Jump to content


  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by james90

  1. Yeah this is definitely true. You could always get a file from someone else, but it will have to be played to match how it's written. Plus if you need to go in and fix something that doesn't sound quite right, it could become a bit tricky. I've learned so much about DAWs and MIDI from writing this file as well, so it's worth it in a way.
  2. Yeah that's definitely true. I stopped using my MacBook (same amount of ram) for these projects. Can't simply add more either, since it requires a completely different board. But yes, if you have several MIDI tracks with their own instruments and plugins going at the same time, it's going to slow things down a bit. So it does make sense to convert them into a single .wav file and re-import it into the project, just so you have that and the whammy control. I haven't checked if the Focusrite stuff is having any issues, but I don't think those actually require their own drivers like Steinberg does. I did re-install the driver and it seems fine so far. I think it was just the 1st gen Focusrite interfaces that had clipping issues. I had the 2i2 1st gen and I always had to keep the gain super low on it, but the 2i4 2nd gen that replaced it seemed fine. I recall it also had switches on the front to pad the inputs, which helped. I've not tried the 3rd gen models though. The one I have is the UR-RT2. Not familiar with the UR22, but this one is pretty decent. Main issue besides the driver is that some of the features that would normally be on the interface itself (such as the input/playback control on the Focusrite) have to be adjusted separately through the included software. I can't say I find their software particularly intuitive, though I've only used Cubase. It does appear to be easier on the computer, and is a little more flexible with drawing automation
  3. Sounds great - you're certainly brave for attempting that live, especially when Matt seems to have things go wrong with the MIDI stuff at times. Though I guess there's a lot more that could go wrong with the amount of stuff he uses. The one time I played that in front of others (just to demo the track) I didn't have the box ticked. Didn't go too well. Also, unrelated, but if you're using a mac - I'd take caution if you plan to update to the new OS. I just did, and it doesn't recognize my audio/MIDI interface anymore. I gather it's more because steinberg didn't update their driver, but it does apply to other brands as well.
  4. The part about it being repaired by its owner really should be made more clear, especially if it's estimated (by who?) to go for that much...
  5. Well it depends which live version - I think he was using the fuzz factory (or possibly the fuzz head?) in the T2L era (2012/2013) recordings. In that last video I linked (from 2018 I think) it seems to be one of the high gain channels on the VH4. It's definitely easier to get a good sound with amp distortion rather than a fuzz pedal. You could probably use that Strymon pedal with similar results though. I think I get what you mean. I ended up changing that part slightly, but just so it wouldn't use the dry signal from the DT side of the pedal. Seemed a bit closer with the dive-bomb only. So at the minute, the only part using both sides of the pedal combined are the A notes on the 12th fret. -1 octave with dry signal on the DT side combined with -1 octave on the whammy side. As for external instrument, in this case, it's for the MIDI interface. It's that bit highlighted in blue in the channel strip (left of the window) where you select the MIDI interface and channel. It might just show up as "External I" until you click it, and then you'll see this: It sounds like you already have it configured to work with the whammy, but you'll want to have that box ticked like above. As for the signal bleed, that shouldn't be happening. I wouldn't think there's any audio that travels through the MIDI interface. I will say that I've noticed similar behavior with my setup, but I always assumed that it was due to the mic bleeding into the monitors - as if the gain control on the interface still let some of the sound through, even when turned all the way down. I'll have to look into it though - might be the exact same issue. My initial thought is that it's related to the computer, since the MIDI and audio interfaces are completely separate. And no problem at all - glad to help
  6. Yeah that's normal. You just don't want it turned up too high so that it affects the sustain. The other option is turning the stab control all the way up and the almost all the way up, but that doesn't sound quite the same to me. I haven't tried the file myself yet, only just had a quick look at it. It's definitely a tricky one to get a decent sound for, and there are different ways you can approach it. For what it's worth, Matt seems to have recorded it with the 007 which does have a P90 (single coil) in the bridge. If that's the case, it would likely be pretty noisy with a fuzz pedal on high gain settings. But as far as I know, it's that same setup where he's running it direct, and has the input gain cranked up so it's clipping there (while having a reasonable setting on the fuzz pedal) And maybe - I'll have to pay closer attention to what he's playing in the live videos, but it sort of sounded like there were two sounds at once. I did find the same about the 5th fret compared to 12th fret though. Here's what the DT file sounds like at the minute. No video this time, but better sound quality anyway. The expression automation is exactly the same as in the picture, but I corrected some of the program changes (mainly the ones for bypassing, so it doesn't make much of a difference I guess.) This is with the low A notes played on the 12th fret, using settings from both sides of the pedal. The nut strikes will sound a bit off in this one. The guitar has a 3+3 headstock, so I just hit the open strings instead. Should still give you an idea though. This was just with amp distortion and some post EQ to brighten it up slightly. One downside of the DT that I think I mentioned was that it doesn't seem to track MIDI well. You can hear that on the wider/slower pitch bends (the -2 octave ones). As for the lag issue, go to the external instrument plugin and make sure the auto compensate latency box is ticked. I know mine has a significant lag if it isn't. dt.mp4
  7. It's definitely a DT in the studio video. You can see the extra switch and LED on it. The whammy 5 can still get super close and seems to track MIDI better, but the range/sweep of the pitch bends on the DT is slightly more accurate. The main thing is that it sounds much better on the low notes, due to the dry signal being mixed in. @giovannicovanni here's some of the DT MIDI track if you want to have a look. I ended up splitting the program changes into two separate tracks (one for each side of the pedal) as it was far too messy, especially with two events often happening at exactly the same time.
