Tag Archive for: arrangements

How I Classify My Projects and Files

/in , /by

I’m not sure if you’re like me, but it’s possible that your hard drive, after a while, becomes a total mess. There will be a few folders with some projects in them, and other folders with random samples. Not to mention all those projects named New project…

 

There are ways to organize folders and all your work that allows you to easily navigate it. The way I classify projects is also aimed at having a quick scope of which one I will work with next, which songs should go in an album, and those that need specific actions.

 

Before I explain myself, let’s talk about the different stages a project will go through and also, the different tasks related to that.

Note: If you’re new to this blog and aren’t familiar with my production technique, I would encourage you to read a few articles about this, which will give more sense to what I’m about to describe.

 

The different stages of music production (and labeling your projects so)

 

The way I work to maximize the results is to take each step in making music and call it a phase, or a stage. 

 

The different stages I label with are these:

 

1- Ideas digging, concept, testing techniques, hook finding, etc. 

2- Preliminary loop made from stage 1 that could be the heart of the song. Basic structure of the song.

3- Arrangements.

4- Mixing.

5- Song at 90% done and needs last minor tweaks.

 

The main reason why I give high priority to the state of the song is based on the idea that when I want to work on music, I might be in a specific mindset. Perhaps one day I’ll want to just have fun doing some sound design or another time, I need to work on an EP and will be checking for the few songs incubating. As you might know my approach for when I do music, when I reopen projects, I want to quickly know where that one is at. In an hour of work that I do on music, I hop from one song to another, while I also like to revisit projects that have been sleeping for weeks because what I want is to always have the freshest perspective on my work. If you work on something for hours, trust me, by the end of it, you might have lost all perspective and the work will suffer for it. 

 

Stages 1 and 2 can overlap

 

I’ll give you a study case of mine so we can have a clear understanding of how I can use a project and its evolution toward a finished song. But we’ll start with the 2 first stages. 

 

Projects that are in stage 1 are your pool for fishing ideas. 

So the idea of a project in stage 1 is really about ideas, not much more than that. It could be more if you want, it’s up to you.

 

Stage 2 is where we’re working on a precise hook or main idea. There are multiple ways to work and find hooks, we have talked about that in previous articles. I usually drop a very simple percussive loop to define what will be the rhythm of the song, its groove, and its accents, and then place what would be the hook on top. We often overthink the hook. It’s often very simple. 

 

Usually, in stage 2, I find that I should have:

 

  • A root key 
  • A scale
  • A hook, not longer than 1 bar
  • Rhythmic groove, time signature

 

If I have all of that, then I know the project has passed to that new stage and will rename it. Usually, when I rename a project, I make sure to save it, and do a “collect all and save” to make sure I copy all the needed files from its previous form. When you rename a project, it’s better you do “Save project as…” in the File Menu of Ableton and its original stage 1 will still exist. You can later decide if you archive the original project or keep it as an incubator. Usually, when I’m finding an idea from an incubator, I will make sure I save the different effect chains as macros so that they can be reused. I also will color code my channels, and name them as well so I can harvest them later from the right side browser of Ableton.

 

However, you might have an incubator at stage 1 that will never grow because you could mutate the original incubator to stage 2 but it’s completely different, but still came from a father project. For instance, I have projects that are sorely made for making sounds, where they never have evolved from there and tons of songs or even live sets have come from them.

 

Arrangements, the full story of Stage 3

 

I find that arrangements should start by working on the middle part of the song and then deconstruct that idea to the start of the song. So the early part of Stage 3 would consist of working in the middle part, roughly 1 minute long.

 

As you can see, you basically shift your initial Stage 2 loop and drag it to arrangements, then stretch it. Some people build their initial loop in arrangement mode so you can just move it from the start to the middle. When I work on arrangements, I usually love to make a quick draft of the song, where I’ll split it in 3 sections: intro, heart, outro. That draft is made quickly, sometimes in a surprising time of 20 minutes alone. I will come back later with a fresh look and listen from the beginning and will readjust the arrangements so it makes more sense. 

 

In stage 3, the mixing isn’t important. You can level it for pleasant listening but I wouldn’t worry much about it. 

 

Mixing as 4th stage

 

This doesn’t need much explanation here but one thing to clarify is that it’s not something rigid either. You might notice some arrangement problems in mixing that will make you redo them. As I always say to clients, if your sound design and arrangements are solid, there will be basically almost no mixing, or just touch-up.

 

Stage 5 is when your song is 90% done

 

To me, 90% done is my definition of done. I know it sounds weird but it is like that. First off, when you first accept that a song is never done, it’s easier to accept its imperfections and to move on. Second, you want to bring as many songs as possible to 90% because the day you want to do a release, you’ll take those and then wrap them all at once to 100%. This might sound confusing but letting your songs sleep at 90% and then wrap multiple songs at once means that the last stretch for all of them is your chance to unify them to make them coherent as a release. 

 

So what’s the difference between Stage 4 and 5?

 

Well, it’s kinda when you’re done arranging, you shift it to stage 5. It’s sort of like, I’m done with this one. Once in a while, I might reopen 5 to maybe do a little tweak but to me, when it gets to 5, it’s sort of saying that it’s ready.

 

In conclusion

 

When I open my folder with all my projects, I will see from 1 to 5, all songs being in order. With the file browser, I can also classify them from 5 to 1 as well. I like in mac OS to be able to put some tags as well. That can be for genre, if it’s signed or whatever is useful.

Photo by Amy Shamblen on Unsplash

Definition Of Done In Music Production

/in /by

This seems like a common scenario which involves one’s doubt about the status of their song, mainly to know if it’s done. You may be that person. You’ll be feeling your song is finished, bounce it, listen to it in the car or with friends and then you feel that wave of discomfort overwhelmingly creeping on you because you’re noticing all the mistakes and things that aren’t right. Let me reassure you that you’re not alone and this is more common than you think.

 

The concept of DoD (Definition of Done) is something I borrowed from the Agile process, that is typical of coders dealing with a scrum master, mainly in project management. In Agile, there are sprints where there’s a goal set, then tasks/actions are taken to reach a certain point. They’ll agree that the task is done when a certain number of criteria are met. This could apply to basically any projects possible, from weeding out your garden to cooking a dinner.

In a world that is not from the digital realm, with 1’s and zero’s, the concept of done can be a bit tricky as per the one who sets a DoD, the level of mastery might change. In other words, you might be agreeing that my DoD on a song will be very different from someone’s new to music. And that’s ok.

 

There are a few concepts that we can look into that will help you let go of whatever that inner voice of doubt is whispering you about.

 

A song is never really done

This one hurts, yeah? But I tell you, there will never be a field where uncertainty can hit you the most than music, mainly because things are abstract in the world of sounds. Your main enemy is really yourself and your self-judgment towards what you do will change everyday, sometimes it will completely change within a day itself. You’ll never really know honestly but there are a few things that can help you though. I’m not referring to you to just say to let go of things here. I’m more interested in knowing how much imperfection I can live with and how much a random person will notice. This is where it matters.

There are a number of things we don’t know and there are also a gray area of things we don’t even know that we don’t know of. Your song is in between there and your future self of in 10 years ahead, will have a more compassionate understanding that this song has been done within the technical limitation of that moment. And it’s really ok, trust me. 

 

References will reveal truth

This is where many people fail. You can’t know you’re done if you don’t have a model. So, for instance, you might cook a pizza but honestly, if you never ate one (I would pity you!), it’s sort of hard to compare it with anything. I had some of the best pizza of my life in New York and that taste was forged as my favorite. Whenever I have a pizza now, from the airport to a little restaurant, my mind compares it to that one I had in NY. It’s the same with sound. When I do mastering or mixing, I have models of other projects and know exactly how I want it to sound like.

So for arrangements, what’s easy is to simply load up a song in Ableton or your DAW and just use it as a cookie cutter. I encourage people to do critical listening, counting how many sounds they hear in the reference and compare it to theirs. So many times, people have way too much happening or maybe, there’s one less – and that helps much. Same for levels, in the mix.

But I want to sound like myself… I hear you say. Well, sure, you’ll get there but you need to get your skills of finishing songs to be solid first.

Again, most of the time someone feels they can’t tell if they’re done or not, I’ll first ask “compared to what?” Mostly because if we’re not comparing it with anything, we just feel arbitrary in the decision and this is why you’ll feel like a yes or nay, depending on your mood and insecurity level.

 

Lastly, be careful about comparing yourself to a master file. You might be setting yourself up for failure if you are comparing yourself to a song that has been made by a musician that has more experience than you, that has released a lot of music and also, if the song is mastered and yours is not, well, it will not be even. Checking for volumes (eg. snare vs kick), as well as other details is more of a fair fight.

 

Feedback, ask for it

There are multiple ways to ask for feedback and many places to do it as well. You can get some for free in my facebook group (when I’m free) or through my Patreon program. You can ask other producers, even if they’re not that experienced but be sure they listen to it in the right mind set, or context (some listen on their phones, no!).

 

Take pauses and distance

This has been said many times on this blog but studio sessions beyond an hour long are a road to trick yourself about whatever you’re doing. You might think it’s amazing or shit, perhaps it’s neither because your judgment, honestly, quits after 1h of work. It’s called decision-fatigue and you might have experienced it already.

 

I make sessions of 1h max, but preferably about 20 minutes at a time, with pauses. I let my songs sleep for weeks or months. When I reopen them, I want to have forgot about them enough to be able to feel I’m listening to someone else’s song and we all know how good of a critique we are when it’s not our own. I create projects and often rework them 3-4 years later. It’s really fun and eventually when you create these sessions, you’ll have a bunch and will always rediscover sleeping bombs.

 

When I make a really good idea and feel it would be really good, I usually stop right there and WON’T WORK ON IT! I will let it sleep for months. Mostly because what I think is an amazing idea might not be one and if it is, I want my future self to handle it. Between now and then, i will have thought about it, cumulated new ideas, gained new plugins and experience so that when I open that sleeping gem, I have all the goods to turn it into what I want. Sometimes I am working on a great song and might be missing something so I could also grab that idea and bring it into a almost finished bomb, which is for sure going to be beyong what I expected.

 

Decide when you feel good

This one might be confusing or so obvious you might feel caught off guard. Think of the last time you saw one of your friends in their facebook feed saying they quit their DJ career or something they like… well, they’re basically taking a decision when feeling bad. If you decide to quit, you’ve been accumulating frustration. This is the same about your projects. Like the previous suggestion suggested, taking pauses and waiting before making a decision is quite healthy and let’s you wait for when you feel actually good about your song. Especially if you feel like half of the time you listen to it, it’s shit. When in doubt most of the time, pauses are crucial. If you’re 90% of the time feeling something needs a correction, then do it.

How to set your DoD:

Now that we have covered strategies to find out if your song is done, let’s look into setting your own Definition of Done.

 

1- Pick a reference (or a few), as discussed previously. This is to set the tone, aesthetic, direction. Decide and commit to what this song will be (a ballad? Ambient drone? Dance floor bomb?) then find something you know is solid as your cookie cutter. You’ll refer to that.

 

2- Analyze your reference and know what are the minimum requirements. Understand in advance what you can’t do from that one and what you can control. Ask for help, check tutorials and do as much as you can.

 

3- Decide in advance what you will do and what you can’t. If you know yourself and parts where things are a bit more difficult, you can always ask for help. There’s this misconception that one should be able to do everything themselves but this is counter-productive. Do you want to be average at all the different sides of production? You ideally want to be having fun first and get better but you can also ask for help: friends, other producers, myself.

