chipmusic.org is an online community in respect and relation to chip music, art and its parallels.
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
ChipMusic.org / Forums / Nintendo Handhelds / LSDJ Video Tutorial - Combining Wav Kicks w/ Basses; Pre Snare Instr
Greeting all. Here is a video tutorial I filmed containing some useful tips for LSDJ. First I show you my Noise instrument called the 'Pre Snare'. then I go through a method of creating the illusion that your wav kicks and wav bass instruments start on the same downbeat.
Any feedback will be appreciated. If I'm not clear enough or you want something else explained, please let me know. I'd also love to hear any music you make utilizing these tips.
Agree.
Even if i always didn't use the Groove Channel, it now got a purpose for me, definitly gonna experiment with this.
Keep it up, great Work!
cool vid! could be edited more succinctly though, but thanks for sharing this :>
personally, i do kick/bass combos inside the kick table, with P00 followed by a transpose
Very well done video, pretty helpful, you've got very clean cut instruments, good programming.
I've done the groove trick in the past, sometimes I get too lazy to re-write everything in double-time though. There's another potential option there, though it's a bit more clumsy and I'd recommend your method over this one.
If you know that all of your kicks will be on an even beat and all your basses will be directly following that, you can set your wav channel's groove to:
0-03
1-09That way you don't have to work in double-time. Or if you're being really boring and just doing 4 on the floor you could do this:
Groove
0-03
1-09
2-06
3-06OR if you only need it in isolated cases and want the rest of your groove to be steady you can always change it temporarily and then change it right back. Assuming The 03,09 groove is on G-01:
KICK G-01
BASS ---
--- G-00All of them sound exactly the same, but some might fit your use-case better.
Also, very nice kick, sounds punchy.
Very well done video, pretty helpful, you've got very clean cut instruments, good programming...
Also, very nice kick, sounds punchy.
Thank you very much. Honestly.
Also super tip! A 3/9 groove is rather clever. Though it may not work for some situations. Particularly situations I often implement. I might be wrong but wouldn't that stop me from being able to make a beat like the one below? Beats 7 and 9 would start 3 tics before I wanted them to, right?.
0 Kick
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Kick
8 Snare
9 Kick
A
B
C
D
E
FI'll play with it when I get the chance.
Last edited by TylerBarnes (May 29, 2013 6:58 pm)
cool vid! could be edited more succinctly though, but thanks for sharing this :>
personally, i do kick/bass combos inside the kick table, with P00 followed by a transpose
Ditto.
Also super tip! A 3/9 groove is rather clever. Though it may not work for some situations. Particularly situations I often implement. I might be wrong but wouldn't that stop me from being able to make a beat like the one below? Beats 7 and 9 would start 3 tics before I wanted them to, right?.
Yeah it wouldn't work with that 
It's almost always better to just do it the long way, but for 1 time scenarios the 3-9 groove makes it so you don't have to write out everything as a 3-3 groove.
cool vid! could be edited more succinctly though, but thanks for sharing this :>
personally, i do kick/bass combos inside the kick table, with P00 followed by a transpose
I do this sometimes too, if you'd like your bass sound to be different than your kick you can just use an F01 command and copy the WAV instrument 's WAV of your choice into the second frame of your kick-drum's wave table. Only works for static wav basses, (unless you want to go super technical) but should work in most cases.
TylerBarnes wrote:Also super tip! A 3/9 groove is rather clever. Though it may not work for some situations. Particularly situations I often implement. I might be wrong but wouldn't that stop me from being able to make a beat like the one below? Beats 7 and 9 would start 3 tics before I wanted them to, right?.
Yeah it wouldn't work with that
But also you can have 16 steps in the groove screen, so you can match it to what ever happens in a phrase
Good point Saskrotch. I still think 3/3 is the most elegant solution. I honestly don't see what is so wrong or inconvenient with drawing out the wav chains in such a way. It actually gives me more flexibility without resorting to R or D commands. Also, I personally really like the fact I can have 1 chain start with the kick and the following chain starts with my snare (for halftime beats per my example). To each his own I suppose. One thing about the all in one table method is wouldn't the kick sound be transposed as well every time you change bass notes? either that or you'll have an awful lot of redundant tables wasted just for bass notes 
. I again personally prefer the consistency and control my method would give to the kick tone.
It's seems we all have some personal tastes that draw us to using one of these techniques over the rest. I actually didn't know there was so many ways of achieving this. I'm delighted to be learning so much about it.
About your table for the tonal kickdrum, you say that the K command comes in after three ticks, when it should actually be three steps or nine ticks. Three steps at groove 3:3 is 9 ticks (3*3).
Also using E2 and transpose in the table can be a bit confusing for beginners and also a waste of cpu and space when you just could have E7 to begin with. Just a thought.
I personally would make the tonal kickdrum in another way because I don't like how it takes up two steps in the phrase and that you're using G3:3. But each to his own.
Don't take this as a rant. I really like to watch how other people go about doing things in lsdj. Keep up the good work!
About your table for the tonal kickdrum, you say that the K command comes in after three ticks, when it should actually be three steps or nine ticks. Three steps at groove 3:3 is 9 ticks (3*3).
If I'm not mistaken, each step on the table screen equal one tick and one step on the phrase screen equals the number of tics designated by the groove. Which in my example, the kick only used 3 table steps, and the kick instrument occupied only one phrase step. So since my phrase was running on a groove of 3/3 each phrase step was only 3 ticks long. Am I missing something?
You're right about the E2 E7 thing. It's just a workflow preference for me.
I didn't see it as a rant. I find most all feedback helpful, an appreciate it all. but thank you for considering my feelings/reactions to your comments.
G00 on tables changes it to steps. Default is ticks. G01 seems to be like half a step? It's not quite ticks or steps.
Also the 3/3 thing is only bad if you write music that isn't super repetitive. Taking up twice as many phrases will help you run out of space much quicker (the song I brought up to check i had the groove commands right was already in the BXs, if i had uses 3/3 i wouldn't of been able to finish that song)
nordloef wrote:About your table for the tonal kickdrum, you say that the K command comes in after three ticks, when it should actually be three steps or nine ticks. Three steps at groove 3:3 is 9 ticks (3*3).
If I'm not mistaken, each step on the table screen equal one tick and one step on the phrase screen equals the number of tics designated by the groove. Which in my example, the kick only used 3 table steps, and the kick instrument occupied only one phrase step. So since my phrase was running on a groove of 3/3 each phrase step was only 3 ticks long. Am I missing something?
You're right about the E2 E7 thing. It's just a workflow preference for me.
I didn't see it as a rant. I find most all feedback helpful, an appreciate it all. but thank you for considering my feelings/reactions to your comments.
I was pretty sure you had the G command in the table and not in the phrase, so I rewatched it, and of course I was wrong. You are of course completely right! I stand corrected. Sorry about that.
Yeah, from what I understand, tables are always at tic speed. Any G commands inside a table will cause the resulting phrase to change, but the tables themselves are unaffected by grooves. EDIT: This information is wrong.
Last edited by TylerBarnes (May 29, 2013 10:03 pm)
No, what I'm saying is that using a groove command inside a table changes what speed the table runs at.