TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Remixing very important

Remixing very important

Hey guys,

I thought, in stead of posting a question i would post soem info for a change.

I just started remixing existing tracks by Ti�sto and Paul van Dijk and found their is just so much to learn doing this it's ridiculous.

If you don't do it already start doing it and you'll see what I mean.

kind regards,

Charly Darwin

Re: Remixing very important

quote:

Originally posted by nhibberd Hey guys, I thought, in stead of posting a question i would post soem info for a change.

i look forward to it.

Re: Re: Remixing very important

quote:

Originally posted by thesuperfunk i look forward to it.

Geez can't a guy be open and honest about what he is learning withought someone who has already learnt it frowning upon him?

kind regards,

Charly Darwin

Re: Remixing very important

quote:

Originally posted by nhibberd I just started remixing existing tracks by Ti�sto and Paul van Dijk and found their is just so much to learn doing this it's ridiculous. If you don't do it already start doing it and you'll see what I mean. kind regards

Are you trying to say remixing is harder than making an original track?

I think the opposite, but yea I just remixed PVD and Tiesto was my last remix. Good luck on those projects sir

Well, it forces you to create a sound you already have in your head for one thing. One thing I did learn was that for a lead one synth is often not enough to get a propper sound down. For In My Memory I needed three synths playing the same sequence to get what I wanted. You know, the lead that it starts with.

kind regards,

Charly Darwin

quote:

Originally posted by nhibberd Well, it forces you to create a sound you already have in your head for one thing. One thing I did learn was that for a lead one synth is often not enough to get a propper sound down. For In My Memory I needed three synths playing the same sequence to get what I wanted. You know, the lead that it starts with. kind regards, Charly Darwin

That doesn't really make sense though, because instruments are just a combination of a bunch of oscillators and effects (and yes I understand that subtractors and such don't literally "add" the elements, but the principle is still the same).

Now, sometimes a lead or a synth may be more complicated - it may be a sample, not a synth at all (in which case PvD or Tiesto didn't "create" it either so it's a moot point) - or, it may involve some complex morphing stuff between several samples or synths, but I don't ever remember hearing that type of stuff in a track by PvD or Tiesto.

So, by no means am I criticizing you, but I think that in a way, you're missing the point. It doesn't matter if you're creating an original track or doing a remix, you will always have a certain sound in your head that you need to translate into an audible signal, and it is ALWAYS difficult. If you blast through your original tracks simply by screwing around until you get a sound you like, the tracks are not going to be very good - you have to *think* about your track first and know what you want. IMO, it's the same challenge doing your own or remixing someone else's.

Also, I realize that there are, for example, "remix competitions" on TA where they'll post a MIDI file and have people recreate everything else from scratch. But this particular version of a "remix" represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the term. Think about the word remix - it means mixing again, in a new and different way. By definition this means you already have the original elements, usually in the form of raw audio data that came from the original producer, and you are just cutting them up, rearranging them and adding some of your own elements. What you're talking about is not just a remix, but a reproduction of the track, which is an entirely different beast.

That's just my opinion, though. I thought the thread topic was a little trite so might as well open up a meaningful dialogue here.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut

sir, you know the score.

quote:

Originally posted by nhibberd Well, it forces you to create a sound you already have in your head for one thing. One thing I did learn was that for a lead one synth is often not enough to get a propper sound down. For In My Memory I needed three synths playing the same sequence to get what I wanted. You know, the lead that it starts with. kind regards, Charly Darwin

hmmm i think he is talking about the fatness and richness of a single synth...if so then you are correct to say a combination of three synths will give you a richer sound...but you will need to tweak each so you get some variety...

or you could mean that you have each synth playing lo, mids, and highs...that would work as well

btw...is charly darwin your real name? if so, that is freaking awesome

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut That doesn't really make sense though, because instruments are just a combination of a bunch of oscillators and effects (and yes I understand that subtractors and such don't literally "add" the elements, but the principle is still the same). Now, sometimes a lead or a synth may be more complicated - it may be a sample, not a synth at all (in which case PvD or Tiesto didn't "create" it either so it's a moot point) - or, it may involve some complex morphing stuff between several samples or synths, but I don't ever remember hearing that type of stuff in a track by PvD or Tiesto. So, by no means am I criticizing you, but I think that in a way, you're missing the point. It doesn't matter if you're creating an original track or doing a remix, you will always have a certain sound in your head that you need to translate into an audible signal, and it is ALWAYS difficult. If you blast through your original tracks simply by screwing around until you get a sound you like, the tracks are not going to be very good - you have to *think* about your track first and know what you want. IMO, it's the same challenge doing your own or remixing someone else's. Also, I realize that there are, for example, "remix competitions" on TA where they'll post a MIDI file and have people recreate everything else from scratch. But this particular version of a "remix" represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the term. Think about the word remix - it means mixing again, in a new and different way. By definition this means you already have the original elements, usually in the form of raw audio data that came from the original producer, and you are just cutting them up, rearranging them and adding some of your own elements. What you're talking about is not just a remix, but a reproduction of the track, which is an entirely different beast. That's just my opinion, though. I thought the thread topic was a little trite so might as well open up a meaningful dialogue here.