 

4- Give yourself a plan. You can set yourself a deadline but also zones of no actions to be taken as well. 

 

5- Define some points of what would be some targets of done. This can be a scope of how much mix you want to do (ex. I will spend 2h max in the mix). Or “I want my drums to be very punchy” as something to reach. Perhaps your song will never be as punchy as what you dream but when you ask for feedback to someone who has never heard it, you can ask if they think it sounds punchy. Asking general and vague feedback will bring vague answers.

 

6- Test in context. Play your track in a DJ mix or ask a DJ friend to play it. See what happens, how it sounds compared to other tracks. This alone can reveal many flaws and strengths. I also like to bring a reference in my DAW and play my song with another one, mix them so it is not a mess, so I can see with the arrangements if it works.

 

Conclusion

This approach has proven many times with clients that it works. The more prepared you are, the better. Do you need to always do that? No. I mostly do it when I have periods where I struggle with inspiration or when I’m booked for a bigger contract. But it’s good to put it in practice here and there so that when you’re faced with challenges, you don’t start this with no warnings. It could actually backfire.

 

Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash

How To Use Hooks To Finish Songs

/in /by

I understand that many artists build a loop and then they expand outwards from there in order to build a track. However, quite often, this results in them getting lost, because they have no vision of where it is going. They hear their loop and think, “Wow this is really cool; I could listen to this for hours.” Then after listening to it for hours they realize they have no direction in where to go with it. 

Sure, there are plenty of people who can create a loop and then build outwards from it, but one thing I notice in coaching is that this is often not the case. Some people can’t finish songs because they have no vision for the finished product. Contrasting, some people can’t finish songs because they have too much of a vision and want to throw it into a template of theirs. Problem is, fresh songs don’t fit a defined template.

Therefore, there has to be a delicate line between planning and instinct. That’s when songs come together with ease.

The Hook Is Your Song

Someone who is excellent at this is production mogul Timbaland. If you’re not familiar he’s done tracks with Justin Timberlake, Rihanna, J Cole, Missy Elliot, and dozens more pop stars. 

Yeah, yeah, a pop artist, but if you have an open mind about music, you’ll realize that writing pop music is difficult. What’s especially difficult is to continuously write pop songs that top the charts, like Timbaland. There are only a few people on the entire planet who have this skill, so that’s to be respected. 

I was recently watching production tutorials of Timbaland’s and one thing that he harps on is that all great songs start with the hook. Sure, it might take a while to get that hook, but he recognizes that it’s the hook that people remember from music. Not the percussio, not even the verses, but the hook. If you don’t know what a hook is, think “Superstition” by Stevie Wonder. What’s the only part of that song that you remember? Yeah, that part. That’s the hook. 

Other good examples include Niel Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline”, or Daft Punk’s “Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger.”

Making Non-Pop Hooks

But you may be asking me, “but Pheek, you make avant-garde dance music, and most of your students are avant-garde dance music artists. How on Earth do I take influence from pop hooks?” Well, a hook can be loosely defined. Let’s take Aphex Twin’s “Alberto Balsam.” In a lot of ways, that song kind of follows the “only-hooks” format that producers like Max Martin evangelize, where every phrase is a hook, in a way. Almost every phrase has some sort of memorable element, but in that way, it makes the hook less defined. If there was a hook, it would probably be when the synth first comes in and continues throughout the song in one way.

The key to that “Alberto Balsam” hook is that it readily defines the rest of the song. The moment that comes in, whether it’s a rock band covering it, or it coming on your playlist (because God forbid you’ll probably never see RDJ play it live), you know that it’s “Alberto Balsam.”

This example is easy because it’s prevalent over the entire thing and everything else is essentially a jam over top of it. And that’s all you have to do, in a lot of cases, is just jam over the hook, and you will come out with something memorable.

Hook Modifiers

But before you write your hook, it’s good to think about what sort of emotional direction you want to go in, because ultimately, the hook will define this direction. For instance, do you want your song to be uplifting? Then you have to build tension and release. Perhaps even a triumphant key, like D Major. 

If you want it to be emotionally releasing, then you need to change keys, perhaps from major to minor. It’s often these “hook modifiers” that make a song special.

If you want to raise the intensity of the song, then you can increase the density in the song – with delay, reverb, another layer of percussion. It can be done with velocity or volume.

However, in club music, at some point, someone invented “the breakdown” to raise the intensity of the song, and now we’re doomed because 95 percent of electronic songs have them. There doesn’t have to be breakdowns. Instead, we can have events, which can be to confuse people, change their emotions, or whatever, really. 

In a song, I heard Timbaland ask Siri a question. Yes, corny, but it interrupted the song and took people off guard enough for when the hook came back in, it was fresh again. In dance music, it could be a weird sample or field recording; it could be an awkward silence.

Build Everything Around The Hook

Going back to “Alberto Balsam” you will notice that the hook is prevalent over the entire thing. From there on out, the rest of the song materialized around it. If this was your song, all you have to do is add percussion, take away percussion, add verses. There aren’t a ton of timbres in this song but each one works because it sits overtop the hook. See what I mean that all great songs start with the hook, now?

Make Something New

Perhaps, one day, you will create a transition that becomes the new breakdown, where people start copying your hook modifier. Because ultimately, that’s what it is nowadays: follow the leader. One only has to look at the Beatport Charts to see how all the waveforms look the same: but at some point, there was a waveform that looked different and topped the charts.

However, if you think about songs as just memorable elements and hook modifiers that jar the listener out of their trance, then you may be able to create something that is lasting and memorable. So next time you decide “this part needs a breakdown” think, “can I do something different instead?” Because the goal is to give people something different so that the familiar becomes fresh again – and there are more ways to do this than taking the drums away and reintroducing them. 

 

Murakami’s Writing Lessons Applied To Music

/in /by

Recently I read this article about one of my favorite authors, Haruki Murakami. This article wasn’t so much about him as it was about his lessons for being a good writer. While reading this, it dawned on me that his lessons can be applied to writing music as well, and figured I should write an article on this perspective.

If you’re not familiar with Murakami, he creates surreal stories that invoke a sense of wonder and deep connection to the main character and their psychology. They’re easy to read, divided into clear, conscience paragraphs that leave plenty of space for the reader to get lost in his vivid metaphors and similes. These words often transport you into the narrative and have the opportunity to rattle you in ways you never expected, not unlike a song. 

So without further ado, here are my interpretations of Murakami’s advice for good writing, as it applies to music.

 

Read

“I think the first task for the aspiring novelist is to read tons of novels. Sorry to start with such a commonplace observation, but no training is more crucial. To write a novel, you must first understand at a physical level how one is put together . . . It is especially important to plow through as many novels as you can while you are still young. Everything you can get your hands on—great novels, not-so-great novels, crappy novels, it doesn’t matter (at all!) as long as you keep reading. Absorb as many stories as you physically can. Introduce yourself to lots of great writing. To lots of mediocre writing too. This is your most important task.” 

–from Murakami’s 2015 essay “So What Shall I Write About?,” tr. Ted Goossen

This one is pretty self-explanatory. Just substitute reading for listening. By listening to a ton of music, good and bad, you open your mind up to new patterns and perspectives. You get an idea of what sounds good to you, and what doesn’t. At a certain point, you may be able to ascertain aspects of mediocre songs that you find appealing, as well as aspects of good songs that you find unappealing, and apply that to your own skillset. It’s only by listening to tons of different songs that you will find your own sound.

Also, don’t only listen to songs within your genre. Listen to all sorts of music, especially music that is outside of the periphery of electronic music, such as folk, classical, and even country. There is perspective in everything, and more perspectives allow for a richer understanding of music.

 

the old words and make them new again.

“One of my all-time favorite jazz pianists is Thelonious Monk. Once, when someone asked him how he managed to get a certain special sound out of the piano, Monk pointed to the keyboard and said: “It can’t be any new note. When you look at the keyboard, all the notes are there already. But if you mean a note enough, it will sound different. You got to pick the notes you really mean!”

I often recall these words when I am writing, and I think to myself, “It’s true. There aren’t any new words. Our job is to give new meanings and special overtones to absolutely ordinary words.” I find the thought reassuring. It means that vast, unknown stretches still lie before us, fertile territories just waiting for us to cultivate them.”

–from Murakami’s 2007 essay “Jazz Messenger“

It’s interesting because he uses a composition metaphor to explain writing while I am trying to use writing metaphors to explain composition. What Thelonius Monk said is spot on. There are only so many notes and those notes have always existed and will continue to exist. What you have to do is put them in new contexts. In electronic music, this often means timbral ones. We are allotted more tools than ever before to shape and design sound; way more than Monk probably could have imagined during his storied career as a jazz pianist. Using an acid bassline that’s in C minor isn’t really a new timbre for the context, but taking an acid bassline and putting it in a Thelonius Monk song, now that’s making the old new. 

 

Explain yourself clearly.

“[When I write,] I get some images and I connect one piece to another. That’s the story line. Then I explain the story line to the reader. You should be very kind when you explain something. If you think, It’s okay; I know that, it’s a very arrogant thing. Easy words and good metaphors; good allegory. So that’s what I do. I explain very carefully and clearly.”

–in a 2004 interview with John Wray for The Paris Review

What I appreciate from his explanation is the accent on clarity which is also crucial in arrangements. You need to have an idea that is understandable and accessible so the listener feels intelligent because he got it. By balancing the complexity and accessibility of the motif, you can extend the listener’s attention to the song. Too complex and the person feels lost, too simple and ther listener is bored. That’s what he relates as good metaphors and allegory, as in, something parallel to explain an idea, which is the same thing in music. 

The images and scenes you create need to be clearly understood by your audience. For instance, there are certain moments in a song, such as the chorus. How do you connect the chorus with the pre-chorus?  You can be very smooth if you use a transitional element too to ease it. If you don’t have this element, it might be too abrupt and jar the listener (unless this is what you’re trying to do). 

 

Share your dreams.

“Dreaming is the day job of novelists, but sharing our dreams is a still more important task for us. We cannot be novelists without this sense of sharing something.”

–from Murakami’s 2011 acceptance speech for the Catalunya International Prize

Dreaming is a full-time thing for musicians as well. We often dream about what other people think of our music, whether that’s a crowd, a label, or a friend. Those thoughts you have about your music in the context that makes you happiest are powerful motivators when it comes to finishing songs.  

Many times this means realising your music, whether that’s just to your friends, or a full-scale distribution plan. It’s a lot of work to finish and release a song, but in general it’s a lot of work to manifest a dream into reality. 

Another form of dreaming is the act of composing songs in your head. As a musician, you’re probably always bombarded with clips and snippets of songs that may or may not be original. It’s sometimes hard to capture these ideas, but if you can focus, you may be able to harness one of these ideas for a future composition. However, there are also easier ways of capturing these daydreams. if it’s a melody, hum or whistle it into your phone. Drum patterns can even be finger tapped out and then exported to Ableton where they can be converted into MIDI.

 

Write to find out.

“I myself, as I’m writing, don’t know who did it. The readers and I are on the same ground. When I start to write a story, I don’t know the conclusion at all and I don’t know what’s going to happen next. If there is a murder case as the first thing, I don’t know who the killer is. I write the book because I would like to find out. If I know who the killer is, there’s no purpose to writing the story.”

