Blog Archives - Page 5 of 15 - Pheek's Mixdown and Mastering

Sound Design and Arrangements Series Pt. 4: Emphasis and Proportion

August 10, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Sound Design, Tips/by pheek

This post is part of a series: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

In this post I thought I’d dive into two principles that I find go hand-in-hand: emphasis and proportion. Let’s start by defining what they mean, then how we can use them in what we love doing—music production.

In past articles I’ve talked about how to start a song. While there’s no right or wrong answer here, we can agree on certain points for the core of a song. Let me ask you a straight-up question to start with, which is, when you think of your all-time favourite song, what automatically comes to your mind as its most memorable part?

All kind of answers can come up, and perhaps you’re hearing the song in your mind while reading this. Maybe you remember the chorus, the main riff (motif), or have a part of the song where a specific emotion is evoked in you; you might even be thinking about a purely technical part.

Whatever you remember from that song was your point of focus. The focal point of the listener is what grabs attention and keeps it engaged.

Emphasis is a strategy that aims to draw the listener’s attention to a specific design element or an element in question. You could have emphasis on multiple focal points, but the more you have, the less emphasis impact you’ll have.

When producing a song, I like to ask, what is the star of this song? What is the motif, the main idea? What’s going to catch your attention first and keep you engaged? When listening to a song, you might have different layers and ideas succeeding one another, but of course, they can’t all grab a listener’s attention, as you can only really focus on 1-2 elements at a time. As explained in past articles, the listener will follow the arrangements exactly like one would follow the story line of a movie.

I see emphasis is from two perspectives: from the tonic side and/or from the storytelling part.

The tonic part is where you have your phrase (melody) and there is a part that is “louder” than the others. So, let’s say we take one sentence and change the tonic accent, it will change it’s meaning (caps represents the tonic):

I like carrots.
I LIKE carrots.
I like CARROTS.
but also, I LIke carROTS!

We have here 3 different tonic emphases, and in each, the focal point of the listener is shifted to a specific word. When we talk, we change the tonic naturally—emphasis on a specific word is to put importance on it for the listener. It can be used as weight, on insisting your position about a topic, or to clarify one word.

The same is also true for timing:

I like… carrots.
I… like carrots.

Or spacing perhaps the syllables to create another type of tonic:

I li..ke carrots.
I like car…rots.

Pausing creates tension as you wait. If you can focus on one idea and articulate it in various ways, you can imagine that your motif will keep the interest of the listener.

Now imagine these ideas transposed to your melodic phrase; you can play with the velocity, but also create emphasis by pausing, delaying, and accentuating it.

Potential solutions to add emphasis: velocity, swing, randomness.

In our coaching group on Facebook, I often see people try to focus on everything a song should have, but without a main idea and therefore without emphasis, listeners have a hard time getting hooked on any part of it. You can do anything you want in music, yes, but perhaps if you listen to your favourite songs, you might notice that they usually have a strong hook or something to suck you in.

Tip: Strip down your track to the bare minimum but so that it’s still recognizable as the same song. Are you left with the melody or is it something else? What’s unique about your song?

While this post is not going to discuss motifs and hooks in detail, since it was previously covered multiple times on this blog, I’d like discuss how emphasis can be used to bring a hook/motif to life.

To emphasize a specific sound, hook, or motif, you can use any of these techniques:

Amplitude: One sound is 25-75% lower or higher in gain than another. Think of different drum sounds in a kit.
Brightness: Brightness mostly starts at around 8khz. A filter or EQ boost around that area and higher will feel like magic. Same for multi-band saturation. This is why cutting or taming sounds compared to the one you want brighter will help contribute to emphasis.
Thickness: If you take multiple samples, percussive for example, and compress some in parallel (eg. 50% wet) very aggressively with a ratio of 8:1, you will definitely see a difference.
Dynamics: Using an envelope, map it to some parameters of your plugins to have them interact with the incoming signal.

However, all of these techniques depend on one thing: whatever you put emphasis on must have an “edge” in comparison to the other sounds. In ambient or techno with multiple sounds, you’ll want to make sure to setup routing in your production even before mixing your song. I like to group all elements that are decorative so they are treated as if they’d be a bit more distant. For example, for that group you could start by cutting most of the highs at around 10k with a gentle filter curve, then control the transients with a transient shaper by making them less aggressive and then have a reverb that focuses on a late response, which will create a distance. You can then lower the gain of the entire group to taste to get more of a background feel from all those sounds. Something like Trackspacer could also very useful here to create space between the main idea and your other sounds.

To support emphasis, you need proportion. In sound design, I like to think of proportion as an element of design more than a pragmatic thing. If you think of a drum set, all hits are really at different volume levels—you never see a drummer hit everything at the same volume level; they probably wouldn’t even if they could because it just doesn’t sound right. This is a version of proportion that can be applied to any of your sequences, percussion, and other ideas—it’s often related to velocity.

I also see proportion in the wet/dry knob of your effects. How much do you want to add or remove?

For the listener to understand the importance and emphasis of an effect, you’ll need to counter-balance it with something proportionally lower. If you want the listener to hear how powerful a sound is, try using another one that is very weak; the contrast will amplify it.

Proportion comes from different aspects. Arrangements take over from the mix in a dynamic way. So, if you think of your song as having an introduction, middle, and ending, proportion can also be address from a time-based perspective in arrangements. While there’s nothing wrong with linear arrangements, which are some of the friendliest DJ tools possible, they are perhaps not strongest example of proportion in music.

Here are just a few examples of how you can address proportion in your productions with some simple little tweaks:

When mixing your elements, look at the volume metering on the Master channel. You want your main element to be coming the loudest and then you’ll mix in the other ones. You can group all your other elements besides the main element and have them slightly ducking with a compressor. I’ve been really enjoying the Smart Compressor by Sonimus. It does a great job at ducking frequencies, a bit like Track Spacer but, cleaner since it provides a internal assistant.
If you’ve missed past articles, one technique I’ve outlined is the 75-50-25 technique, as I’ve named it. Once you have your main element coming in, you’ll want other channels to be either a bit lower (75%), half of the main (50%), or in the back (25%). This will really shape a spatial mix to really provide space and proportion for the main element.
I find that if you want emphasis, there’s nothing better to bring in some life in it and I’d recommend you use a tool like Shaperbox 2. I would automate the volume over 4 bars. I find that 4 bars is the main target for electronic music, mostly for the organization and variation it needs to keep the listener engaged. If it changes every 2 bars, the listener will notice, but every 4 bars, with a progression, it will create the idea that there’s always a variation. Also, I like to create fades in different plateaus of automation. You can have a slant between bar 1 and 2, then jump to a different level on 3 and a slow move for 4. This is very exciting for the ear. Pair that with filtering automation, and you’ll have real action. Emphasis will work well if this type of automation is happening on your main element, but it’s hard to do on all channels because it becomes distracting.
Supporting elements can share similar reverb or effects with the main idea for unity.
Dynamics are helpful for articulation and emphasis. The new Saturn 2 is pretty incredible for this—it can tweak the saturation based on an incoming signal.

Can you trust yourself to judge your own music?

July 6, 2020/in Blog, Mastering, Mixing, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Tips/by pheek

This has been a popular topic recently—I think that because of the pandemic and the isolation that comes with it, people rely a lot on online contacts to get feedback on their music. The lack of in-person music testing as well as and lack of being able to go to clubs has changed the way we are able to analyze our own music.

I was a part of an organized live stream recently to support a friend named Denis Kaznacheev, who has been held in prison for something we all think is impossible (but that’s another topic). Being in a room with 4 people, playing live, and getting feedback after months of isolation was a weird experience. The first thing that came to my mind was, that my music sucked. Yeah, I also go through it once in a while, and I had forgotten how playing music for and in front of people changes the dynamic of a song. In studio, it sounds a specific way but add one listener and it’s all of a sudden, different.

Some song, different context, completely different mood. Was there something I could do to predict this?

Technically, there was absolutely nothing wrong with what I did. People who tuned in loved it. The thing that clashed was the mood, the feel of the track, compared to what I had in mind. In past articles I’ve discussed the importance of a reference track, and this could have helped me in this particular situation, and could have helped better classify my music as well. But as you know, there’s no do-it-all plugin that can prevent this. This is why many people struggle with judging their own music.

Technical Validation

When it comes to technical items, you can self-validate using some handy tools.

See if your track is, compared to a reference, feeling like the same tone and balanced, I’d recommend using Reference. This tool is my go-to plugin whenever a client insists that the track I’m working on doesn’t sound like a particular song. I’ll load up the reference song and then, after volume matching, I can see if the lows, mids, highs are adjusted in a similar way than my mix. It also shows you if you have, per band, the same level of compression or wideness. It doesn’t lie and you can match it to have something similar. But how do you raise one band to match the reference?

I use a multi-band compressor to compress and, or EQ. A shelving EQ, with 3 bands can be helpful to adjust, but a multi-band compressor really can set the tone. You’ll set the crossovers of each band to match Reference and by adjusting, you’ll see it react to your gain or reduction. While you could use any multi-band compressors, I’d highly recommend the Fabfilter MB.

The same company that makes Reference also made a plugin named Mixroom which, with the same idea as reference, focuses on everything in the mids and highs. It’s a bit tricky to use at first, but once I found reference songs that were analyzed properly, it gave me some interesting pointers on what to push or remove. I thought it was pretty interesting to reverse-engineer some complicated mixes.

Many times people will tell me they don’t like to compare to anyone or that they’re going for their own style but that’s like trying to draw your grandmother from your memory. Some people might do better than others, but audio is abstract and you need to compare yourself to someone else to know what’s lacking or overflowing. I mean, even within a mix, I compare my channels to see their peaks, densities, and panning to make sure one doesn’t cross another, unless to create something as a whole.

People struggle with loudness, but it’s is a bit easier to manage. You’ll need a metering tool such as the IKmultimedia TR5 Metering or the lovely Hawkeye from Plugin Alliance. They are costly but necessary. For a mix, you have to keep in mind a few details: the loudest peak should be -6dB, the RMS (more or less the density) around -13 to -20dB, in LUFS, I’d suggest to be around -15dB and dynamic range to be above 10. A plugin such as Reference will also indicate loudness, and that can be really useful to see if you’re in the same ballpark.

Please consider these are numbers I deal with, and that for certain genres, it can be completely different.

If you come to struggle with the low end, the guys from Mastering The Mix also have a low-end validation/enhancement with the excellent Bassroom plugin. Again, you’ll need a quality reference to do the trick, but once loaded and with some practice, a muddy, weak low end will be a thing of the the past.

These are the best technical validation tools I’ve used in the last few years. They’re efficient, affordable and very useful in whatever I do.

Self-Mastering and Mixing

Pretty much anyone who’s been making music for a while or has studied audio engineering will agree that mixing or mastering yourself isn’t the real deal. It’s doable, understand me right, but you’re not winning. With the previous listing of all the technical tools I shared, you can make some really efficient mixes, but perhaps sometimes that’s not enough.

As an engineer, the main thing I’ll say is that someone else might spot things that are in your blind spots, plus that person is also emotionally detached from the music itself, so making decisions feels like less of a risk in itself. If you’ve been reading this blog regularly, you know I often refer to our duality as humans to have a analytical side and a creative side. When I work with musicians, I invite them to see this duality as a muscle. Your creative side needs to be exercised; it needs to constantly be fed because it’s a sponge. You want to find the perfect routine and be efficient at it, then break it to pieces to reinvent your new way of making music by re-combining them for a new version of yourself.

The way I see music-making isn’t about trying to be in full possession of your potential, but more about always putting yourself into a state of instability and risk, so new creative ideas emerge. You’ll connect the dots of the past to create a path in the now.

This state of mind is one that is not always technical, and it’s raw. I would invite you not to tame it, but to create spontaneous ideas and raw projects.

This approach is basically the exact opposite of sitting in front of your computer to design and fix a snare. There’s nothing wrong with that if you like, it but like I say to people, artists should become experts at flow, not perfection. They want to be artists, not craftsmen. But I won’t stop you from being both—I just often feel that technical production doesn’t age as well as solid creative ideas. The only thing that stands the test of time is simplicity, and that comes with a mastery of both flow and technical expertise.

If you want to be a master at everything, you’ll be very average at everything as well for quite some time, or potentially forever.

So, imagine you have an amazing idea that you made but you are very average at mixing and new to mastering—you’ll probably be butchering your idea when you try to do either. Yes, you save money and learn by doing it yourself, but I think if you’re aspiring to release something on a good label, to get attention, it might be a good thing to have someone look into your mix, even a friend. But if you really want to do it all yourself, get yourself solid tools to make sure you get the most out of them.

If you want to practice mixing, I suggest trying to find what I call, a swap buddy who can send you their mixes and vice-versa. You both learn by tweaking each other’s work, and going back to your own music after will feel easier, and clearer as well.

Psychological Validation

Now, psychology is an area where don’t get any tools to help that we all have to deal with. It’s that limbo where you maybe made a few different mixes and feel unsure which one is best. You know technically everything is there and in order, but in the last bit you’ll try to label your song into one of these buckets: Good, Not Good, Still needs work, Ready for mastering…etc.

Are advanced, experienced, and veteran producers exempt from this state of mind? Not at all. After decades of making music, I still have no idea if my music is “good” or not, even if got in the top 10 on Beatport or if my friends all love it. Deep inside, sometimes, I’ll doubt myself. However, I came up with some personal rules to help me judge if I think my own work is decent or not.

Deal with technical points first: This is why I started this post with technical stuff. I see in our Facebook group, people giving feedback, and my observation is that it is often biased by their mood or listening situation. What has become clear to me is that when giving feedback, you need a common reference. I can tell you that your kick is too loud, but compared to what? I have clients sometimes who complain about the low end being overpowering but in the same mastering session on that day I had another client who loved really, really loud kicks. The difference was laughable and both had the exact opposite feedback: one had weak low end but he felt it was too much while the opposite was a bass orgy but he wanted more. Could it just be what they hear? Yes, probably, and this is why you need to be able to use a FFT to check, but also, listen to you music in the middle of a playlist that has other songs of the same genre to know if it sounds right.

A client was telling me “It sounds right in the studio, wrong in the car and at home, its a different song… which one is right?”

The one that is right should be your studio version, but it should be cross-validated technically with other songs. If it doesn’t sound right at home, then find a song that sounds good there and then study it at the studio to see what that song has that yours don’t.

Know that you’ll never really have a permanent opinion about your music. Each day your mood might change and affect how you appreciate your music. Down the road, you’ll learn new techniques and then hear mistakes in your song, you’ll hear a better song than yours… all these points will make you doubt yourself. You’ll always want to go fix something. Since you know you’ll never be really satisfied with it, then you can accept to move on faster. Just start another song, apply what you learned, use your new influences and try something new.

