TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Mixing while arranging
Pages (2): « 1 [2]
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Diginerd You're right it doesn't mater how it's done. But there is a world of difference between "Good" for you and your mates, and "Excellent, proven floor filler". |
Blablabla, no disrespect here, but I think some people think too much about making music. This is why they don't create anything near reasonable music (though my music sucks too).
Sometimes when I read posts, I get the idea music production is rocket science. Well, its not. Just be creative, and if you are, you will make good music eventually. I know some pro producers personally who create fantastic tunes, and sometimes I'm surprised of their lack of "knowledge". Many times I know more of certain techniques etc, so why are those guys better than me? Because they don't sit at production forums 50 hours a day, they don't read books about production. They are being creative and just make music. Don't fill your brain with useless knowledge, just make music.
Off topic here, but I think this needs to be said every now and then, sorry for that. You will probably think, who am I to say these things? Well I am nobody, so ignore me if you want.
@digi
Okay, look, I don't know why you're pushing this matter, but I'll resolve it in a moment with an example.
I really don't understand why someone as intelligent you would be making such blatant blanket statements as this; I understand your idea, and agree with it in general, but to stubbornly be so resolute and ignore all other possibilities? Seems silly, no?
First, I want to point out that for some reason you're assuming that I don't understand these basic concepts you're outlining; you obviously know that I know what mastering is, etc, and the different processes it involves, so I'm not sure why you're telling me to check up on "threads on it", when I've probably participated in them all. This doesn't make you seem any better than me, nor do you need to make any distinction like that, it doesn't work this way.
Second, just because it's your opinion does not mean it is universal, nor does its application in your work or even the work of the majority make it mandatory, more creative, or necessarily more efficient in any way.
Now, let's take an example of a time when the initial mixing of your tracks and the final mixing of your song are all integrally pulled together into one cohesive movement. Step back from the bubble for a moment and consider full-on Psytrance.
One of my favorite genres of "electronica". :grin: 
I'm not sure if you're ever written any psy, and I'm not going to assume either way, but just in case I will outline the very simple principle of the "foundation", as you say, of a fullon psy track, as well as the merging of "production theory" with "music theory".
Your low-end in a psy track has to be *perfect*, and the processing and mixing of the kick and bass signals have to be spot-on. It makes or breaks your track, and you *have* to build it from the bottom up with the mixing console providing half of the creative movement of the task, and thus a large scale portion of your entire track becomes based on the results of your ability to manage "music theory" and "production theory" simultaneously as you go. You need to mix it from the word go, and then you need to back it up with solid mixing throughout the track, else your song does not evolve.
Careful about making assumptions about other people and subjective enterprises; just because I don't pick apart every little detail of yours or someone elses post doesn't mean that I don't understand the concepts, because I assure you, I very well may and don't see a need to comment. And it doesn't mean that I don't have my own perspective, as do you, to throw into the conversation.
Take it as you will.
Oh, by the way, the notion that commerce supercedes art is not one I share.
PLUR,
jay
+1 for thois also; none of this is necessary to make good music, but it's still fun to talk about. this is our hobby afterall. aren't you glad you didn't take up knitting instead? i bet the knitting forums get pretty boring fast!! 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Thois Blablabla, no disrespect here, but I think some people think too much about making music. This is why they don't create anything near reasonable music (though my music sucks too). Sometimes when I read posts, I get the idea music production is rocket science. Well, its not. Just be creative, and if you are, you will make good music eventually. I know some pro producers personally who create fantastic tunes, and sometimes I'm surprised of their lack of "knowledge". Many times I know more of certain techniques etc, so why are those guys better than me? Because they don't sit at production forums 50 hours a day, they don't read books about production. They are being creative and just make music. Don't fill your brain with useless knowledge, just make music. Off topic here, but I think this needs to be said every now and then, sorry for that. You will probably think, who am I to say these things? Well I am nobody, so ignore me if you want. |
Oh boy.. Me dons Nomex underwear...
Mastering whilst mixing is dumb, and non-effective. That's not just my opinion. Ask around.
It's so dumb you actually said so yourself when backing up from "You can even MASTER when mixing", but you backed off and said it based on CPU power, not anything to do with the real reasons.