–in a 2004 interview with John Wray for The Paris Review

If you already know exactly how a song is going to turn out, then what’s the excitement in composing it? We’ve all been there where we aim to do something, and then it turns out to be completely different in exciting ways we never could have imagined. That’s because, in a lot of ways, song writing is about piecing together ideas that manifest themselves out of creative motivation, rather than dedicated intention.

A great way to harness this unpredictability is to jam. Instead of drawing everything in a grid and using loops, try playing those out using some sort of reactive tactile motion, like playing a keyboard, drum pattern, or even live programming a sequencer. The spontaneity of live performance and the “accidents” that come as a result are rarely something your conscious mind can replicate. 

 

Repetition helps.

“When I’m in writing mode for a novel, I get up at four a.m. and work for five to six hours. In the afternoon, I run for ten kilometers or swim for fifteen hundred meters (or do both), then I read a bit and listen to some music. I go to bed at nine p.m. I keep to this routine every day without variation. The repetition itself becomes the important thing; it’s a form of mesmerism. I mesmerize myself to reach a deeper state of mind. But to hold to such repetition for so long—six months to a year—requires a good amount of mental and physical strength. In that sense, writing a long novel is like survival training. Physical strength is as necessary as artistic sensitivity.”

–in a 2004 interview with John Wray for The Paris Review

By repetition, Murakami means having unwavering habits. However, I would like to add something to that. By having scheduled habits, you are also creating a moment where you are the most fresh. I find that there is only one time per day where I have that initial creative plasticity that allows ideas to flow from me unencumbered by other thoughts or distractions. That’s why I make sure to dedicate out a block of time for music, and then once I’m done, I’m done for the day, because I know that anything else made outside of that pre-planned time won’t have the same impact.


Hoard stuff to put in your novel.

“Remember that scene in Steven Spielberg’s film E.T. where E.T. assembles a transmitting device from the junk he pulls out of his garage? There’s an umbrella, a floor lamp, pots and pans, a record player─it’s been a long time since I saw the movie, so I can’t recall everything, but he manages to throw all those household items together in such a way that the contraption works well enough to communicate with his home planet thousands of light years away. I got a big kick out of that scene when I saw it in a movie theater, but it strikes me now that putting together a good novel is much the same thing. The key component is not the quality of the materials─what’s needed is magic. If that magic is present, the most basic daily matters and the plainest language can be turned into a device of surprising sophistication.”

First and foremost, though, is what’s packed away in your garage. Magic can’t work if your garage is empty. You’ve got to stash away a lot of junk to use if and when E.T. comes calling!

–from Murakami’s 2015 essay “So What Shall I Write About?,”

Everything in your life should be captured as a source of inspiration, because you never know when you’re going to need it. Obviously it’s impossible to grab everything, but make a conscious decision to know how to locate things. In music this can be sounds, samples, field recordings, snippets from movies, anything. They can be the most mundane of things. Just as Muramaki said in his essay, it’s not about the quality of the components, it’s about the magic that is applied to them.

For instance, some songs are extremely simple. However, that doesn’t matter, because there is magic in them. It’s hard to say exactly how to create magic, but usually what makes a song gel together and feel magical is the right balance of different factors like technicality, emotion, and timing. There are songs that are very technical but have no emotion, and the magic is difficult to happen because there is no balance. But when you have enough of the two – the emotion vs the technical part – you have this sort of familiarity and humanity to it. The familiarity comes from the technical side, where you know that it’s going to sound correct, because it’s composed fluidly. Then the emotion is the human side; the unpredictable side that makes music fresh and interesting. 

 

Focus on one thing at a time.

“If I’m asked what the next most important quality is for a novelist [after talent], that’s easy too: focus—the ability to concentrate all your limited talents on whatever’s critical at the moment. Without that you can’t accomplish anything of value, while, if you can focus effectively, you’ll be able to compensate for an erratic talent or even a shortage of it. . . Even a novelist who has a lot of talent and a mind full of great new ideas probably can’t write a thing if, for instance, he’s suffering a lot of pain from a cavity.”

–from What I Talk About When I Talk About Running

“Although I compose essays as well as works of fiction, unless circumstances dictate otherwise, I avoid working on anything else when I am writing a novel . . . Of course, there is no rule that says that the same material can’t be used in an essay and a story, but I have found that doubling up like that somehow weakens my fiction.”

–from Murakami’s 2015 essay “So What Shall I Write About?,” tr. Ted Goossen

If you’re always looking for something to fix, or improve on, rather than concentrating on one aspect of a song at a time, you can get lost and scattered. When starting to work, set an intention. For example, focus only on the percussion for this section, or better yet, focus only on the syncopated aspects of percussion. Or if you start doing sound design in your session, focus on that, rather than figuring out how it will fit in the arrangement. Then when you’re finally ready to arrange, direct your focus there. In short, have an intention.

 

Cultivate endurance.

“After focus, the next most important thing for a novelist is, hands down, endurance. If you concentrate on writing three or four hours a day and feel tired after a week of this, you’re not going to be able to write a long work. What’s needed for a writer of fiction—at least one who hopes to write a novel—is the energy to focus every day for half a year, or a year, or two years. You can compare it to breathing.”

–from What I Talk About When I Talk About Running

In order to be able to focus on one aspect of a song, you must be able to endure the dedication to takes to do such a thing. If you’re only able to concentrate for an hour or two at a time, you’re going to have a heck of a time trying to create anything meaningful. At first, you’re going to feel tired after a few hours a day, 7 days a week. But eventually, by making this habit, it’s going to be just as Muramaki says, “like breathing.” You’re going to have to get to a point where you are doing it every day, for long stretches of time, sometimes up to a couple of years to create your most meaningful work. However, just like an athlete trains in the off season, when you’re done with your work, you must keep training, to keep your stamina at a certain baseline.

Experiment with language.

“It is the inherent right of all writers to experiment with the possibilities of language in every way they can imagine—without that adventurous spirit, nothing new can ever be born.”

–from “The Birth of My Kitchen Table Fiction,”

It’s easy to compose the same thing over and over again once you have a template. However, people may get bored with this palate because everything is just more of the same. If you feel like you’re stagnating, or you are getting feedback from your audience that it’s more of the same, trying changing up keys, and scales. Harmonics are the language of music. Changing them will create something unexpectedly new, even if you use the same tones and tempo. Some may be concerned about alienating their crowd if they change their language too much, but if you keep similar timbres, if they are fans, they’ll hear you within it and usually will be pleasantly surprised.

Have confidence.

“The most important thing is confidence. You have to believe you have the ability to tell the story, to strike the vein of water, to make the pieces of the puzzle fit together. Without that confidence, you can’t go anywhere. It’s like boxing. Once you climb into the ring, you can’t back out. You have to fight until the match is over.”

–from a 1992 lecture at Berkeley, as transcribed in Haruki Murakami and the Music of Words, Jay Rubin


Trust what you’re doing. Some people can spend too much time on little things like their kick, or clap because they keep on second guesing themselves, due to a lack of confidence. If you start second guessing yourself, sometimes it’s best to just take a break from it and come back. Trust what you know you have the ability to do at that moment, and know your limitations. Just know that you may be able to exceed your limitations with the right dose of practice and confidence. That’s how we improve. But first, it takes trust in yourself and knowing what you are capable of.

 

Write on the side of the egg.

“[This] is something that I always keep in mind while I am writing fiction. I have never gone so far as to write it on a piece of paper and paste it to the wall: Rather, it is carved into the wall of my mind, and it goes something like this:

‘Between a high, solid wall and an egg that breaks against it, I will always stand on the side of the egg.’

Yes, no matter how right the wall may be and how wrong the egg, I will stand with the egg. Someone else will have to decide what is right and what is wrong; perhaps time or history will decide. If there were a novelist who, for whatever reason, wrote works standing with the wall, of what value would such works be?”

–from Murakami’s 2009 Jerusalem Prize acceptance speech

Sometimes we create something that we fear might be too abstract or might even sound incorrect, despite enjoying it. This is the egg – a fragile, messy, yet critical part of life, whether that’s as it’s function as an incubator for life, or as food. If you create an egg, and it seems to fit, yet you still feel a sense of controversy, keep it. These are often the indescribable factors that make people remember songs. You just have to rely on the listener to decode it. 

 

Observe your world.

“Reflect on what you see. Remember, though, that to reflect is not to rush to determine the rights and wrongs or merits and demerits of what and whom you are observing. Try to consciously refrain from value judgments—don’t rush to conclusions. What’s important is not arriving at clear conclusions but retaining the specifics of a certain situation . . . I strive to retain as complete an image as possible of the scene I have observed, the person I have met, the experience I have undergone, regarding it as a singular ‘sample,’ a kind of test case as it were. I can go back and look at it again later, when my feelings have settled down and there is less urgency, this time inspecting it from a variety of angles. Finally, if and when it seems called for, I can draw my own conclusions.”

–from Murakami’s 2015 essay “So What Shall I Write About?,” tr. Ted Goossen

 

If you judge something as being an absolute truth then you’re going to be disappointed. There is no objective right and wrong, especially in art. Everything is subjective, and the “rules” created are put in place by societal norms, rather than a cosmic order. Sure, there are standards that people have for their art, but that doesn’t make it right or wrong. It just makes it a personal standard.

This sense of objectivity is helpful when evaluating the art that surrounds you on a day to day basis; art that is often not your own. These are where we get our influences from. So rather than dismissing an entire genre or style, because of societal pressure, try to think objectively about it. For instance you might despise EDM, but why is it so popular? One could argue it’s popular because it has pop music structure and hooks. Perhaps that’s a lesson you can take away from it. In other words, pay attention to trends, because you never know what nuance you can take from a trend for your own art. 

 

Try not to hurt anyone.

“I keep in mind to ‘not have the pen get too mighty’ when I write. I choose my words so the least amount of people get hurt, but that’s also hard to achieve. No matter what is written, there is a chance of someone getting hurt or offending someone. Keeping all that in mind, I try as much as I can to write something that will not hurt anyone. This is a moral every writer should follow.”

–from Murakami’s 2015 advice column

In 2017, producer Dax J took a verse from Islamic prayers and sampled it in his music. Then, in all of his wisdom, he decided to play in in Tunisia. And as all of the murdered cartoonists who tried to draw Muhammed demonstrate, Islamics do not take kindly to people altering their religious symbols. Despite receiving death threats, Dax wasn’t beheaded. However, he was sentenced to jail in Tunisia for a year. 

This is an extreme example though. A good rule of thumb is to wein on the side of not culturally appropriating, or at the very least, when you do decide to sample someone else’s culture, know the audience you are playing to. An Islamic country is a terrible choice to play an Islamic prayer in. This is not uncommon knowledge. Dax should have known better. But playing an Islamic prayer in your techno song at Burning Man? Many burners suck up cultural approrpiation like it’s oxygen. I know that Muramaki says to write on the side of the egg, but there are things that are already determined to be culturally sensitive, and you should respect that, or else face the consequences.

Another way you can look at this is to not steal other people’s work and call it your own. However, there is always a fine line with this because electronic music is sample music.

 

Take your readers on a journey.

“As I wrote A Wild Sheep Chase, I came to feel strongly that a story, a monogatari, is not something you create. It is something that you pull out of yourself. The story is already there, inside you. You can’t make it, you can only bring it out. This is true for me, at least: it is the story’s spontaneity. For me, a story is a vehicle that takes the reader somewhere. Whatever information you may try to convey, whatever you may try to open the reader’s emotions to, the first thing you have to do is get that reader into the vehicle. And the vehicle–the story–the monogatari–must have the power to make people believe. These above all are the conditions that a story must fulfill.”

