY you choose to do what you do, not just WHAT you are doing! That's the question I hear the most with tutorial videos, fwiw. 

Also, like your previous video you use the line mixer to add gain (@0:45), where you could more easily just add 6 dB of gain to the signal path in this case (which probably isn't a good idea IMO unless it's 6 dB too low for you, but it's your patch!). Again, you describe WHAT you are doing but totally leave out WHY! 

Also, with the Line Mixer, when you hard pan a signal you ignore the opposite input totally, so you've not only created more work for yourself with the extra cables, but you could have just as easily increase the volume on the Subtractor by 6 dB (from 80 up to 100) and got the EXACT same results! Maybe you think you're creating a "stereo" effect by panning the line mixer, but that's not how audio works. If you take the same mono signal and send it equally to the left and right speaker, it ends up perfectly in the middle. 

As for the question of why, you could also explain why using an external filter is any different than using Subtractor's built in filter (otherwise you're just adding more work for yourself, like with the line mixer). Or why put the EQ AFTER the compressor instead of BEFORE. Or why choose the little PEQ-2 over the MClass EQ (you use both), or why have both the RX-7000 AND the RV-7. I'd be surprised if you're not already getting these kinds of questions.

Also, after you start adding effects around 2:20, you totally stop "talking" to the viewer - now you're no longer explaining even WHAT you're doing! It's like you forgot anyone was even watching IMO, and for the next 3 1/2 minutes you don't make a single comment. Don't forget, we can't stop you to ask questions during a video tutorial so you must anticipate what the viewer will be asking, and then answer it for them! The video kinda ends abruptly too IMO.

Cool ideas for things like the gated reverb - but your patches have redundant devices that do nothing, and you don't explain why you make the choices you make. That's my 2 cents, and I'll end by say I hope I'm not discouraging you. On the contrary, I hope you continue to make more tutorial videos and improve your skills along the way!

[avensa]

I've mentioned this to you before, but I'd like to see you say WHY you choose to do what you do, not just WHAT you are doing! That's the question I hear the most with tutorial videos, fwiw. 

Also, like your previous video you use the line mixer to add gain (@0:45), where you could more easily just add 6 dB of gain to the signal path in this case (which probably isn't a good idea IMO unless it's 6 dB too low for you, but it's your patch!). Again, you describe WHAT you are doing but totally leave out WHY! 

Also, with the Line Mixer, when you hard pan a signal you ignore the opposite input totally, so you've not only created more work for yourself with the extra cables, but you could have just as easily increase the volume on the Subtractor by 6 dB (from 80 up to 100) and got the EXACT same results! Maybe you think you're creating a "stereo" effect by panning the line mixer, but that's not how audio works. If you take the same mono signal and send it equally to the left and right speaker, it ends up perfectly in the middle. 

As for the question of why, you could also explain why using an external filter is any different than using Subtractor's built in filter (otherwise you're just adding more work for yourself, like with the line mixer). Or why put the EQ AFTER the compressor instead of BEFORE. Or why choose the little PEQ-2 over the MClass EQ (you use both), or why have both the RX-7000 AND the RV-7. I'd be surprised if you're not already getting these kinds of questions.

Also, after you start adding effects around 2:20, you totally stop "talking" to the viewer - now you're no longer explaining even WHAT you're doing! It's like you forgot anyone was even watching IMO, and for the next 3 1/2 minutes you don't make a single comment. Don't forget, we can't stop you to ask questions during a video tutorial so you must anticipate what the viewer will be asking, and then answer it for them! The video kinda ends abruptly too IMO.

Cool ideas for things like the gated reverb - but your patches have redundant devices that do nothing, and you don't explain why you make the choices you make. That's my 2 cents, and I'll end by say I hope I'm not discouraging you. On the contrary, I hope you continue to make more tutorial videos and improve your skills along the way!

Again, this is an old tutorial. Just thought I'd share it on here. I was using the Splitting technique because I was new to it and wanted to share it with other people after I learned it off of a different tutorial. I never really discuss the 'WHY' because many of the tutorials I've seen never did, so I picked it up from them, obviously.

When I started adding the effects, I explained WHY I was doing it without showing the HOW. It's all up to preference & the surrounding elements if used in a project. I wasn't going around telling people that this synth should be EQ'd like this and compressed like that.

Also, in my other video that you commented about to me I've put in the description about why I used the splitting technique and the two different reverb units, I obviously forgot to do the same with this video.

I tried to end the video better than it did, but my editing software was acting up. Hence the different intro's & outro's between the two videos.

Again, these tutorials were done a while ago. I'm doing more tutorials soon and will be doing voice overs, so I will explain the WHY much better & quicker.

[selig]

I've mentioned this to you before, but I'd like to see you say WHY you choose to do what you do, not just WHAT you are doing! That's the question I hear the most with tutorial videos, fwiw. 

