TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- What the easiest EDM genre to produce?
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle thats a very stupid thing to say... of course there are differences! you can produce a trance track with no understanding of recording, no knowledge of any kind of synthesis other than subtractive, perhaps not even that. when talking about genres on a whole, some are alot more complicated that others, that is pretty obvious. i would say the easiest in my experience and personally for me so far would be the typical trance sound that is so common these days. it doesnt take a huge amount of effort or skill to cook up a basic trance record. in my experience anyway

Well sure, you can produce a track with no understanding of recording, synthesis etc. but it'll sound awful. Hell, anyone can produce anything if you're going with that analogy... but that's not really the point, now is it? Who'd want to listen to that.

But the production in itself really doesn't differ between genres - the ideas do. And coming up with the ideas is the hardest part of producing. If you know your production tools well (if you're a good producer) you can create whatever you want... as long as you have the ideas.

That is why there is no "easier" or "harder" genres to produce.

Mystery, let's learn a bit about each other. People that say this:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery I can't say I really give a shit

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery make me sick.

^

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle to be fair, that was quite hypocritical. you are quite often posting copletely pointless replies to peoples quite reasonable comments or questions. like in this thread for example. why bother?

Don't even start, it doesn't concern you in the slightest. At least when I post something it's on topic.

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol Mystery, let's learn a bit about each other.

Ahh, people who don't care about you make you sick. So your only motive is to get attention?

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Don't even start, it doesn't concern you in the slightest. At least when I post something it's on topic.

Actually it does concern him, because it affected him. Welcome to the world of public speaking

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle to be fair, that was quite hypocritical. you are quite often posting copletely pointless replies to peoples quite reasonable comments or questions. like in this thread for example. why bother?

mike, for the sake of your good name on this website, turn your computer off NOW.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Don't even start, it doesn't concern you in the slightest. At least when I post something it's on topic.

lol. i just think its unnessesary how miserable you always are, there is no need for it.

Actually it does concern him, because it affected him. Welcome to the world of public speaking

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Ahh, people who don't care about you make you sick. So your only motive is to get attention?

ROFL I have no idea where you got that assumption

Try to stop bashing and think about what you're saying and you'll get it

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol Actually it does concern him, because it affected him. Welcome to the world of public speaking

That is exactly why I said that if you have a problem with me you should PM me instead of starting shit-slinging fests.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle lol. i just think you its unnessesary how miserable you always are, there is no need for it.

Please stop making ridiculous generalisations. You have only read about 5% of my posts.

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol ROFL I have no idea where you got that assumption Try to stop bashing and think about what you're saying and you'll get it

You just said it there. What other motive would you have in making this a public conversation?

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery That is exactly why I said that if you have a problem with me you should PM me instead of starting shit-slinging fests.

Afraid of being humiliated? Reputations are tools that skill lacking people use to look awesome

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Well sure, you can produce a track with no understanding of recording, synthesis etc. but it'll sound awful. Hell, anyone can produce anything if you're going with that analogy... but that's not really the point, now is it? Who'd want to listen to that. But the production in itself really doesn't differ between genres - the ideas do. And coming up with the ideas is the hardest part of producing. If you know your production tools well (if you're a good producer) you can create whatever you want... as long as you have the ideas. That is why there is no "easier" or "harder" genres to produce.

i have to say i still disagree. not all electronic music is made with a sequencer, alot is performed live (for example)... sure there are alot of similarities but it is certainly not as black and white as "the technique is the same its just the ideas that are different"... different genres require strengths in different areas to others. the initial question was "what is easier to produce". to your average jo with little experience, some genres of electronic music are alot harder to produce than others, its as simple as that.

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol Afraid of being humiliated? Reputations are tools that skill lacking people use to look awesome

Humiliated? Reputations? What the hell are you talking about?

The only person humiliating himself here is you. Just let go man, you're turning this thread to something completely else than what it was supposed to be (which is what I predicted some time ago, surprisingly).

I haven't seen you comment anything that was actually on topic yet...

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery There's no difference in the actual production procedure, no matter what you do. The only difference is in the execution of the ideas.

true, but there are different degrees of difficulty with producing something to (what is generally considered) an acceptable level of quality

like i'd imagine that producing a trance tune for today's scene would be technically harder than say, a techno piece (in most cases... trance & techno are broad terms). since modern trance tends to be polished as fuck & contains lots of layers which all have to be balanced perfectly in the mix... alot of techno can get away with being rougher & raw

though i'm taking from a technical point of view. like i said in creative terms, epic trance is probably one of the easiest since you have the basic formula layed out for you already

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Humiliated? Reputations? What the hell are you talking about? The only person humiliating himself here is you. Just let go man, you're turning this thread to something completely else than what it was supposed to be (which is what I predicted some time ago, surprisingly). I haven't seen you comment anything that was actually on topic yet...

Look in the first post I made

Since when do you care about threads? The first thing you said was how retarded this thread was.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle i have to say i still disagree. not all electronic music is made with a sequencer, alot is performed live (for example)... sure there are alot of similarities but it is certainly not as black and white as "the technique is the same its just the ideas that are different"... different genres require strengths in different areas to others. the initial question was "what is easier to produce". to your average jo with little experience, some genres of electronic music are alot harder to produce than others, its as simple as that.

Sure, but like you said it's not black and white. What's hard to one producer is easy to another and vice versa. That's why there's no right answer to the original question either.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle i would say technically its one of the easiest as well. you can pack a trance track full of lots of little sounds until it sounds full.. if its not quite there yet you can throw in some other random little synth or whatever. what IS difficult is making a track with alot less sounds, which still sounds full. becasue each sound has to fit perfectly in the mix.

i guess you could view it like that also... but still stand by my last post. guess it varies from case to case

quote:

Originally posted by isoterra true, but there are different degrees of difficulty with producing something to (what is generally considered) an acceptable level of quality

i think id agree with that!

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Sure, but like you said it's not black and white. What's hard to one producer is easy to another and vice versa. That's why there's no right answer to the original question either.

ok so there is no right answer, but people will have opinions on the matter, like i did. and like many other people here did. i dont see the need to call the original poster an idiot. thats all.

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol Look in the first post I made Since when do you care about threads? The first thing you said was how retarded this thread was.

No I didn't. I said the question was silly since there really is no right answer to it. It's a bit like asking for an absolute truth to "best track" etc. since there's no absolute answer to that either.

However, we did get a decent discussion going (no thanks to you) and therefore think this thread could actually be salvageable.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle ok so there is no right answer, but people will have opinions on the matter, like i did. and like many other people here did. i dont see the need to call the original poster an idiot. thats all.

I didn't call him idiotic, I said the question was. Might have been a wrong choice of words, I'll admit that.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery No I didn't. I said the question was silly since there really is no right answer to it. It's a bit like asking for an absolute truth to "best track" etc. since there's no absolute answer to that either. However, we did get a decent discussion going (no thanks to you) and therefore think this thread could actually be salvageable.

So you're saying you made this better by cutting down the threadstarter?

quote:

Originally posted by iammesol So you're saying you made this better by cutting down the threadstarter?

Now where did I say that?

If you're gonna' play dumb, then forget I said anything

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery I didn't call him idiotic, I said the question was. Might have been a wrong choice of words, I'll admit that.

ok well at least u can see how it might have been taken the wrong way. generally by saying that someones question is idiotic, you are implying that you would have to be an idiot to ask it, hence indirectly calling the guy an idiot. but hey, never mind

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.