–from a 1992 lecture at Berkeley, as transcribed in Haruki Murakami and the Music of Words, Jay Rubin

Take listeners on a journey. I’m an avid fan of trying to create a song that you don’t want to end, because it keeps evolving and is never boring. Whatever genre you’re making, the best songs transcend space and time, where there is always this feeling that time passes, unknowingly. When you lose track of time you know you’ve been in a musical journey. I also believe that DJs are collecting music to create journeys and one of our tasks is to feed them with memorable ideas for them to use. This is about letting the ego aside and see your music as part of something bigger than you but also important in other’s people lives.

Write to shed light on human beings.

“I have only one reason to write novels, and that is to bring the dignity of the individual soul to the surface and shine a light upon it. The purpose of a story is to sound an alarm, to keep a light trained on The System in order to prevent it from tangling our souls in its web and demeaning them. I fully believe it is the novelist’s job to keep trying to clarify the uniqueness of each individual soul by writing stories—stories of life and death, stories of love, stories that make people cry and quake with fear and shake with laughter. This is why we go on, day after day, concocting fictions with utter seriousness.”

–from Murakami’s 2009 Jerusalem Prize acceptance speech

All music is an expression of human dedication and emotion. In order to be a great artist, one must be dedicated to their craft, and have the ability to recognize and alter emotion. Electronic music is often lyricless so we have to figure out how to express the emotions of a narrative in other ways, especially in music that can be seen as robotic to many. A good way to add humanity in electronic music is to add swing, quantazation, randomization, and actually performing and jamming your tracks, whether that’s in the studio, or live. Human recognizes human.

 

No matter what, it all has to start with talent. . . 

“In every interview I’m asked what’s the most important quality a novelist has to have. It’s pretty obvious: talent. No matter how much enthusiasm and effort you put into writing, if you totally lack literary talent you can forget about being a novelist. This is more of a prerequisite than a necessary quality. If you don’t have any fuel, even the best car won’t run.”

–from What I Talk About When I Talk About Running

 

“Writing is similar to trying to seduce a woman. A lot has to do with practice, but mostly it’s innate. Anyway, good luck.”

–from Murakami’s 2015 advice column

. . . unless you work really hard!

“Writers who are blessed with inborn talent can write easily, no matter what they do—or don’t do. Like water from a natural spring, the sentences just well up, and with little or no effort these writers can complete a work. Unfortunately, I don’t fall into that category. I have to pound away at a rock with a chisel and dig out a deep hole before I can locate the source of my creativity. Every time I begin a new novel, I have to dredge out another hole. But, as I’ve sustained this kind of life over many years, I’ve become quite efficient, both technically and physically, at opening those holes in the rock and locating new water veins. As soon as I notice one source drying up, I move on to another. If people who rely on a natural spring of talent suddenly find they’ve exhausted their source, they’re in trouble.”

“In other words, let’s face it: life is basically unfair. But, even in a situation that’s unfair, I think it’s possible to seek out a kind of fairness.”

–from Murakami’s 2008 essay “The Running Novelist,” tr. Philip Gabriel

Some talent is just innate. It’s the reason why you see so many dynasty professional athletes, where sons and daughters of their parents become equally, if not more successful. You also see this is siblings quite often as well. This example doesn’t always happen in music, because talent does not necessarily mean popularity, but when you’re talking about sports, talent is quantifiable through wins and losses.

However, many of us know those people, where they just pick up something new and they are effortlessly good at it. This is even true in music, where they might create their first loop and despite not having any experience in music, it sounds like something well beyond their abilities as a beginner. It’s these people, the Jimi Hendrix’s of the world, that go on to define their cultural niche for decades to come.

However, if you work really hard at something, you can be great, like Muramaki, who says that he is not an innately talented writer. He’s probably just being humble, however, I have seen in my own teaching where people come to me for coaching and the initial stuff they show me is pretty bad. Then they stick with it, take lessons to heart, and apply themselves. Then after a relatively short period of time, you start to see significant improvement. However, who knows, they could be innately talented to begin with, they just needed someone to give them confidence to harness their abilities. 

 

 

 

Service Update: Track Finalization Is Now Exclusive

/in /by

It’s been a hard decision to make since I’ve enjoyed collaborating on so many tracks that have been sent to me through the track finalization service that I offer. However, I have found that by just allowing anyone to purchase this, it becomes not only a source of a great deal of stress but also the work to reward ratio often doesn’t pan out. Therefore, I am indefinitely pausing my track finalization service, except for people with who I have enjoyed working with in the past. 

However, rather than just pausing the service, I feel like I owe an explanation. This blog post will be a little different than most and will have two authors. First, I’ll explain my reasoning, and then someone who has used my service a few things will explain his thoughts on working with me.

 

Pheek’s Perspective

I have clients that have standards that are pretty high, which I have no problem with. I’m happy to help. However, paradoxically many producers come to me and love their track just how it is. Yet they still want me to work on it. This is confounding to me, because if you love your track, why do anything else to it? Music is subjective, and in the ear of the beholder, so it will never be great to everyone. The only thing that matters is if it’s great to you.

However, they still hire me and have a track that they are emotionally invested in because they have put so much effort into it. They just want the track to be perfect, so they think that I can do this, which isn’t true. Hiring an engineer won’t fix everything, and transform a piece into the hottest track to hit their respective Beatport chart. And while this sometimes may happen (usually by pure luck), engineers can only fix what we are allowed to, and often have to contend with people’s cognitive bias’ towards their track. 

Therefore, with these clients, it’s necessary to communicate that nothing is perfect and that the concept of perfection, especially in art, is folly. To be fair though, as an artist, this concept took many years to accept. I eventually realized that no matter how much I tackle imperfections, the end result is often staleness. And staleness is something that nobody who is writing art-focused music wants since it’s these imperfections that make songs exciting. It’s these imperfections that make them human. And humanity, especially within electronic music is sorely needed since the criticism from detractors is often that electronic music sounds too engineered, or robotic. 

This pursuit of perfection messes up my client’s workflow because they are often obsessed with having the perfect track rather than just finishing them. To me, this is essentially chasing unicorns in a field of chocolate, because, like I said before, perfection is a fantasy. Still, this mindset persists in many since people set standards for themselves that can’t be easily changed.

Now, a perfectionist mindset would be fine, if it was tolerable. However, after all these years of consulting, I’ve noticed that perfectionists always comes with one personality trait – they’re micromanagers. And let’s be real here when was the last time you heard someone praising a micromanager? Probably never, because it drives everyone crazy. 

The end result is usually two things: they will either say that the track is too close, or different from what they gave me initially. However, I usually don’t know which one it is until after I submit the track back to them. They reply with what else needs to be fixed, so I go and fix it, which I’m happy to do because there is no way I’m going to get it right the first time unless I’ve worked with them before. However, quite often, I spend hours going in a loop and reverting it back to pretty much exactly what they gave me in the first place. Or they will ask for so many additions that it eventually warps the track to a point where it doesn’t match the patterns they have set in their own heads. If you’re a producer, you know what I’m talking about – you can anticipate what is going to happen before it happens and if you miscalculate that, or if it’s different, it creates cognitive dissonance.

This cognitive dissonance is because producers are emotionally engaged with their tracks, and they have heuristics in their mind about where things should be in the mix, or compositionally. They EQ’d it a certain way, they didn’t have certain effects or compositional elements in it that are now in it, so when they hear it, it is jarring, because they expect it to be a certain way. Therefore, it doesn’t sound “right” to them. 

However, more often than not, a producer’s home studio is not representative of the outside world, so it’s no wonder that it doesn’t sound “right” to them. But since they are so wrapped up in it, they ask for more modifications, without realizing that what they are asking for is actually incorrect. However, this sometimes forces me to go back to how it was, because of their inability to realize that the reason why they hired me in the first place was to provide them a track that translates well across all systems. 

This happened again recently, where the producer lamented that it didn’t sound close enough to their reference track, which they never provided. So I asked them to send that over, and lo-and-behold, the reference track wasn’t properly mixed. Now, I happened to know this artist pretty well, so I provided them with a reference that was correct. Strangely enough, I haven’t heard back from this client.

As you may have surmised, I’m not a fan of doing business this way. Therefore, from now on, track finalization will only be available to people I’ve worked with successfully in the past. Because at the end of the day, why would you want someone to finish a track that isn’t on the same creative wavelength as you?

 

Alex Ho Megas’ Perspective

Ok, so none of you know me. However, I’ve been doing marketing for Pheek for almost a year now. And sometimes we trade services, and one of those services is track finalization. He asked if I would write something about my experience working with him on this since we have done it a few times. You may be thinking, “how can someone be unbias towards their client?” The answer is, I really can’t. However, I’m going to do my best to explain what working with him is like.

Reading Pheek’s perspective above, I intimately understand the cognitive dissonance that comes from having your track modified. You do expect certain things to be in certain places, subconsciously. Consciously, I know that they are most likely wrong since I don’t have a tuned studio and an acute knowledge of mixing and mastering. I, personally, just like writing music and designing sounds. 

One thing we often agree on is that music is usually a collaborative process and that electronic music is one of the only genres where it’s often not. Therefore, I hire Pheek knowing that collaboration often leads to better music. So you know, I’m not always immediately happy with everything I get back. I just know to give it time and to send it off to people that I trust to provide feedback. Then, I think critically about it and note things I would like changed. 

For instance, sometimes I notice that the tuning on a sample is incorrect, or that an element needs to either be extended or shortened. Sometimes there are parts that I want to have emphasized that Pheek deemphasized, like how a snare hits at a transition. So I confer with him and ask if it makes sense to change those things. Often he says they can be changed, however, I always make sure to just trust that 1) my room is incorrect and 2) that a new perspective is helpful. Sure, sometimes I override his recommendations, but only after careful consideration. And to be fair, I still could be wrong about those decisions, but as he said earlier in this post, music is subjective in many ways. 

I would say that the most difficult one we’ve worked on was the last one we did. Right from the beginning, there were some warping errors that made the channels not properly align, and therefore significantly changed the composition of the track. This was hard to explain because he was not familiar with the track, so he couldn’t figure out what was wrong. To him, of course, it’s correct, why wouldn’t it be? However, I just pointed him to a time in the original track where it was wrong, and had him compare it to the version he sent over. It took some time to figure out an effective communication method on this, but ultimately, we got there.

Then he added a bunch of foley sounds to the track, per my request. However, they were either too maximalist or minimalist, so I asked for a modification. These weren’t exactly what I was looking for, so we went back again. Being content with what it was, I sent it in for a mixdown. Then I sent the mix to another engineering friend to see what he thought of it – and it didn’t think it was right. So I just asked Pheek to bounce down the stems and send them over so I could see what my friends sounded like. Funny enough, after comparing the two, I prefer Pheek’s and will use his version when it’s eventually released. This example just goes to show that this track had a particularly strong hold on my perceptions, which makes sense – I worked on it forever. It was only after a good amount of time that I was able to crack these biases. 

 

The best recommendation I have about his track finalization service is to make sure to clearly mark where there are things that need to be changed. Note the time, note the duration. Make sure to have a copy of the old track handy that you can send him so that you can point to when you need things reverted. Make sure to mark the times and durations on those. He has a blog post about “how to communicate with an engineer,” which provides tips that will smooth the process of working with him on track finalization. However, it seems like now, he’s only working with people he has vetted in the past. So if you’re reading this, and have successfully done track finalization in the past, I recommend reading this article.