Nothing exterior will validate your music. No matter what you think or do with your song, you might doubt it. This means, you don’t need the latest synth or to be on that specific label. “...and then I’ll be happy.” is a fallacy. Knowing that, it re-centres you to count on a handful of friends for feedback.

4. Let things age. Nothing better than taking a few weeks off before listening to know how you feel about it.

What’s interesting is that, whenever I receive criticism, I start see a perspective I didn’t look into enough—super important. Music production and audio engineering is often discouraging and that’s the reality of the art. That said, I don’t think there’s a day where I make music that I don’t learn something new. Accept that everything is work in progress. This is why songs that take too long to finish are often because my perfectionist side took over, and that’s not where I can make magic happen—it’s often the other way around.

Sound Design and Arrangements Series Pt. 3: Repetition

June 15, 2020/in Blog, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Sound Design, Tips/by pheek

This post is part of a series: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

This post focuses on how I approach repetition in my music, as well as how I perceive it when working on clients’ music. While this is a very obvious topic for electronic music oriented towards dance, where patterns repeat, I understand that as an artist, it can be a very personal topic. Each genre has a way of approaching repetition, and if you’ve been browsing this blog, you will recognize some concepts previously covered that I’d encourage you to look into in more detail. I’d like to approach repetition in music by reviewing your workflow to avoid wasting time on things that can be automated.

Tempo

Using tempo to deliver a message is a very delicate subject. Often before I played live in a venue, I would spend some time on the dancefloor and analyze the mood and the dancers’ needs. I’d check out what speed a DJ’s set was, how fast he’s mix in and out, and the reaction of the crowd. It has always surprised me how playing at 122 BPM vs 123 BPM can shift the mood; I really can’t explain why. But when I’d make a song, I’d keep in mind that DJs could speed it up or slow it down—an important factor affecting energy. I find that increments of 5 make a huge change in the density of the sound in the club. If you slow down very complex patterns, the sounds have room between themselves which also gives the listeners to perceive the sound differently.

Whatever tempo you’ll be using, I highly recommend that you look into using gating for your short percussion or use an envelope maker like Shaperbox 2 to really shape the space between your sounds and have some “white space” between each of them. If you go for a dense atmosphere, I would recommend that you use very fast release compression and make use of parallel compression as well to make sure you’re not over crowding your song.

Sound Repetition

Once we find something we love, we tend to want to repeat it for the entire length of a song. This is, of course, a bit much for someone who listens to it. People expect change—for sounds to have variants and to be sucked in with perhaps something unexpected from the sound. Also, John Cage would disagree and suggest that an idea could be repeated for 10 minutes and the listener would be liking it, but I honestly haven’t heard many songs (through experience or work) that kept me that interested for that long.

The question is, how frequently can an idea be repeated?

It depends of a lot of factors, and while I don’t claim to know the truth, there are techniques to keep in mind. I’d like to teach you how to learn the best way for your music. Let me explain some of my own personal rules—my “reality check” for the validity of a song and the questions around repetition.

First impressions never fail: This is really important. 99% of people I work with start losing perspective and trust in their song’s potential by doing extended sessions on production. This means, when you first open a project you worked on, what hits you at first is what you should fix in that session. Once this is done, save it under another name and then close it. If you can space your sessions out by a few days or weeks (best option), then you can check your first impression of the song again and see if there’s something new clashing.

Hunting for problems will haunt you: There’s always something to fix in your song. Even when you think it’s done, there will always be something. At one point, you have to let go an embrace imperfection. Many people fall into the mindset of searching for problems because they think they missed something. Chances are, they’ll be fixing unnecessary things. What you actually think you’re missing will be details that are technically out of your current knowledge. Usually I do what I call a “stupid check” on my music which is to verify levels, phase issues, clipping and resonances. The rest is detail tweaking that I do in one session only. After that, I pass it to a friend to have his impression. Usually, this will do it.

Listen with your eyes closed: Are you able to listen to all of your song with your eyes closed upon first listen? If yes, your repetition is working, otherwise, fix, then move on.

Generating Supportive Content and Variations

In music production mode, if you want to be efficient and creative, you need to have a lot of different options. So let’s say that your motif/hook is a synth pattern you’ve made, what I would suggest is to have multiple variations of that.

In this video, Tom showcases a way of working that is really similar to how I work (and how many other people work). It’s something that is a bit long to do but once you switch to create mode, it becomes really fun and efficient. The only thing is, I personally find that he’s not using repetition enough, and while this is super useful for making short, slower songs that have a pop drive like in the video, it is not great for building tension. Too much change is entertaining, but you really have to flex your creative muscles to keep it engaging. I would rather have a loop playing to the point where the listener goes from “it should change now” to “I want this to change now.” So perhaps there will be a change after 3-4 bars in your loop. This is up to you to explore.

How do you create variations?

There’s no fast way or shortcut, creating good variations takes time and patience. It also take a few sound design sessions to come up with interesting results. To do this, randomizing effects is pretty much the best starting point and then you tweak to taste.

MIDI Tools – The best way to start editing, is to start by tweaking your MIDI signal with different options. The MIDI tools included in Ableton at first are really useful. Dropping an arpeggio, note length change, or random notes and chords are pretty amazing to just change a simple 2-note melody into something with substance. One plugin that came out recently I’ve been very impressed with is Scaler 2. I like how deep it goes with all the different scales, artist presets (useful for a non-academic musician like me) and all the different ways to take melodies and have templates ready to be tweaked for your song. One way to commit to what you have is to resample everything like Tom did in his video. Eventually, I like to scrap the MIDI channel because otherwise I’ll keep going with new ideas and they’ll probably never be used. If you resample everything, you have your sound frozen in time, you can cut and arrange it to fit in the song at the moment it fits best.
Audio Mangling – Once you have your MIDI idea bounced, it’s time to play with it for even more ideas. There are two kind of ideas you can use to approach your movement: fast tweaks or slow. When it comes to fast event, like a filter sweeping or reverb send, I used to do it all by hand; it would take ages. The fastest way out there is to take a muti-effect plugin and then randomize everything, while resampling it. The one that I found to be the most useful for that is Looperator by Sugar Bytes. Internally you can have random ideas generated, quick adjusting, wet/dry control and easily go from very wild to mellow. It’s possible to make fast effect tweaks (common to EDM or dubstep) but slower too. Combine this with the Texture plugin to add layers of content to anything. For instance, instead of simply having a background noise, you melt it into some omnipresence in the song so it can react to it, making your constant noise alive and reactive. The background is a good way to make anything repetitive, feel less repetitive because the ears detect it as something changing but it constantly moves its focus from foreground to background.
Editing – This is the most painful step for me but luckily I found a way to make it more interesting thanks to the Serato Sampler. This amazing tool allows, like the Ableton sampler, to slice and map, and rearrange. You can combine it with a sequencer like Riffer or Rozzler (Free Max patch) to create new combinations. Why Serato instead of the stock plugin? Well, it’s just easy—I just want to “snap and go”, if you know what I mean, and this demands no adjustments.

Editing is really where it you can differentiate veteran from rookie producers. My suggestion to new comers would be a simple list of different ideas.

Decide on internal rules: Some people like to have precise rules that are set early in the song and then that will be respected through the song. I do it because it helps me understand the song’s idea. If you change too much, it may fall in the realm of “experimental” and maybe this isn’t what you had in mind. Every now and then, when booked for track finalization, people have a problem with the last third or quarter of their song. They lose focus and try to extrapolate or create new ideas. If you create enough material in the beginning, you’re going to make the last stretch easier. But when people are lost, I usually listen to the first minute of the song and go “let’s see what you had in mind at first” as a way to wrap it up around that logic. Basic rules can be created by deciding on a pattern and a series of effects that happen, more or less, at the same time, or a sequence of elements or sections. Pop has very precise rules for sections, while techno “rules” are more related to the selection of sounds and the patterns created.
Process, process, process: If I have one channel of claps or a different sound, I want to have variations of it, from subtle to extreme. Why? Because even simple ones are going to make a difference. It’s what makes a real human drummer feel captivating (if he or she is good!), because their playing slightly changes each time, even when playing a loop. Looperator is a good tool but you could also use the stock plugins and just use the presets to start with and resample, move knobs as you process and you can get some nice effects already.
Duplicate everything: Each channel should have duplicates where you can drop all your wet takes. You can put them all on mute and test unmuting to see how it goes.
MIDI controllers for the win: Map everything that you want to tweak and then record the movements of yourself playing. Usually will give you a bit of of a human feel compared to something created by a mouse click. You want to break that habit.
Use your eyes: I find that working with the clips visually and making patterns is a good way to see if you are using your internal rules and see if you use too many sounds.

Now, after all this, how do we know if a song’s repetition is good enough, and how do we know if it’s linear?

Validating with a reference is quick way to check, but if you take breaks and distance your sessions, that would be effective too. But the internal rules are, to me, what makes this work properly. I think the biggest challenge people face is that in spending too much time on a track they get bored and want to push things, add layers, change the rules and what perhaps felt fresh at first will be changed to a point where you’re not using the repetition principle to its full potential. The best example of someone being a master of repetition is Steve Reich and his masterpiece Music for 18 Musicians. There’s nothing more captivating of how one can create so much by playing with repetition.

Some effects in here would be reproduced with delays, phasers, the delay on the channel and such. You can also use the humanize patch to add a bit of delay randomly. I would strongly encourage you to listen to this a few times to fill yourself up with inspiration.

Sound Design and Arrangements Series Pt. 2: Balance

May 25, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Song Finalizing and Arrangements/by pheek

This post is a part of a series: Part 1 | Part 2

Balance in mixing—and in music in general—is one of the main aspects of healthy sounding music, mostly because it is a reflection of space, and perhaps, our life as well. While this post is mostly about my philosophy of work, I’ll still discuss some technical tips that can be applied to your mixing strategy and arrangement work.

Let’s define what balance means in design and see how this translate to music:

Balance is the distribution of the visual weight of objects, colors, texture, and space. If the design was a scale, these elements should be balanced to make a design feel stable. In symmetrical balance, the elements used on one side of the design are similar to those on the other side; in asymmetrical balance, the sides are different but still look balanced.
Source: Getty Edu

While this comes from visual design, you should already able to see how this is applicable to the world of sounds. When I first read this definition, I could understand how I was already applying it to mixing music, as I get very conscious of space and the distribution of the frequencies. One of my favorite tools at the moment is Neutron, which I use on all my groups and sometimes, all channels, so I can monitor all of them visually. I can also apply EQ flipping, where if you boost on one channel, you’ll do the exact opposite cut on another channel that is battling the first one to be heard. Using the Visual Mixer tool, you can then place each sound in space. For people who struggle with panning, this is a precious tool that will also help you see if you have distributed your sounds properly.

One of the most misunderstood aspects of mixing I see is the volume difference between elements. Thinking that everything should be loud is a not only a misconception, but it creates imbalance. The volume difference represents the space use and you need some that are further away otherwise the louder one won’t be important, they’ll be lost.

Same goes for textures. Not all your sounds can be textured simultaenously, otherwise you won’t be able to notice their differences. However they can all be textured at different times. I like to split the arrangements timeline in 3 parts and will let sounds have their moment in each; it keeps the story evolving.

Regarding the stereo spectrum, we often relate this to left and right panning, but one important part a lot of new people to mixing don’t see is the importance of the mono section. If you want your song to have a backbone, you need that part to be dead solid. One trick I like is to have a compressor in a return channel and add a mono utility there. I’ll send a lot of my groups to that mono’er channel that will beef up the mono signal of the track.

As for the frequency spreading, I find that your whole spectrum can be divided in 5 sections: low, mid-low, mids, highs-mid, highs. You can technically have them all loud, but that’s not really good balance, and your mix will probably sound harsh if you don’t control resonances and transients properly. I think having 2 out of those 5 frequency ranges slightly lower than the others will give some room for your mix to breathe. When people book me for mastering, they can select a coloured or transparent master, and if they ask for coloured, this is basically what I’ll do. Re-adjusting 2 of the bands will give a new tone to the track and most of the time, mixes I get are already unbalanced as there’s often a band that is way too loud (most of the time, the lows). If the lows are too loud, then I will lower them.

Now, when it comes to arrangements, this is where it gets fun.

I find that there’s a lot to say about the significance of arrangements. Arrangements come in many forms: short stories, edited experiences, live jams, etc.—but I find those three types are a good starting point. A pop song can be a short story, and a piece of minimalist techno music can also be one, but with a different purpose. The reason we apply a certain methodology to arrangements is to maximize the potential of the sounds, as well as the patterns. In the previous post in this series, we talked about contrast and how it can be used in a specific sound—balance, on the other hand, can be exists on multiple levels.

How Do I Know if an Arrangement is Well-Balanced?

The idea of using balance to leverage creativity is not a rule, but an idea and approach. There are countless pieces out there that have no balance and it work perfectly. I find that balance in arrangements is a method of regulation, but it’s not something I’d focus on alone as the main approach.

See balance as tomato sauce. It can be a really great base for a lot of dishes and yes, it can be used as-is, but it does a better job when it’s combined with other ingredients. This is why it works well on a pizza and pastas, etc.

So It depends what you listen to and of course, some great songs are totally unbalanced and that’s what makes them special. I like to say that rules are made to be broken, but you need to know the rules first. A balanced song has a better chance of creating a quality that we all strive for in music: timelessness. In visual arts, minimalism aged well. The logo of Mercedes has basically remained the same, compared to Google’s original disaster brand. Same for music, in general. What I see is that music which is balanced, has a number of sounds playing at a time and has an organization and internal self rules that are set to keep a clarity and easy understanding.

I find that balanced arrangements usually feel easier to understand and are not too destabilizing. But if you go in the opposite direction voluntary, it can be a good way too create contrast.

A song with a balanced mix has a full presence and usually doesn’t have one element stand out. So for percussion, I like to have a balance of numerous sounds but you can then have one that pop out, in contrast (refer to part 1).

As for having balanced arrangements, I’d recommend the following:

Set the rules of your song in the 1st minute (or first part). This can be the tempo, time signature, density, motif preview, etc. The rest of the song is a balance of contrast operating in the rules you’ve set. By balance, we can agree that it’s about not placing all your tricks into the same thing.

Distribute your ideas evenly across your song. I’m talking about the motif for instance, that could reveal one variant more per section. Balance predictability as well unpredictability by having your sounds come in and out at times the listen gets used to.

Use repetition to create patterns that support one another. The famous call and response technique is a good example.

The best way to leave annotations in your arrangements is by adding a empty MIDI channel and creating blocks that you can stretch over sections of your song and leave notes accordingly. This can be very helpful if you have a hard time seeing how sounds are distributed once a channel is flattened.

I like to have colours for each genre of sounds. This usually tells me if there’s too many percussion blocks compared to another group, for example.

