TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Good Energy Control
Good Energy Control
Boom Jinx touched on this aspect of energy control, and I'm here to elaborate on it a bit more so it makes more sense.
You can read the original article here:http://www.facebook.com/boomjinxofficial?sk=notes
The amount of energy that a track gives off is controlled by the perceived loudness. The lows, mids, and high frequencies all contribute to this sense of energy, but not each band has the same weight. The low band is typically very steady in dance music so other than turning a kick or bassline on and off, it doesn't have a grand effect. Of the three bands, the low band can be sacrifice the most easily with the least amount of damage to the perception of the energy of the track. The low mids, 250 Hz - 2k,are the second least important, and finally the upper mids and highs(2k-6k and 6k+) are the most important.
It's important to be able to listen for this aspect of music, and before going further I'll tell you how to do so more easily. Most of the time in a track is spent making relatively incremental changes, so a track that goes from a level of 1 to a level of 10 might not be readily apparently if the track is 10 minutes long. The easiest way to hear these changes is to load the track into your DAW, place markers in front of all of the major sections and maybe 1 or 2 within each section, and then rapidly switch between them only listening a few seconds. Making this rapid change will allow you to get a better overall profile of the track and how it changes.
Have a listen to three short samples from each of the three major section in Pryda's "Niton."
Good Energy Control by Good Energy Control
Notice how the second section has a slight energy boost with the extra hat, and then the track bumps it up a few notches in the final section that really goes all out with vocals, a new lead, and new layering.
The general rule of thumb for good energy control is: the track must ascend until its peak, where it then winds down. The peak of the track should happen in the last third of the track. When the peak is reached, it might plateau for a little while and then it will descend. If energy control was expressed via a line over time, it would not necessarily be straight. Dropping the energy during parts of the track is perfectly normal. However, the general trend should be upward, not downward or flat-lining.
Of all of the less than stellar tracks that I have heard, amateur and professional alike, poor energy control is really one of the hallmarks. Good energy control is a constant hallmark of a great dance track. People like Deadmau5, Pryda, and SHM really get this aspect of dance music, especially Eric Prydz and SHM.
One exception to the rule of thumb are some pop dance tunes(Prydz's "Call on Me"), the chorus might actually just repeat itself verbatim. Despite the exception, three minutes pop dance tunes are still can and do follow this rising energy template like Benny Benassi's "Satisfaction."
Recommended listening for good energy control:
This track is just brilliant:
this is basically a discussion on form and scot project is one of the best in this regard. One of the few guys that uses motives, uses coherent forms that aren't just ABA like 99% of the producers out there.
Arguru remains my favourite progressive house track of all time.
Thanks for the read. One of the actually more useful threads than a lot of "how to get this sound" or "what should I buy" threads
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Looney4Clooney this is basically a discussion on form and scot project is one of the best in this regard. One of the few guys that uses motives, uses coherent forms that aren't just ABA like 99% of the producers out there. |
Nice piece, Beatflux.
Quality post.
Part of my challenge in completing a quality track is getting this concept down. It's not only the energy levels that I need to constantly be aware of, but also the timing of the tension and release.
Found this video tutorial on tension for any beginners looking at this thread. Very basic explanations but guy has a good perspective on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D180XXa8m4s
okay, so I had to upload a track (and share it) because I need some advice on this "energy control" your talking about. What about this? Is the energy controlled enough? Is it (meaning energy) channeled correctly?
Virtual Reality (Original Mix) by DJRYAN�
nope.
that is just one monotone passage with no dynamics / energy control what so ever.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJRYAN� okay, so I had to upload a track (and share it) because I need some advice on this "energy control" your talking about. What about this? Is the energy controlled enough? Is it (meaning energy) channeled correctly? Virtual Reality (Original Mix) by DJRYAN� |
Track is flat-lining(bad energy control):
Good energy control with the track ascending and peaking near the very end:
you have two things at work here. Not only does the arrangement contribute to the energy but use of implied time signature change going from 6/8 to 4/4 increasing energy. You have 3 different plateaus. One of the best dance tracks ever made.
Another great example of just taking things to new levels never getting redundant.
