Shakers

[chucklechops]

Why not just use a loop? Seriously, what's the point fannying about trying to synthesise something like a shaker? It's never going to sound as good as a real shaker recorded and played by pros. Stick a loop in and offset the timing till you get that delayed effect you're after.

ha ha thats so funny, i can synthesize a shaker in 10 seconds, tailor it to fit the track, give it the exact texture and tone i want, even make it do things a human being couldnt do with a physical shaker.
i make electronic music, why should i want to cut and paste someone elses musicianship, when i can do it better myself.

sample textures from the soundscape of your life and do something creative with it, then it becomes a real psychedelic instrument.

Sorry, I misread the OP as wanting advice on how to achieve a good shaker sound. Turns out what he really wanted was yet another tedious fucking lecture on artistic integrity from mnml.nl's pseuds corner.

[sorgenkind]

or the chance to learn something new.

doooode...

[steevio]

Why not just use a loop? Seriously, what's the point fannying about trying to synthesise something like a shaker? It's never going to sound as good as a real shaker recorded and played by pros. Stick a loop in and offset the timing till you get that delayed effect you're after.

ha ha thats so funny, i can synthesize a shaker in 10 seconds, tailor it to fit the track, give it the exact texture and tone i want, even make it do things a human being couldnt do with a physical shaker.
i make electronic music, why should i want to cut and paste someone elses musicianship, when i can do it better myself.

sample textures from the soundscape of your life and do something creative with it, then it becomes a real psychedelic instrument.

Sorry, I misread the OP as wanting advice on how to achieve a good shaker sound. Turns out what he really wanted was yet another tedious fucking lecture on artistic integrity from mnml.nl's pseuds corner.

ok i was reacting to your fannying about comment, if you're into making music on synthesizers, it's as much fun and as legitimate making a shaker to fit your track as any other sound, is that not what a synthesizer is for ?
unless you record yourself playing a physical shaker along to your track, its very unlikely that will get exactly the right shuffle and feel to fit your tune from a random shaker sample.
i wasnt lecturing, i was just passing on some knowledge which may or may not be useful to somebody, and i found it funny that what i do in my studio could be disgregarded as fannying about, by someone who advocates the 'why bother, just clone it off a sample cd approach'

[steevio]

mmm... i'm all digital so its definetly quite a little bit different. than using gear... since the tempurature of the device can affect truly analog equipment. I like digital cause I can always go back to a track 5 months later and pick up where I started. I can review my thoughts in a way and interact with them because they are than just recordings.

My primary synths for building patches from scratch are synth1 and alpha.

i like to experiment with other synths like daHornet for leads and shitty bass.

oddity for dissonant monosynths. this one is touchy for sure.

I also use minimonsta.

I also should have mentioned I really only resample when I need to do some complex effect stuff because i'll likely adjust the sound just to get some fresh tones in there... I also do a lot of duplication of tracks and subtraction. Ableton makes this pretty easy in both regards. (shameless ableton plug)

I love the idea of using automation, and i've looked at my friends tracks and they are automation masters. as soon as I start tweaking my sound, I start losing what I started with and it becomes a big messs.

yeah it's a bit different to using hardware, i spend a lot of time getting all my synths and drum machines singing together through the desk, so theres a synergy happening, and do most of the automation with LFOs and envelopes in the synths themselves. and cos ive only got two hands i program as many parameter tweaks into as few knobs as possible on a midi controller, with the sounds i want at the beginning of the tune morphing into the sounds i want at the peak at the other end of the turn, that way i never lose the sound, but theres plenty of room for variation in between depending on how the tune is flowing.
i used to record tweaking live as controller messages, but always found that after hearing the same tweaks over and over i tired of them quickly, another reason i dont sample synths.
i do actually like the slight variations and supprises you get from doing as much live as possible, it feels more like a performance.
anyway bruv theres no right or wrong way, i might come over as too opinionated but i'm just over enthusiastic about live synthesizer music.

[chucklechops]

Why not just use a loop? Seriously, what's the point fannying about trying to synthesise something like a shaker? It's never going to sound as good as a real shaker recorded and played by pros. Stick a loop in and offset the timing till you get that delayed effect you're after.

ha ha thats so funny, i can synthesize a shaker in 10 seconds, tailor it to fit the track, give it the exact texture and tone i want, even make it do things a human being couldnt do with a physical shaker.
i make electronic music, why should i want to cut and paste someone elses musicianship, when i can do it better myself.

sample textures from the soundscape of your life and do something creative with it, then it becomes a real psychedelic instrument.

Sorry, I misread the OP as wanting advice on how to achieve a good shaker sound. Turns out what he really wanted was yet another tedious fucking lecture on artistic integrity from mnml.nl's pseuds corner.

ok i was reacting to your fannying about comment, if you're into making music on synthesizers, it's as much fun and as legitimate making a shaker to fit your track as any other sound, is that not what a synthesizer is for ?
unless you record yourself playing a physical shaker along to your track, its very unlikely that will get exactly the right shuffle and feel to fit your tune from a random shaker sample.
i wasnt lecturing, i was just passing on some knowledge which may or may not be useful to somebody, and i found it funny that what i do in my studio could be disgregarded as fannying about, by someone who advocates the 'why bother, just clone it off a sample cd approach'

The OP is asking about shakers on a deep house tune which he posted. Go and listen to the tune. It's a loop. The one thing it does not sound like is filtered fucking white noise. I responded to the question the guy was asking in a way I thought would be helpful.

And I think it's only fair to add that I'm listening to 'punkjazz2' right now and I've just listened to 'ty-puresinewavemix14' and if this 'synthesise everything' approach is intended to result in original sounds then it might be time to re-assess.

[hydrogen]

anyway bruv theres no right or wrong way, i might come over as too opinionated but i'm just over enthusiastic about live synthesizer music.

haha... its an online forum... you are allowed to be cocky.

I'm just joking. I truly appreciate your perspective and i'm jealous.

Good thread btw... i like the different perspectives on shakerism!!!

[ec50]

why make things more difficult than they need to be - use an existing sample of a shaker (theres so many different ones available) - MIND YOU - A SAMPLE NOT A LOOP - and draw it out in any pattern you like -

afterwards you can do anything with it you wish: transpose - decay - volume etc (ableton) to cater to your own track/sound

then add effects... (delay, etc)

seems to be much more productive than sitting around generating something yourself... or recording it yourself.

bit counter productive to 'waste' so much time on somehting 'simple' (i gather you're using lots of time - based on reading through this post... doesnt sound like anyone has has quite figured it out)

after all - its only a shaker...

[chucklechops]

The point about shakers is it's a complex sound consisting of two parts: a bunch of small things inside an enclosure being dragged in one direction, hitting the wall of the enclosure then being dragged in the opposite direction making a slightly different sound. It's sounds like shi-ka, shi-ka, shi-ka

In the past I've messed around with a directory full of shaker one-shots trying to find two which match to create that shi-ka sound and tearing my hair out cos non of the sounds match. So I concluded that the best way to recreate that sound is to use a recording of someone shaking something.

Record it yourself or if that's not an option there are plenty of good quality recordings out there.

This is merely my opinion and I have released fck all and made very little music that I'd dare play outside my bedroom in about 10 years of casual producing in various genres. So take it with a big pinch of salt.

Rest assured that some of your favourite producers are not adverse to using a percussion loop here and there and that no-one on the dancefloor really gives a flying fck.