  8. Exactly. I know the one Matt tends to use in his live setup is a slightly older Vexter (the one after the initial black/green print version), but those shouldn't vary anywhere near as much as the old pedals did. Tolerances aside, the older pedals did have differences in component types as well, but it seems like they became fairly consistent after he switched transistor types in 2003/2004 But as far as the settings go, the sound I'm describing is... well, it's that effect you get when turning the comp control up. It seems to take away a bit of low end and make the high end a bit smoother? But you don't want to turn it too far (past where it stops oscillating) otherwise the sustain is affected. You basically just want it to have that subtle effect on the sound. I'd also keep the stab control on a higher setting (around 2 o clock as mentioned) since it does take away some low end. Same with the drive control (keep this above 12 o clock). I'd try to set the gate around 9 o clock, but you can lower it if it's affecting the sustain too much Here's a good example. He probably has the comp control turned a bit higher than I'd suggest for Unsustainable, but you should be able to hear the effect I'm referring to. With the nut strike bit, I think I see what you mean. The reason it works better switching between active/bypass (rather than active with expression CC 0/CC 127) is because of the difference in high end when using the pedal. In other words, if the pedal is on the whole time, it will be reducing the high end the entire time, as the signal is going through the pedal anyway. But if you switch between active/bypass, the nut strikes stand out a bit more for the bypassed sound, since it's not going through the pedal's circuitry. And yeah, I can't say for sure if they did it that way, but... the low notes sound so much better (even with the whammy straight into the fuzz factory) and the sweep of some of the pitch bends seems a bit closer. Another combination seems to be the second +2 octave triplet part. Seems like it might be the +1 octave dry setting mixed with something else. Have a listen to 1:36 in this video - almost sounds like the harmonizer? As for the tuning, worth a try I guess. Might make the pitch bends sound a bit different though, but I guess that's less important than the low strings. Got halfway through the middle part, but got sidetracked when I realized the DT is setup differently for the entire song. 🤦‍♂️ So I'm trying to figure that out at the minute. It doesn't really require rewriting anything, but just trying as many combinations of the drop tune/whammy sides as possible to see what works best.
  9. Right, I see - just as long as you don't have the preamp gain on the amp turned up. As for the settings, you still want it to oscillate clearly and have good sustain, but not exactly the same as when the comp and gate controls are all the way down. It's sort of hard to describe the difference. Basically keep the gate around 9 o clock, turn the comp up until the oscillation and hum stops, and then turn it back down until the sustain is how you want. If that makes sense? The gain should be somewhere around half, with the stab around 1 or 2 o clock As for the string tree sound, I looked at your file. First - it's really impressive, so well done on that. But as far as the string tree sound goes, there's more of a difference if you have the pedal actually switching on and off - especially if the fuzz factory is in front. So with the whammy 5, you'll want to have it at CC 127 throughout that part and just have it switching between active and bypass on the dive-bomb setting. If you look closely in the making of video a few seconds before Matt starts playing, you can just about see the computer screen with the automation patterns, and it appears it was done this way. Regarding the triplets, ignore that - I had thought he was switching to a different setting, but it seems like it's just the open strings being hit when he's moving back up the neck. I will mention that I've experimented with the whammy DT a bit more, and while the whammy 5 is more than good enough, there are a few settings on the whammy DT that get those low notes and the sweep of the pitch sounding a bit closer. In other words, the drop tune (which also has upper octave settings) section is before the whammy section of the pedal. So you could basically have the pitch anywhere between +1 or -1 octave BEFORE it goes into the whammy part of the pedal. What this means is that the heel position of the whammy isn't the unaffected guitar sound, as it's already being shifted up or down by the drop tune part of the pedal. As for the tuning, it's definitely in standard. You can see him play the E string on the 5th fret for that low A note in live performances. I only discovered this today, but I think it's due to the -1 octave + dry setting on the drop tune section of the pedal. You can combine this with the -1 octave setting on the whammy side and get a better sounding -2 octave, which is likely how he did it in the studio.
