Do You Love Your Track? Or Are You Just Overly Committed?

  • The creative process involves a lot of fantasizing. You fantasize about the reaction you’ll get from crowds, and the reaction you’ll get from promoters. You fantasize about the reaction you’ll get from their creative peers, and the reaction you’ll get from your friends. Perhaps the person you have a crush on will like it. Perhaps you’ll get it signed to the label of your dreams, and it will break your career as a musician. This often creates a deep level of love for your track. 

However, the caveat is that many people feel this adoration in that euphoric phase of composition, where you’ve discovered an amazing loop or a basic structure of a song that enraptures you. 

This is that moment when you pull the hammer back on the metaphorical pinball machine and bounce your idea into the summit of the board, where it starts bouncing off the bells, whistles, and fixed, flashing bumpers, sending it careening into a space of infinite possibilities. 

Then after a while, it slows down, and you begin to see that the ball is falling deeper and deeper towards your flippers and that if you don’t hit it just right, you may destroy your track forever.

This is that moment of self-reflection and doubt that most creatives have. It’s in this period that you might think that you messed the whole track up by adding a part that doesn’t elicit the same joy as before, almost like chasing the high the first time you took a drug. 

The problem is that you’ve committed so much time to this track that you may be convinced that it’s still incredible, and become stubborn about any suggestions. 

Or it could go the other way, where you’ve committed so much time to this track that you feel like you need to do something with it, but you don’t love it like you used to. There are solutions to both conflicts, resulting from the same emotion – love for your track.

 

A photo of Ableton next to a cup of coffee.

 

A solution to loving your track too much

This is a hard one because people often get stubborn about their art. They love it so much that they can’t absorb any feedback or rejection from their peers about it. Often that’s because their love for it is built on the cognitive heuristic of commitment, rather than them actually believing it’s an incredible track. 

Therefore, often this fallacy is built on eggshells and critique may seem like a personal attack, and therefore the creator protects it from opinion and rejection, lest they be rejected too. This sometimes leads to people not putting their track out at all, always “waiting for the right moment.”

The way to get over this fear? Truly don’t give a shit what other people say. Most great artists didn’t. We always hear stories about the albums that critics lambasted or art that sat obscurely for decades before being dusted off and appreciated. Or there is the opposite, where their art’s controversy was appealing to some, and appalling to others, creating a maelstrom of press. 

This is what happened to John Cage and Karlheinz Stockhausen, who made some of the most challenging music in modern history, where to this day most people don’t understand it. But they are both considered important in the canon of music. 

They knew their music was threatening, but they probably didn’t care, because they thought it was important, and thus put it out there. 

If people want their music to get out there, especially if they still hold onto the original fantasy of other people listening to it, then they need to put it out there for critique. Whether that’s your friends or a marketing campaign that goes out to media contacts and DJs, you’re going to feel rejection, even if it really is brilliant. That’s because music is subjective. 

 

A photo of Deadmau5, who understands that his love for his tracks can often be misguided.

Credit: Wikipedia

A solution to not knowing if you still love your track

If you got to the point where you can put the song out, but are still having doubts about it, keep in mind that you really have no idea how it will sound to others. Remember, when you first started the track, there were elements about it that sent your brain bouncing off the proverbial pinball machine. Therefore, there is a good chance that other people will love it too. 

Deadmau5, love him, or hate him, knows how to finish tracks, and has released some of the most seminal modern rave anthems. With his hit, Strobe, he was having this conflict. He liked it enough to finish it, but not enough to be confident with it. 

Since his label hadn’t seen anything in a while, he decided to send it over to them, suggesting that it could be a B-side to a record; another piece of content to whet the appetite of his fans. Then, to his surprise, it blew up in 2009, right at the advent of the EDM explosion, helping to propel his career into the stratosphere. 

If you listen to Strobe, you might be able to see why he wasn’t confident in it. It’s at least two minutes longer than any other song on the album, clocking in at 10:33, and it takes a few minutes before the kick drum comes in. It’s not necessarily a radio anthem. 

But believe it or not, people like challenging music, because it gets them thinking.

A less mainstream example of this is from one of my clients who had a song that they sent me that I thought was pretty good, but they were having doubts about. I was like “Look, how about I send it to some labels and see what happens.” 

So I sent it out to some labels, and it didn’t just get signed, it got picked up by a bunch of different places. They were having doubts, and their doubts were squashed when it became as successful as anything else they’d released.

You also don’t know who tracks are going to resonate with. While they might not vibe with your primary (often fantasized) audience, they could resonate with an entirely new audience. 

A good example of this is a client of mine who sent me over some ambient tracks they made, which was surprising based on his previous work. What was also surprising is that they had all these Indian-sounding names. 

