|
How to create a standard trance tune (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Eldritch
What are those four tunes? Just curious. |
"Serious Truth" by Tom Colontonio
"Light Collector" by Tom Colontonio
"Panorama" by Icone
"Aerial" by Static Blue |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by G-Con
I have to agree completely.
I am also surprised that anyone who is getting into producing would ever need a guide like this. Surely the type of people who want to start producing trance (or any genre) will be incredibly passionate about the music already, will have listened to it extensively and because of this, would already understand the basic structure. |
Exactly - very well put. This thread encourages people who don't have a clue to produce to a boring, overused and lifeless standard.
EricR - I do see your point but classical is not really analogous - it is so complex and diverse. The whole problem is that trance has become so homogenised and formulaic, threads like this do nothing for the new producers in our community - it just encourages people to look for shortcuts, in the worst possible way, without listening to what came before and making individual/personal creative choices. |
|
|
| Purpose Unknown |
DJ Rann wrote:| quote: | | EricR - I do see your point but classical is not really analogous - it is so complex and diverse. The whole problem is that trance has become so homogenised and formulaic, threads like this do nothing for the new producers in our community - it just encourages people to look for shortcuts, in the worst possible way, without listening to what came before and making individual/personal creative choices. |
Like EricR I have mainly a classical background and have posted elsewhere on what I feel is the difficulty for many newbies, who have followed classical learning to some degree. Whilst I totally agree that so much of trance is formulaic, most music theory, or any theory for that matter begins with defining your terms, including trance. What makes trance, 'trance'. Likewise in my own field, Buddhist logic and Epistemology, one begins by understanding what we mean by using a word, such as 'knowledge', whether in its commonsense or philosophical sense. No amount of enthusiasm is going to get round the basic building blocks of the subject. However, the point of such learning is to enable the student to develop more insight and valid examples and counterexamples to defend his/her thesis.
But if we havent learnt the alphabet, how can we be expected to write a thesis?:) Perhaps this forum isnt the most appropiate place for newbies to come to, although many experienced trancers give a great deal of time and energy giving the benefit of their experience. there are threads on this forum which have given outlines to trance formulas, which at least give some idea as to a basic structure.
Although I can hear and create trance music in my head, I can no more transcribe it as I can a complex concerto, or choral setting for 4 or more voices. That is where one needs to get down to writing out the parts, experimenting until you get the sound right. It just helps if you understand something about the rules of counterpoint and have an idea what the basic structure of a baroque concerto is. That wont make you a great composer, but at least you know where to begin:)
This is just my humble point point of view |
|
|
| pho mo |
Well there's been some excellent discussion in this thread.
lowski has taken the basic start and fleshed out some more details, I especially agree with the importance he/she places on getting the main melody in early but as a hint to what's coming later on. It's important, especially on the dancefloor, if you've got a great hook to tease it, let people know what's coming but don't deliver until later. That's what a lot of the dynamics of a dance song is, tension building and release, and that's not just rhythm builds but also melodies.
I also completely agree that this is not meant to be taken as a rote formula, pretty sure I said that at the start but it's worth reiterating - what you bring as a producer is your take on things, not following set rules or patterns. But of course look at pop, there's a very basic formula people follow to get that 'perfect' 3:30 pop song, intro verse bridge chorus verse chorus chorus blah. And there's been millions of pop songs based around this arrangment yet even within this constraint there are so many songs that sound so very much different.
Also, it's worth think about all the supersaw tutes in this forum, sure all the seasoned trancers scoff at anyone trying to create a supersaw - oh my god, a supersaw, how boring! Yet the supersaw and its variations underpin loads of new trance. How many rock tunes are there? And they tend to underpin themselves around the sound of a distorted guitar.
So yeah, learn what you can but always strive to be original. And there's plenty to gain from a frank discussion of the fundamentals. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
There's a difference, though. Rock didn't begin primarily as a highly experimental way of exploring new sounds and creating them from scratch.
But electronic music did. And now people are turning their backs on electronic music's wonderful beginnings, turning themselves into a bunch of imitative monkeys and treating the supersaw as trance's "guitar." |
|
|
| Barachem |
THE reason why i dislike the idea of rock is because of the eternal guitar just being used over and over again and the reluctance of bands and listeners to try something new, albeit using another string instrument to play the main melody with, like a banjo or a koto or whatever.
The SAME applies to trance with the supersaw and other defining sounds.
Of course supersaws and other defining synths and samples shouldn't be shunned, but diversity is good.
And if a producer has a sound or synth or a certain rythm as trademark because he likes it or thinks it's something unique, then let him be, uniqueness shouldn't be sacrificed on the altar of innovativity, but blandness and boringness should. |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
I get the feeling you didn't hipass three of those tracks. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
I didn't do anything at all to them. I just layed them right on top of each other.
I didn't even have to speed them up or slow them down, since they were all at 138 bpm.
:p |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I didn't do anything at all to them. I just layed them right on top of each other.
I didn't even have to speed them up or slow them down, since they were all at 138 bpm.
:p |
Heh. Standard trance ftw! |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by thoughtlessjex
Heh. Standard trance ftw! |
Certainly makes things a lot easier for the DJ at least... |
|
|
| Massive84 |
I didn't hear much difference n the percussion line.. is it me or ?? |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Massive84
I didn't hear much difference n the percussion line.. is it me or ?? |
That's because there's practically no difference. All four tracks use almost the exact same perc sounds and patterns. |
|
|
|
|