Also, like your previous video you use the line mixer to add gain (@0:45), where you could more easily just add 6 dB of gain to the signal path in this case (which probably isn't a good idea IMO unless it's 6 dB too low for you, but it's your patch!). Again, you describe WHAT you are doing but totally leave out WHY! 

Also, with the Line Mixer, when you hard pan a signal you ignore the opposite input totally, so you've not only created more work for yourself with the extra cables, but you could have just as easily increase the volume on the Subtractor by 6 dB (from 80 up to 100) and got the EXACT same results! Maybe you think you're creating a "stereo" effect by panning the line mixer, but that's not how audio works. If you take the same mono signal and send it equally to the left and right speaker, it ends up perfectly in the middle. 

As for the question of why, you could also explain why using an external filter is any different than using Subtractor's built in filter (otherwise you're just adding more work for yourself, like with the line mixer). Or why put the EQ AFTER the compressor instead of BEFORE. Or why choose the little PEQ-2 over the MClass EQ (you use both), or why have both the RX-7000 AND the RV-7. I'd be surprised if you're not already getting these kinds of questions.

Also, after you start adding effects around 2:20, you totally stop "talking" to the viewer - now you're no longer explaining even WHAT you're doing! It's like you forgot anyone was even watching IMO, and for the next 3 1/2 minutes you don't make a single comment. Don't forget, we can't stop you to ask questions during a video tutorial so you must anticipate what the viewer will be asking, and then answer it for them! The video kinda ends abruptly too IMO.

Cool ideas for things like the gated reverb - but your patches have redundant devices that do nothing, and you don't explain why you make the choices you make. That's my 2 cents, and I'll end by say I hope I'm not discouraging you. On the contrary, I hope you continue to make more tutorial videos and improve your skills along the way!

Again, this is an old tutorial. Just thought I'd share it on here. I was using the Splitting technique because I was new to it and wanted to share it with other people after I learned it off of a different tutorial. I never really discuss the 'WHY' because many of the tutorials I've seen never did, so I picked it up from them, obviously.

When I started adding the effects, I explained WHY I was doing it without showing the HOW. It's all up to preference & the surrounding elements if used in a project. I wasn't going around telling people that this synth should be EQ'd like this and compressed like that.

Also, in my other video that you commented about to me I've put in the description about why I used the splitting technique and the two different reverb units, I obviously forgot to do the same with this video.

I tried to end the video better than it did, but my editing software was acting up. Hence the different intro's & outro's between the two videos.

Again, these tutorials were done a while ago. I'm doing more tutorials soon and will be doing voice overs, so I will explain the WHY much better & quicker.

I'm not at all suggesting you should tell folks this synth SHOULD be EQ'ed or compressed a certain way. But you ARE doing it for a certain reason, are you not? Why not share that with others so they can understand what YOU are trying to accomplish with each technique? That's a far cry from saying something SHOULD be done a certain way. After all, there are no rules here, and the best we can do is share what works for us. And if it works for you, I'd like to know why! Sharing your thought process helps others to develop theirs IMO. I find I get more from the videos that say why they choose a certain direction - maybe I'm in the minority though!

Again, keep it up because everyone's viewpoint is valid and offers a new way of looking at the same things!
(and Id' suggest leave out the splitting thing, since it's not actually doing anything!)

[craven]

I always love to see how others build their combis. Now, I've been reminded twice this month about the gate of the RV-7000 (Selig, you really tried to confuse us with calling it RX-7000 ).

Looking forward to more EDM leads and chords, maybe also some tutorial on writing the melody itself.

[avensa]

I always love to see how others build their combis. Now, I've been reminded twice this month about the gate of the RV-7000 (Selig, you really tried to confuse us with calling it RX-7000 ).

Looking forward to more EDM leads and chords, maybe also some tutorial on writing the melody itself.

Thanks for watching! I've actually learned something awesome from experimenting with the combinators and will be doing a tutorial on it within the next couple of days.

[Llama Chops]

Thanks for posting this, another tutorial to add to my reference collection. As Selig pointed out though, you should keep in mind and aim for the lowest common denominator in any tutorial and explain each step and why. I know you left the effects up to individual tastes but for a newbie it's always handy to have some initial frame work to work to, then they can experiment and tweak from there. Even though I've used Reason for a while, this is still how I learn new things, copy then tweak. But still a cool tute though, thanks.

[avensa]

Thanks for posting this, another tutorial to add to my reference collection. As Selig pointed out though, you should keep in mind and aim for the lowest common denominator in any tutorial and explain each step and why. I know you left the effects up to individual tastes but for a newbie it's always handy to have some initial frame work to work to, then they can experiment and tweak from there. Even though I've used Reason for a while, this is still how I learn new things, copy then tweak. But still a cool tute though, thanks.

Thanks. Will be doing voice over tutorials in the future, with a sort of 'script' of what I wanna say.

[Sinistereo]

I really appreciate that you're making tutorials, and would love to see more. I still don't understand why you are splitting and immediately recombining the Subtractor signal. This is making a monophonic signal... twice as monophonic.