Well, it turns out those Indian names were actually holy words in a religious sect, and when people searched for those on Google in regards to the sect, their songs would come up. With this, their music, in a way, became holy music and ended up performing better than any of the other, more branded tracks that we worked on together.

 

A Note On Expectations

As I get older, I realize that the desire to be understood, or liked by others is a trap for the creative process. The real joy should come from if a song is technically solid, or if you changed your style to something that you’ve never done before. These are both something to be proud of as they show an improvement in your abilities as an artist.

I like to think of each track as journaling, and it’s a capturing of an idea, rather than trying to make something that will please thousands of people. The most frustrated artists are the ones who have high expectations for their music and where it goes, the least frustrated are the opposite. 

A note on collaboration

As many of you know, I do track finalization. Whether you do it through me, or another session musician, I think what I’m about to say rings true for both. Basically, I only like to work with people who have a realistic expectation of their art or don’t view me as some sort of savant. Just like they have high expectations for the track, they might also have too high of expectations for the session work, especially if they have both. Because whether people realize it or not, they might have subconscious ideas of how their track should go without consciously knowing how it should go. 

Then when I or anyone else goes in and makes edits, these sorts of clients expect it to sound like something completely different. Also, if they’ve heard a track a couple hundred times, any alterations to it are going to be glaringly noticeable, and might not jive with the congruency you have programmed in their head. Therefore, if you have these sorts of expectations, it’s best to forgo them, as they diminish the creative potential of a track. Remember, it took something like 27 people to write “I Feel Love” by Donna Summer. Did they all agree? Did it diminish the value and impact of the track?

The best people to work with are ones who are about a 6 or 7 out of 10 on their love for their track. These people tend to keep an open mind.

 

A photo of someone listening to a track. Don't listen to your track too much or else you might love your track artificially.

 

Favorite Equalizer For Electronic Music

People often ask me what my favorite equalizer for electronic music is, and my answer is that it depends on what their goal is, as well as their skill level. However, the EQs that I like for electronic music generally fit a certain set of criteria. Not every equalizer in this article fits all of the criteria, but here is a not-so-exhaustive list of things that I like to see when I’m purchasing a new EQ.

Keep in mind that all EQ’s are at their core, just filters, but some go above and beyond this. Equalizer settings for electronic music vary based on the timbres and styles, but each one of these will work universally for electronic music.

 

Criteria

  1. They have previews of the band that you can solo (you can press the button and hear the band on its own). This allows you to hear things more specifically.
  2. The plugin needs to be able to do oversampling.
  3. The plugin needs to be able solo the filter (EQ band).
  4. The EQ needs to have a mid and side mode, aka M/S mode.
  5. The EQ can switch from digital approach to analog. A digital EQ is very clean, and an analog is a little bit more organic and less precise.
  6. The EQ can be dynamic
  7. While all don’t have this feature, it’s nice if an EQ has a piano roll, so you can see how frequencies quantize to notes (this is a good way of seeing if a note will fit inside the track).

 

Fabfilter Pro-Q 3

A picture of one of the best equalizers for electronic music, in my opinion, the Fabfilter Pro Q 3

First on the list is the Fabfilter ProQ 3 – an affordable, easy-to-use EQ that hits most of the points I look for in an equalizer. It’s versatile, as in it can be used in both mastering and mixing. On top of state-of-the-art linear phase operation and the ability to get zero latency readouts on your EQ, you get natural phase modes, mid/side processing, and a bunch of other intuitive options.

 

A Neat Pro-Q 3 Trick


One of my favorite features is that if you have the ProQ 3 on multiple channels or busses, it can communicate with the ProQ 3’s on the other ones and let you know if there are conflicts in frequences.

Then, with the side processing (sidechain), you can easily duck precise frequencies, and you can even solo these frequencies to hear exactly how the sidechain is affecting the relationship between all the individual sounds. Or sometimes you don’t even need a sidechain, and you can just grab the curve and bring the conflicting frequency down.

Another neat trick with the Fabfilter ProQ 3 is that you can use it to split the stereo, and modify the same frequency at different amplitude levels on the stereo. So for instance, sometimes in a recording, you have a sound that mixes well on the right pan, and doesn’t quite mix perfectly on the left, but should be somewhat present on the left panning in order to fill out the stereo field.

With the ProQ 3, you can leave the level on the right channel as is, and on the left, alter the amplitude in order to fit the frequencies it’s conflicting with.

All of these reasons are why it’s a favorite equalizer for electronic music. It produces some of the best equalizer settings for bass, mids, and highs in all genres.