Another good thing to read would be his post on finalizing tracks on your own now that the service has been made exclusive to previous clients,

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

/in , , , , , /by

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:

  1. Amplitude: One sound is 25-75% lower or higher in gain than another. Think of different drum sounds in a kit.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.

Sound Design and Arrangements Series Pt. 3: Repetition

/in , , , , /by

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.

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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

/in , , /by

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

Tips to Keep a Loop Interesting for an Entire Song

/in , , , /by

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:

  1. How someone listens to a song.
  2. 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!

Creating Depth in Music

/in , , /by

I don’t know many people who took theatre in school, or aspired to become an actor or comedian. For me, having a background in theatre has shaped my vision of music, performance, and storytelling. In Québec, we have a “theatre sport” called Improvisation, where teams meet in a rink to create stories and characters, out of the blue. After practicing this for 20 years or so, it’s shaped how I perceive songs and sets. There are so many parallels to music in theatre: how a story develops, the use of a main character, supporting roles, etc., all of which can be applied to the use of sounds in a track.

A story is never great without quality supporting roles. Support adds depth to any story, and richness to the main character. Think of all the evil nemeses James Bond has faced—the more colorful they were, the more memorable the story, and the same goes for songs.

You might have a strong idea for your song, but if it has a good supporting idea or two, then you’ll end up with a song that keeps you engaged until the end.

I’ve been really into minimalist music lately; I like music that has a solid core idea that evolves. I was reading a really nice post on Reddit about Dub Techno where one of the main criterion discussed was the importance of simplicity. Simplicity doesn’t make something dull or dumb—in music it can be a reduction of all unnecessary elements, in dub techno resulting in a conversation between the deep bass and the pads and other layers.

If you’re immersed in electronic music, you’re generally used hearing multiple layers and often multiple conversations between sounds. Percussion layers will be often related to themselves, but the main idea is usually supported by a second layer. I often hear this in some indie rock songs too, especially ones that have some electronic elements in them. The way the human ear works, is that we will always hear the main component of a song as the centre of attention, but attention will shift back-and-forth between different layers. The advantage of having depth in music is that it encourages repeat listening. For a listener to replay a song and hear something new is exciting; some songs will grow on them even though they may have felt overwhelming during the first listen.

How can you create secondary ideas and “supporting roles”?

There are multiple ways to do to add depth to your songs.

Negative Space

The most important part when you program or write a melody, is to leave some empty space in it, which I call “negative spacing.” This space is where your secondary ideas can appear, supporting or replying to the main idea. I usually start by writing a complex melody, and then will remove some notes that I will use elsewhere, either in a second synth, bass, or percussive elements. Here are some suggestions as to what you can do with the MIDI notes you remove from the first draft of your melody:

  • Use the same MIDI notes from your melody, but apply them to multiple synths or other sounds to create variations and multiple layers that all work together.
  • Use the MIDI tool chords and arpeggios to build evolving ideas that come from the same root.
  • Look into some MIDI-generating Max for Live patches that can give you alternative ideas. I’ve had some fun with patches like Magenta, but also with the VST Riffer or Random Riff Generator which are really interesting.

The “Fruit of the Tree” Exercise

This is an exercise that is a bit time-consuming that I have a love/hate relationship with. You spend time playing the main idea through intense sound altering plugins. So, if your main idea is a melody, imagine you send it through granular synthesis, pitch-shifting, a harmonizer, random amplitude modulation, etc.—you’ll end up with a bunch of messed up material that can be shaped into a secondary idea while still being related to your original idea. The idea is to transform what you have into something slightly different. There are multiple plugins you can look into for achieving this:

  • Vocoders, mTransform, mHarmonizer, mMorph: These all work by merging an incoming signal and with a second signal. So, let’s say you have your main idea or melody—you can feed it into something completely different, such as a voice, some forest sounds, textures, or percussion, and you’ll obtain pretty original results.
  • Shaperbox 2 is the ultimate toolbox to completely transform your sound by slicing, gating, and filtering it, with the help of LFOs. This is pretty much my go-to to create alternative tools quickly. One thing I like to do a lot, is to run two side-by-side on different channels, and then use them to create movement that answers one another. For instance, one will duck while the other plays. You can also use side-chaining in the newest version, which can create lovely reactivity, if you use it along with the filter to shape the tone by an incoming sound. This allows you to do low-pass gating, for instance, which isn’t really in Ableton’s basic tools.

Background Sounds

The lack of background sounds, or noise-floor, always leaves people with the impression that there’s something missing in a track. This can be resolved with a reverb at low volume that leaves a nice overall roundness if you keep it pretty dark in its tone. Low reverb creates an impression that a song is also doubled, or wide. Another good way to make background sounds is to load up a bunch of sounds that can be played multiple times in different sections of your song, at very low volume. I was checking out this producer who does EDM/festival music, and he would use sounds of people cheering at a very low volume in moments where the chorus of the song would hit, to create more density and excitement. However, at a high volume, this approach can conversely create a “wall of noise”, so it should be crafted carefully.

If you simply drop a background sound into a project, such as forest sounds, you’re missing out on one of the most enjoyable activities in making music, which is to create your own live sounds. A forest has a bunch of—what seems like—random sounds. You can alter this, and say have a basic 5-second background of noise-floor and then decide when the bird chirping comes in via automation and perhaps have them sync to the tempo. This creates a bit of a groove too. A good exercise is to try to create sounds that emulate nature as you’ll have a bit more control over the sounds (and you’ll learn more about sound design in the process).

Ghost Notes

Ghost notes are mostly discussed as they relate to percussion, but they can be used, as a technique, with anything. A common example of ghost notes is their use in hi-hats, as a bunch of in-between hats at a very low volume to fill up space, which stretches the groove and but avoids too much negative space. Aside from using this technique on the low end—where sounds need a lot of space and room to breathe—make sure everything doesn’t sound mushy. The use of a delay in 16th or 32th notes can be a good way to create ghost notes.

A tap delay, where you can program where the delays fall, is also super fun in terms of creating ghost notes, as you can use one to make complex poly-rhythms. However, I suggest cutting some part of the high-end from the delays to avoid clashing with the main transients, and make sure the volume is very low. Using a AUX/Send bus for delays can be quite useful.

SEE ALSO : Improving intensity in music

Are all Electronic Tracks Starting to Sound the Same?

/in , , /by

Recently, I noticed someone on Facebook post something like “why are you guys all making the same track over and over? All the tracks are sounding the same and you’re killing the genre I love.”

I think he’s partly right. As a label owner and mastering engineer, I hear a lot of tracks, and many do sound the same. I remember that in the mid-90s, there was a moment when I was playing some hard techno at a record shop—listening to a pile of records I wanted to buy—and half-way through, I noticed they all started the same: they all had a break at the exact same spot, used the same rides, etc. I left the entire pile without buying anything. I was really into minimal, but back then it was much harder to find music of that genre, let alone anything interesting enough to buy. In that moment, I lost total interest in hard techno and got into other genres. At that time, everyone wanted to sound like Adam Beyer—10 years later, everyone wanted to sound like Minus/Richie Hawtin—and now, 10 years after that, everyone wants to sound like artists who could play Sunwaves in Romania.

We love genres for certain reasons, but as time passes, we might start disliking them for the same reasons. Somehow, we hope that a genre can be constantly reinvented in a linear way, so we never get bored. If a genre gets popular enough—and people see that learning how to make it can give them some sort of recognition or return on their work—you get a whole bunch of people repeating the same ideas that got the genre popular, over and over. The genre is then flooded with a crazy amount of songs that are all made up of the same basic ideas, just arranged differently.

So, how can you make sure you’re not falling into this trap? To start, you might want to read my post about how to reinvent your sound.

That said, what makes a genre stagnate? What makes a genre feel like it’s lost its soul? I could go on and on about this but I’ll try to keep it short.

Formula-Based Techniques

Before writing this part of the post, I went on Beatport and had a look at the “minimal” section. I’ve been very familiar with this section since 2006, when I joined that platform. I find that if you want to hear the common denominator of a specific genre, just listen to the top 10 sellers of it on Beatport. Recently, it seems like things have changed—I was happy to see that the top 10 minimal tracks didn’t all sound the same (but the same can’t be said about some other genres I checked out). However, even in the minimal category, I can tell that shuffling and swinging of hi-hats, and breaks all seemed to follow the same kind of formula. The top 10 best-selling tracks on Beatport are, in my opinion, never the most creative songs. The majority of DJs who buy tracks for their sets want transitions to feel smooth, so their sets feels seamless. Approaching music production this way results in a couple of issues:

  • What gets popular, and heard the most, becomes a standardized form of expression. The genre gets characterized by standards of production based on what people play, and this causes new and old artists to conform their music to fit the mold.
  • Seeing formulaic music sell positively reinforces artists to repeat similar ideas.
  • Production-wise, formulaic music does not age well. Down the road, it will have no personality, and it might just sound gimmicky or bland.

As you can see, this becomes a pretty nasty pattern for creativity, as things that are slightly outside “the norm” might get rejected unless they’ve been charted by bigger names (which is why DJs get bombarded with promos).

For example, here are some formulas that a genre might have:

  • Use of a specific sample. It can be a type of kick (i.e. 909 for techno, 303 bass-lines for acid).
  • An effect (i.e. lush reverbs for dub techno).
  • A swing type (i.e. the 65% MPC swing in house).
  • Programmed sequence (i.e. trap has a very recognizable way of using hats and snare, minimal techno has a particular way of using backgrounds).
  • Structure (i.e. the use of long breakdowns and bass drops in some genre that have become the norm).

Potential Solutions

To be aware that formulas exists is already a huge step forward, as you are mindful of the potential trap you might have fallen into. Some people often say to me that they just want to make the music they like, and not worry so much. That’s great, but there are also other options, such as:

  • Take the common denominator of a genre and add something new. This is a good way not to throw people off too much. For instance, in the “deep minimal” section, I noticed that the hi-hats are all quite similar—these types of hi-hats could be your anchor to build from while adding something new. If you really care about your sound, I’d encourage you to spend some time listening to the top 10 of whatever genres you’re interested in to see how people are working. This way you won’t repeat the same thing (this is the opposite approach some people will outline if your goal is to make a “hit”).
  • Do you have a personal signature sound? Some artists like to record themselves making a specific sound, or will design something that they use for each track they make. This is usually a good idea to make yourself a bit more personable.
  • I often discuss the use of reference tracks while producing, especially in the arrangement section. You can see and hear how a track is built, and make decision to counter certain recurrent use of a structure. For instance, if you notice that multiple tracks are often taking a kick-pause around 1 minute before bringing a bass, perhaps you might want to do the opposite by bringing the bass before 1 minute and do a kick-pause at 1:15, for example—mess with expectations.
  • One of the pitfalls people tend to fall into is thinking that adding elements will create a new style, but I find that removing is often the key. Stripping down what you have and really working existing sounds might create better results and can point you in new directions. For instance, when I work on a clap, I like to have 4 different variations total; that’s all.

The Availability of Samples

Online stores offer quality samples based on what’s in demand from producers. Sometimes, they’ll even approach successful artists to propose using a sample pack of a certain type. While you can use samples as they are, if you create a few loops of your own this way, you’ll automatically sound like a trend. It should be no surprise that I encourage you to tweak all your samples at least a little.