Background sounds are often a good way of helping everything work together. Songs that feel full have a background, a noise floor. It can be a reverb, noise, or it can be field recordings. People often ask me where you can find sounds like that. Archive.org, Freesounds.org, Loopcloud, and Soundly are all super useful for finding these as well as odd and out of ordinary ideas.

This post is a part of a series: Part 1 | Part 2

Improving Your Workflow to Prevent Decision Fatigue

May 17, 2020/in Blog, Song Finalizing and Arrangements/by pheek

What makes on 30-minute block of music making painful versus some other 30-minute block where everything flows organically? The choices you make can make a huge difference in how you use energy. If you use all your energy in the first 30 minutes of a session, you likely faced too many decisions and ran out of gas.

This overwhelming feeling often comes about when you’ve worked on a loop and mess around with arrangements for a moment before getting discouraged. You’re pretty much burning your brain out and then expect a second wind, but that doesn’t happen right away so easily.

What I’ll advocate throughout this post is a reminder of multiple things explained on my blog that push people to dive into music production and thrive in how they make music instead of being stuck. Strategies to facilitate an easier flow of your music-making are fairly easy, too.

Let’s dive right into the 5 different prerequisites to reach a state of flow.

Risk
Novelty
Complexity
Unpredictability
Pattern recognition

One of the things that I didn’t list here which is important to focus on is the intention to spend a moment making something you know well. By venturing too deeply into something that is difficult (something that is, however, sometimes necessary for self-education), you’re acquiring some new information and achieving a good state of flow is not possible. Once you’ve learned a new concept/theory by practicing it multiple times, you’ll get good at it.

Hence the importance of making yourself:

Start a lot of new projects.
See most of your songs as lessons where you practice. Forget the aim to create masterpieces or to release all of your songs.
Spike time where you actively rehearse something you love doing.

When I teach music production, I explain to people that I can teach them everything their DAW can do, but then they’d sit in front of their computer with the idea of making a song and they’d be lost. The approach I encourage is to start by creating a strong base and then modulating each new skill into lessons. The idea is to focus on what’s useful to get from A to B in order to go to C and not try to go from A to Z in one shot.

A strong base means that you know some essentials, but beyond that, you know what you enjoy doing and what you seem to do naturally.

Once this is set and clear, we can approach the first take in my list above—taking risks. To know what taking a risk means, you need to be at ease with something. By risk-taking, I mean to try something in a different way. This can’t be really done if you can’t do the thing first. For example, you can’t take beat programming risks if you don’t know the basics of how your sequencer works (well, you can actually, but just diving in, chances are, your beat may come out with too much risk).

What’s a Risk in Music-Making?

Is it trying a new technique? Is it finishing a song? Is it learning a new software?

Let’s classify it as a single question: “What if?” This can and often imply a notion of risk. So let’s say you’re making loops, perhaps you can ask “what if I extend it to a whole minute instead of 2-bar loops?”

If you observe how we live, we often will do something we love doing and that usually is because we’re flowing in it; we don’t think—things just roll. You don’t have to make a lot of choices because you already know what you have to do. Taking a risk is a way of elevating what you’re doing a notch.

It’s a personal affair, and it’s something to be asked once in a while. But this gives rise to a second point which is novelty.

Self-Learning, Novelty & Complexity

Another thing I’ve been advocating for in past articles is the importance to see the majority of your music projects as lessons. A cycle I often notice is:

Getting interested in a specific sound, aesthetic, idea, genre direction.
Research and exploration on how to reproduce or imitate it.
Struggle.
Acknowledging a new concept.
Practice and expression.
Perfect it.

Each time I’m interested in something specific for music, I spend a lot of time trying to acquire the knowledge and techniques behind it. I spend a lot of time on YouTube on several How-tos, read some blogs and forums, and then test what I have. For instance, when I was obsessed with Dub Techno, I was searching a lot about it, which led me to acquire a lot of information about filters, reverb, chorus and delay, but also something I didn’t expect—noise. When you dig for information, you’ll find one thing you didn’t know or may not have been searching for, which is the novelty that is precious. In the state of flow, the exploration, in a context where you already feel comfortable but are on a quest of expanding, feeds you with a lot of creative energy that makes you get lost in what you do. But usually just before this happens, you’ll have a moment of struggle and it’s important to go over it to really get to the plateau of full creative force.

Once you practice and work on really handling a new skill, you’ll perfect what you do more and more. You’ll be more able to express yourself properly and eventually, you’ll want to perfect things. To get back to my example of Dub, I started to learn about delay techniques, tried many delay plugins and started understanding their personality and types. Same for reverbs, where I really got into plates and how they sound. The new trick I learned was about noise and started to get very much into the different types of noise: pink, white, blue, brown and red. Which then led me to get really interested in random generators, LFOs and modulation. Always adding a layer of information, precision and personality was a way to feed myself with novelty and complexity hand in hand. They’d play ping pong together.

Imperfection and Unpredictability

Choice fatigue roots in the quest of perfection. When you have more than two choices, you have a moment of not knowing. This clicked one day as I was reading a silly article that a lot of CEO in Silicon Valley will start the day with simplifying how they’d dress to make the least number of decisions possible. They’d have a work wardrobe of only a few things and they’d pick one without thinking. I find that flow starts with the yes-man attitude, as well as the why not. So it’s enemy would be a no, without trying.

Being in the flow, in a certain way, is almost the straight opposite of searching perfection. That is, you’re in the moment and you’re grasping something real and spontaneous. In a way, that is a form of perfection. When you begin searching for problems and feel doubtful about your work, I usually suspect you’re not in the flow, at all. You’re trapped in your analytical mind, the ones that questions and doubts. That part is really important much later, but I don’t give it too much importance in how to improve your flow.

A good routine for improving flow includes the following music-making tasks:

Explore, play, improvise.
Record everything.
Tweak to improve, not to perfect.
Consider the future of what was done. Release or not?

I find that I prefer to record 2 or 3 new songs instead of trying to give one a new life by working on it for 10 hours. I could even recycle the best part of a song that’s not working. Making more tracks makes you practice being more spontaneous but also more accurate in what you do, just like a DJ would get better at mixing, transitioning or doing tricks. As you go, your results need less polishing. For years, I left some imperfections in my work as I felt it was part of what made my music unique and human. It received a lot of positive comments and with time, if I listen to my older tracks, there will be things I don’t like, but I don’t know what was left there purposely or should be considered as a problem. That issue is itself, is part of the soul of the song.

As a mixing engineer, I do get in the zone as well. This is why my first mix of the day is crucial for the rest of the day. I usually start with all corrections, and try to do them in one shot, otherwise I start fixing stuff that clients like. I noticed that with time that if it works, don’t change it.

Now, unpredictability is something that feeds all the other ideas I’ve listed above that help to improve flow:

Taking risks by not knowing what will happen.
Discover new ideas you maybe have filtered out.
Making your routine more complex by including new items.

To me, adding a dose of unpredictability starts by making all your elements dynamic with your sounds and effects used. For EQs, I would make sure they’re dynamic (like the Pro-Q3). Compression is dynamic, but I’d link an LFO on the threshold. Adding LFOs, randomizers, and reacting envelopes to the incoming signal would make everything reactive, yet you never are really sure of where it’s going. This is partly explaining how people get addictive to modular synths because it’s all about modulation and unpredictability. A good way to check that is by trying VCV (free) or Softubes’ Modular that is a lot of fun. Reaktor is also an excellent platform to experiment.

Having separate sessions where you prepare an environment for making music is quite encouraged. By opening Ableton Live and launch a starting template that doesn’t take an hour to setup, you’re allowing yourself to be in the zone. Types of “setup” sessions include:

Sessions for setting up your future sessions. I’d encourage you to make themes instead of having templates that have all the bells and whistles.
Record sessions and sound design moments. These will be precious if you want to make music later.
Tweak, arranging and polishing sessions are helpful, but do them later.

The last aspect of improved workflow I’d like to discuss in more detail is pattern recognition—the moment where you realize that you’ve had a good or bad session, and are able to reconcile what happened in order to prepare the next session.

I like to tell my students that if you struggle in a session, it’s mostly because your preparation wasn’t adequate. If you struggle to arrange your session, start small…like, really small. Start from bottom to top: low end, percussion, mids, highs.

If you also fail to finish a jam, maybe you get distracted—a crucial thing to fix. Try to mute all notifications on your phone. Close social media, have snacks and water nearby. Avoid anything that can make your body and mind leave the moment to be elsewhere. If your session lasted at least 20 minutes, you’ve succeeded. Sometimes people feel sessions have to be long, but 20 minutes is sort of the key to get in the zone (unrelated, but this is also why I believe 1 hour DJ sets aren’t fair for the artist).

Personal Rules and Studio Attitude

Be a yes-man to any idea that comes up until tried in context.
Avoid maybes. It’s either a hell yes, or no. A maybe is a no, by default.
Save all rejected ideas for future use.
If it doesn’t feel good, stop everything. After a pause resume, or change tasks.
If something feels like a lot of effort, take a pause and come back later.
If you only have negative points of view, do something else.
If an inner voice insists that you can’t do this or that (music-wise), I suggest you do it anyway to see what happens. Sometimes we stop ourselves from doing things that are creative.
Collaborate as much as possible.
Each session should have a session of listening before or after.
Stay curious and open!

Let me know your experiences with decision fatigue and improving your own workflow!

Sound Design and Arrangements Series Pt.1: Contrast

May 10, 2020/in Blog, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Sound Design, Tips/by pheek

I’ve been wanting to do a series of posts about arrangements because I’m passionate about this aspect of music production, but also because I noticed many of the people I work with struggle with arrangements in their work. There are so many different approaches and techniques to arranging—everyone has their own, and that’s sort of the goal I’d like to drive home in this series. I invite you to make a fresh start in developing a personal signature, aesthetic, vocabulary, and personality.

This post is not for people who are just beginning with arrangements, but if you are, it still contains information that could be interesting to consider down the road.

What do I Mean by “Contrast” in the Context of Arrangements?

In design, contrast refers to elements (two or more) that have certain differences, and their differences are used to grab attention or to evoke an emotion. When I teach my students about contrast, the easiest example to understand and summarize this concept is a difference of amplitude (volume). In movies, to create surprise, excitement, or tension, the amplitude will be low, and then rise either quickly or slowly, supporting the images in the emotion that is present.

In many electronic music songs, we have heard (too often) noise used as a rising element to create a tension. Noise builds became a caricature of themselves at some point given their overuse—but it’s a good example, nonetheless.

How is Contrast Used in Sound Design?

I spend my days working with musicians—contrast comes into play in different circumstances.

Within a single sound, it can be fast or slow changes from one extreme to another. I like to visualize this by analyzing a sound through different axes to help me understand what can be done to it.

Attack: Does it start abruptly or slowly?
Decay/Amplitude: Does it get really loud or is it more subtle?
Frequency/Pitch: Is it high, medium, low?
Release/Length: Short – Medium – Long – Constant?
Positioning: is it far or near? Low or higher in front of me?

Good contrast, generally, is to have two extremes in some of these domains. Think of a clap in a long reverb, as an example of how a super fast attack with a long release can create something unreal, and therefore, attention-grabbing. A sound that changes pitch is another form of contrast, as we go from one state to another.

Another way of thinking about contrast is to think about how pretty much all complex sounds are the combination of multiple sounds layered. When done properly, they feel as one, and when it’s done with contrast, the contrasting layer adds a movement, texture, or something dynamic that revives the initial sound. Of course, short sounds are more difficult to inject contrast into, but if you think of a bird’s chirp, which is basically the equivalent of a sine wave with a fast attack envelop on the pitch, it’s sounds are short but incredibly fast moving, too.

If you think about using contrast within a sound itself, the fastest way to make this happen is to use a sampler and really take advantage of the use of envelops, mod wheel assignment, and of course LFOs, but it’s really through the use of the envelops that you’ll be able to produce a reaction to what’s happening, sonically.

As I mentioned, the easiest way to produce contrast is by using two sounds that different characteristics, for example, short vs. a long, bright vs. dark one, sad vs. happy, far vs. close, etc. When you use two sounds, you give the listener the chance to have elements to compare, and the ear can easily perceive the difference.

When you select sounds to express your main idea, think of the characteristics in each sound you’re using. Myself, I usually pick my sounds in pairs, then in batches of four. I’ll start by finding one, and the next one will be related to the first. I’ll keep in mind the axis of both sounds when I select them and usually start with longer samples, because I know I can truncate them.

In the morning I usually work on mastering, and in the afternoon, I’ll work on mixing. The reason is, when you work on mastering, you get to work on all kinds of mixes; they have issues that I need to fix to make the master ready for distribution. By paying attention to the mix, I often deal with difficult frequencies and will spend my time controlling resonances that poke through once the song is boosted.

When I’m mixing, often I deal with a selection of sounds that were initially picked by the producer I am working with. The better the samples, the easier will be the mix and in the end, the better the song will feel. What makes a sound be great comes from different things:

Quality of the sample: clarity, low resonances, not compressed but dense, well-balanced and clear sounding, open.
High resolution: 24 or 32-bits, with some headroom.
No unnecessary use of low quality effects: no cheap reverb, no EQ being pushed exaggeratedly that will expose filter flaws, no weird M/S gimmicks.
Controlled transients: nothing that hurts the ears in any way.

You want to hunt down samples that not too short, because you want to be able to pick it’s length. You won’t need a sample that covers all frequencies—you’ll want to feel invited to layer multiple sounds all together without any conflicts or have one shelf of frequencies to be overly saturated.

When I listen to a lot of mixes, the first thing that I look for is the overall contrast between the sounds. If they lack contrast, they will be mostly mushed together and difficult to mix, and harder to understand.

In theory, a song is a big sound design experiment that is being assembled through the mix. If everything is on one axis, such as making everything loud, you lose the contrast and make your song one-dimensional.

How is Contrast Used in Arrangements?

If contrast in sound design is within one single sound, it’s through and entire song or section that we can approach contrast in arrangements. A song can have different sections—in pop, think “chorus”, “verse”, etc., which are very distinct sections that can be used in any context as moments through the song. You can move from one to another, and the more of a distinction between one another, the more contrast your storytelling will have.

Is this type of contrast essential? No, but it can engage the listener. This is why, for a lot of people, the breakdown and drop in electronic music is very exciting, because there’s a gap and difference and the experience to go from one to another, is intense and fun (especially on a big sound system).

In techno, linearity is a part of the genre because songs are usually part of a DJ set and made to be assembled and layered with other tracks, to create something new. Huge contrast shifts can be awkward, so it’s avoided by some—tracks emit contrast very slowly and subtly, instead of a sudden drastic change.

So, what makes a song interesting, to me, or to anyone, is the main idea’s content, based on the listener’s needs. What do I mean exactly?

A DJ might be looking for song of a specific genre and want its hook to match another songs he/she has.
Some people want to have a song that expresses an emotion to be able to connect with it (ex. nostalgic vibes).
Some other people might want to have some music similar to songs they like, but slightly different, while others, to be exposed to completely new ideas.