  10. I see what you mean - where do you have the gain (preamp volume) control set? If you're running those fuzz pedals, I'd definitely set the amp for a neutral clean sound without too much bass. Otherwise it'll likely be far too compressed sounding. If there's a bright switch on the amp, you'll probably want to have it switched off if it's at low volume. As for the fuzz factory. I worked out some settings a while back which seemed to sound right - I think I wrote them down somewhere. It wasn't anything too extreme, but it was on an oscillating setting. If I remember correctly, it was gate 11 o clock, comp 1 o clock, drive... can't remember, and stab 2 o clock (?) What I do remember is that I was intentionally turning the comp control up to the point of the oscillation cutting off, and then turning the gate control back down to where it was consistently/clearly oscillating. Regarding the live version, the MIDI track is different during that part, but that's definitely true about not playing the exact notes. And I got it thanks, will have a look and let you know. I set my backing track up based on the one from here (definitely check it out - great resource) and adjusted everything until it sounded close enough. Still need to work on the bass though, especially that big bend. http://www.rppmf.com/muse.htm It's in French, but easy enough to navigate and download the files. Most are fairly accurate, at least compared to the ones you get from converting the guitar pro files from ultimate guitar for example. Also, as for those triplets being in -2 octave and returning to normal pitch - I think he just might be hitting the open strings instead, but it doesn't sound high enough for it to be that. I do have some ideas of what it could be, but it's something that only works for the DT. Basically requires using both sides of the pedal at the same time. Still experimenting with that though.
  11. I don't think it's the amp. The Blues Junior is a good one, though maybe not ideal for those low notes if you're playing at super high volume. It's more to do with how the whammy processes the signal. To give you an idea, run your distortion pedal into the front of the whammy, and then try it after. You'll notice the high end and sustain will be completely different. This is why I'm using that switching system, which will essentially do the following: 1. Fuzz factory > Buffer (Boss SD-1 switched off) > Whammy. Used for most parts of the song. 2. H9 > Fuzz head. Used for the lower octave notes that are played on the bottom two strings. And it's not absolutely necessary to add a buffer, but it does make a difference. What I meant to post yesterday was based on something I had tried previously though, which was whammy > buffer > fuzz factory (if I remember correctly.) This was going directly into the recording interface. midi.mp4 But if you're not plugged directly into the whammy, it's still worth adding one directly before. As for the triplets, I'm not sure how to explain it. I'll try to make a video or sound clip later, but the automation basically has to be inverted for it to work - maybe with some reverb as well. And that sounds good anyway - nice job. Seems like the middle section of the live version is much easier to figure out than the studio recording. Also just put together a backing track for this, which I'll upload after I get the software instruments sounding a bit better.
  12. I think I get what you mean. It can easily end up too distorted, but still lack the high end/treble and sustain - especially when compared to the other octave up settings. I find that using a distortion rather than fuzz works best, since fuzz pedals don't always play nicely with the whammy - especially when placed after. If you've got a pedal that has buffered bypass (rather than true bypass) try placing that in front of the whammy. Any Boss pedal for example will work. Don't switch the pedal on, but just have it in the signal chain directly before the whammy. So it would be... Guitar > any pedal (switched off) with a buffered bypass > whammy > treble booster > distortion > amp I'd experiment with the different settings on the Strymon combined with the treble booster. Maybe try a lower gain setting on the Strymon, and adjust the treble booster to where it sounds best. In this case, I'd actually avoid using the fuzz factory, since that would have to go in front of the whammy anyway. I think still possible MB recorded it that way (based on the oscillation at the very end of the song) but he often runs into a DI with the gain cranked up, which is part of getting that additional overdrive and treble. And sure, or if a sound clip is easier I can try to figure it out myself. A little more difficult as the guitar is lower in the mix during that part of the song. Also, an observation about the live version. Those same triplets we were discussing earlier (the quick ones towards the beginning) - it seems that the live version actually has the first as +2 octave, and then the others as -2 octave. Right around 1:34. It's definitely not in the studio version, but seems to be in all the live ones.
