TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Less is more!?

Less is more!?

Less is more!?
Is Less is more talking about what song your working on?
or dose
Less is more talking about what gear you have in the studio?
What tha hell dose less is more mean?
Happy new year!

....whut?

Well, it cant be in regards to studio, because everyone knows the quality of your tunes directly correlates with how much money you've spent on gear.....

alot of newbs cram their tracks with layers and layers of shit to try and make it sound better. this is bad, instead you should have less elements, but make sure they are really good. for example, back in the old days i used to put tonnes of "background" drum loops in my songs, because it makes the percussion sound more full... but this is crap. these days i'll use a very simple kit and pan and compress stuff better, to get the same effect.

in regards to tools, the general idea is to have a few good ones and learn them inside out, rather than have tonnes of synths etc and just whore the presets.

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm alot of newbs cram their tracks with layers and layers of shit to try and make it sound better. this is bad, instead you should have less elements, but make sure they are really good. for example, back in the old days i used to put tonnes of "background" drum loops in my songs, because it makes the percussion sound more full... but this is crap. these days i'll use a very simple kit and pan and compress stuff better, to get the same effect. in regards to tools, the general idea is to have a few good ones and learn them inside out, rather than have tonnes of synths etc and just whore the presets.

I don't see a problem with using a lot of layers to make music.

quote:

Originally posted by meDina I don't see a problem with using a lot of layers to make music.

+1. It just leaves you with two different types of songs.

quote:

Originally posted by echosystm alot of newbs cram their tracks with layers and layers of shit to try and make it sound better. this is bad, instead you should have less elements, but make sure they are really good. for example, back in the old days i used to put tonnes of "background" drum loops in my songs, because it makes the percussion sound more full... but this is crap. these days i'll use a very simple kit and pan and compress stuff better, to get the same effect. in regards to tools, the general idea is to have a few good ones and learn them inside out, rather than have tonnes of synths etc and just whore the presets.

yeah i also don't see the harm in using multi layers, i like to make uplifting and that genre is packed fulll of FX and background sounds. the new tracks that are coming out these dats seem to be replacing the "saw" with the pluck. i still think this sounds great and as long as producers keep making rocking uplifting riffs, I'm IN !!

quote:

Originally posted by pwnage1 +1. It just leaves you with two different types of songs.

when i make beats i offten like to use a pluck synth for chord melody, and then start to layer the saw melody over it. from the first time i tried it i loved it.

so yes technically, yes you are using layers of synths whitch can get heavy very quick. Almost a classic of mine is to layer the pluck with a saw, even a mellow one , just to give it that extra "flying feeling"

But I also agree on "over producing"/ Re-working a song until the end, you can kill the life out of a song by trying to much. I honestly think it soundls like nervousness when you feel you need to add so much to a track just beacuase you aren't 100% about it yet, I have offten feel for this one, i feel i need to step the song up every 16 measures, and have a fill every 8.

Less is more because u can get away with using very few elements in a track.

10 Great sounding layers will sound better than 20 Good sounding layers.

Ive used as much as 50 layers in some of my tracks, and as little as 15-20

imo "less is more" is not something you can say as a general rule.
There are no rules. Only in certain instances will "less be more".



But I obviously understand that some people use too much reverb, too much compression etc.
I myself tend to put too much reverb on, because I personally think it sounds cool.
It can sometimes stuff the mix up badly. Trial and error.

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle Less is more because u can get away with using very few elements in a track. 10 Great sounding layers will sound better than 20 Good sounding layers. Ive used as much as 50 layers in some of my tracks, and as little as 15-20

It's better to use 20 layers that sound good solo and great together than 10 layers that sound great solo and good together.

quote:

Originally posted by Beyer imo "less is more" is not something you can say as a general rule. There are no rules. Only in certain instances will "less be more"

+1
Like many other things, the "less is more" bit is just another thing to keep in mind.