When I listen to the songs I work on, my first task is to quickly understand what the composer is trying to say/do. If the person is trying to make a dance-oriented, peak-time song, I’ll work on the dynamics to be able to match music of the same genre and make sure all rhythmic elements work all together.

The precision in the sound design is quite essential to convey a message, whatever it might be. Sometimes I hear a melody and because of the sample used, it makes me frown—a good melody but weird selection of sounds results in an awkward message.

It’s like you trying to impress a first date with a compliment/gift that doesn’t make sense—you wouldn’t tell someone his/her nose is really big…?!

The combination of good sound design and supporting your idea, is executed by arrangements. The whole combination of multiple sounds through a mix is what creates a piece.

Some examples of contrast use within arrangements could be:

Different intensity between sections, either in volume or density.
Different tones, emotions.
Changes in the time signature, or rhythm.
Changes in how sounds move, appear, or evolve.
Alternating the pattern, sequence, or hook, adding extra elements to fill gaps, holes, or silences.

One of the biggest differences between making electronic music 30 years ago and the present, was that back then, you’d make music with what you could find. Now we have access to everything, so how do you decide what to do when there are no limits?

I find that when you remove all technical limitations like sound selection from your session, you can focus on design and storytelling. Same goes for if you feel like you have managed to understand your technical requirements and now want to dig deeper—then you can start with contrast.

To summarize this, use contrast within a sound to give it life, either by slow or fast movements. Create contrast in your arrangements by having differences between sections of your song—play with macro changes vs. micro changes.

Stuck on a Song? Tips to Help You Overcome Negative Thought Patterns

May 4, 2020/in Blog, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Tips/by pheek

One of the best things I’ve ever done has been a challenge I signed up for in early 2020 to make one song per week for the entire year. It felt a bit like wishful thinking at the time knowing how busy I am; I didn’t think I’d be able to pull it off, but it’s turned out to be one of the best exercises I’ve ever done. The most important lesson for me was learning that writer’s block comes and goes, but being stuck on a particular song seems like it happens more frequently. The more you make music, the more you develop personal strategies to overcome this problem quickly. My experience making one song per week has been extremely useful when working with younger artists, as I quickly spot where they’re stuck and can help them see options they’re not seeing.

I made myself a list of rules and tricks to refer back to when I get stuck on a song and noticed they usually stemmed from two categories: technical issues, and mindset. Rethinking your mindset helps re-frame what the problem is, exactly—but that’s usually the hardest part of overcoming issues finishing a song.

The trick, as an artist, is to quickly spot in which of those two categories of problems you’re facing, and then find a solution. Let’s discuss some of the most common problems that makes people get stuck on a song:

“I don’t know where to start.”

Category: Technical Issue & Mindset

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I lack material to start using, I have difficulty translating my ideas into software, or I lack motivation.

This is a fundamental question that, even with experience, many artists sometimes still have. The thought of starting something new can be overwhelming. Coming into a new session with tons of motivation and ideas doesn’t overcome the very first hurdle you face when starting a new project: how to get it done, and of course, how to get started.

My first recommendation is to take a Kaizen approach (a Japanese project management methodology) and first think about what you want to do, and then start with the first thing you know about it. For example, if you are making a house track, maybe you know you’ll want a 4/4 kick as a loop, so start with that, then add a few other elements. Maybe it won’t be the right sound exactly, but just start with that. Can’t make a loop? Get pre-made loops, slice them, and rearrange them to taste, and have that as your starting point.

For productivity’s sake, use sounds you find, don’t chase something you have in mind. Find one that you like and then play with it to see what you can make out of it. Break your project down to things you know you can do, as this will bring self-confidence before tackling tasks that are difficult to do.

Is there a right way to start a song? No. Each song can be started in multiple ways. But capturing yourself jamming with loops and sounds is about yourself being “in the moment”, and that is very much what music is about.

If you’re overwhelmed by a lack of resources, I’d encourage you investing into LoopcloudLoopcloud. It’s a quick-fix solution to gather samples based on what you need, instead of buying bundles. It’s also an incredible option to find that missing link, as you can open it in your project, sync it to your DAW and play samples in context to see how things fit. Using samples is, for me, a hip-hop inspired approach that never fails. It’s also a way of layering different sounds to create something new. When I’m lost, I go back to sampling.

“I don’t feel motivated to make music.”

Category: Mindset

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I don’t see why I’m doing this, or I lack an idea of where this will go.

One of the reasons why people are obsessed with releasing their music comes with the fact that their efforts are now validated. A lot of artists are goal-oriented, others are more interested in the journey. As life goes on, you might find you’re more one or the other. If you lack motivation, it’s possible you lost track of priorities. Maybe you need to have a goal in mind? Or perhaps you need to be exploring a new technique?

Knowing your needs, you can reorganize your music sessions accordingly. If it’s because you don’t have labels to send your music to, perhaps you can focus on podcasts or DJs. If you need new ideas, I suggest you check YouTube and look for a technique, either new or something else.

I’m a firm believer that I get better results by seeing each song as a lesson, an experiment, something to learn…instead of seeing it as something to be controlled or perfected.

Every time I find myself in front of someone who lacks motivation, I try to bring them back to what makes them happy and encourage them to get back to what works, what brings them joy. Do that for a while, and prepare material for when the inspiration returns.

“My sounds (or anything I use) don’t feel as solid or as cool as my references”

Category: Mindset

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I lack the technical knowledge to achieve something similar to artists I like.

Comparing yourself is nothing new or uncommon; we all do it. Where it fails is, when you compare yourself with people who are not in your league. It’s like playing football and complaining you’re not able to play like Ronaldo or other pros. Your friends would start laughing, right?

How is that any different than comparing yourself to artists who has a lot more experience? You’re seeing a song but you don’t see the 30 other songs they did before nailing that one. Do you need to be a pro to enjoy playing a sport? No. It should be the same for music.

If you keep in mind that each song you make is a lesson, then making 20-30 songs will teach you a lot. On the 50th, you’ll have a vocabulary and fluidity to express yourself with a lot more ease. After this, you can slowly look to others to pick up tricks, inspirations, or ideas.

“After a while, I lose interest in what I do.”

Category: Technical

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: Listening to my song for too long bores me.

Welcome to music production! If you only work on one song, you’ll get fed up with it quickly. The idea of working on a song is that it’s something you want to finish quickly so you don’t lose sight of your initial idea, but you want to take your time to fix the issues. I usually wrap a song and then I’ll come back to it in sprints of 30 minutes to an hour (max) to fix as many issues as I can, but then I’ll close it and do something else. I never get bored and the distance I take between sessions keeps my judgment fresh. As you might have already read, I’ve encouraged musicians to make multiple songs at once to not get bored in this blog many times before.

I have more and more clients that come to me being frustrated with their first song. Usually, this is normal. A large part of my songs don’t feel right, but I need to move on. Moving on is an important habit to learn, I find.

“My song feels boring because of getting too technical.”

Category: Technical

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I tend to over-analyze what I do to the point where I get lost.

Technical tweaks often kill the beauty of spontaneous creativity—I try to find a balance between the two. Sometimes, I ask friends to take care of the technical part of certain songs I don’t want to ruin the rawness of. The thing that makes it boring, is that you have been over-hearing it. To think that anyone would listen as much as yourself, or that someone would analyze your song as much as you do after 100 listens, is highly misleading. Again, this comes down to taking a lot of breaks and working on multiple songs at once.

“Mid point in the song, I don’t know what to do next.”

Category: Technical

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I struggle to make the story-line evolve properly.

Having a loop is one thing, but keeping it interesting is another. Many people make the mistake of starting a song by at the beginning, thinking their loop is the starting point, but I like to think of putting the main loop you’ve been working on, right in the middle of the song. Then I deconstruct it by simplifying it from the beginning. You can then add elements to create the last stretch of your song.

Usually when you’re at the mid-point, most of the song’s main work has been done and you can process your elements to create “child” ideas that you can use as supporting elements, which will help a song carry on until the end.

I usually start working on the main part of the song as well as what follows so I have a better idea of the song’s core. Creating the intro and conclusion ends up being a piece of cake. This usually solves this issue of now knowing what to do in the middle.

Now the other technique is also to give variation to your main idea. The fastest way to do that is to slice it and then change the order, either randomly or by hand, depending of your style.

“I’m lacking ideas on what to add to my song, is it enough?”

Category: Technical

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: My song needs validation.

I always like to start with the premise that my song is enough, and that if something seems to be lacking, it could simply be because I’m not exploiting enough what I have already. Less is more, is the school I come from, and I’ve made tracks with three sounds alone, which was probably the most useful exercise ever, as well as an eye opener for creative use on whatever I had already. If someone playing the hand drum can make a song out of it or if a pianist can write an album, you can do a song with what you have already.

Now, if you say something is missing compared to… that’s another story. The best way to validate your work is to load up the reference and to A/B. The first question is, do they have the same amount of sounds used? Take the time to count them, you’d be surprised sometimes that you might have more than your references. Sometimes, what’s missing is just a good mix, a reverb, or modulations.

“I don’t know how to create a new idea that I’ve never made before.”

Category: Technical

If you’ve made 20 songs, at some point you might run out of ideas. If that’s the case, there are a few quick things you can do to get your inspiration back. I’m not talking about having a writer’s block here.

The first thing I encourage people to do to find new ideas is the “talking out loud, describing what you hear” method. I’m not sure if I’ve shared this idea before, but it’s fairly simple. The way I use it is to check a random song, either in my Soundcloud feed or Spotify, or whatever you use to be exposed to music you haven’t heard before. Play it, and then, using your smartphone, record some vocal notes of you describing your best what you hear. Try to do it for the duration of the song and when it’s done, stop the annotation. I like to have a bunch of tracks described like that and have vocal notes without any references to what I have listened to. When you eventually listen to your notes, it will be very abstract ideas of songs you can listen to. You can also do this throughout the day—some people think about making music all day and don’t know how to vent, so I suggest to record all the ideas they have, vocally.

This method came to me as I was waking up during the night with ideas and I would record a description of my dream. I would later listen to them and have a lot of concepts.

The other way to get a lot of ideas is to use songs or samples and chop them into random ideas. This sometimes will generate an idea that you can extrapolate by pulling out the best of it.

“I don’t feel satisfied with my mixes.”

Category: Mindset

This thought pattern can also be re-framed as: I feel technically inadequate.

This one’s a bit complicated. First and foremost, the idea of a perfect mix is counter-productive because such thing doesn’t exist, or at least, for the person who mixes it doesn’t. There’s always something to fix and at one point, you need to wrap it up and call it done, even with imperfections. What’s left undone, unless it’s a huge issue (which are usually hard to miss), will often be seen as something that is part of the song. People who are looking for the flaws of your song are rare. Usually someone will like or dislike it. This is why very few people care for details. People have small attention spans, and those who really see the issues, aren’t the people you’re making music for.

The idea that each song is a lesson also applies to mixing. You bring your song to the max you can bring it to. I like to have my mixing sessions in three rounds: the first, I remove all issues. The second, I work on embellishments. Third, I do the final adjustments and fix the tone.

You can’t fix everything effectively in one session so it’s always a good thing to take a second look after a night of rest.

“I don’t know how to finish a song.”

Category: Technical

Finishing music is a hot topic. It’s a good thing to know but it’s not a prerequisite to enjoy making music. Some people have a lot of fun jamming or starting loops and that’s it. The idea that you have to finish a song and potentially release it is, what I call, a romantic idea, and just like any romance, it’s not a necessity. Some beautiful relationships exist without romance. I find it way more important to collect ideas, create sketches, and make loops in large quantities. Eventually, when you get to finishing songs, if you have all those ideas and loops ready, it will feel like you have a gold mine.

Learning to finish songs is a skill that comes with using references, as I’ve explained many times in this blog. You use one song, check how it’s made, then apply part of the template to a loop you have. That’ll do it. Really, it’s that’s simple; it’ll feel like cheating.

I hope this was helpful in your day-to-day struggle!

Tips to Keep a Loop Interesting for an Entire Song

April 26, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements/by pheek

To keep a song built mostly on a single loop interesting, we need to discuss how you work and your perceptions. I can’t just recommend technical bells and whistles that will solve everything. You need to think about how you see your music, and from there, there are certain things that I think can make a difference in helping to keep a listener engaged, even if your song is built around a single loop.

There are two main things you need to consider with regards to listener engagement when making a song:

How someone listens to a song.
How your song can engage the listener in his/her experience.

Meeting Your Listener’s Expectations

If you read this blog, you’ll know that this topic has been covered in other posts, so I won’t deeply go into this again but I’d like to remind you of a few key elements. The first and foremost important point here is to understand what you want to do in the first place. From the numerous talks I’ve had with clients, this is where many people get lost. To know what you want to do with a song has to be clear from the start.

Is a plan for a song something set that can’t be changed afterwards?

Of course you can change your mind, but this can open a can of worms, as the direction and vision of what you want to do becomes less clear. Music is about communicating some sort of intention.

When, in the music-making process, should you set your intention?

You don’t have to about your intention explicitly, of course, but doing so helps if you’re struggling with a lack of direction or when you feel you can’t reach goals. I find there are two important moments where setting an intention can provide significant benefits. The first is when you start a project—when you start a song, you can think of something somewhat general, such as “an ambient song” or “making a dance-floor track”; but the more precise you are, the more you are establishing some boundaries for your wandering mind. Many people don’t feel this approach helps and may skip this aspect of writing music, but for others, it can be a leveraged to maximize your efforts in what you do.

For instance, I often make songs without a precise goal because I just like to let things flow and to see how it’s been made affects the end-product. But when I’m asked to make an EP, I need to focus the results.

For me, for example, to meet my client’s expectations, I need to know what they want. It helps if they work in a specific genre or can reference an artist they like so I can help them deliver music that will appeal to people with similar tastes. When working with a clear intention, one needs to study how the music is made, more or less, in terms of variations, transitions, number of sounds, duration, tones, etc.

The objection I always get to this recommendation is “yes, but I want to have my own style.” I feel this a bit of a erroneous statement. We always are influenced by other artists and if you’re not, then you might have a problem in your hands: who are you making music for?

I know some people who make music for themselves, which is great. But when they tried to sell it or promote it, there was no way to know who it was for because we had no model to reference. Can you be original and still be heard? Yes, but I think a certain percentage of your songs need to have some sort of influence from a genre that people can relate to. For example, a very personable version of drum and bass, or house—then your music will fall under certain umbrella.

Meeting Your expectations and Your Listeners’ Expectations at the Same Time

The number one problem I hear is of the producer being bored of his/her own music, rather worrying that the listener might be bored, and that’s quite normal, considering the amount of time one can spend making music. Personally, I make my songs with a meticulous approach:

1 idea, 2 supporting elements.
Percussion, limited to 5 elements maximum.
Bass.
Effects, textures, and background.