The best way to tweak samples quickly generally follows the same few types of tweaks:

  • Pitch-related: You can alter the pitch by loading the sound in a sampler or using a pitch-shifter. I really like using an envelope that will modify the sound which makes it a bit less static, compared to simply altering it.
  • Effect-altering: Reverb, chorus, and phasers are always helpful. A multi-fx plugin like Movement (by Output) is a really easy shortcut to new ideas. You can also use presets from different effects in your DAW and quickly swap presets to find a starting point, then play with the knobs to see what comes out.
  • Transient/Decay: If you can play with an envelope that alters the length of the clip in a sampler, it’s always interesting, as you can discover “hidden” parts of the sound. Sometimes, I like to start the sample later, when it’s less loud, and then add gain, then shorten it. You can get some really off-sounding results, especially with kicks and percussion, where you create a nice surprise.
  • Multi-band is to me the solution to approaching sound design in new ways. Whenever you have a sound, you can split it into 3 bands, and treat each of them independently. This can be done by quickly by using a multi-band effect or by duplicating a sound 3 times so that each channel has a band in solo, and the sum of 3 channels is the sound itself (tip: use the Fabfilter EQ3). One of my favorite tools in Max for Live is the Shaper. You can create an LFO, and then apply it to any knob of an effect, like the Utility Tool from Ableton. Modulate the gain or panning for example or bring saturation only on the highs or add EQ changes in the mids.

Structured Predictability

When you listen to a specific genre and can predict when certain elements will happen, you know that the artists making it have fallen into the trap of predictability, which is one of the most common issues in music production. To keep the listener interested, you need to create a balance of new ideas alongside a world of known territory. This usually keeps engagement with the track going, because it’s not entirely predictable. Again, a reference track is helpful to spot moments where there are elements of predictability. In your references folder, perhaps you have a sub-category of case studies where you can have a few “generic track structures” so you can use those do the last polishing of your arrangements.

Also, I love to save my project (eg. Ableton’s .als file) on the desktop without any samples. When you open a lost file like this, Live will be display an error messages that some samples are missing and you’ll only see ghost clips in the arranger. From there, you can import new clips of your own and distribute them into the structure that’s already in place. However, with using pre-made arrangements this way, you should pay attention to avoiding repeating yourself, in the ways I’ve described in this post.

SEE ALSO : How to maintain consistency in the quality of your productions

Creating a music sketch

/in , , , /by

In this post, I’d like to explain how making a music sketch can help you to stay on track when creating a song or track, much like how a painter creates an initial sketch of his/her subject. I’ve explained in previous posts that the traditional way of making music goes something like this:

  1. Record and assemble sounds to work from.
  2. Find your motif.
  3. Make and edit the arrangements.
  4. Mix.

Here we’re talking about a way of making music that was popularized in the 1960s and is still used frequently today. But what happens when you have the ability to do everything yourself, and from your computer alone? Can you successfully tackle all of these tasks simultaneously?

When I do workshops, process and workflow are generally questionable topics to address because everyone has different point of view and way of working. However, to me it always comes down to one thing—how productive and satisfied an artist is with his or her finished work. Satisfaction is pretty much the only thing that matters, but I often see people struggle with their workflow, mostly because they keep juggling between different stages of music-making and get lost in the process (sometimes even losing their original idea altogether). For example, an artist might start working with an initial idea, but then get lost in sound design, which then leads them to working on mixing, and then sooner or later the original idea doesn’t feel right anymore. For some people, perhaps its better to do things one at a time; the old before-the-personal-computer way still works. But what if breaking your workflow into distinct stages still doesn’t work? Is there another alternative approach?

In working with different artists and making music myself, I’ve come to a different approach: creating a music sketch—a take on the classic stage-based process I just mentioned. Recently, this approach has been giving me a lot of good results—I’d like to discuss it so you can try it yourself.

Sketching your songs and designs

I completed many drawing classes in college because I was studying art. If you observe a teacher or professional painter working, you’ll see that when they create a realistic painting of a subject, they’ll use a pencil first and sketch it out, doodling lines within a wire-frame to get an idea of where things are. Sketching is a good way to keep perspective in mind, and to get an idea of framing and composition. The same sketching process can be used in music-making.

When I have an idea, I like to sketch out a “ghost arrangement”. Sometimes I even sketch out some sound design. The trap a lot of people fall into when making a song—particularly in electronic music—is to strive to create a perfect loop right from the start. Some people get lost in the process easily which is, honestly, really not important. People work on a “perfect loop” endlessly in the early stages of making a song because when you are just starting a song, the loop will have no context and it will be much more difficult to create something satisfying. By quickly giving your loop a context through a sketch-type process by arranging or giving the project a bit more direction, you’ll hear what’s wrong or missing.

I’m of the belief that having something half-done as you’re working can be acceptable instead of constantly striving for perfection. I think this way because I know I’ll revisit a song many times, tweaking it a little more each time.

Sketching a song can be done by understanding at the beginning of the process that you’ll work through stages of music-making more quickly and roughly, knowing you’ll fix things later on. This is more in line with how life actually goes: we live our lives knowing some problems will get solved over time, and that there are many things we don’t know at a particular moment in time. In making music, some people become crazy control freaks, wanting to own every single detail, leading them down rabbit hole of perfectionist stagnation, in my opinion.

Creating a sketch in a project is simple. Since I work with a lot of sound design, I usually pick something that strikes a chord in me…awakens an emotion somehow. Since this will be my main idea, next I’ll try to decide how it will be use as a phrase in my song. In order to get that structured, I need to know how the main percussion will go, so I’ll drop-in a favourite kick (usually a plain 808) and a snare/clap. These two simple, percussive sounds are intentionally generic because I will swap them out during the mixing process. You want just a kick in there to have an idea of the rhythm, and the snare clarifies the swing/groove.

Why are the basic kick and snare swapped out later?

I swap out the snare and kick later because I find that I need my whole song to be really clear before I can decide on the exact tone of a kick. A kick can dramatically change the whole perspective of a song, depending on how it’s made. Same thing goes for a snare—it’s rare I’ll change the actual timing of the samples, but the sound itself pretty much always changes down the line.

For the rest of the percussion, I’ll sketch out a groove with random sounds that may or may not change later on, but I use sounds I know are not the core of my song.

With bass, I usually work the same way; I have notes that support the main idea but the design/tone of the bass itself has room to be tweaked later.

As for arrangements, when creating a music sketch I will make a general structure as to what goes where, when some sounds should start playing or end, and will have the conclusion roughly established.

Design and tweak

Tweaking is where magic happens—this is where, in fact, a lot of people usually start their music-writing process. Tweaking and designing is a phase where you clarify your main idea by creating context. I usually work around the middle part of the song; the heart of the idea, then work on the main idea’s sound design. I layer the main idea with details, add movement and velocity changes.

  • Layering can be done by duplicating the channel a few times and EQing the sub-channels differently. Group them and add a few empty channels where you can add more sounds at lower volume.
  • Movement can imply changes in the length of the sound’s duration (I recommend Gatekeeper for quick ideas), panning (PanShaper 2 is great), frequency filtering, and volume changes (Check mVibratoMB for great volume modulation). The other option is to add effects such as chorus, flanger, phaser, that modulate with a speed adjustment. Some really great modulators would be the mFlangerMB (because you can pick which frequency range to affect—I use this for high pitched sounds), chorus (mChorusMB) to open the mids, and phasers (Phasor Snapin) for short length sounds. Another precious tool is the LFO by XFER—basically you want the plugin to have a wet/dry option and keep it at a pretty low wet signal.
  • Groove/swing. This is something I usually do later—I find that adjusting it in the last stretch of sketching provides the best results. The compression might need to be tweaked a bit, but in general the groove becomes much easier to fix once everything is in place.
  • Manual automation. Engineers will tell you that the best compression is done by hand, and compressors are there for fast tweaks that you can’t do. Same for automation, I find that to be able to make your transition and movement using a MIDI controller is a really nice finishing touch that is perfect in this stage.

Basically, the rule of finalizing design is that whatever was there as a sketch has to be tweaked, one sound/channel at a time. Don’t leave anything unattended—this can manifest from a fear of “messing things up”.

When tweaking specific sounds from the original sketch, you should either swap out the original sound completely, or layer it somehow to polish it. I always recommend layering before swapping. I find that fat, thick samples are always the combination of 3 sounds, which make it sound rich. When I work on mixing or arrangements for my clients and I see the clap being a single, simple layer, I have to work on it much more using compression, sometimes doubling the sample itself, which in the end, gives it a new presence. Doubling a sound—or even tripling it—gives you a lot more options. For example, if you modulate the gain of only one of the doubles, you not only make the sound thicker but also give it movement and variation.

All this said, I would recommend making sure your arrangements are solid before spending a lot of time in design. Once you start designing, if your arrangements have a certain structure, you’ll be able to design your song and sounds specifically according to each section (eg. intro, middle, chorus, outro) which gives your song even more personality. Sound design completed after a good sketch can be very impactful when the conditions are right.

Try sketching your own song and let me know how it goes!

SEE ALSO : Creating Timeless Music

Live recording with the Ableton session view

/in , , , /by

Many people who sit in from of a computer to make music find this style of music work counter-productive or “too nerdy”, and will always prefer using gear, instruments, and live sounds to create music. If you’re finding your workflow too rigid when working in the arrangements view of a DAW and feel like your usual song structures are “too square”, it’s good to remind yourself that there are other ways to make music.

If you feel limited in your current production style, finding a better way might come from exploring alternatives.

This is partly why modular synth music feels free—tweaking a machine you can’t entirely control with often unexpected results. Similarly, in DJ’ing, the DJ is the master of when a song starts, stops, and how to control certain outputs. One of the best ways to see where you yourself stands is to understand what brings you excitement when you make music. I often hear stories of people struggling with an inner voice telling them how music should be made The Right WayTM and they’ll sit in front of their DAW hoping something happens, but what comes out feels weak, boring and not worthy of any energy. These individuals have been misled in what is believed to be The Right WayTM (though for some the DAW approach works).

The last thing you want to do if you’re bored of DAW-based production is to jump straight in the modular world, especially if you don’t know much about it. Even though you may have read a lot about modular, you might get started with it and not really enjoy it either, which is a waste of time and money.

Explore low-cost alternatives

My view and approach to finding a new way to produce your music is through low-cost gear or instruments, and a drive to explore less predictable music-making methods. When it comes to knowing how to make music, I always insist that what you should master first is the knowledge of your personal tools and how to get the best of them. It takes time and patience, but this approach starts you on a road to success with controllable results instead of facing a long list of failures resulting from never truly being an expert at any tool you use.

Using live audio recordings in Ableton Live (and other DAWs)

It’s easy to forget that you can totally turn your production methods with Ableton Live (or any DAW, for that matter) upside-down without spending a dime. One of the most powerful aspects of DAWs—though sometimes under-utilized in electronic music—are their ability to process live recordings. “Real”, original audio recordings feel more organic than pre-made samples or boring MIDI blocks. So, how can you go about working with live recordings in an effective way?

Gather your loops for source material to jam with

Pre-made loops

There’s a lot of bad-mouthing out there regarding the use of pre-made loops. If you use them “as-is”, you risk having the same loops as other people’s songs, and perhaps be accused of not being original. However, don’t write-off pre-made loops completely—there are many advantages to using them.