I didn't want to rehash for hours on end mastering in a thread about mixing and writing the pages disussed on mastering.
You got my goat right there with that. Real mastering is something that is vital that it's done right. It can turn a So So mix into a good one, and great mix into something stunning. Anyway, enough of that..
As for Writing & Mixing or Writing then Mixing, if you can do it to perfection then fine, but you seem closed to the idea to try it the otherway and see the benefits from it... You are fighting so hard against at least trying it it stikes me as you being closed and defensive.
I'm not saying totally ignore mixing as you go along, I'm saying once you are "Done" track the whole thing off and try rebuilding the song, this time concentrating on just the mix.
You'd be surprised.
You actually raised another interesting point. Where do you get your sound? Do you sit and make & sample each and every sound as you go along? Or do you build up a collection of them in advance with maybe a quick tweak to get it to fit? Or do you sit and stop and build something from scatch?
If you pre-build to keep your creative juices flowing then you're already starting to split up your production into stages.
A few points to end with:-
1) Half (actually usually more than half) the battle is getting decent sounds.
2) You have to be inspired by them when writing
3) The whole left brain right brain thing is a bugger.
4) Write Mix Release and be happy
5) Wide distribution of your music means releaseing records which involves commercialism at least at some level.
6) Knitting circles are vicious arenas of vice and inequity...
And if you hadn't guessed already I'm bored, and waiting to get my studio built out...
I haven't really considered the "pre-building" much. I like that idea and shall try to impliment it. Periods of mostly left-brain activity: synth programming, drum searching, effects building...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Diginerd Oh boy.. Me dons Nomex underwear... Mastering whilst mixing is dumb, and non-effective. That's not just my opinion. Ask around. |
I did. But you blew it the first two times.. Enough.
lmao this thread is turning hilarious now. Mastering while composing is dumb imo. It's pointless to start all your mastering plugins while arranging and all that junk because you're colouring the sound when it might not be THAT great yet. This is when EQing comes in handy, but if you already coloured your sound, then you don't get the original sound coming through do you?
Everyone has their own ways of starting a track and attempting to complete it and yes I do agree with Diginerd that you should have separate processes so you don't get stuck at one point such as trying to EQ your sound to get it "perfect."
My idea is concentrate on your arrangement, melodies, sounds(without effects), and maybe some automations and work on your effects processing such as flangers, phasers, filter automations, dynamics, crescendos and decrescendos afterwards. I like to think of everything like an orchestra. Composers such as Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven worked out masterpieces because they concentrated on being creative first, working on which sounds should be louder and softer during composing and even live just like a music conductor. Concentrating on your mix first is more important than adding your effects that can be put on whenever you please. You'll constantly be changing the mix so work on that first.
Write the music first, then add your final touch to it.
Wow.
I don't understand why everyone is talking about *mastering* while composing? That isn't what the thread is about. Seriously, am I not using the language properly to get across the idea in my head?
Are my examples and distinctions and retractions not making sense?
Tell me, what can I do to connect with you so that you understand what I'm trying to tell you?
What can I change about the way I'm presenting my information to make you better understand it? Where am I going wrong here?
Am I seriously the only one who sees that *NO ONE* is talking about *MASTERING WHILE COMPOSING*? It seems like you picked up this keyword and simply ignored everything else I had to say; there is NO discussion on mastering while composing.
Help me out here guys; I'm not an idiot, I will try my best to bend to your mindset to better help you understand where this conversation careened down a path of misinformation and off-topic rants.
lmao shibby we totally understand i just felt like putting my two cents in on the issue :P
I always mix (roughly) and arrange at the same time. I just can't seem to finish a track if I i try to do all the arranging/writing first. I get bored of the track when I get to the mixing part.
My production process usually goes like this:
1. Choose/create a kick
2. Write a bassline
3. Do 1 and 2 again until they sound good together, this includes EQing and compressing them, adding delays to the bass etc.
4. Create the percussion
5. Start to arrange the build up until the breakdown.
6. Write synth lines and pads, create synth patches.
7. Create FX, sweeps and other stuff.
8. Write the main melody
9. Arrange the rest of the track.
10. Fine tune the mix, adjust levels, EQ...
I don't really master my own tracks, other than throw some light maximizing/limiting on the mixdown to give it more punch.