Not such an obvious choice, but I've always thought this was great example of a track which just continues to build and build:
Ok so it sounds fairly dated now and the vocal's fairly silly, but every main section adds more than the one before it. There are 3 'main' leads, each one sounds like it's going to be 'it' when it first arrives, plus the vocal:-
2:24 - bouncy pluck
2:50 - the pad in the backround takes over
3:00 - arpeggiated lead which has been kicking around in the background comes to the front for the next main section at 3:20
But at 3:20 it's just the arpeggiated lead, leaving it space to build further
At 6:00 they're all there with the vocal for more energy, but again they fade so prominence shifts from pluck -> pad -> arpeggio
Once the wailing gets out of the way at 7:00, the breakdown there's absolutely inspired in my opinion, stripping everything away and using its own little guitar motif, which allows a big build into all 3 lead sounds again, full-force at 8:45.
Then a final clever trick at 9:00 - the arpeggio fades away, the pad gets brighter and then changes to a stab, playing some of the notes of the arpeggio for yet another variation which uses the pad's brightness to give more energy than the section before.
[/massive over-analysis]
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Beatflux Good energy control with the track ascending and peaking near the very end: |
you can also use harmony to achieve a boost in harmony.
The trick i use in the main build of this track which is also the drop is a secondary dominant which leads to the relative major of the key sort of kicking it into overdrive. Also strategic placement of the clap, yep just the clap will add energy. A groove can be completely useless and then you add that backbeat ( what muscians call a snare on 2 and 4 ) , it just gives the groove purpose and adds energy.
in this track you have constant builds which go to sections, then it breaks down, a 303 section, then more build, then a section that introduces the supersaw lead. And then finally when everything comes in you have the harmonic manipulation that takes it one step further.
Sort of like when pop albums modulate 1 key up. Not that all songs have to be one giant cock tease but I was making edm in the early 2000 and my main influence was scot project who was the best at building intensity.
http://www.divshare.com/download/16014944-9f5
another old tune of mine
http://www.divshare.com/download/16015038-b11
one big crescendo but you have 2 subjections, then a break with a huge bassline that comes from nowhere but ends up tying everything together.
I think looking back, i just had mini sections that would each sort of build , a break section, then a massive build in contrast that would then bring back everything. Basically a bunch of plateaus with the highest being the main drop.
I never made filler tracks and each one was made to be the hard hitter that you always played the entire track. Which is sometimes a bad thing as tracks like this don't leave the dj many options. Tracks that don't really have a form are easier to mix in and out of. tracks like the last two I posted would sound stupid without hearing the whole track.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by skyhunter OH MY GOD.... ahhhh not that song! But yea he's right, the track actually grows into something.. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Stu Cox Not such an obvious choice, but I've always thought this was great example of a track which just continues to build and build: Ok so it sounds fairly dated now and the vocal's fairly silly, but every main section adds more than the one before it. There are 3 'main' leads, each one sounds like it's going to be 'it' when it first arrives, plus the vocal:- 2:24 - bouncy pluck 2:50 - the pad in the backround takes over 3:00 - arpeggiated lead which has been kicking around in the background comes to the front for the next main section at 3:20 But at 3:20 it's just the arpeggiated lead, leaving it space to build further At 6:00 they're all there with the vocal for more energy, but again they fade so prominence shifts from pluck -> pad -> arpeggio Once the wailing gets out of the way at 7:00, the breakdown there's absolutely inspired in my opinion, stripping everything away and using its own little guitar motif, which allows a big build into all 3 lead sounds again, full-force at 8:45. Then a final clever trick at 9:00 - the arpeggio fades away, the pad gets brighter and then changes to a stab, playing some of the notes of the arpeggio for yet another variation which uses the pad's brightness to give more energy than the section before. [/massive over-analysis] |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Beatflux Ha. I can't really blame anyone hating this song for being so overplayed. I listened to the entire LMFAO album and "Party Rock Anthem" definitely stands out in a couple of ways. The drop for the song has new instrumentation and there's a new female lead vocal for the last pre-verse(not sure if this is the right term.) |
Very interesting thread, thank you very much! I will definitely keep this in mind when making my next track. 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by skyhunter Not even for being overplayed, I just flat out don't like it. Not because it's cheesy (I love SHM and Afrojack), just because I don't like the song. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.