Thanks man,

no i'm not offended by anything you wrote. A guys has to learn somewhere right and I think their is a lot of good info in you thread. So, thanks. I did mean reproduction, got to get my therms straight. Maybe the point I was trying to make was that a single synth can be slighly limited at times and you would need more to create the right sound. Say if you would want a lead that was punchy bit still warm.

To be honest with you. Before not too long a while ago I just looked for a preset that sounded slighlty in the right direction and changed it a bit. But I just altered things here and their that I thought would make it sound better. I didn't have the complete sound already in my head.

With 'reproduction' you already have the sound you want and you need to recreate it. For me at least, don't know about other people.. this forces me to learn to engeneer a sound more. In stead of just going with something that just sounded good by co�ncidence.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut That doesn't really make sense though, because instruments are just a combination of a bunch of oscillators and effects (and yes I understand that subtractors and such don't literally "add" the elements, but the principle is still the same). Now, sometimes a lead or a synth may be more complicated - it may be a sample, not a synth at all (in which case PvD or Tiesto didn't "create" it either so it's a moot point) - or, it may involve some complex morphing stuff between several samples or synths, but I don't ever remember hearing that type of stuff in a track by PvD or Tiesto. So, by no means am I criticizing you, but I think that in a way, you're missing the point. It doesn't matter if you're creating an original track or doing a remix, you will always have a certain sound in your head that you need to translate into an audible signal, and it is ALWAYS difficult. If you blast through your original tracks simply by screwing around until you get a sound you like, the tracks are not going to be very good - you have to *think* about your track first and know what you want. IMO, it's the same challenge doing your own or remixing someone else's. Also, I realize that there are, for example, "remix competitions" on TA where they'll post a MIDI file and have people recreate everything else from scratch. But this particular version of a "remix" represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the term. Think about the word remix - it means mixing again, in a new and different way. By definition this means you already have the original elements, usually in the form of raw audio data that came from the original producer, and you are just cutting them up, rearranging them and adding some of your own elements. What you're talking about is not just a remix, but a reproduction of the track, which is an entirely different beast. That's just my opinion, though. I thought the thread topic was a little trite so might as well open up a meaningful dialogue here.

Thanks man,

no i'm not offended by anything you wrote. A guys has to learn somewhere right and I think their is a lot of good info in you thread. So, thanks. I did mean reproduction, got to get my therms straight. Maybe the point I was trying to make was that a single synth can be slighly limited at times and you would need more to create the right sound. Say if you would want a lead that was punchy bit still warm.

To be honest with you. Before not too long a while ago I just looked for a preset that sounded slighlty in the right direction and changed it a bit. But I just altered things here and their that I thought would make it sound better. I didn't have the complete sound already in my head.

With 'reproduction' you already have the sound you want and you need to recreate it. For me at least, don't know about other people.. this forces me to learn to engeneer a sound more. In stead of just going with something that just sounded good by co�ncidence.

quote:

Originally posted by qiushiming btw...is charly darwin your real name? if so, that is freaking awesome

No my name is Nick. But I liked Charly Darwin as artist name.

kind regards,

Nick

you're right, you often need > 1 synth to make a lead line.

what else have you learnt from remixing instead of producing original tunes? i'd like to get your wisdom but without the work

Haha, well I thought the whole idea of a forum like this was to learn stuff from eachother. I'm happy to share knowledge...

Well one thing I did learn was that tracks are usualy a bit longer than my usual 4 mins. Suppose they need to fit on a vinil at some stage and a DJ needs a bit of room to play when mixing it in.

kind regards,

Charly Darwin

DIGINUT

explain your post to me again if you would ...

or anyone ...

the exact difference between a remix and a reproduction ...

because Ive suddenly got a weird feeling what I think a remix is and what I think Ive been remixing, Ive just been reproducing ...

quote:

Originally posted by GreenLight DIGINUT explain your post to me again if you would ... or anyone ... the exact difference between a remix and a reproduction ... because Ive suddenly got a weird feeling what I think a remix is and what I think Ive been remixing, Ive just been reproducing ...

Remix: You have the original elements from the original track (either as rendered audio or the actual project data/presets/samples), and you put them together differently.

Reproduction: You have nothing, and you're trying to recreate the sound from a track you heard.

Remixes are much easier than reproductions, but they also tend to spark more creativity, because with a reproduction, too much time is often spent on just trying to recreate the original sound elements (whereas in a remix, the focus is really on warping and playing around with those sound elements).

Oh right,

So if you want to practice tweaking a synth then it would be a good thing to reproduce a track or two.

Charly Darwin

SWEET ! I got confused and thought my remixes were reproductions ... haha ... what was I thinking ? ... thanks for filling me in ...

quote:

Originally posted by nhibberd So if you want to practice tweaking a synth then it would be a good thing to reproduce a track or two.

Sure, if that's your thang. I prefer to spend my time making music as opposed to tweaking synths.

Wel being good at both would be important I reckon

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