  • Search for quality loops. If you hunt for loops, chances are you’ll find some that sound great, and perhaps some will also have at least one sound that you might be interested in. It’s important that you train your ear to what good quality sounds are, and that you are able to see how they are sequenced and processed.
  • Slice the loops into smaller pieces. Once you have a loop, right click to use the option of Slice to MIDI. Once sliced, you can trigger the sounds you want to keep and reprogram them.
  • Drop the slices in a sampler. Using the sampler, you can also isolate one part of the loop, and by playing a note, you can control its pitch—another way to recycle sounds from pre-made loops.
  • Use envelopes. In the clip itself, you can draw automation for gain/volume, and have part of the loop playing while silencing other parts. You can also automate pitch if you want. The fun part in using envelopes is to create automation that isn’t linked to the length to the clip itself—a good way to create strange results or polyrhythms.
  • Adjust the length. You can make tiny loops out of long ones, and you can create strange rhythms by having the loop points a bit “off”.

Recording your own loops

If you are one of those people who doesn’t like tweaking things on a screen, of course you can always record organic sounds yourself, and create source material from those recordings instead of using pre-made loops created by someone else. Once you have recordings saved, you can always tweak them in a similar fashion to the methods we just discussed.

How many sounds or samples should you create for your song?

Collecting and creating quality sounds from pre-made loops takes a fair bit of time and research. You need to do part of the sound design yourself in order have decent material to make your song. As an example, below I’ve created a list of what I believe to be “the bare minimum” to create in terms of loops and slices before to have a productive jam. Keep in mind that this is for mostly electronic music, but it could also apply to other genres:

  • A 2-bar loop minimum of kick or low end sounds that mark the tempo.
  • A 2-4 bar loop of low end material. This can be bass, filtered low synths, toms, etc.
  • 3-5 loops of rhythmic elements to be used as percussive material. For percussive sounds, I strongly encourage you to have at least A/B structure, as in 1 bar of sequence and then a variation in the second. The AAAB pattern is also a great way to keep ears interested.
  • 1 main idea—as long as you like—which will be your hook. Often this can be a short phrase, a melody, or something one can sing. Main ideas work well if they can evolve and develop.
  • 2 sub-ideas to support the main idea. This can be through call-and-response with the main idea, or something in the background. These ideas are secondary to provide support, not to stand out.

I know this seems like a grocery list, and it feels perhaps still very far from the main topic of this post, but keep in mind that if you’re not so found of doing all this, you can also get pre-made loops to practice programming sequences with PUSH.

The power of the session view and recording yourself jamming

Ableton’s session view

Often misunderstood and misused, Ableton’s session view is a very powerful panel that allows you to jam, play, improvise and explore.

Start by building scenes, starting with the main idea from your song. Imagine your song and how it might sound right in the middle of it, when everything is playing together. I know it can be a bit confusing to imagine, but this helps you generate ideas. The second row of the session view could, for example, be the same clips as the first arranged differently. Following that, perhaps you add more new ideas, and so on. Just make sure that row X with, lets say kicks, only has kicks—one sound per column. Basically, you want 10 lines of material to jam with; then once you have this, you jam.

Now that you’re ready, hit the record button and record yourself jamming. Don’t aim for perfection, don’t aim to make a song at all, just jam and eventually you’ll end up with great moments you can use.

TIP: Change the global quantization to 1 bar or less and experiment with how it goes.

When you press the record button while in the session view, everything will be tracked and recorded on the arrangement view. Afterwards, you can slice out the best parts of your jam, and then arrange them in a way that makes the song interesting, while avoiding feeling too “on the grid”. You might even end up with material for multiple songs. I strongly encourage you to read about the creative process I use to start and finish tracks, but working out of jams is very pleasing. I often use jams myself when I have a lot of loops and aren’t sure how to use them in a song.

SEE ALSO : Integrating a modular setup with your DAW

How to maintain consistency in the quality of your productions

/in , , , /by

The most consistent musicians have reached a comfortable flow and they finish tracks that they’re satisfied with fairly quickly. But how do they ensure that each of their tracks are maintaining the same level of quality as their first well-received works, as they complete more and more of them?

Making a lot of songs/tracks and actually finishing them is, to me, one of the most essential purposes of making music. Stalling on a particular idea or song builds up doubts, and eventually you’ll grow to hate it. If you finish up a track quickly—as opposed to more slowly—you capture an idea you liked at a precise moment in time and make the most out of it, then move on to the next idea.

FACT: you will always learn something new when you finish a song that you can apply to the next one.

The faster you become at completing tracks, the more you become articulate in your self-expression; if you dig a really good idea, you’ll know what to do pretty quickly to make the best out of it.

Many well-known and consistent artists make multiple songs (yes, songs!) in one day. Marc Houle, Ricardo Villalobos, and Prince to name a few, have expressed that they like to sit, jam, record, edit a bit, and then move on. Ricardo’s long songs are actually long sessions that haven’t been edited. “It’s more important to simply record something each time you hit the studio rather than make a perfect song“, I’ve heard him say.

How do you maintain consistency in your work when you’re creating a ton of tracks?

My personal mentality that I like to have is to not get too attached to the music I make, nor about its potential or future. With this mentality in mind, you can embrace imperfection, have more relaxed sessions, and have more fun. But yes, there are also some technical points you can keep in mind to avoid letting your work slowly degrade in terms of quality while trying to maintain a regular quantity of completing tracks:

  • Stay away from trends or gimmicks. Trends can be hard to spot when they’re first evolving, but usually there are signs. When many people use the same samples over and over, which can often define a style, you know that’s a road probably too often taken—in going there yourself, you might get lost in the sea of similar sounding songs. To me, production trends are about some samples, effects, and arrangements that become a norm. I’ll always remember a long time ago when I was into hard techno, I was at the record store listening to a pile of 30 records and every record had the exact same structure to the point where you could predict when the kick muted, the hats came in, and so on. Sounding like existing trends is not a good way to stand out as a memorable, original musician; timeless music is often “odd” when it’s first released, but something catchy about it makes it work.
  • Use scales. You don’t always have to be using an established scale when writing, but it will help your music age a bit better. Off-scale or highly dissonant music not only sounds a bit weird or off-putting to the average listener, but by working with established tonal scales people can reference your music decades later. When I think of high-quality music, the musicality in terms of scales is always top notch. If it’s purely experimental and still high-quality, it’s usually based on a concept that makes it relevant.
  • Cross validate with references. I can never stress this enough—your references, loaded in a playlist alongside your music, should feel right.
  • Have a friend as quality filter. A reliable friend is one that will tell you when things aren’t working. I personally like to have 5 people to send my music to in order to get reliable feedback. Sometimes I feel more excited sending them my music than submitting it to a label. You should have 5 responsive people that want to listen to your stuff; proper feedback is a great feeling when done right.
  • Keep your renderings/bounces at -6dB, 24bits. This is in case you want to release them in the future, but also because music with headroom is universally more well-received. Back when the trend was to have very loud mixes, your music was irrecoverable later on if you lost the original mix. Loudness has also aged terribly since this trend went out-of-style.
  • Use quality samples and quality tools. What makes a great mix is the use of great samples. Working with a harsh sample means you have to use more effort to make it sound better, but the end results could still bad, or even worse.
  • Simplicity ages best. Humans tend to remember simpler ideas. Complex intentions and complicated, draining music isn’t always the best in the long-run. I’m not saying “don’t do it” if you’re into it, but maybe to tone things down a bit if you’re interested in the longevity of your work. I’m in love with this quote by Da Vinci: “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”
  • Make sure your mixing is high-quality, and use quality effects. If you can make sure your song is properly mixed, it will certainly age much more gracefully. Otherwise, you might regret some decisions you made in your mix as it ages. Cheap effects and presets don’t age very well because others might also use them heavily. Further down the road, your originality might feel lacking as a result, and plus nothing ages worse than a gimmicky sounding effect (ex. think of cheesy effects used on audio in the 80s.)

The effects of your work habits on maintaining consistent quality in your work

There are things you can do to make sure all your tracks end up with a level of quality you are happy with and will continue to be happy with as they age. I believe that working on multiple tracks at once is a great way to maintain perspective on your quality levels. Personally, I also like to export half-completed tracks and listen to them later, or import them into the next track I’m working on to give myself better perspective(s). Sometimes, I encourage clients to bring in all the tracks they’ve made in the last few months so we can toggle between them easily and make comparisons—this task might reveal a lot to you regarding the patterns and trends you use the most.

Using MIDI controllers in the studio

/in /by

People often say that MIDI controllers are mostly for performing live, but they can also be your studio’s most useful tool. My advice to people who want to invest in gear—especially those who aren’t happy working only on a computer and dream of having tons of synths (modular and such)—is to start with investing in a controller first.

There are multiple ways to use MIDI controllers; let me share some of my favourite techniques with you and give you advice to easily replicate them.

Controllers for performing in studio

One trend I’ve been seeing in the last few months is producers sharing how they perform their songs in-studio as a way to demonstrate all the possibilities found within a single loop. This is not new—many people like to take moments from live recordings and edit them into a song, but it’s becoming clear that after years and years of music that has been edited to have every single damn detail fixed, artists are realizing that this clinical approach to producing makes a track cold, soulless, robotic, and not organic sounding and in the end. If you’re still touching up details at version 76 of your song, this means you’ve probably heard it about 200 times—no one will ever listen to your track that many times. My advice is to leave some mistakes in the track, and let it have a raw side to it. Moodymann’s music, for example, is praised and in-demand because his super raw approach makes electronic feel very organic and real. Performing your music in studio to create this type of feeling is pretty simple; it’s super fun and it inspires new ideas too.

For in-studio jams, I recommend the Novation LaunchXL which has a combination of knobs and sliders, plus it’s a control surface; depending on where you are on the screen, it can adapt itself. For instance, with the “devices” button pressed, you can control the effects on a specific channel and switch the knobs to control the on-screen parameters.

When I make a new song using a MIDI controller, I’ll start by using a good loop. Then I’ll use my controller to quickly play on the different mixes I can create with that loop. Sometimes, for example, I want to try the main idea at different volumes (75%/50%/25%), or at different filter levels. Some sounds feel completely different and sound better when you filter them at 75%. Generally, I put on these effects on each of my loops: a 3-band EQ, filter, delay, utility (gain), and an LFO.

Next, I’ll record myself playing with the loop for a good 20 minutes so that I have very long stems of each loop. Then when it comes to arranging, I’ll pick out the best parts.

TIP: I sometimes like to freeze stem tracks to remove all effects and have raw material I can’t totally go back and fix endlessly.

Controllers for sound design

I find that the fun part of sound design involving human gestures comes from replicating oscillations a LFO can’t really do. It’s one thing to assign a parameter to a LFO for movement, but if you do it manually, there’s nothing quite like it—but the best part is to combine the best of both automated and human-created movements.

I use a programmed LFO for super fast modulation that I can’t do physically with my fingers, and then adjust it to the song’s rhythm or melody—just mild adjustments usually. For instance, you could have super fast modulation for a resonance parameter with an LFO or with Live’s version 10.1’s curves design, then with your controller, control the frequency parameter to give it a more organic feel.

Recently, I’ve been really enjoying a complementary modular ensemble for Live called Signal by Isotonik; it allows you to build your own signal flow to go a bit beyond the usual modules that you’ll get in Max for Live. Where I find Signal to be a huge win is when it’s paired with PUSH, which is by far the best controller you can get for sound design. PUSH gives you quick access to the different parameters of your tools, and if you make macros it becomes even more organized.