That’s it.

The main idea rarely evolves more than 2-3 times in a song. If it changes more frequently than that, you might want it to evolve on a regular, precise interval, i.e. changes every 2 bars.

When Writing Music, How Can You Keep a Single Idea Interesting?

I use design principles that are used in visual content and apply them to my music. If you learn about these principles for music-making, you’ll develop a totally new way of listening to music. In searching for these principles, you’ll see some variety, but generally these are the ones that usually come up:

Balance: This principle is what brings harmony to art. Translating this to music, I would say that, mixing wise, this could mean how you manage the tonal aspect of your song. If we think of sound design, it could be the number of percussion sounds compared to soft sounds, or bright vs dark. I find that balanced arrangements exist when there’s a good ratio of surprises versus expected ideas.

Contrast: Use different sources, or have one element that is from a totally different source than the others. This could be analog vs digital, acoustic versus electronic, or having all your sounds from modular synths except one from an organic source. If everything comes from the same source, there’s no contrast.

Emphasis: Make one element pop out of the song—there are so many ways you can do this! You can add something louder, or you could have one element run through an effect such as distortion, and so on. Emphasis in music is often related to amplitude, dynamic range, and variations in volume. In a highly compressed mix, it will be difficult to make anything “pop”.

Pattern: This is about the core idea you want to repeat in your song. It can also be related to the time signature, or an arpeggio. It could be the part you repeat in a precise or chaotic order.

Rhythm: This is the base of a lot of music in many ways, and this, to me, can directly refer to time signature, but it can also mean the sequence of percussion. You can have multiple forms of rhythm as well, from staccato, chaotic, robotic, slow-fast…it’s really one of my favourite things to explore.

Variety: This relates to the number of similar sounds versus different. This is a bit more subtle to apply in music compared to visual design, but a way I see this is how you repeat yourself or not in your arrangement. If you make a song evolve with no variety, you might lose the listener’s attention…same thing for if you have too much variety.

Unity: This is what glues a song together. To me, the glue is made from mixing, but there are things you can do that makes it easier, such as using a global reverb, some compression, a clean mixdown, same pre-amps (coloured ones) or a overall distortion/saturation.

To wrap this up, I can’t recommend to you enough to space out your music sessions, set an intention and pay attention to your arrangements. If you know what you want to achieve with your song, you can refer to a specific reference, and then build up your ideas using some of the design principles I have discussed in this post. Good luck!

Bass Line and Low-End Mixing Tips

April 19, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Tips/by pheek

Tips on mixing low-end is an often-requested topic in our community and Facebook group. Handling low-end in electronic music is important to give it the glory it deserves, since it’s one of the most important parts of the genre. In this post, I’ll cover tips on how to handle low-end from multiple points of view, not only from the software side, but also from a monitoring perspective. As I’m writing this during the COVID-19 pandemic quarantine, I’ll also propose some tips on how to manage low-end at home.

The Theory

I won’t go into boring engineering theory here because it’s not my blog’s style. I like to keep things simple and straightforward. So for making low-end easy to understand, let’s cover a few important points:

For the purposes of this post, “low-end” means 20hz to 300hz.
The low-end is basically the fundamental part of your song. If it’s muddy, your track will not flow.
Low-end is the most powerful part of your song in terms of loudness. If your song has a lot of lows and not much mid, it will feel less loud while in theory while actually being very loud from a technical point of view.
Over-powering lows makes a song feel muddy and empty in a loud, club context.
Lacking lows will make your song feel wimpy.

When it comes to mixing, I usually start by cutting everything with a filter or high-pass EQ at 20hz with a 24db/octave slant. This cuts unnecessary rumble that most sound system can’t reproduce. If you feed monitors garbage frequencies, it takes away precision in the “good ones.” So I cut everything on the master/mix bus, but I will also high-pass every channel by removing any frequencies aren’t needed. When mixing claps, for example, I will remove everything under 300hz.

Low-End Frequency Bands

20-30hz: The section is the sub area. Not always present in every sound system, but when it is, it really creates a warmth that is quite addictive.
30-50hz: I find this section is where a song gains in power. Most clubs cut at 30, and on vinyl records they also cut there—this zone is critical.
50-80hz: The range that creates a lot of punch.
80-100hz: Punch, presence and precision.
100-320hz: This is the body of the song. It gives a lot of weight.

I usually put everything under 150hz in mono. This really solidifies the low-end and avoids phasing issues that are often present, which can help in clarity. Vinyl cutting requires mono low end or the cut will make the record skip. I’ve seen producers who enjoy the weird effect of a stereo low-end but that’s for home listening mostly, and they know there can be issues.

Frequencies are shared by many sounds, and the more you free space for your low end content to breathe, the better it will perform. I know it’s time-consuming but there’s nothing like doing it this way compared to using a side-chaining tool. This phase of mixing is critical for clarity. The more care you put into each channel, the better the results will be in the end.

Since the low-end has fundamental notes, in electronic and dance-oriented music, it’s generally important to pick a key note for your song and not change it much. You can change it as much as you want, of course, but if you do, you’re going to deal with a few headaches.

The Challenges of Mixing Low-End

Handling low-end has multiple challenges, but with time, but hopefully some of my suggestions here help you to deal with those challenges more effectively.

Monitoring

In general, people who can’t hear or deal with low-end properly is because they’re not equipped to work with it. Using a sub is a good, but it will never have the precision of a tool like the Subpac. The Subpac is a wearable device that reproduces the low-end more physically, making it easier to understand what’s happening down there—you feel low-end on your back directly. Headphones, on the other hand, can mislead you, as you cannot hear lower frequencies.

After figuring out the bet monitoring options for your setup, you need to A/B your mix with something to see how your low-end compares to it. There are two main plugins I highly recommend for A/B tasks: Bassroom and REFERENCE. Both allow you to pick a song you like, and then it measures your work in reference to that song to show you how to manage your song to get the desired result. Doing this without these plugins is very hard unless you’re a veteran engineer.

A/Bing requires something very important that a lot of people find difficult to understand when I explain it: you need to find quality song that has well-mixed low-end to compare your work to.

You can’t make quality music if you have never been exposed to it beforehand.

Low-end mixing approaches also vary widely in genres and producers. I would recommend that you pick a song to A/B that you like the feeling and sound of, and then try to emulate it with those plugins. For instance, some techno producers prefer the bass too be present all the way to 20hz and the kick to hit at around 80hz, while some other genres, it will be the opposite. One isn’t better than the other—they’re just styles—but both will create a certain feel on a dance floor.

Shared Frequency Ranges

Speaking of the kick, I should also mention pads, toms, and synths, as they all share space in the low end with the bass elements. It can quickly get messy down there, and the more shared space, the muddier it gets. If you look at the different bands I mentioned, I try to make sure one one sound per section occupies each band. This is why side-chain compression can come in handy—when the kick hits, you can apply ducking to all the rest of the signals that could be present in that range as well. You can also side-chain the bass with percussion or synth so they all have a moment but not at the same time. For quality side-chain compression, I highly recommend looking into the Shaperbox 2 plugin. It’s a “knife” for extremely precise ducking, filtering, and applying mono to your low end—it’s crazy-good.

Space is not only shared in frequencies but also in time. We all love low-end and I see people getting a little bit too excited and have way too much decay on all their sounds down there, which means a lot needs to be removed. The shorter the sounds, the clearer your low-end will feel. You can do that with Shaperbox 2 but also with the very useful mTransientMB that can help you make super punchy sounds.

This means that picking your envelope can be a very delicate task. If your low-end has too much attack, it will compete with the kick and make things muddy. If it lacks attack, it will feel slow and lifeless. To shape your sounds, I would say Shaperbox is the best tool, but if you can look into understanding the attack/decay/sustain/release of your tools and perhaps looking into a good envelope follower, too. Some max patches can really come handy for this as well.

Density

It’s not because your low-end is loud that it’s dense. If you have your low-end coming in loud, it might need some compression to have more density. I find that the best way to get that is by having side-to-side compression (eg. insert 2 compressors), both in parallel mode (wet/dry at 50%) which will condense the signal and make it thick, warm, and fat—pretty much what we love in low-end. You can also add harmonics by using some saturation. I personally find that the most interesting saturation for the low-end is tape; it just works very well. My favorite is the Voxengo CRTIV Tape Bus plugin, it’s a marvel.

Practice Mixing Low-End

Practicing the mixing and design of the low-end of your song takes time, good monitoring, and understanding of each of the challenges that come with it. Once you start working on it and start feeling something isn’t right, check which challenge you’re facing. Try to be methodological about this.

Here’s how I approach it, step by step.

Pick the root key of your song; G, for example.
Find the hook, motif and main idea of your song, then tune it to the key. Usually the main idea, which could be an arpeggio, will situate itself in around G5.
Use the same idea, pitched down to G1-2 to define your low end. It could be one or two octaves difference. It will support your main idea in the same key, making sure your song feels unified.
Put in mono—all your elements under 150hz should be mono.
Add your percussion. You can tune each element to the root key. Tuning the kick can really give a whole different feel.
High-Pass all channels to remove garbage frequencies.
Clear the decay. Fine tune the decay of all sounds so there’s no bleed and they have more dynamics.
Side-chain elements that are masking one another.
Add or control the attack of each sound for precision.

If you do the items in this checklist, you’ll have much better results already. The rest will come with time.

Writing Bass Lines

This tip builds on my previous post about chord progressions and music theory. I come from the dub techno world where we had one-note, one-bar bass lines that felt satisfying enough, so when people ask me if a bass line can be monotone, I sometimes reply that the simplier the low end, sometimes the more effective it can be. Sometimes making it complicated doesn’t mean good. That said, having a bass line over two bars instead of one is often pretty lovely for variation.

I also find that powerful basses are the ones that are reply to the main idea. Support is efficient, but it will make your bass line lack interaction and making it less engaging.

A good way to find a dialog for a bass is to put a square LFO modulating the volume and then using it to mute parts of your bass. If you change the speed of the LFO, you’ll gate parts out, and might find a good combo or variation. In Hip Hop, they often use a pure sine tone and they’ll duck with an LFO or kick. This makes the low end very full and thick.

Oscillators

If you’re going to pick a synth to design with, it might be wise to consider the use of certain wave shapes. For instance, a sine is warm and pure but it can have resonances which are difficult to remove with a bell EQ because they can phase. You want to control your low end only using filters (high-pass) or a shelving EQ. A filter’s slant will help control a rumble. You can put it at 30hz and then switch the slant from 6dB/oct to 12,18, 24 and see how the low-end changes. They all make it very different, from taming to numbing it out. I like to use a square oscillator, but I’m not a fan of the harmonics it creates, so I will filter some out. I’m very careful with resonances in the low-end, but they can also bring a certain warmth to it. For instance, you can use resonance as an extra sine oscillator, which brings fullness to the low-end.

I hope this covers low-end sufficiently for you. Feel free to share your own findings, techniques, or extra questions!

Artistic Integrity and Music Theory

April 13, 2020/in Blog/by pheek

Last week, in one of our online coaching sessions, we discussed the importance of music theory. In describing my own opinions on the importance of music theory, I’d like to outline different stages of music discovery I’ve gone through during my life. In this post, I will also elaborate on some of my reflections on the current state of music itself.

It’s hard to pinpoint the first time I heard electronic music, but it was probably in the ’70s, and obviously, I fell in love with it. There was a whole science fiction trend at the time, and anything related to sci-fi was characterized by electronic music in the score. During that time, in a sea of pop and rock, electronic music was the oddball, not sounding like anything else. It had its own rules, and while some people were making electronic covers of known songs (which I’ve always hated deeply), I had an appetite for original music.

In the early ’80s, I was really into break-dancing and early electronic hip-hop or electro, which was all the rage. The use of 808s was common, and for me it was also instant love. What I discovered later on was the strong bond between early hip-hop and jazz. Recently, I watched a Blue Note documentary which retraces the roots of hip-hop and jazz, which was very refreshing.

What’s inspiring in this documentary is how this label, in its beginning, was trying to really give artists a chance to share a very personal take on music, and they didn’t follow trends or worry about sales. What was shocking about the film was that, for most part, the artists and label owners talk about what they do largely coming from the same perspectives as electronic musicians do about their own craft.

This type of vision has always resonated with me; what makes an artist wholesome is striving to be personal before anything else. If that’s obvious to you too, I’m sure you also know it’s not the case for many others who might be reading this post. This is why I became close friends with Bryan, who I make jazz with. He’s been playing sax for more than 45 years in all kind of contexts. When it comes to learning music, knowing chord progression rules and things like the circle of fifths, he’s probably the best person to talk with.

We had a talk about those so-called “rules” once. His point of view was very clear: knowing fewer rules might actually keep you more open to making things that are ground-breaking rather than thinking that certain things shouldn’t be done. I can related to this, because when I hear about “engineering rules”, I often feel like I’m preventing myself from doing certain things by adhering to them. Bryan is not interested in guiding me with respect to melodies. “Ya gotta break patterns, man!”, he’ll say, sometimes talking about how it works in free jazz.

“Music rules got blown out of proportion in the ’80s when musicians understood they could make a lot of money if they knew the tricks. Then everyone were more interested in repeating known recipes than making something personal,” he says. We have discussed how historically music elitists came up with serious rules to keep music-making limited to wealthy people who could afford music classes and thus it became less available to the poor. The dialog around music theory has traditionally been downwards, from the higher classes to the lower class—one way communication.

Jazz made music more open and accessible. The early beginnings of the rave days (circa 1987-1992) where music and the scene was really about inclusion and a big F-you to the music industry had a similar ethos. There was a lot of tension back then between electronic music and other genres. Electronic music was often misunderstood, mocked and put down, probably because it was the exact opposite in terms of values and ways of life.

From the early ’90s until around 2010, one of the most important values in most branches of electronic music was a sense of novelty. In my early rave days, we’d attend to be musically challenged. We wanted to hear music that we never heard before, and we even wanted to be disoriented. You’d have DJs dropping a huge mish-mash of different styles, and beat-matching was not as important as it seems to be now. It got more and more organized and popular DJs became the ones that were more structured, and eventually DJs started playing sets of one genre alone. One genre would emerge, stay for a while, and then become “bad” until another one usurped it as it faded into the past. This progression had many victims: Trance, Techno, House, Drum and Bass, etc. It was pretty different from today where there’s room for everything and artists are the ones to come and go instead of genres. Maybe they never really “go”, but the media focus often shifts to others in the same genre who are slightly “different”.

But let’s get back to music theory and academic chord progressions.

Often people make melodies based on some concept or rule they have in mind, or something they’ve heard before. One thing I hear a lot from people is that when they read about music theory and then try to apply it in their own work, they sound cheesy or too pop-y. So the question is, is there a way to know rules regarding melodies and still make something that sounds right?