  13. Cubase I guess, but I'd need to set the project up first. I'd need to figure out a few things first though - can't say I use that program too often. I don't have any written out yet, no. The only one that sounds correct to me is the switching between bypass and dive-bomb. Only thing is that even if I've got the timing of the two settings right, it sounds like too much like a kill switch effect - switching completely on and off. It might involve one of the drop tune settings on the DT I guess. Thanks, and that was the Marshall DSL amp distortion. I think that was just with the gain and treble turned up and bass turned down. I can't remember if I mentioned this, but if you're using the whammy 5, have it switch to the classic mode for the lower notes. So you'd essentially be using the chords mode program changes (PC 42, 43, etc) for all of the song except for the low A notes, which would be PC 8 (for -2 octave anyway.) Tends to sound a bit better, and it's only single notes, so the tracking isn't much of an issue. Or if you want to be overkill, you can take a MIDI controllable loop switcher, and use a different pedal for certain parts... and that is just for the pitch shifting. As there are three unused loops, I could add three different fuzz/distortion pedals that could be instantly switched out for different parts of the song. Planning to do something else though.
  14. Thanks, and yeah, it only seems to be for mac unfortunately. Do you have access to any other DAWs? I could try to set it up as a Cubase project, but will need to see if it requires redoing everything from beginning to end. I should also mention that I haven't actually done the middle section of the song. It's just set for -1 octave all the way through. Basically what you see in this video, but I've made some small adjustments since then. Mainly fixed the timing of the nut strikes (which were correct initially, but not here 🤦‍♂️) and that same bit towards the beginning that I've never really figured out...Yet. video.mp4
  15. That's the thing though. It's not quite as simple as exporting from one DAW and importing into another. At least with Logic into Cubase. The automation ends up scrambled with a bunch of extra points added automatically. Though technically that's correct since they're made up of individual CCs, but the points between 0 and 127 seem to change location. As for MOTP, is that for the whammy, or does studio one have a sequencing plugin of some kind? I just finished up a file as well - it was originally intended for the whammy, but I ended up using a different pedal. My Movie.mp4 Interestingly there only appear to be two patterns in the song - but they need to be written (copied and pasted really) carefully, as it doesn't repeat consistently.
  16. Bs didn't need a MIDI file to play Unsustainable.... But then he didn't need me as a friend on facebook either. 🖕😭🖕
  17. That's fair enough - I doubt Matt's played it exactly the same more than once in live performances Sorry, shouldn't have called it a dive-bomb actually. I meant the very end of the live version that has that note that drops in pitch. It should be switching to -2 octave at the beginning of the 127th measure, and it remains on that for the pitch drop during the next measure. This is what I mentioned earlier about how some parts of the song don't have the higher octave settings, but are actually the lower octave settings returning to the actual pitch (if that makes sense)
  18. The MB-1S seems to be gone, but the shop has this one https://reverb.com/item/25452884-manson-sdl-1-matthew-bellamy-signature-guitar-2016-silver-aluminium Also their dealer in Belgium https://reverb.com/item/26052659-manson-mb-1-2019-red-alert-matthew-bellamy
  19. I think I get what you mean. I don’t think there’s anything particularly bizarre or complicated like that in the track. As I mentioned, I’ve tried loads of different ideas like going from CC 124-127 because it matched the pitch closely, but it really didn’t make sense to do it that way. Yeah, the dive-bomb effect is key for that part. It sort of mutes the notes if that makes sense? I recall it sounds best with the dive-bomb effect switching on and off VERY quickly at the end of each of those three triplets. I can give you the timestamps of where to put the six program changes, but it might not match depending on the grid you’re using. Are you doing this in Logic or Cubase? Or something else? And yeah that’s correct - it’s standard tuning. I was originally playing it like in the studio version (everything around the 12th fret) but found those -2 octave A string notes sounded pretty bad. So I set it up to be like the live version, which has the 5th fret low E on -1 octave like you say. As for the part at the very end of the live version, you might be right. It seems like the slight bend was coming from the part below? It’s the same pattern, but has the final 127 point moved to a different position. The string tree parts are the dive bomb patch switching on and off. I have the automation set to 127 the entire time. The reason is likely due to the difference in the guitars. The MB guitars don’t have string trees, so it sounds a bit different. Similar to doing it on a Gibson style guitar with an angled headstock really. And before I forget. If you try to go super accurate and match the sweep of the pitch and whatnot… get the instrumental track and isolate it so you’re only hearing one guitar. I can send you this if you’d like. As I mentioned earlier, they’re not perfectly in tune with each other for whatever reason, so it’s best to base everything on one guitar track if you’re trying to match it exactly.
