|
structuring a track
|
View this Thread in Original format
| gerrycueto |
okay, I know you guys are probably still mad at me by now, but I decided in order to solve my arrogance problem, I should eat a peice of humble pie, and start from scratch, and for those who don't know about what happened before, it's an incident in the producer promotions section. I'm starting from scratch and turning a new leaf.. So I want to admit my flaws to you, and maybe you guys can help me.
I'm a producer, some of you may have already heard my tracks, but I have a problem. It's with my vision. Where I want the track to go... I was wondering if you guys could post about how you get the vision to arrange your track. What makes you arrange the track in any certain way? My arrangements to me sound pretty much canned and possibly outdated, but I was wondering how the good producers do it. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Well, I don't know if I'm one of the "good producers", and I'm not claiming that I am, but I have been called a good arranger, so I'll offer what I can here.
First, understand that if you're trying to come up with an original arrangement, the vast majority of EDM out there is not good for inspiration purposes because so much of it follows the same cliché formula:
Intro, breakdown, buildup, drop, outro.
Listen to classical music, jazz, even some rock music (older rock music, not the crappy boy bands or stupid emo punk), if you want to hear much more elaborate and interesting arrangements. It's not so easy to divide into "pieces" like this.
For example, the track I just did has a direction that sort of looks like this (it's not to "scale", but it should be pretty easy to follow along):
It's got the same general direction as the cliché version (it has to, otherwise it's too hard to mix), but it's got some twists and turns in it. One of the things I like to do is, during a buildup (big or small), instead of just slamming right into the next section, cut out everything except the bassline (or some other instrument, or even just an effect like a "swoosh") for one bar, and either have a massively condensed 1-bar buildup or just slam down the beats in the next bar without any warning. You're aiming to surprise people here.
That diagram is just one of many possibilities, of course. All of my pieces would look different if I drew one of those for them. I haven't actually heard the track in question that you got criticized for, but if you think an arrangement sounds "canned", then you need to think about what I'm showing you - the general direction of the track. You don't want people to be able to guess exactly what's going to happen next. You also don't want them to be confused as hell - it's all in the balance.
Not sure if that answers your question or not, but I hope it helps a little. Good luck! |
|
|
| gerrycueto |
| hey man that was a really good diagram... you are very talented... thanks :) |
|
|
| ronk |
is this because of my pm? hell of a day you're having today heh...:)
anyway I don't really have any good tips, I'm kinda messing around with the arrangement of the track I'm working on atm...but DigiNut has some good tips here. |
|
|
| gerrycueto |
| quote: | Originally posted by ronk
is this because of my pm? hell of a day you're having today heh...:)
anyway I don't really have any good tips, I'm kinda messing around with the arrangement of the track I'm working on atm...but DigiNut has some good tips here. |
yeah man... i kinda suck with arrangements... i'm pretty sure that's my weakest point as a producer,and my arrangements to me are uninspiring. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| Production's an art like any other... there's no such thing as right, but there is such a thing as original. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
|
thats looks like the track in my sig :eek: |
|
|
| Aquarian |
| I like the typical trance structure. I don't see what's so bad about it. Sure you can add subtle variations, but the graph you posted is just excessive, and would take away from the continuity. Or maybe that's just me. |
|
|
| Analog Artisan |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
[COLOR=#99CCEE]
/COLOR] |
Whats the difference in the main build up between the sreight upward line and the slighty curved one? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Aquarian
I like the typical trance structure. I don't see what's so bad about it. Sure you can add subtle variations, but the graph you posted is just excessive, and would take away from the continuity. Or maybe that's just me. |
I didn't say anything was wrong with the typical structure, but he said he thought it sounded canned, so I was trying to help out on how to be original.
Listen to the track before you say it's excessive. ;) It's an ugly looking diagram, but there's obviously a lot more to the music than that - it's not just a sine wave with gain linked to the chart position. :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Analog Artisan
Whats the difference in the main build up between the sreight upward line and the slighty curved one? |
Well, if you work in Cubase or FL, think of drawing an automation with a straight or curved line. A straight line is just a linear buildup; the concavity of the curve in the buildup indicates that the buildup is slow at first and comes on rapidly before the drop; by contrast, the "breakdown" near the end happens very quickly but not instantly. |
|
|
| RIPassion |
Oo, glad to see an arrangement thread pop-up. I can offer my advice!