That’s a bit of a hard one to answer.

It’s either you understand the tones and keys associated with a genre first and then try to reinterpret them in your own creative way, or you don’t. But to me, this raises some issues regarding artistic integrity—perhaps you want to work within a genre but still create a strong sense of originality. Is that possible?

Well, if you chose a genre that really speaks to you that you want to work in heavily, that’s a certain decision you make about who you are as an artist. But in my opinion, the quality of the vocabulary you can develop in electronic music comes—first and foremost—from understanding sound design.

That said, understanding music theory is a huge help in understanding how to strike a particular note. There are numerous tools out there to help you improve your tonal and theoretical knowledge. Here are a few:

Instascale: Not familiar yet with this one, but I’ve heard good things.
Scaler: For helping you understand chord progressions by proposing what could follow your melody, based on a genre.
Melodyne: one of the most used plugins for pitch correction.
Captain Plugins: The complete suite gives you access to tools that facilitate melody-making, pitch detection, bass-making and can make a huge difference in creating musical structure.

One thing I do a lot is work with my reference tracks using a pitch detection plugin (Mixed in Key, studio edition) and then will have that as a starting point. Then if you want to generate a different starting point, I’ll use Rozzer (Free Max patch) that generates a random pattern. That usually helps me find a motif for a song. Andrew here also has a few good suggestions:

I find that one thing that helps me a lot about making melodies is to work with what’s proposed instead of trying to control the output too much. If you start working with an expected melody in your head, you might spend hours trying to recreate it and it will end up sounding like crap. You sort of need to find the right melody for the right sound. That’s where it’s easy to go down the rabbit hole.

This is why if you work with what you have and try to get the most out of it, you might end up with something more original. I’ll record a lot of MIDI ideas and usually will go back to them and try a large series of presets until I find what feels like a perfect match, then tweak the sounds (this is where the sound design knowledge comes handy).

In this blog I frequently talk about remaining open-minded as much as possible and letting go of control. The notion of having control over what you do comes with practice. Same an understanding of musical theory. You need to make a lot of projects and a lot of songs to become more fluent and understanding in what you do. But to get there, first you need to really let go!

It’s Time for Musicians to be Inclusive

April 6, 2020/in Blog, Tips/by pheek

Anyone making music regularly goes through numerous phases of wisdom. Sometimes, it can seem like the music industry is a video game, where—with some luck and networking—you can “level up” until you attain glory. Making music with this frame of mind, which many artists seem to do, produces certain unattractive behaviours:

An unwillingness to share knowledge and contacts
Taking a competitive approach to music
Snobbery and arrogance towards other people and artists

New producers are often thrown-off by the attitude of established artists. Established artists do filter people for other reasons, as being completely open to everyone and everything can become draining, especially if many are trying to “use” them (i.e. for attention, feedback on music, etc). Some artists are also really bad at communicating or just shy, which makes them adopt a closed persona as a way to hide. That said, there exists a very thin line that can be crossed from filtering to snobbery.

Where Does Arrogance Among Artists Come From?

If people work hard on learning something, giving what they spent time and money to understand to someone else for “free” might seem unfair, right? People might also feel that if they’ve reached a certain status, maybe others coming up behind them might bump them out of their position.

Sharing knowledge doesn’t make you lose it.

Sometimes people also feel that opening up to someone to share valuable information and getting anything in return can be very frustrating, as it feels like a waste of energy. Or worse, sometimes there are concerns that there will be some sort of betrayal if the recipient gets “further” with the shared piece of information than the original artist did themselves. It’s not really a surprise that many artists are extremely protective, as they constantly feel like they’re at risk of being “surpassed”.

Seeing someone succeed doesn’t mean you failed.

Reality check—a music career is just a series of ups and downs, with some peaks and plateaus. You can’t escape it, it’s part of the game. It’s never related to other people’s success, it’s just organic. A music career is absolutely bipolar and extremely volatile. These conditions are conducive to feelings of hyper-vigilance, anxiety, and depression. Some people manage to reach a flow where things work longer than others—this is related to a good combo of solid networking, natural talent and a good dose of charisma. Sometimes helping other artists can actually help an artist’s career for the better.

What are the Benefits of Being Inclusive and Helping Other Artists?

While for many this might seem obvious, you’d be surprised how for many others, the idea to work with other people sounds like a bad or compromising idea. I’m not one to judge anyone’s opinion because there is indeed a big risk we need to first address: theft and knowledge abuse. Many artists are taken advantage of by labels, club promoters, Spotify or other giant takeovers in the music business, and even other artists copying or “stealing” content/ideas. Does being inclusive pose risk for these types of situations to increase?

Being inclusive is not being naive. It is—first and foremost—trying to help others, as you wished you were helped when in need.

While writing this post, most of us are in quarantine and have no idea what things will be like in the near future. Interestingly enough for me, for the last 20 years, I’ve become used to being in my studio, secluded and working remotely. I’ve done countless collaborations online and ran labels as well. But now this lifestyle is imposed on many people who aren’t used to it. Not everyone can feel comfortable in this position, even musicians. In the last two weeks, I managed some online groups through Zoom to support my community. Sessions of three hours with more than 30 participants made it clear to me that we all want to reach out to one another, and that our life is far from a dystopian movie depicting revolts and violence. I see way more creative collaboration, online performances, tons of entertainment, classes and people spending their time helping strangers. I want this to happen with music-makers as well.

During a prolonged time of inactivity such as the situation we’re in right now, many institutions, clubs, festivals, and artists will suffer losses. I see people organizing crowd-sourcing campaigns, but they don’t seem to be gaining much traction. Money is only one aspect of the problem—it’s not the real solution to this situation. Where we’ll really need help will in reaching out to one another, supporting local musicians and businesses, and cutting out this business of acting like a “music diva”—we should rethink how we work.

I would like to outline some ways of acting towards others that have been my way of life. I don’t see myself as perfect, but I try to live by these maxims. Being inclusive is something essential to my daily life.

One thing I often do, since of course I don’t always have the time to help is that I teach people to troubleshoot their problems, find answers through efficient researching. For instance, YouTube has solution to many issues and many people ignore that.
I give everyone a chance until they prove me otherwise. Just like in life, if someone comes to me, seems friendly and wants to chat, I’ll usually take the time to chat back. I’m always interested in getting to know others with the time I have. For the most part, people are really friendly. The great thing about an online presence is, you can take distance yourself easily if things don’t go well. But I like to give people a chance and would never snob someone unless I feel there’s a strong clashing of life values (ex. aggressive behaviour, inability to listen, excessive drug use, or anything that can put my health at risk).
I like to be a “yes-man”. For the most part, whatever people ask me, I will do my best to say yes and answer. I’ve been told I’m too nice and that people take advantage of me, but there are a lot of people who are like that and it’s often more energy-boosting than draining. I find that having strong boundaries are essential, though.
I invest in those who invest in me. I’ve often chased after people who I thought were cool, but from whom I wasn’t getting any attention back. I kept trying and usually ended up feeling resentful. That behaviour is in the past now for me, and I only invest myself in people who give attention back. If I send an email and there’s no follow-up, I might poke a second time, but I usually set no expectations. This has cleared up a lot of frustration towards labels who don’t reply or other artists I’ve been wanting to work with that would never reply. I now focus on people who come to me in the first place. There’s a lot more energy there.
Listening to what people have to say teaches me one thing a day. When I do online coaching, I spend time listening to what people have to say. There’s space for learning just as much as for teaching. I believe that everyone gets to teach me something because the world of music making is too vast to claim to know it all.
Develop trust that even when confronted with what seems like a failure, there’s something ahead that will benefit me. Sometimes I felt like some misfortunes were really bad for me personally or for my music career. It’s really impossible to foresee what’s ahead but strangely enough, when it comes to the future no one is in control; magic that can happen down the road, in ways that were impossible to imagine. Stories of missed flights, cancelled events, pirated albums and so on, have been things I went through and I could go on about, but there was always something positive that came out of those experiences. I’m not someone that believes “positive thinking” can in negative situations fixes everything, so I prefer to stay grounded and have a sense of trust that there’s something to come that will be better for me or others.
Always put people in touch—sharing connections creates power. I’ve never ever kept contacts for myself but this is something I often see people do. I don’t see the point to keep people apart. If you can put people in contact and something happens from that, you’ve just created a channel that many people will benefit from.
Never take anything personally—’Nuff said.
You never know who will help you in the future. So many times, I’ve talked with some random people and years later, these people came back to me with something. Recently someone booked my services for a mix and said I gave him a CD in 2004!
Being nice often pays more in the long run. I don’t believe that being difficult pays off in any way, and in the long term, people will avoid you if you’re unpleasant.
Explaining is learning. This is my motto. If you can teach someone a trick, you need to know it well enough to explain it. Therefore, you’re teaching yourself how to do it again. Often, if someone doesn’t get it, you need to find other ways to explain it, which tends to help discover new opportunities in your workflow.

FOBMO: The Fear Of Being Missed Out

March 23, 2020/in Blog, Tips/by pheek

If you examine the history of an artist, often you will find that an artist’s first releases are pretty different from those they release later in their career(s). In many cases, it’s the effect of maturation, but sometimes it’s the result of the artist trying to maintain a following by adjusting the music he or she makes to be more like what sells. Many artists try to centre their music output on what “worked” and others are try to chase attention by jumping from one bandwagon to another. It’s no surprise then that newcomers to music-making will try to copy artists they love, in attempting to generate attention for their own work.

No matter how long you make music, at one time or another you’ll experience the existential crisis that leads to questioning why you make music at all, and who you should be making it for. When artists feel this way, I see a number of habits that start to emerge in their work:

Mimicking another artist’s path
Changing genres or styles
Aiming to be featured in charts
Making music with the goal being “to get more plays”

Is there anything wrong with doing any of these things? No, not at all. But if you’re trying to do something and expect control over the outcome, then you might feel frustrated and eventually develop a love/hate relationship with your music. This is a pattern I often see in coaching and it’s difficult to reverse.

Fundamentally, many artists have a fear of being missed out (FOBMO)—they begin to equate certain things in how they make music with “success”, which can mean they worry they’re being “missing out” on as a result of things like:

Not making music that’s “good” enough. Belief: “My music needs to sound in a specific way to be good.”
Not being signed to a label. Belief: “If I’m on the label X, then I will see success because people will hear/see me.”
Not having enough plays on tracks posted. Belief:”If people aren’t listening to my music, it’s because I’m not doing things properly.”
Not having the chance to be heard playing in a club. Belief:”My music isn’t getting me gigs.”
Not releasing on a vinyl. Belief: “Vinyl is consecration.”

“Artist X got to where I hope to be. Therefore, I will try to follow his steps because it seems like they worked.”

If one of these things aren’t happening, or not happening fast enough, some artists feel like everything they’ve worked on will slip away and that they will never get any recognition. Honestly, I know a lot about it because I’ve been there, but mostly after being very much in demand. Most of the time, I see this more in people before their breakthrough. But in both cases, its the same thought flow that goes on in this attention-seeking process. This carousel repeatedly demands an artist consider one important question: how much of what you do is just for yourself, and what should be released?

To have an appetite to be heard or seen, and to succeed is what is needed to help you answer this question. If you persist, there are chances success will happen—but you need to invest a lot of work in your craft first.

Does Every Song Need to be Released?

No, obviously. Let’s go one step further—does every song needs to be polished? Perfect? Good? Again, no. But for many, answering “no” to these questions isn’t debatable, as they put all their energy into polishing and finishing songs to ensure they’re ready to be sent as a demo to a label.

For me, 2020 has seen a new working style where I’m making one song per week. I try to push it as far as possible; I try to make music every day. It’s completely changed my perspective on how to approach my music. There are days where my inspiration is off and others where my energy isn’t there—it’s hard for everything to line-up and have that perfect moment. But more importantly, this approach has taught me that sitting in front of my computer to make music has to come with a very clear intention as of what I want to do with my time and the emotion I’m about to channel into the music. Everything changes when the intention is clear.

If you have a hard time re-opening an older project and getting into it, it’s mostly because your intention behind what you’re doing probably isn’t clear, and your mind is really elsewhere. This is why the idea of copying or emulating other artists or songs becomes a bit problematic, as you can’t really replicate novel emotional intention.

Should You Try to Copy or Imitate a Song or Artist?

If you’re copying with the intention to learning a process, yes. But if you’re copying to try and capitalize on public attention with expectations to be appreciated, signed, booked, seen as cool…or anything attention related, please don’t.

If I Don’t Release Anything, won’t I be Forgotten?

Not really. Some artists have been successful without releasing much. Release quality is obviously very important, and for me personally, releasing often provided me with some momentum and attention. But besides all the music I make today, many people still remember me for the music I made 10 years ago.

In conclusion, if you’re making music in reacting, you might be seeing yourself in this FOBMO. I invite you to create now more than ever as people are going through this quarantine episode and need art more than ever. You won’t be forgotten or missed, you’ll be appreciated.

Working with Loopcloud

March 2, 2020/in Blog, Production, Song Finalizing and Arrangements, Sound Design/by pheek

Making music in 1990 involved working with samplers, a very basic Atari computer running Cubase, and sampling sounds from tape cassettes here and there to make music. We’d also add synth lines over what we had, but we were really limited in what we could do. You have no idea how exhausting making a simple loop could be—it sometimes took a whole afternoon. Plus, we’d have to leave everything running to continue later without losing anything. If you fast forward 10 years, it was much easier, but to find samples you needed or that you couldn’t make yourself, you’d buy samples on CDs or sample music you liked—it still wasn’t super easy.

When I decided to start working with people on their music as a producer, there’s one thing that became essential, which was the organization of my files: samples with tags so I could find them easily. When I work on a full album while working on 2-3 other projects for clients, if I’m not organized when I have a flash of inspiration, my flow will be lost.

Enter Loopcloud into my life, and I haven’t been the same—no joke.

What’s Loopcloud and How Does it Work?

First and foremost, Loopcloud is a desktop app that syncs with your DAW. It’s also a sample organizer and online store for any samples you might be missing. So, the app contains your samples and the cloud’s library—it’s like a door to a library where you can find pretty much every single sound you need. The best way to use it is to open the Loopcloud VST in your DAW and then go on the app to browse for sounds you need. If you do that in a song you’re working on, it will sync your BPM and then you can also tell it what key your song is in (if that applies). If you find loops that aren’t in key, you can also force the app to tune it to the key of your song. Then you just simply drag the sample you found in Loopcloud and drop it directly in your DAW—it’s pretty magical.