  20. Did you try https://www.mansonguitarworks.com They have second hand ones from time to time. Pretty sure there's a red glitter MB-1S for sale, or at least there was recently. Or did you mean one of the few that were built in the mid 2000s? Because there are only five of those in existence (including the rust relic, excluding M1D1) and it seems like the same person has been getting his hands on them when they go up for sale. Wonder if MB is taking them out of circulation one by one...
  21. Nice, one of the roadworn models? Looks great. As for the the +2 octave part you mention, that's definitely the logical way to approach it. You'd think that if it's two octaves up at CC 127, it would sound like it's one octave up at half that value (63.5, but round that to 64) But if you check that older video I posted, I recall it was set much closer to the +2 octave value for those triplets. Like 124-127 or something like that. I might still have a screenshot of that somewhere - will see if I can find it. While it seemed to match the original track's pitch closely, it really seemed like an extreme way to do it... Even though Matt is playing everything around the 12th fret in the studio/making of video, I've never seen him play it that way live. Plus it's difficult to say if the making of video is how it was really recorded. So I ended taking all of the -2 octave settings for the low notes out and using -1 octave instead, as well as using +1 octave for those fast triplets towards the beginning. It does require playing it differently and moving around the neck a bit more though, but also sounds a lot better because the pedal isn't altering the sound as much. The dive-bomb sort of effect I mean is at the very end of the live version, as soon as the rest of the band stops playing. He hits a note on the 17th fret on the high E string, and it slowly drops two octaves in pitch. So the part right before that (the "you're un-sus-tain-a-ble" bit) is played on -2 octaves, 17th fret on the high E string. And thanks - I've spent more time working on this than I'd like to admit, but happy to discuss what I've found. I'll see if I can send you a screen shot of the automation, but yours is sounding good. Like I said, the correct triplet grids are key, but also keeping in mind that most parts of the song use lower octave/divebomb patches on the whammy, and have those return to the original pitch. You'll have to invert the automation if you've already written it to use the higher octave patches though.
  22. That's better than most I've heard actually. Program changes sound like the correct ones. Also, nice looking strat 😉 I can't tell, but have you put any automation points between 0 and 127? Meaning the heel/toe positions of the whammy. From what I've learned so far, the track doesn't have any that are between. Something to think about is that the original track has the pitch in a lot of parts actually dropping and coming back up to the original. For example, when you saw it live, do you remember how there was a dive-bomb sort of effect at the end that stopped on -2 octaves? Here's a fairly recent video I did. I haven't changed a whole lot, but trying to approach that bit at the beginning in a different way (assuming it's only playing in the background in the making of video) And yeah, the overall sound quality deteriorates quite a bit when run through the whammy on the -2 octave settings. I have it setup on -1 octave here. I noticed it's nowhere near as bad on the classic mode, so I'd switch to that if you're using the chords mode. 67902478_143253750101010_229437455806690456_n.mp4
  23. I think I get what parts you mean. Is it more the timing you're having difficulty with, or just figuring out the correct automation and program changes? Most of the track can be figured out easily enough if you have the correct grid divisions. Easiest way to do it is to figure out if the part you're working on has quarter, eighth, etc notes and then adjust the grid to match. The first part you mention is quite tricky. I don't think he's actually playing that part in the 'Making of' video - I thought it was a 12th fret harmonic on the A string, but it seems like he's muting everything completely. I'm pretty sure he's playing that one live without any backing, considering it sounds different each time. The original recording has the same +2 octave part in the MIDI track, but he hits the strings above the nut the fourth (final) time it's played. 03:39 in the recording.
  24. Do you mean the part towards the beginning with those fast triplets? That's the one part I'm still not convinced about. It's difficult to tell since the original track has two guitars, and one seems to be at a slightly different pitch (not sure if it's latency related or just out of tune to begin with)
  25. Thanks - yeah, saw that the other day. A bit strange that MGW isn't mentioned in the article even once... pretty sure the pictures are from them as well, but Mind Music Labs is credited. 😕
  • Create New...