Controllers for arrangements

Using MIDI controllers in arrangements is, to me, where the most fun can come from; using them can completely change the idea of a song.

For instance, if your song has a 3-note motif that has the same velocity across the board, I love to modulate the volume of the 3 notes into different levels. When we speak, all the words we use in a sentence have different levels and tones. For example, if you say to someone “don’t touch that!”, depending on the intonation of any particular word, it can change the emphasis of what you’re saying. “DON’T touch that!” would be very different from “don’t touch THAT!” This same philosophy can apply to a 3-note melody; each note is a word and you can decide on which ones to emphasize and how a certain emphasis fits in your song’s main phrase or motif.

If you assign a knob or fader on your controller to the volume of the melody, you can also control the amplitude of each note. You can do this for the entire song, or you can copy the best takes and apply their movement to the entire song. I find that there will be a slight difference in modulation depending on if you use a knob or fader; each seem to have a different curve—when I play with each, they turn out differently (but perhaps that’s just me). Explore and see for yourself!

TIP: Using motorized faders can be a a huge game changer. Check out the Behringer X-Touch Compact.

Another aspect of controllers that people don’t often consider are foot pedals. If you’re the type who taps your foot while making music, you could perhaps take advantage of your twitching by applying that to a specific parameter. Check the Yamaha FC4A. Use it with PUSH and then you have a strong arsenal of options.

SEE ALSO : Equipment Needed to Make Music – Gear vs. Experience vs. Monitoring

Workflow Suggestions for Music Collaborations

/in /by

One of the most underestimated approaches to electronic music is collaboration. It seems to me that because of electronic music’s DIY approach people believe they need to do absolutely everything themselves. However, almost every time I’ve collaborated with others I hear them say “wow, I can’t believe I haven’t done that before!” Many of us want to collaborate, but actually organizing a in-person session can be a challenge. In thinking about collaboration and after some powerful collaboration sessions of my own, I noted what aspects of our workflow helped to create a better outcome. I find that there are some do’s and don’ts in collaborating, so I’ve decided to share them with you in this post.

Have a plan

I know this sounds obvious, but the majority of people who collaborate don’t really have a plan and will just sit and make music. While this works to some degree, you’re really missing out on upping the level of fun that comes out of planning ahead. I’m not talking about big, rigid plans, but more so just to have an idea of what you want to accomplish in a session. Deciding you’ll jam can be plan in-itself, deciding to work on an existing track could be another, or working on an idea you’ve already discussed could be a more precise plan.

Personally, I like to have roles decided for each person before the session. For example, I might work on sound design while my partner might be thinking about arrangements. When I work with a musician, I usually already have in mind that this person does something I don’t do, or does it better that I can. The most logical way to work is to have each participant take a role in which they do what they do best.

If you expect yourself to get the most of sound design, mixing, beat sequencing, editing, etc., all at once, you’re probably going to end up a “Jack of all trades, master of nothing”. Working with someone else is a way to learn new things and to improve.

A good collaborative session creates a total sense of flow; things unfold naturally and almost effortlessly. With that in mind, having a plan gives the brain a framework that determines the task(s) you need to complete. One of the rules of working in a state of flow is to do something you know you do well, but to create a tiny bit of challenge within it.

Say “yes” to any suggestions

This is a rule that I really insist on, though it might sound odd at first. Even though sometimes an idea seems silly, you should say yes to it because you’ll never know where it will lead you unless you try it. I’ve been in a session where I’ve constantly had the impression that I was doing something wrong because we weren’t following the “direction” of the track I had in my head. But what if veering off my mental path leads us to something new and refreshing? What if my partner – based on a suggestion that made have seemed wrong at first – accidentally discovered a sound we had no idea would fit in there?

This is why I find that the “yes” approach is an absolute win.

Saying yes to everything often just flows more naturally than saying no. However, if the “yes” approach doesn’t work easily, don’t force it; it’s much better to put an idea aside and return to it another day if it’s not working.

Trust your intuition; listen to your inner dialogue

When you work with someone else, you have another person who’s also hearing what you’re hearing, and will interact with the same sounds and try new things. This new perspective disconnects you from your work slightly and gives you a bit of distance. If you pay attention, you’ll notice that your inner dialogue may go something like “oh I want a horn over that! Oh, lets bring in claps!” That inner voice is your intuition, your culture, and your mood, throwing out ideas; sharing these ideas with one another can help create new experiments and layers in your work.

Combining this collaborative intuition with a “yes” attitude will greatly speed up the process of completing a track. Two people coming up with ideas for the same project often work faster and better than one.

Take a lot of breaks

It’s easy to get excited when you’re working on music with another person, and when you do, some ideas might feel like they’re the “best new thing”, but these same ideas could actually be pretty bad. You need time away from them to give yourself perspective; take breaks. I recommend pausing every 10 minutes. Even pausing for a minute or two to talk or to stand up and stretch will make a difference in your perceptions of your new ideas.

Centralize your resources

In collaborating, when you reach the point of putting together your arrangements, I would say that it’s important to have only one computer as the main control station for your work. Ideally you’d want an external hard-drive that you can share between computers easily; this way you can use everyone’s plugins to work on your sounds. One of the most useful things about teaming up with someone else is that you get access to their resources, skills, materials, and experience. Make sure to get the most out of collaborating by knowing what resources you can all drawn upon, and then select a few things you want to focus your attention on. It’s easy to get distracted or to think you need something more, but I can tell you that you can do a lot with whatever tools you have at that moment. Working with someone else can also open your eyes to tools you perhaps didn’t fully understand, were not using properly, or not using to their full potential.

Online collaboration is different

Working with someone through the internet is a completely different business that working together in-person. It means that you won’t work at the same time and some people also work more slowly or more quickly than yourself. I’ve tried collaborating with many people online and it doesn’t always work. It takes more than just the will of both participants to make it work, it demands some cohesion and flexibility. All my previous points about collaborating in-person also apply to collaborating online. Assigning roles and having a plan really helps. I also find that sharing projects that aren’t working for me with another person will sometimes give them a new life.

If you’re a follower of this blog, you’ll often read that one of the most important things about production that I stress is to let go of your tracks; this is something very essential in collaborating. I usually try to shut-off the inner voice that tells me that my song is the “next hit” because thinking this way usually never works. No one controls “hits”, and being aware of that is a good start. That said, when you work with someone online, since this person is not in the room with you and he/she might work on the track while you’re busy with something else, I find works best to be relaxed about the outcome. This means that if I have a bad first impression with what I’m hearing from the person I’m working with, I usually wait a good 24h before providing any feedback.

What if you really don’t like what your partner is making?

Not liking your partner’s work is probably the biggest risk in collaborating. If things are turning out this way in your collaboration, perhaps you didn’t use a reference track inside the project, or didn’t set up a proper mood board. A good way to avoid problems in collaboration is to make sure that you and your partner are on the same page mentally and musically before doing anything. If you both use the same reference track, for example, it will greatly help to avoid disasters. If you don’t like a reference track someone has suggested, I recommend proposing one you love until everyone agrees. If you and your partner(s) never agree, don’t push it; maybe work with someone else.

The key to successful collaborations is to keep it simple, work with good vibes only, and to have fun.

SEE ALSO : Synth Basics

The rule of thirds in arrangements and mixing

/in , /by

One of my favorite aspects of music making is to use proportional ratios regularly. While this seems perhaps counter-productive when compared with the artistic side of producing music, I use it to eliminate a bunch of technical roadblocks that emerge in the process of decision making. Because making decisions can sometimes end up in roadblocks, you can use this technique as a general rule that you always refer to whenever you have to.

Let me explain how this rule of thirds can give you wings.

The first time I familiarized myself with this concept was when I used the iPhone grid to take pictures. I had read that a tip to take better pictures was to use that grid to “place” your content. To compose your photos according to the rule of thirds, you must imagine your photo divided into nine equal parts using two vertical lines and two horizontal lines. For example, the square in the middle should have the subject of your picture, so it’s perfectly centered, it is also recommended to have something like a detail where the lines cross.

When I practiced this, I immediately saw a parallel with musical arrangements. For instance, any song will have three distinct sections when it comes to the story line (intro, main section, outro). Where each section meets, there must be a pivot, an element of transition. When I work, I always start by dividing the song into equal thirds, then, I’ll divide again so I have nine sections total. Starting with arrangements, they have equal parts, but this will then change as I dive in details of arrangements; some of the “lines” of the grid will be moved around.

TIP: Use markers in Ableton and give names to each section.

What you want in arrangements, is a good balance between expected and unexpected elements.

Using the rule of thirds helps achieve this balance: while you center the main idea of your song right in the middle of your timeline, you can have an overview of where the listener will sort of expect something to happen. Then you can play with that. Either you give the listener something where they expect it, or move it slightly to create a surprise.

The rule of thirds can also help in a few other aspect of your work:

  • Tonal balance: We covered this topic recently and this means splitting your song’s frequency range in three areas (low, mid, high). You can use a shelving EQ to help you with this or you could re-route your sounds into three busses that are per-band. This will allow you to control the tone using the mixer of your DAW. In this case, by simply splitting in 3 bands, you minimize the work of deciding which tone to take.
  • Sound design: We’ve discussed sound design before but I’d like to pinpoint how you can apply the rule here. For instance, think of how a kick is made. There will be the mid punch of the kick, supported by a bit (or a lot) of sub, then a transient on top. Most of my percussion are layered with three sounds. One will occupy most of the space, another will add add body, and the last one will be adding transients or texture. I also find that shuffling with three sounds often makes it difficult to get bored of a sound. The rule of thirds – where you have sound variations – pretty much always works for me. The question to ask is, is there a balance or is there a dominant?
  • Mixing: When I do a mixdown, I always have multiple categories for my sounds. Part of this is that – since I really don’t want all my sounds to be front forward – I’ll have some that are intentionally low, others in the middle, and the loudest one are the ones that are meant to be right in front of me. It’s very soothing for the ear to have these three areas of sound levels because it help creates dynamic range and creates an acoustic feeling of tangible spacing; putting some sounds in the back will give support to the ones who need to be heard. Just like sound design, if you always keep in mind that you’re layering in thirds, this can give your mixes a lot of depth.
  • 1, 2, PUNCH!  This is a technique that I’ve learned in my theater classes, consisting of creating expectations to then mess with the expectations. Basically, you want to introduce a fun sound, and in the pattern introduce it again later, but at the exact same place, then the listener will expect it to come a third time. This is where you can surprise them by either not playing the sound or by bringing something different. Simple, but very effective.
  • AUX/Sends. This might sound a bit much, but I limit myself to not use more than 3 aux/sends. I find that an overflow of effects will make your song messy and unnecessary busy. One of my starting templates has only three sends by default: reverb, delay, compression (or another sound modulation effect such as chorus).
  • Stereo spectrum. I like to see the placement of my sounds in a grid of 3 x 3 zones. It will go as: right, middle, left then, low middle and high. Some of the main sounds will have to be right in the middle (ex. clap, melody), some in the low-middle (ex, bass) and then some elements that are decorative, around. A healthy mix is sort of shaped like a tree: middle low should be strong with bass/kick, then middle left-right and middle-middle are strong too, then some content in the middle-high, with a little presence in the high left-right. You want to be very careful with the zones of low left or right as this could create phasing issues. You want your low end to be in mono, therefore, centered.

There are other examples, but these are the main ones that come to me!