The Different Ways I Use Loopcloud

Finding a specific missing sound for a song. You can spend 30-40 minutes trying to do a drum roll properly, tweaking a synth to sound exactly like some deep house leads you like, etc. With Loopcloud, I sometimes find 2-3 samples that are similar to what I envision and layer them to create something new.
Exploring genres you usually shy away from. If you’ve been collecting and buying samples based on one genre, sometimes it’s very interesting to venture off into other genres that you aren’t familiar with and find sounds that are different from what you’d usually use. It’s normal to be picky with sound-fetching, and you might not be interested in buying a full pack of a genre you might never use. Now you can get a single sample—a vocal or a weird world instrument—to create unusual soundscapes. Using organic sounding, acoustic percussion over your digital sounds can add a nice extra touch.
Test a sound in context. Since the Loopcloud’s audio-out is rewired in your DAW, you can add effects on it to see, for instance, how a hook will sound once compressed or with a delay. Normally, it’s hard to know exactly how the samples you’re about to buy will fit in there, but with a Loopcloud channel, it opens up a lot of options. However, sounds are watermarked for piracy control so don’t expect to record them from there!
Randomize ideas. With more randomized samples, you can try a lot of different things in your work that you’d normally not be looking for—with Loopcloud you can test them and see what happens. There’s a great discovery aspect here that often makes me smile.
Testing multiple options in arrangements. Sometimes in a moment where you know something is missing, but you’re not sure if this or that would be the thing that makes the difference, you can check out loops that might provide you with a better perspective of what you can do.
Use Loopcloud’s sample editor to fine tune a loop. While there are a lot of loops in Loopcloud, you can rearrange sounds in the editor and also add some integrated effects to tweak the perfect sample. The multi-layer function allows you to have up to 8 loops playing. This is really an added value to your library, giving yourself a lot of options to tweak original material from, perhaps even very simple content.
Test one sample alone in a context. You can pick one sample and with Loopcloud’s inner sequencer and create a pattern to hear how it would sound. This is pretty killer, as sometimes you’re missing that one thing. This is, by far, way faster than Ableton’s browser, so with all your samples you have along with those you don’t have, there’s absolutely no way to fail in finding good sounds. Perhaps, having too many sounds might become an issue!

If haven’t read about it in this blog already, for 2020 I will be making one song per week as part of a personal challenge that I’m doing on WeeklyBeats, and it’s been a life changing experience. Music is one of the central parts of my life, both my lifestyle and working life, but putting my own music first was a bit of a challenge because I’ve been dedicating a lot of my time to clients—but this has also paid off in many ways. The first benefit of taking a break from my own music was to review in detail how I start a new song.

Loopcloud is a very useful tool to be able to start new songs from scratch. Basically, how I work is that I need first a core groove to be able to jam new potential ideas. The groove can be generic or simple, but I need something different each time. To make something new and refreshing is difficult if I’m stuck with a certain set of sounds, synths, and habits. Having access to random banks of new grooves is mind-blowing because it’s as easy as popping-open the app to see what today’s flavor will be. Perhaps ethnic, world beats, with a funk background and house bass? I’m the only one responsible to make it work, and if I let my brain tell myself “no”, then I know I’m missing out.

To start a track and to begin sketching, here’s how Loopcloud can help:

Try a base BPM and key to the song. This can of course be changed, but if you can start with that, you can then also find samples to work with.
Think of a genre you want to work with. This is just to remove a lot of potential distraction. If you think of techno, this will eliminate a huge number of decisions you have to take.
Pick a sub-genre or influence. If you’re a purist, this might be for you. I suggest picking a second genre to go fetch cross-genre sounds. Ex. Arabic melodies with house.
Decide on your rhythmic signature, such as 4/4 or breakbeats or anything else. Build a core loop to work with. Loopcloud also lets you pick one.
Collect a large group of sounds for your song. This should be, bass, main melody, supporting ideas, effects, stabs, transitional elements and background. I usually make sure I have 3-4 sounds for each of them, ideally in key to the song.

Is Working With Loopcloud Making Music Production “Easier” a Trap for Producers?

I don’t think it is. I find that the more people making music, the more refreshing ideas get invented. This starts with making music increasingly accessible, which Loopcloud does. In the hands of experienced producers, tools give us more time to focus on important details and things we like the most. In my case, I noticed I gained a lot of speed in starting new ideas or tweaking my client’s needs. I have more control and I also can share ideas with my clients before sending them a project so we’re on the same page.

Does Having Access to so Many Sounds Limit Creativity?

No, quite the opposite. If I have more material to work with, I find there are fewer obstacles to creating richer songs. One of the things I explain to many new music producers is that working with quality samples trains your ear on how to pick quality material, which gives you top results. For instance, once you realize that best hi-hats often have a certain air in the highs, you’ll combine the transients of certain hats you have with some others you found through your searches. You’ll soon be able to create your own percussive combination of layers 3-4 sounds to get another very odd sound design. Same for melodies. But it’s really hard to start learning sound design on your own if you’re not familiar with what really works. Once you learn, you can then work to reverse-engineer the sounds that work best. But to do that, there’s nothing like having access to a huge library, like what Loopcloud offers.

In the end, what music comes down to is only a few things: reproducing melodies/atmospheres/experiences you want, with the best flow possible. That requires experience, patience and the use of quality material.

Update: June 2021

Loopcloud recently released version 6 of the platform, which extends its sampling capabilities by incorporating artificial intelligence to match harmonic and rhythmic samples, similar sound matching, and enhanced search filters so that you can find a sample easier without having to do the dreaded “scroll and listen.” In addition to their enhanced algorithm, Loopcloud 6 comes loaded with tons more samples to increase artistic expression.

Sound Matching

Whenever you select a sound, a list of adjacent loops will appear that should work well with the one you selected. This algorithm will also look through your sample collection and find sounds that will compliment them too. So, if you have a sound that you have been using as a signature, Loopcloud’s updated algorithm will pump out a list of recommended sounds that may help expand that pallet, whether that is harmonically or rhythmically. This could be the spark that gets you to the next step in your game, while saving you a hell of a lot of time, all by working with Loopcloud.

More Advanced Search Filters

Perhaps you already have an idea of what you want in a sound, but are having a hard time building it from scratch. Loopcloud 6 has advanced their search filters in order to make working with Loopcloud and finding that particular sound more seamless. You can search for the tone, length, stereo, BPM, swing, rhythmic density, attack, and decay in order to track down that elusive tone in your head. You will probably not be able to find exactly what you need, but even if you find something adjacent, that can inspire a whole new universe of creative thought.

Find Familiar Sounds

This feature does just as it says. If you have a sound that you like and click the “find similar sounds” button, Loopcloud 6 will populate a list of sounds that it thinks are similar to it. This makes working with Loopcloud a valuable tool for quickly cycling through sounds that may fit your timbral palette.

Three New Effects

Working with Loopcloud just got more diverse, with its additions of compressor, Tonebox, and EQ effects. You can tweak the parameters of these effects or select a preset on any of the sounds to tailor your sound in unique ways before exporting it to your DAW.

Easier Sorting

If you want, Loopcloud’s AI will combine your sounds into theme-friendly folders so they are easier to find.

Links may contain affiliate offers.

Tips for better clarity in your mixes

February 24, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Tips/by pheek

Clarity in mixes is not something people understand or perceive well when they first start mixing, but it’s a magical part of a song that often distinguishes professional mixes from amateur mixes. Clear-sounding mixes instantly grab your attention because they feel precise, open, airy and easy to understand. While clarity in a mix might seem easy to create, it’s actually very difficult to achieve.

I can say that I’m starting to better understand clarity myself. If you’re familiar with my music, you know I like busy music and my songs are generally quite full, with multiple layers of sounds. It’s a challenge for me to get a clear mix because of the number of sounds I use, but for me this is also the best way to practice mixing clearly, as it’s more difficult than if I were only using a minimal amount of sounds.

Here are some of the things I’ve learned when creating clarity in my own mixes.

Less is more, and less is clearer

The less you have going on, the clearer your song will be. Nothing clashes and there’s less to try to find an appropriate spot for. When mixing, you need to find a fitting place for every sound you use. If you have 5 hihats, 3 claps, and 5 melodies, this can become quite a challenge.

How can you clean up a mix and make it clearer?

I see a lot of clients struggle with cleaning up their mixes. Most artists suffer from a strange thought process that goes something like “I’m afraid the listener is going to get bored, therefore I will fill my mix with as much as possible so the listener never feels let down.” To this I would reply that there’s a remedy in your DAW…the mute button! Let me explain:

1 – Loop a section of your song, the part where it’s the busiest.

2 – Mute everything, then start by un-muting your essential sounds. What are the fewest number of sounds that can communicate your song’s idea clearly? Toggling mute on parts of a song sometimes create interesting perspectives and can reveal things you didn’t realize about your arrangements—it often takes fewer sounds to create a clear mix. This can mean no fills, no decorations, no backgrounds, just the essentials.

3 – Are your essential sounds sharing space in the frequency spectrum?

Technically, if you have less, sounds are most likely to occupy less space and clash with one another less frequently. Generally, there are a few areas where your sounds can clash:

Frequency: If you divide the spectrum into 4 or 5 bands, you want each band to have the same number of sounds. Low-end would be under 100hz, then 100 to 1k for mids, 1k to 3k for high mids and then 3k to 10k for highs, then 10k+ for the air/transients. If you have a hard time muting your sounds, you can also isolate a few different sounds in different bands.
Amplitude: Also known as volume, amplitude is often not understood properly. People want everything LOUD and are afraid that secondary sounds won’t be heard. Everything gets heard in a mix and sometimes, things that are less loud are way better. Some sounds should be the loudest, then the others should be mixed in relation to those. The greater the amplitude distance you have between your sounds, the more they’ll feel like they’re breathing instead of fighting. This is your dynamic range, a concept that’s often misunderstood. I would recommend playing with levels here and there as well. Having modulation on the amplitude of a sound is a good way to create a breath of fresh air in a mix. You can use a tool like MTremolo to give you a hand with that.
Sample length: This is something many overlook but is very important when it comes to samples. In many cases, samples people use are too long (too much decay) and that can cause a lot of noise, especially once compressed. Take kicks, for instance; people love big, badass kicks but don’t realize how problematic a long kick is in the low-end, especially in mastering. It bleeds in the bass and everything becomes mushy. I often use Transient Shaper (by Softubes) to shorten kicks or other percussive elements. You’d push the attack if you want and reduce the decay. You can also reduce the decay of a sample in Ableton if you go in the “Preserve” to be switched to “Trans” and then make sure it’s one-way, and play with the percentage to remove the decay.

Stereo space: I’ve explained this before and will refrain from repeating myself, but stereo clarity is crucial. If your sounds are spread wildly, you might get into phasing issues which means, you’ll end up with holes and sounds ghosting when they should be heard. I know that discovering phasing issues might be a bit of a mystery to many new producers, but with a good metering, you can see them. You can also listen to part of your song in mono to see if everything is coming out properly.

Chaos-inducing mixing errors

There are a number of tools and habits that can create chaos in a mix—I run into them often, and here are a few I see regularly that I can provide some advice for:

1- Using loop samples: There’s nothing wrong with using a pre-made loop or sampling something from source, but you won’t be able to access the loop’s sounds individually, and can get trapped dealing with issues that already exist within the loop or sample. If you’re using a loop, make it the centre of your song and make sure that you work the other samples around it. Tip: Using busy loops can be a bit of a problem, but you can use a multi-band compressor to control them, or put them in mono and use a multi-band stereo tool like the Shaperbox 2 to decide on the position of each sound.

2- Auto-panning nightmares: Making things move can feel exciting, but it doesn’t help mix clarity if you overdo it. Using multiple auto-pan effects on sounds can be cool, but the human ear can only handle a certain number of complex things going on. If on the first listen, one can’t understand the movement clearly, there are chances the modulation isn’t helping. TIP: Use just one auto-panning effect per song, max.

3- Delays and reverb: Reverb and delay multiply or make sounds longer, songs busier, and therefore, potentially more confusing. Reverb can be useful, but a type like Hall can make things sound a bit messy. I would recommend to have your reverb set to a short decay and low wet/dry. Darker reverb can also help preserve the highs in your song. Tip: Using reverb with a Chamber/Room at the beginning can help to know how much you should use. Also, if you can use a delay instead of reverb for creating wider sounds, use an EQ to tame the clashing frequencies.

4- Intense compression: Compression glues and adds body to sounds, but a compressor with a slow release and high ratio can also mess up the precision of a sound. Keeping some transients intact can really help a sound to pop out of a mix. If you compress, perhaps using the magic 1:1.5 ratio with slow attack to help the transient snap. TIP: Parallel compression is always useful for clarity.

My last general tip is to always check your mix in mono…it really helps!

I hope this was useful.

Music Feedback: When to Take the Opinions of Others Seriously and When Not to Care

February 16, 2020/in Blog, Tips/by pheek

If you make music, you’ll get what I’m trying to explain here—the head space where you’re fully aware that it’s important to make music solely for yourself, but yet you really want to share it with the world, with other people who could potentially like it. If you love what you do, maybe someone out there also loves it, too?

Where should you draw the line between making music for others versus making it for yourself?

Honestly, it’s a tough question. The voice of reason in most people will answer it with something moralistic, like:

Making music for yourself is the way. Sharing is good, but don’t make a big deal out of what people say.

Unless you have a real mastery of your emotions, if you’re an artist, you will, at some point, want to share your work. If you share your work with “random” people, especially close friends or family, you’ll mostly get random feedback which can be confusing and hard to analyze constructively. Sharing your work is, at its most fundamental level, about seeking validation. Even old fart producers like me who have 20+ albums and have toured, still carry the need for validation. The difference I see between myself and younger artists, is that I carefully pick the people I share my music with—a way of knowing if you’re still relevant to people you trust. In past posts, I’ve explained how to network properly and how to build a circle of solid contacts.

A pattern I often see is artists having a very productive session, and the resulting track feels very emotionally powerful to them. Validation comes in when they seek to determine if the emotions in the session were valid, or if they were hyped over something bogus.

This sort of pattern results in an “they’re right, I’m wrong” thought process that causes cognitive dissonance. Let’s examine this pattern from a technical point of view:

You make music absolutely for yourself, but this is artistic masturbation; it’s normal to want to connect with others to validate these feelings.
The opposite is making music for a label, other artist, crowd, club, or festival, in which an artist is chasing other people’s opinions and lacks control over their own work—they usually end up frustrated.

If you ask someone for advice about music, sometimes people come at it from the problematic position of “I’m right, you’re wrong.” They’ll tell you what they think is good or not, based on their point of view. Sometimes people are not totally open to giving real feedback and will be biased. When most people are given the opportunity to criticize, they’ll find something wrong. It might not always be useful, but sometimes with music, particularly concerning technical aspects of production, there’s value in receiving good feedback.

When Should You Take Someone’s Feedback Seriously?