Comes down to taste, I think. Personally I love the "spare" quality of a lot of older tracks with maybe ten to twenty layers. They feel like they have more breathing room, more "space" in them. A lot of new stuff feels really "noisy" to me, a quality exaggerated by the fact that lots of people put a compressor on everything.

But that's just me. I know plenty of people who prefer the heavily-layered, more compressed style.

I have definitely found that less is more when it comes to the equipment I use, though. If I allow myself to use just one or two pieces of kit, I can almost guarantee I'll be more creative than if I let myself casually scroll through lots of different synths.

quote:

Originally posted by pwnage1 It's better to use 20 layers that sound good solo and great together than 10 layers that sound great solo and good together.

Definitely, alot of layers can add more depth to a track.. having depth in a track is very important for a track to last longer.
Atleast for home listeners.

Im a less is more man when i started i used to ram with shite and as i have progressed I have thinned out my mixes and they getting thinner layer wise but fuller in qualiy wise and people are saying they prefer my new stuff to old. Also whenever you feedback on tunes in producers forum 1st time posters usually ram with stuff and experienced people generally dont.

Most of armin a state of trance album is sparse songs with great sounding melodies or at least the on the beach cd is

If you are bad at making music then your songs will suck regardless of how simple or complex you try to make them. There are no magical rules. A complex track is not necessarily bad and a simple track is not necessarily good.

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle Definitely, alot of layers can add more depth to a track.. having depth in a track is very important for a track to last longer. Atleast for home listeners.

I disagree. The tracks I listen to most at home are things like salt tank and chicane, which are fairly minimal in a lot of cases. My main gripe with most modern trance is all the fluff that talentless producers pack in. You especially hear it with a lot of anjunabeats tracks released in the last year or so. Theres not much melody going on, but its not going on over about 10 layers of pads. Then they try to pass it off as uplifting
Less is definately more. Adding more layers to an already good track will spoil it 9/10 times.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips I disagree. The tracks I listen to most at home are things like salt tank and chicane, which are fairly minimal in a lot of cases. My main gripe with most modern trance is all the fluff that talentless producers pack in. You especially hear it with a lot of anjunabeats tracks released in the last year or so. Theres not much melody going on, but its not going on over about 10 layers of pads. Then they try to pass it off as uplifting Less is definately more. Adding more layers to an already good track will spoil it 9/10 times.

Depth doesnt mean alot of layers, it just means that there is more behind the tune than that catches the ear.

Salt Tank and Chicane are fairly minimal but there are alot of depth to those tracks as well.

Like panning a percussion instrument or an effect left to right can really do the trick.

I think that it is a problem with modern trance that songs are getting one main lead melody and then several background plucks and too many pads. I think that songs with lots of layered sounds that take up a similar amount in mix and there isnt really a main lead going on is really cool. I haven't heard this much in trance and this is what i want to eventually be able to produce.

I also like as JBJ was saying the old school 20 layers type thing this is also something i like and i want to produce trance like this also.

The problem with trance now i think is more the idea of one lead and 50 plucks playing chords or arps in the background. As well as the obvious buildup breakdown structure.

I am really tired and had to rush that so it might not have made much sense.

quote:

Originally posted by pwnage1 I think that songs with lots of layered sounds that take up a similar amount in mix and there isnt really a main lead going on is really cool.

Like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGfmTTEZh-c

sometimes it just gets too little u know? u loose the groove and everything beacuse its simply lacking enough elements.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGfmTTEZh-c

Yeah thats a pretty cool song this is what trance was meant to be.

Edit: I am not trying to say that songs with background melodies aren't real trance. Background melodies can sometimes add something but its just now i find that every trance song uses too many and they are all the same chord pluck patterns. So i think thats what you guys mean by less is more don't add stupid boring melodies in the background.

The main thing i am trying to do with my trance music is give it a different structure than that in most of todays trance. I like to fade in and out of melodies and revisit them or variations of them later, or as i talked about earlier layering sounds all taking up the about the same amount in a mix.

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