I'm not saying this is the best way to do it. But it works for me.
I won't change my way of working just because everyone else in the industry does it a specific way.
So what does "master" mean?
Is the same as when Big Dave makes me call him master at the Happy Man's Leather Club over in big town?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Shibby Perhaps the suggestion to mix after arranging was given by someone in a different era? In 2006, if you buy a new PC, you can even MASTER while arranging! |
Shibby, but THEN I realized you were being sorta sarcastic.
I tried highlighting the important points.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJFreaq I got it, and I lol'd. At first I was like Shibby, but THEN I realized you were being sorta sarcastic.We have to all write a great new DAW. We'll call it "Gold Button" It will only have one button when you load the program, and it will compose, arrange, mix, and master an entire track! --- Back on topic: I am working on a project right now. Where I'm going to do my intensive mixing after the fact. Shibby, personally one of my favorite sub-genres of electronic music is Psy, so I do spend LOTS of technical time during composing to get the kick and bass feeling just right. But aside from that... I still tend to do all my mixing after the track is arranged. But it's a hard habit of new "producers" like myself, having been born in the age of computers, to shake myself of just "doing it all in one go." I have SO many unfinished projects, simply because I lost the creative juice train. I lost it! Because I kept getting buggered out about the mixing. I'm serious. I'm looking at my Nuendo projects, my Reason projects, and my Acid projects and there's like in total 40 projects or so (with actual "meat" in them) that never got finished. So recently, as I said above, I'm really trying to separate the fun part of music creation from the different-sort-of-fun part (mixing): 1. Fun = Composing & Arranging 2. Fun = Arranging & Creative Mixing (Crazy panning and make bass sounds hot) 3. Different Fun = Intensive Mixing 4. Not Really Fun = Mastering (and at this point I give it to someone else to do) Because when it comes right down to it. Unless you're really good with making sure while you're mixing you're also doing some comparative listening, you will by BIASED by the time you're done mixing. So it's GENERALLY always better to have someone else master your track. --- *Read all of this before you knee-jerk-reply* Oh and to some of the people in this thread going on about "OH you're complicating things mannnnnnn, it's about the music, mannnnnnn." Grow up you fucking hippies. lol. (I just wanted to say "fucking hippies" no offense meant) Because in the real world of music production, generally, hippies don't make the cheddar, don't see success, and basically don't make good music. Sure they "feel" the music, and are "connecting" to some kind of vibe. But I don't know about you, but as much as I "feel" my music. I WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO OTHER PEOPLE! Because I want other people to feel my music, and it's a good feeling when people come up to you and go "wow that was really a good song, good job." EVERYONE LIKES THAT FEELING. Otherwise you wouldn't create art in the first place. You think your own art is just about you? And the way it makes just YOU feel. Then why would play your music for other people? And I know some people will say to me: "Jeeze, that DJFreaq kid, damn what a retard, srsly" Now I know I'm still young relatively (20 yrs) and I have no real experience in the music business. But I've been going to the Art Institute of Seattle for about 2 years now, and I've seen this argument too many times. It happens between students, and it happens between students and teachers. And it's an interesting dynamic. Mainly because some of the teachers are washed up engineers that had limited success, and some are engineers that were/ARE successful. But both those types of teachers have the same argument. Hippies never win. And I guess this comes down to separating, what's a hobby, and what's an obsession. Because if it's a hobby to you, then arguments like--"Oh you're complicating it, it's about the music"--make sense. And in essence it IS about the music. That's why I'm obsessed with it. That's why I like being creative. But that doesn't mean I loose sight of tried and true methods for creating good polished pieces of art that everyone can enjoy. WOW. Excuse the rant. I need to boil that down sometime into some more coherent thoughts. K. I tried highlighting the important points.EDIT: This is an interesting side-thought, its not original, and I it's a very common occurance. Why not make a team effort on creating a track? Thios was saying "Oh just be creative, and one day you'll make awesome stuff." That is WRONG by itself. And then other people like Deriv is saying "You HAVE to be technical and MIX MIX after your arrange compose." And that is SORT of wrong by itself. Shit. Just make music with a partner. That essentially what you're doing with a ROCK BAND + RECORDING ENGINEER. Some of the best electronic music acts out there are duos. One guy can be retarded about technical mixing aspects, and just make good sounding tunes, and the other dude can be still pretty creative, but more focused on mixing the track. My friend Vadim and I are doing that right now. And it works pretty well. Anyway, I haven't eaten breakfast and I'm starting to rant again. Fuck. I might just delete this post. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJFreaq I got it, and I lol'd. At first I was like Shibby, but THEN I realized you were being sorta sarcastic.We have to all write a great new DAW. We'll call it "Gold Button" It will only have one button when you load the program, and it will compose, arrange, mix, and master an entire track! --- Back on topic: I am working on a project right now. Where I'm going to do my intensive mixing after the fact. Shibby, personally one of my favorite sub-genres of electronic music is Psy, so I do spend LOTS of technical time during composing to get the kick and bass feeling just right. But aside from that... I still tend to do all my mixing after the track is arranged. But it's a hard habit of new "producers" like myself, having been born in the age of computers, to shake myself of just "doing it all in one go." I have SO many unfinished projects, simply because I lost the creative juice train. I lost it! Because I kept getting buggered out about the mixing. I'm serious. I'm looking at my Nuendo projects, my Reason projects, and my Acid projects and there's like in total 40 projects or so (with actual "meat" in them) that never got finished. So recently, as I said above, I'm really trying to separate the fun part of music creation from the different-sort-of-fun part (mixing): 1. Fun = Composing & Arranging 2. Fun = Arranging & Creative Mixing (Crazy panning and make bass sounds hot) 3. Different Fun = Intensive Mixing 4. Not Really Fun = Mastering (and at this point I give it to someone else to do) Because when it comes right down to it. Unless you're really good with making sure while you're mixing you're also doing some comparative listening, you will by BIASED by the time you're done mixing. So it's GENERALLY always better to have someone else master your track. --- *Read all of this before you knee-jerk-reply* Oh and to some of the people in this thread going on about "OH you're complicating things mannnnnnn, it's about the music, mannnnnnn." Grow up you fucking hippies. lol. (I just wanted to say "fucking hippies" no offense meant) Because in the real world of music production, generally, hippies don't make the cheddar, don't see success, and basically don't make good music. Sure they "feel" the music, and are "connecting" to some kind of vibe. But I don't know about you, but as much as I "feel" my music. I WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO OTHER PEOPLE! Because I want other people to feel my music, and it's a good feeling when people come up to you and go "wow that was really a good song, good job." EVERYONE LIKES THAT FEELING. Otherwise you wouldn't create art in the first place. You think your own art is just about you? And the way it makes just YOU feel. Then why would play your music for other people? And I know some people will say to me: "Jeeze, that DJFreaq kid, damn what a retard, srsly" Now I know I'm still young relatively (20 yrs) and I have no real experience in the music business. But I've been going to the Art Institute of Seattle for about 2 years now, and I've seen this argument too many times. It happens between students, and it happens between students and teachers. And it's an interesting dynamic. Mainly because some of the teachers are washed up engineers that had limited success, and some are engineers that were/ARE successful. But both those types of teachers have the same argument. Hippies never win. And I guess this comes down to separating, what's a hobby, and what's an obsession. Because if it's a hobby to you, then arguments like--"Oh you're complicating it, it's about the music"--make sense. And in essence it IS about the music. That's why I'm obsessed with it. That's why I like being creative. But that doesn't mean I loose sight of tried and true methods for creating good polished pieces of art that everyone can enjoy. WOW. Excuse the rant. I need to boil that down sometime into some more coherent thoughts. K. I tried highlighting the important points.EDIT: This is an interesting side-thought, its not original, and I it's a very common occurance. Why not make a team effort on creating a track? Thios was saying "Oh just be creative, and one day you'll make awesome stuff." That is WRONG by itself. And then other people like Deriv is saying "You HAVE to be technical and MIX MIX after your arrange compose." And that is SORT of wrong by itself. Shit. Just make music with a partner. That essentially what you're doing with a ROCK BAND + RECORDING ENGINEER. Some of the best electronic music acts out there are duos. One guy can be retarded about technical mixing aspects, and just make good sounding tunes, and the other dude can be still pretty creative, but more focused on mixing the track. My friend Vadim and I are doing that right now. And it works pretty well. Anyway, I haven't eaten breakfast and I'm starting to rant again. Fuck. I might just delete this post. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJFreaq I got it, and I lol'd. At first I was like Shibby, but THEN I realized you were being sorta sarcastic.We have to all write a great new DAW. We'll call it "Gold Button" It will only have one button when you load the program, and it will compose, arrange, mix, and master an entire track! --- Back on topic: I am working on a project right now. Where I'm going to do my intensive mixing after the fact. Shibby, personally one of my favorite sub-genres of electronic music is Psy, so I do spend LOTS of technical time during composing to get the kick and bass feeling just right. But aside from that... I still tend to do all my mixing after the track is arranged. But it's a hard habit of new "producers" like myself, having been born in the age of computers, to shake myself of just "doing it all in one go." I have SO many unfinished projects, simply because I lost the creative juice train. I lost it! Because I kept getting buggered out about the mixing. I'm serious. I'm looking at my Nuendo projects, my Reason projects, and my Acid projects and there's like in total 40 projects or so (with actual "meat" in them) that never got finished. So recently, as I said above, I'm really trying to separate the fun part of music creation from the different-sort-of-fun part (mixing): 1. Fun = Composing & Arranging 2. Fun = Arranging & Creative Mixing (Crazy panning and make bass sounds hot) 3. Different Fun = Intensive Mixing 4. Not Really Fun = Mastering (and at this point I give it to someone else to do) Because when it comes right down to it. Unless you're really good with making sure while you're mixing you're also doing some comparative listening, you will by BIASED by the time you're done mixing. So it's GENERALLY always better to have someone else master your track. --- *Read all of this before you knee-jerk-reply* Oh and to some of the people in this thread going on about "OH you're complicating things mannnnnnn, it's about the music, mannnnnnn." Grow up you fucking hippies. lol. (I just wanted to say "fucking hippies" no offense meant) Because in the real world of music production, generally, hippies don't make the cheddar, don't see success, and basically don't make good music. Sure they "feel" the music, and are "connecting" to some kind of vibe. But I don't know about you, but as much as I "feel" my music. I WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO OTHER PEOPLE! Because I want other people to feel my music, and it's a good feeling when people come up to you and go "wow that was really a good song, good job." EVERYONE LIKES THAT FEELING. Otherwise you wouldn't create art in the first place. You think your own art is just about you? And the way it makes just YOU feel. Then why would play your music for other people? And I know some people will say to me: "Jeeze, that DJFreaq kid, damn what a retard, srsly" Now I know I'm still young relatively (20 yrs) and I have no real experience in the music business. But I've been going to the Art Institute of Seattle for about 2 years now, and I've seen this argument too many times. It happens between students, and it happens between students and teachers. And it's an interesting dynamic. Mainly because some of the teachers are washed up engineers that had limited success, and some are engineers that were/ARE successful. But both those types of teachers have the same argument. Hippies never win. And I guess this comes down to separating, what's a hobby, and what's an obsession. Because if it's a hobby to you, then arguments like--"Oh you're complicating it, it's about the music"--make sense. And in essence it IS about the music. That's why I'm obsessed with it. That's why I like being creative. But that doesn't mean I loose sight of tried and true methods for creating good polished pieces of art that everyone can enjoy. WOW. Excuse the rant. I need to boil that down sometime into some more coherent thoughts. K. I tried highlighting the important points.EDIT: This is an interesting side-thought, its not original, and I it's a very common occurance. Why not make a team effort on creating a track? Thios was saying "Oh just be creative, and one day you'll make awesome stuff." That is WRONG by itself. And then other people like Deriv is saying "You HAVE to be technical and MIX MIX after your arrange compose." And that is SORT of wrong by itself. Shit. Just make music with a partner. That essentially what you're doing with a ROCK BAND + RECORDING ENGINEER. Some of the best electronic music acts out there are duos. One guy can be retarded about technical mixing aspects, and just make good sounding tunes, and the other dude can be still pretty creative, but more focused on mixing the track. My friend Vadim and I are doing that right now. And it works pretty well. Anyway, I haven't eaten breakfast and I'm starting to rant again. Fuck. I might just delete this post. |
+1
Note to self.. Posting on forums when you have a sore back makes you grouchy..
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.