There are two major ways to think of arranging:
1.) The Big Picture (aka diginut, and why I think he's a great arranger)
2.) The zoomed in picture
I'd say that if a producer is thinking about arrangement at all, he does it as he's bundled up in his synthesis, drum programming, etc. and devotes only half-assed respect to the arrangement compared to what it deserves. If you think about arrangement as you audition the track, you're getting the zoomed in picture, which can be nice for drawing the perfect automation curve, small buildup, etc... and you may get the big picture at least a little bit when you are trying to make the track mixable, but in that case you may focus only on the intro/outro (tisk tisk), and all the while, you never break it all down (like diginut; sorry to keep using you, hehe). (and I'm not trying to say my "skillz" are superior to yours by using you as an example.. you probably own my ass in the arranging department).
Soo...
Do some homework: You wonder how the professionals arrange their tracks? You aren't thinking straight! It's all right there, published and ready for you to analyze and incorporate into your own style(s)! Get out your paper and pencil and listen to some tracks. You can draw the diagram just as diginut did above (some of us are visual people) or you can write out the bars and instruments and what happens (and also important, the types and curves of automations, and please, please, PAY ATTENTION TO THE MOST MINUTE OF DETAILS AS THEY CAN ADD THAT PERSONAL, MUSICAL TOUCH. i.e. a filter automation before a buildup on a lead will sound bland with a linear automation 99.9% of the time... what if you tried this?):
Put as much thought into the arrangement as you do into the synthesis of sounds, making of beats, and fun you have doing it. :)
edit: oh, suggested tracks to analyze:
York - The Reachers of Civilisation
E-razor - India (Brainbug remix)
Sasha - Xpander <---------------- Do this track thouroughly including all channels and automations and you have yourself an arrangement worthy of any mantlepiece.
Hybrid - Symphony (or finished symphony)
And some older tracks... incorporating older styles into your production will seem original in this new day and age:
Age of Love - Age of Love
Unity 3 - The Age of Love Suite (Trance Dub + Fantasy Dub) |
|
|
| gerrycueto |
i just copy track arrangements..... some people notice and critcize me for it, most people don't and like the way it's strucured regardless if you time-align the track with the reference everything breaks and builds the same way... arrangement isn't something i dream up of... I know other artists do that too, but is that ethical to do? that's why i posted this thread... maybe a real seasoned producer uses his pure creativity and feel.. i could be wrong.
When I hear a track i like... i try to copy the arrangement to give my track that same feeling. Everything else, like percs and melodies are stuff I dreamt up for the track. I guess it's also a learning experience for me. I learn what to expect in a trance production, but I will never get the whole gist of producing... there's always a new sound to conquor, or else you're deemed outdated.
So yeah if what i'm doing is unethical, I would like to know, and possibly find an alternative to arranging tracks... or maybe learn how to be more creative when it comes to that aspect.
I could be wrong tho... I mean I should listen with a more attentive ear or try to time align trance tracks I think are similar in structure to see if they were used as references... I usually get lost in the music when i listen to trance, so I really don't pay attention to details... However with other pop music, I can hear if the structure has been aligned with other tracks, and i know A LOT of pop producers do that, so like I said... what I'm doing could actually be a good thing.
From producing a lot of trance, I've noticed most trance doesn't get the main bassline till 32 bars... so there could really be a canned strcture I'm not noticing beyond that.
Oh yeah btw... when I do align structures with other trance tracks, I do show the original artist my work and not tell them anything... Most of the time they don't notice, and most of hte time they like my track better than anything else (because I copied their structure? heh wtf). I guess the human ear likes their music to be predictable.
So like I guess what was posted... it's probably not a wrong or right thing to do, just there's the difference between a copy and an original. |
|
|
|
|