[avensa]

I really appreciate that you're making tutorials, and would love to see more. I still don't understand why you are splitting and immediately recombining the Subtractor signal. This is making a monophonic signal... twice as monophonic.

Before I started making the tutorials, I learned that technique from another producer. He said that splitting them into two different channels & panning them is the same as duplicating the Subtractor units and doing the same. He said it created a stereo effect. It was clearly a misleading statement. Thanks for watching.

[selig]

I really appreciate that you're making tutorials, and would love to see more. I still don't understand why you are splitting and immediately recombining the Subtractor signal. This is making a monophonic signal... twice as monophonic.

Before I started making the tutorials, I learned that technique from another producer. He said that splitting them into two different channels & panning them is the same as duplicating the Subtractor units and doing the same. He said it created a stereo effect. It was clearly a misleading statement. Thanks for watching.

Yes, because a "stereo effect" relies on DIFFERENT things happening in each channel. When you put the SAME thing in each channel you end up with mono, and when you duplicate the same thing you add 6 dB. Of course, louder always "sounds" better - but it's just louder. The louder you make a patch, the more you'll have to turn it down so it won't clip your mix. BTW, as a future guide, the Factory Sound Bank patches (the newer ones, at least) are all designed to peak at around -12 dBFS, and no higher. If you created patches that match this level, they will integrate into the "Reason system" much better in my experience.

[submonsterz]

I really appreciate that you're making tutorials, and would love to see more. I still don't understand why you are splitting and immediately recombining the Subtractor signal. This is making a monophonic signal... twice as monophonic.

Before I started making the tutorials, I learned that technique from another producer. He said that splitting them into two different channels & panning them is the same as duplicating the Subtractor units and doing the same. He said it created a stereo effect. It was clearly a misleading statement. Thanks for watching.

Yes, because a "stereo effect" relies on DIFFERENT things happening in each channel. When you put the SAME thing in each channel you end up with mono, and when you duplicate the same thing you add 6 dB. Of course, louder always "sounds" better - but it's just louder. The louder you make a patch, the more you'll have to turn it down so it won't clip your mix. BTW, as a future guide, the Factory Sound Bank patches (the newer ones, at least) are all designed to peak at around -12 dBFS, and no higher. If you created patches that match this level, they will integrate into the "Reason system" much better in my experience.

I find louder patches easier to work with .
But I like to distort lots of things a lot of the time.
and I find louder patches easier to drive a distorted signal into the channel fader prior and turn the overall level down from the mix channel fader keeping the inputted distortion fed into it .
Maybe I learnt to work backwards but personally for me that's how I like to achieve distortion prior to mix channel fader rather than via mix channel and insert slots on it.
And not watched the video yet by the way .
In fact I'm not listening or watching or making nothing till I fix my computer as my graphics card went pop :frown: . And my set up has no on board graphics akkk. And that computer was my master computer in my set up.

[selig]

I really appreciate that you're making tutorials, and would love to see more. I still don't understand why you are splitting and immediately recombining the Subtractor signal. This is making a monophonic signal... twice as monophonic.

Before I started making the tutorials, I learned that technique from another producer. He said that splitting them into two different channels & panning them is the same as duplicating the Subtractor units and doing the same. He said it created a stereo effect. It was clearly a misleading statement. Thanks for watching.

Yes, because a "stereo effect" relies on DIFFERENT things happening in each channel. When you put the SAME thing in each channel you end up with mono, and when you duplicate the same thing you add 6 dB. Of course, louder always "sounds" better - but it's just louder. The louder you make a patch, the more you'll have to turn it down so it won't clip your mix. BTW, as a future guide, the Factory Sound Bank patches (the newer ones, at least) are all designed to peak at around -12 dBFS, and no higher. If you created patches that match this level, they will integrate into the "Reason system" much better in my experience.

I find louder patches easier to work with . But I like to distort lots of things a lot of the time. and I find louder patches easier to drive a distorted signal into the channel fader prior and turn the overall level down from the mix channel fader keeping the inputted distortion fed into it . Maybe I learnt to work backwards but personally for me that's how I like to achieve distortion prior to mix channel fader rather than via mix channel and insert slots on it. And not watched the video yet by the way . In fact I'm not listening or watching or making nothing till I fix my computer as my graphics card went pop :frown: . And my set up has no on board graphics akkk. And that computer was my master computer in my set up.

My point is, you'll have to lower that "louder" level eventually. It's easy to add gain in front of distortion devices, which is the whole point when distorting. But again, if that track is going to be mixed with others, you will HAVE to turn it down at some point! 

Knowing where the level is that keeps the mix from clipping makes the job of driving patches into distortion even easier, because you'll know how much to bring the output back down to keep your mix from clipping.

[dflynn]

I miss read it, and expected on learning the theory of EDM chords. I know there are a lot of suspensions in them. I enjoyed your tutorial anyway. Classic Reason workout. That's a cool chord progression as well.

This might help a bit: http://promusicproducers.com/6-deep-hou ... beginners/