It’s up to you, but it’s heavily dependent on your ability and accuracy in evaluating your own work beforehand. Here are a few tips for evaluating your own work before seeking external feedback:

1. If your track creates emotion in you, never doubt it, even if it never reaches anyone. Not all tracks need to be released, heard publicly, or shared. You can make a song for yourself and perhaps a few friends—this is a totally valid way of making music. The “need” to release all your music is really a misconception that you’re entitled to be heard because you made a song. Honestly, you aren’t.

2. Listen to your song in different contexts to see what it feels like. For example, listen to it while commuting, in your living room, in your car, in front of a friend (in person!) or in the middle of your favourite playlist. This can reveal flaws in your work. If something feels off and you are limited technically, then you know that asking someone for feedback with a precise request should provide value to your work.

3. Use a reference tool such as Reference from Plugin Boutique which, if you compare your work with a song you like, you can easily see what is missing (tone or loudness). Fixing issues might be a roadblock for some artists, and that’s another reason it might be useful to get feedback.

Once you’ve done these three things, I’d upload a snippet to Soundcloud to get a reaction or share it privately with a few friends. I would never post music in forums without knowing what regular users are like in the first place. I also don’t share with close friends; they never get it and sometimes it can make the friendship awkward. I prefer having two circles of friends: music-related and non-music.

Never forget that it’s important to age a song for a few weeks or months, just like a wine, then come back to it afterwards—this trick reveals incredible details you can’t initially see or hear.

When is Feedback Disposable and Not Worth Taking Seriously?

When someone implies that you should change something in the arrangement or sound design based on their tastes.
When someone discusses some so-called “unwritten rules” about how music “should” be made (ex. you have to make all your sounds from scratch, you can’t use samples, etc).
When their technical feedback is questionable. For example, some people might comment on bass without having access to a sub.
When someone who lacks empathy can’t understand the vision of the track and tries instead to see it from their own point of view. For example, my ex never understood that music I made at home would translate differently in a club.
When someone tags your music with buzzwords. Sometimes people would listen to a song and say “oh, it’s chill” but not understanding that on a large system, it might groove.
When you receive comments such as “X is good” or “X is bad“. As if the person had the universal understanding of some permanent elements in music—such comments don’t mean anything at all. We all know that if person X finds it bad, person Y might think it’s genius.

I hope this helps you understand what type of feedback is worth taking seriously!

Changing Genres: Coming to Electronic Music from Other Genres

February 10, 2020/in Blog, Production, Tips/by pheek

Since interest in electronic music really blossomed in terms of popularity, musicians from different spheres have all tried to capitalize on it. 20 years ago, big musicians in rock, pop, dabbled with it. We saw Madonna and some other bigger names venture into electronic sounds, but they sounded mostly like tourists in a country that they were visiting. With the recent victory of Billy Eillish at the Grammy’s for her album, not only it is mostly electronic, but it was also recorded in their modest home (precisely, in a bedroom) in Los Angeles. I’m currently involved in a few mixing engineer groups on Facebook, and while many were laughing at the album, some people took real interest in it—sometimes, less might be better, and you don’t need the latest toys to make something interesting.

Most newcomers to the scene, however, lack the knowledge of electronic music culture, and understanding of what electronic music is or sounds like. For people like me who have been listening to the genre for decades, when I hear someone with a rock background pick up synths and try to make techno, there’s something that always sounds slightly off: it doesn’t sound like what electronic is generally like, or it sounds something like rock, but not in a good way. In the 50s, people experimented with making classical music on synths—most of it was plainly horrible. Same goes for the early attempts of synth presets mimicking very colourful instruments like a trumpet. “Trumpet” presets make jazz musicians cringe, and with good reason.

Should an experienced musician restrain themselves from venturing into a new genre? Of course not. But knowing some tips to make the switch is probably the right course of action.

References and Getting to Know What Works

The biggest mistake I see from people who come to electronic music from a different scene, is not understanding who they are making music for. I can’t speak for how it works in the rock industry, but I think there are fewer fragmented areas of it than there are in electronic music. Electronic music has DJs, fans, labels, media, internet, etc., all with different sub-scenes. Knowing your specific audience can influence how you make music itself. For “musicians”, this is something many have a hard time getting their head around. For instance, if your track is made for DJs, you wouldn’t approach it the same way as if you make music for yourself, or for the general public.

“Why would I do it for DJs?”, a rocker once asked me.

Well, they expose your music to a public that might be interested to listen to it in a specific context. Your purpose is not the same as if you make music for, let’s say, home or even, after-parties.

“Oh, there are different types of DJs?”, he replied.

Yes indeed, I replied, and that’s another level of complexity in electronic music. You don’t make music for opening sets or after-parties, the way you would for peak time—and even for peak time, each genre has their own standards of what constitutes “peak music”. House, EDM (aka Vegas music), minimal, techno, etc., all have different styles. Even ambient and drone, have their own version of “peak time music”, which might sound bizarre if you’re not familiar with these genres, but go to an ambient or drone festival and you’ll know what I mean.

“But I just want to make cool music”, he then said.

Yeah, I know, I do too. But then again, if it’s for yourself and friends, you then know who you make it for and that’s very cool. If you’re aiming for a broader market and want to commercialize it, that approach probably won’t work well. Electronic music is a genre where you are free to do whatever you want and have unlimited resources to make many dream ideas come true, but the whole commercialization aspect of it is really messy, complicated, frustrating, paradoxical, and sometimes counter-productive. I’m aware this is the case in other genres as well, but the “successful” dance-oriented market is pretty tricky.

So what’s the real problem if you don’t follow a certain aesthetic?

Well, the most common scenario I see is enthusiastic people following their current tastes (often based on music that was cool 5-10 years ago) and without any self-criticism or feedback release music, and years later feel embarrassed about how off they sounded, or how badly it aged. Not a big problem, but it’s simple to not fall into this trap.

If you’re familiar with this blog, I frequently discuss the importance of references.

One thing that might surprise you is that I often recommend Spotify as an exploration tool. Let’s say you like the Chemical Brothers… Spotify can expose you to similar sounding artists. You can also see the latest releases by an artist and how he or she has developed. Personally, I love that.
Another thing I suggest is to spend some time listening to a lot of different artists. That also includes checking online magazines (I love XLR8R), get familiar with DJ charts, see what festivals book them or other artists you like, and get to know the other artists playing.
Going out to events is important, too. To hear music in context really gives huge insights to a musician. As an engineer and coach, I occasionally pop in to local events to see what’s happening.

Collaboration, Mentoring, and Networking

I think another very important thing to do when you venture into other genres is to quickly find someone of reference or reputation that you can trust. Develop a relationship where there’s no filter on your discussions or feedback—this can take quite a while to find or build.

Working with friends who have great taste or hiring professionals also, for the most part, provides you with some quality control.

Try to get to learn about plugins that are used on a daily basis by professionals.
Have some ideas of where to buy quality presets for certain soft-synths for the purpose of learning how some sounds are made.
Have a good idea of influential artists behind current trends. For every bigger, commercial trend, there’s a lesser-known artist who started a movement, an idea, or a musical direction that often “inspires” bigger names who commercialize it.
Get familiar with festivals that are fun and that could be good hubs for networking.
Build a network with media, promoters, and DJs. There are a lot of benefits and opportunities this type of network can produce.

However, when everything is said and done, collaboration is about making music, and getting to know the tips and tricks while networking. These are, in my opinion, some of the best things to know about if you aspire to make your way into a new genre!

Does Your Mix Sound Too Clean? Unpolish It.

February 3, 2020/in Blog, Mixing, Production, Sound Design/by pheek

If you think about it, it’s pretty astonishing to consider the number of tools that exists to make our music sound more professional. Since the 90s—when the DAW became more affordable and easily attainable for the bedroom producer—technology has been working to provide us with problem-solving tools to get rid of unwanted noises, issues, and other difficult tasks. We now face a point where there are so many tools out there, that when confronting a problem, it’s not about how you’ll solve it, but about which tool you’ll pick. Some plugins will not only solve a particular problem, but will also go the extra mile and offer you solutions for things you didn’t even know you needed.

The quantity and quality of modern tools out there have led myself, and others I’ve discussed this topic with, to a few observations regarding the current state of music. A lot of music now sounds “perfect” and polished to a point where it might be too clean. Just like effects in movies, deep learning, and photoshopped models—it feels like we’re lacking a bit of human touch. On top of the tools, engineers (like me) are more and more common and affordable, which makes it easier for people to get the last details of their work wrapped up. For many, music sounding “too clean” is not an issue whatsoever, but for others—mainly those who are into lofi, experimental, and old-school sounding music—the digital cleanliness can feel like a bit much.

If you think about it, we even have AI-assisted mastering options out there, but mastering plugins are also available for your DAW (Elements by Izotope does an OK job), as well as interactive EQs or channels strips to help you with your mixing (Neutron, FabFilter Pro-Q3), and noise removers and audio restoration plugins (RX Suite by Izotope). We’ve been striving to sound as clean as possible, as perfect as a machine can sound, and with increased accessibility, technology gives us the possibility to really have things sound as perfect as we can dream of.

So where should you stop?

Monitoring

You can only sound as perfect as what you can hear. If your monitoring isn’t perfect, you might not be able to achieve a perfect sounding mix. I know some people who intentionally will work with less-precise monitoring—it could be on earbuds/Airpods (not the Pro version), laptop speakers, cheap headphones, or simple computer speakers. Engineers usually test their final mix on lower-grade systems to make sure it will translate well in non-ideal settings. Starting out mixing this way also works; if you make music on low or consumer-level monitoring, you’ll be missing some feedback, which can actually turn out to be a good thing for your sound.

When producing on lower-grade speakers however, it also means you might not polish parts that actually need fixing. One of the frequency zones that always needs attention is the low-end—not paying proper attention to mixing it can be problematic in certain contexts, such as clubs. In other words, making bass-heavy music without validating the low-end is risky, because compared to other songs of the same genre that do sound “perfect”, your mix might have huge differences, which could sound off. In my opinion, if you want an “unpolished” sound, you should still give the low-end proper attention if it’s an important part of your song.

However, having self-imposed limitations, such as in your monitoring, is a good way to add a healthy dose of sloppiness to your mix.

Technical Understanding

The more you learn, the more you realize you really don’t know much. It’s perfectly fine not to know everything. Each song is a representation of where you are at the moment with your music production. I never try to accomplish a “masterpiece”. The more time and energy I put into a song to make it sound “perfect”, the more I realize I’ve sort of screwed up the main idea I had in the first place. Quickly-produced music is never perfect, but its spontaneity usually connects with people. I see people on Facebook amazed with music I’d consider technically boring from a production perspective, but the emotion these works capture strikes people more than the perfection of a mix.

Every time I search for something music-related, I learn something new. There are also some things I’m okay with not doing “the proper way”. I don’t think my music should be a showcase of my skills, but more of a reflection of the emotions I have in that moment.

I often see people over-using high-pass filters in their mixes, which makes their music feel thin or cold, or using EQs side-by-side that could introduce phasing issues…but does fixing these things actually matter? I’ve made some really raw music without any EQs at all (Tones of Void was recorded live without any polishing), which sounded really raw and was my most complimented work in the last 10 years of my productions.

Similarly, a lot of producers know very little music theory—how important is it? I’ve never gone to school for music and it’s only recently that I started wanting to learn more about it. Clients often ask me questions like “is it okay if I do this?” To which I reply that there is no right or wrong. Following rules might actually lead you to sounding too generic, if you’re technically-influenced.

The resurgence of tape in production and the rise of lofi love is great thing for music. People on Reverb are buying more and more old tape decks, four-tracks, and recording entire albums on them. One thing I love is the warmth it brings and the hiss as well (note: I get sad when clients ask me to remove any hiss). Some even have a shelving-EQ that can create a nice tone. Using an external mixer for your mixes can also create a very nice color, even on cheaper ones. Perhaps you shouldn’t be looking for the best sounding piece of equipment to improve your sound!

References

If your usual references are music that is really clean-sounding, you’ll be influenced to sound the same. I like that at the moment I see younger producers who are interested in uncompressed music, and like to have as much of a dynamic range as possible in their work; this is the opposite of the early 2000s when people thought loudness was the way to go—a trend that made a lot of beautiful music sound ugly as hell. Now some of the top producers have been passing their love for open dynamics on to the people who follow them, and that opens up a really large spectrum for exploring the subtle art of mixing.

When music is too clean and safe, it also becomes too sterile for many peoples’ tastes. If your references are only the cleanest sounds possible, perhaps you should explore the world of dub techno, lofi, and strange experimental music on Bandcamp—you’ll start to understand how music can exist in other ways.

Technical Validation

Self-Mastering and Mixing

Psychological Validation

Tempo

Sound Repetition

Generating Supportive Content and Variations

How Do I Know if an Arrangement is Well-Balanced?

What’s a Risk in Music-Making?

Self-Learning, Novelty & Complexity

Imperfection and Unpredictability

Personal Rules and Studio Attitude

What do I Mean by “Contrast” in the Context of Arrangements?

How is Contrast Used in Sound Design?

How is Contrast Used in Arrangements?

“I don’t know where to start.”

“I don’t feel motivated to make music.”

“My sounds (or anything I use) don’t feel as solid or as cool as my references”

“After a while, I lose interest in what I do.”

“My song feels boring because of getting too technical.”

“Mid point in the song, I don’t know what to do next.”

“I’m lacking ideas on what to add to my song, is it enough?”

“I don’t know how to create a new idea that I’ve never made before.”

“I don’t feel satisfied with my mixes.”

“I don’t know how to finish a song.”

Meeting Your Listener’s Expectations

Meeting Your expectations and Your Listeners’ Expectations at the Same Time

When Writing Music, How Can You Keep a Single Idea Interesting?

The Theory

Low-End Frequency Bands

The Challenges of Mixing Low-End

Monitoring

Shared Frequency Ranges

Density

Practice Mixing Low-End

Writing Bass Lines

Oscillators

Where Does Arrogance Among Artists Come From?

What are the Benefits of Being Inclusive and Helping Other Artists?

Does Every Song Need to be Released?

Should You Try to Copy or Imitate a Song or Artist?

If I Don’t Release Anything, won’t I be Forgotten?

What’s Loopcloud and How Does it Work?

The Different Ways I Use Loopcloud

Is Working With Loopcloud Making Music Production “Easier” a Trap for Producers?

Does Having Access to so Many Sounds Limit Creativity?

Update: June 2021

Sound Matching

More Advanced Search Filters

Find Familiar Sounds

Three New Effects

Easier Sorting

Less is more, and less is clearer

How can you clean up a mix and make it clearer?

Chaos-inducing mixing errors

When Should You Take Someone’s Feedback Seriously?

When is Feedback Disposable and Not Worth Taking Seriously?

References and Getting to Know What Works

Collaboration, Mentoring, and Networking

Monitoring

Technical Understanding

References

About

Pheek’s Coaching Corner

Stay Connected

Pheek’s
Coaching Corner