 

Wavefactory Trackspacer

A photo of Wavefactory's trackspacer, which allows you to have some of the best equalizer settings for electronic music without the hassle.

This one is not necessarily an EQ, but if you’re familiar with Wavefactory’s Trackspacer you can see why it would fit well within this list. Basically, it uses a mathematical formula in order to automatically figure out where conflicting frequencies are between two tracks and then it will apply precise side compression to the parts that are necessary to compress to get them to meld better.

You can even apply a low pass or a high pass filter to each end of the frequency spectrum to isolate what part of the sounds you want to compress. It’s ridiculously easy to use.

 

HornetVST Total EQ

a photo of HornetVST's Total EQ. It's one of my favorite equalizers for electronic music.

Not everyone has the money to invest in VSTs. However, HornetVST makes VSTs that are ridiculously cheap, and they often do sales, so you can get decent plugins for 5 bucks. 

The HornetVST Total EQ is similar to ProQ 3, sounds really good, and is easy to work with. Personally, I believe it’s better than Ableton stock EQ’s because you have a team working specifically on developing the best equalizer for electronic music (or all music at that matter).

While it doesn’t have all the gizmos and detail goodies that the ProQ 3 has, it’s still really good. For instance, it has 12 bands, a real-time spectrum analyzer, a whopping 17 different kinds of filters for each band, individual analog response and emulation for each band, band soloing (like in the ProQ 3), mono/stereo for each band, and a bunch more features.

 

Melda Productions – MAutoEQ

Image of one of my favorite equalizers for electronic music - the Melda Productions - MAuto EQ

The thing that makes this EQ special is the MeldaProduction Filter Adaption (MFA) technology which uses a formula to analyze your recording and make suggestions based on your recording, another recording, or even a spectrum that you can “draw” inside the interface. It’s kind of the Photoshop of EQs, in a way. It can also be used extensively for mixing and mastering.

MAutoEqualizer can place a track into a mix using the spectral separation feature, where you can, like in Photoshop, pencil your preferred frequency response. MAutoEqualizer’s technology will search for the best settings and alter the parametric equalizer bands to fit the best form.

With a normal equalizer, you are listening to the spectrum and then increasing or decreasing the amplitude of the band to fit what you believe is the correct level, which can be a chore. With MAutoEqualizer it gives your ears a little bit of a break by setting things to levels based on its algorithmic predeterminations. 

Also, if you are allergic to resonance in your sound then this EQ is for you. One of the things it does best is listen to the incoming signal, where it then finds resonances that it can apply filtering suggestions to. Then with the wet/dry knob, you can determine how much resonance you want in the areas it pointed out. It’s really simple, and a favorite equalizer for electronic music.



Brainworks’ BX3

A photo of the Brainworks’ BX3, which produces some of the best equalizer settings for electronic music.

A mastering and mixing EQ I recommend is BX3 by Brainworks. It’s an extremely powerful, surgical EQ that I use extensively. It can make space, clean, and can really polish things up. This EQ is not meant for adding color or character to mixes, but rather making sure that everything sounds as clear and crisp as possible. It’s a bit difficult to use if you’re not super familiar with mixing and mastering, but it’s extremely powerful, making it a favorite equalizer for electronic music.

This EQ’s Auto Listen feature automatically solos each band’s Gain and Q (resonance) controls based on their respective settings while doing the same with the channel’s Frequency controller. By setting Gain, Q, and Frequency on an individual channel (L or R), Auto Solo switches the monitoring to that channel.

Your tweaks are illustrated with separate frequency-response graphs for each channel. With this feature, you may notice that your adjustments will become more visible and audible than ever before since it allows for some of the best equalizer settings for electronic music.

 

Brainworks’ AMEK200

photo of one of my favorite analog emulated EQ's for music, the Brainworks’ AMEK200.

My favorite analog emulation EQ is AMEK200 by Brainworks. This is modeled after classic 70’s and 80’s mastering EQ’s, such as the GML 8200 and vintage SONTEC vintage EQs, but with some plugin specific upgrades, such as Auto-Listen features, variable high-pass and low-pass filters, and M/S processing.

All of these features result in a very transparent mix that does a really beautiful finishing. Note that the AMEK200 has no spectral readout, just knobs you twist, which is good for learning how to trust your ears.

 

So, which one is my favorite equalizer for electronic music?

There is no specific one. All of these plugins will allow for the best equalizer settings for music, whether that’s minimal house, techno, jazz, rock, hip-hop or k-pop. They all allow for the best equalizer settings for rolling bass, or entrancing mids, it just depends on your experience level, and your desire to learn and experiment.

This article contains affiliate links which I may make a commission off of.